League needs bigger TV deal to fund pay increases
Darren Lockyer | March 20, 2009 11:00pm
IN A week in which the Broncos were in the headlines with player-retention issues, the AFL rich list caught the eye. This week there was a survey by a newspaper which found 28 AFL players earned $500,000 or more last year in contract payments and endorsements.
There were three Lions players named as having earned more than $500,000 Jonathan Brown, Simon Black and Luke Power and 28 overall throughout the competition.
But the figure that stood out for me was that total player payments for all AFL clubs had increased from $62.1 million in 1998 to $128.8 million now more than double.
It's definitely not the case in our game.
The NRL's salary cap is $4.1 million. I asked someone to check what the salary cap was in 1998 and I'm told it was $3 million. That's an increase of 36 per cent since 1998.
This is not a whinge about league players wanting more money. I'm stating the facts and looking at how the two most popular football competitions in Australia can have had such varying increases in player remuneration.
I appreciate that rugby league had a wages explosion in the mid-1990s and had to do some belt tightening to stabilise the game. We have lost some ground but I believe with the right plan for the future we can get it back.
But the comparisons with AFL earnings just underlined to me that the NRL needs to get more from the next television rights deal.
Whether the AFL did their television rights negotiations better than the NRL is open to discussion. The dollar outcome certainly was better for their game and their players.
I understand there are different circumstances for all the football codes in Australia, but the fact is that rugby league needs to increase its revenue.
Our international game is an important tool to bring revenue in from abroad. With the success of last year's World Cup, I believe there is a great opportunity to capitalise and attract more sponsors.
The inclusion down the track of an NRL team from a new market like Adelaide or Perth is another way.
The NRL's next television rights deal will hopefully improve the earnings of the next generation of NRL stars to the point where they won't want to join another competition or code.
With the economic downturn, sponsorship for all sports is a bit subdued.
Third-party deals for players are a tough one because the NRL adjudicate on whether these deals are legit under the salary cap rules.
The NRL is trying to avoid a one-town outfit like the Broncos, who can tap into more corporate dollars than some of the Sydney clubs, attracting a high number of the top players.
As I said last year when Mark Gasnier left for French rugby, if you have someone of that stature leaving the NRL, it can't be good for the competition.
I still can't see why the NRL/ARL can't have separate, top-up contracts for the top 30 or 40 players, similar to the ARU, to keep them in our competition.
If the NRL paid $200,000 for the top 10 players and $100,000 for players ranked from No. 10 to No. 30, it would be a $4 million investment by the NRL.
Not a bad investment, either, I reckon.
There are a group of players the game needs to keep and Karmichael Hunt should be in that category.
One thing which helps the AFL maintain the strength of its competition is that their players can't go and play in another league or another code. By these figures, they don't need to.
As I said earlier this week, I really hope Karmichael re-signs with the Broncos after taking his time to decide what's the best step for him.
