The only way the NRL can topple the AFL? Expansion
By Ryan O'Connell May 6th 2011
The AFL can quite rightly claim the status of Australias number one football code, if not sport. Its crowd attendance figures are the highest; it recently signed a massive TV rights deal; it has impressive participation rates; and the geographical breadth of its clubs represents a truly national competition with apologies to Tasmania, the ACT and the Northern Territory.
All in all, the AFL is a very well run organisation and should be applauded for its growth over the last 15 years.
There is no question that it currently sits above rugby league when ranking the nations football codes.
Personally, I dont necessarily believe the NRL needs to topple the AFL. So long as rugby league is growing, generating revenue, attracting talent, and has a sustainable future, it matters very little whether or not its the number one football code.
Having said that, I would hope that those in charge of rugby league in Australia are a little bit more ambitious than me.
I would hope that the NRL does have a desire to surpass the AFLs growth and success. I would hope that there is a strategy or blueprint to become the number one sport in the country.
The AFL has a vision, and it steadfastly sticks to it, despite any criticism.
Over the years, some of that criticism has included:
- giving interstate/new teams too many concessions
- helping to pay rugby league recruits Karmichael Hunt and Israel Folau
- expanding into rugby league heartland (Western Sydney)
- moving out of suburban grounds in Melbourne
The reasons for each of these decisions were varied, but at the heart of all of them was the AFLs desire to grow the game, along with a mentality of short term pain, long term gain.
No one could ever accuse the AFL of not having a plan.
It is this type of strategic thinking that has put the AFL where it is today, and if the NRL wants to compete with the AFL, it needs to match that thinking, if not beat it.
Perhaps its due to the fragmented nature of rugby leagues leadership, but the game certainly doesnt give the impression of having a unifying goal. Metaphorically speaking, it often seems that rugby leagues leaders are not singing from the same hymn sheet.
And that perception exists because its the reality.
The involvement of News Limited in the game has been well documented, and I wont go over old ground that has been well covered before.
But News is just the tip of the iceberg. There is also the fractured relationship between the ARL, QRL and NSWRL, plus the heavy influence of Channel 9 in many decisions.
The whole thing is actually a bit of a tangled mess, and the sooner the Independent Commission is set up, the better.
Perhaps then the game will have a long-term strategy, rather than relying on a combination of loyal fans and brilliant players.
There will be many items on the agenda once the Commission is in power, but at the very top of that list should be a blueprint for the next ten years, and beyond. One would hope the NRL has such a plan already, but any existing future plans seem fairly loose, and certainly not transparent to fans or the media.
Central to the ten year plan should be the topic of expansion.
It cannot be overstated how important expansion is to rugby league, for it fulfils many needs:
- It is a clear indication of growth.
- It increases the footprint of the game, giving it greater exposure and opening it up to more fans.
- It increases the value of TV rights and sponsorships, generating more revenue for the game.
- It enables the sport to maintain/hold onto more playing talent.
- When the new club launches, it provides the sport with free publicity in the form of extensive media coverage.
- It gives the sport an overall impression/perception of momentum and optimism.
Expansion is important. Its the quintessential no-brainer. The question is not should the NRL expand?, the question is where to?
And thats when it becomes interesting, if not tricky.
There are two differing strategies for expansion. Colloquially speaking they are:
1, Fish where the fish are
Or
2, Build it, and they will come
The former is based on the notion that there is great merit in placing a team where rugby league is already popular, whilst the latter is based around gaining traction in geographic areas in which rugby leagues popularity massively under-indexes.
In laymans terms, the decision for the NRL is basically whether the next location for NRL expansion should be the Central Coast, or somewhere like Adelaide or Perth.
The Central Coast is a fantastic nursery for rugby league, and the fans in that part of the world love their league. Blue Tongue Stadium is a fantastic venue. There are next to no major sporting teams from the Sydney Harbour Bridge all the way to the Central Coast. The Central Coast Bears have an abundance of sponsors and fans already lined up. There is a still a bad taste in the mouth of many rugby league fans over what happened to the North Sydney Bears. All in all, the Central Coast makes a compelling case to be included into the NRL.
However, the counter argument to granting the Central Coast a NRL licence is that you are preaching to the converted, and therefore not really growing the game.
Instead, wouldnt the game be better served trying to expand its footprint, growing incrementally, and taking rugby league to new frontiers? Definitely. But whilst this sounds great in theory, it also takes patience and a lot of money. And its also not a foolproof plan merely placing a team in a city does not guarantee the sport will take off in that area.
Reinforcing and shoring up the game, or attempting to grow the game. The two objectives shouldnt be mutually exclusive. But at a very basic level, thats what the decision will come down to.
However, there is also a third strategy when it comes to expansion, though its one that is normally met with extreme reluctance.
Relocation.
Its a dirty word in sport. Over the years, weve seen some real emotion surface when fans have felt their team may be taken away from them. Yet there has always been the belief that Sydney has too NRL many clubs, and relocating one might be what is best for Sydney, the NRL, the new city, and the club itself.
The AFL have used all three expansion strategies well.
Their decision to grant Port Adelaide entry into the league was an example of fishing where the fish are, as Port was one of the strongest Aussie Rules clubs in Australia even before its first AFL season in 1997.
The Greater Western Sydney Giants, and to a lesser extent, the Gold Coast Suns, are both the products of a build it, and they will come strategy.
And lastly, the Swans move from South Melbourne to Sydney, and the Brisbane Bears/Fitzroy Lions to Brisbane Lions relocation/merger, whilst both executed some time ago now, are still examples of the AFL doing things right when it comes to expansion.
When the egos are finally put aside to form the Independent Commission, they should continue to push their egos under the table and admit that the AFL does a lot of things right.
If the NRL is serious about toppling the AFL, it needs to beat them at their own game: aggressive growth through expansion.
Deciding on expansion should be an easy decision. Deciding where will be a little more complex.
http://www.theroar.com.au/2011/05/06/the-only-way-the-nrl-can-topple-the-afl-expansion/
