It's been mentioned a few times in this thread - the AFL simply has a bigger supporter base. Amounting blame to the existing NRL supporters is not going to achieve anything. It's those that don't support it that need to be converted in order to get bigger crowds. As much as you and I love the game, the fact is there's a large percentage of the population that don't - either because they just don't like it, or because they've never been introduced to it. You can't force people to like the game.
I mean, I don't like basketball and I don't watch it at all, however there are others that do. I'm not sure if they're worried that the NRL or AFL get bigger crowds than they get at the basketball, but I doubt it. They're able to survive as a competition and serve their supporters accordingly with what they have. Why can't we just face reality and do the same? Seriously, who gives a toss if more people go to AFL than NRL as long as we still have a comp to follow? Yes, it would be good to have bigger crowds, hence bigger revenues, and in turn, bigger salaries and better player retention and theoretically a better quality comp, but I see those as bonuses rather than necessities.
Getting back to the basketball analogy, crowd attendances are not necessarily the primary key to a healthy competition. Take American basketball. I think you'd be kidding yourself if you were to suggest that NRL has a bigger following than American basketball. Their players are paid exponentially more than NRL players, yet their stadiums and attendances, for the most part, aren't all that big. As an example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alamodome#NBA_basketball said:
The San Antonio Spurs moved to the Alamodome from HemisFair Arena after the 1992-93 NBA season. The Spurs played nine seasons in the Alamodome, including during their first NBA championship season, which was played against the New York Knicks in 1999. Attendance was 39,514 for Game 1 of the 1999 NBA Finals and 39,554 for Game 2 (the largest crowd to see an NBA Finals game).
During the regular season, most of the upper level was curtained off. However, the Spurs opened a portion of the upper level when popular opponents came to down and on certain weekends, expanding capacity to 32,500.
So, the largest crowd for an NBA finals game was 39,554. Not overly impressive figures are they? It's all about TV rights and sponsorship dollars. While we may agree that the best way to watch a game is live and if you really want to experience the atmosphere, that's the only way to do it, I can see why the NRL doesn't treat it as a priority. It's much more advantageous for the NRL to have 200,000 people watch the games on TV then at the grounds because the sponsorship dollars and TV rights are worth more to the NRL than a percentage of gate takings.
It's a bit sad, but that's the way it is. My advice is to not worry so much about it. If the NRL aren't going to put in the effort, then there's little that you or I can do that will have any long term impact. Just enjoy the fact that we can almost always be guaranteed a good seat to a live footy match whenever we want and get on with life.
