NRL faces major turmoil as clubs threaten breakaway league

[Stormwarrior82]

I didn't realise football had to be played on Monday night or Friday at 6pm by heavenly decree. I thought it was something the NRL agreed to voluntary for a few theoretical extra bucks. How silly of me.

Personally I believe our TV rights deal would not lose a dollar in value if we had a single Friday night game and the rest on the weekend (barring public holidays). AFL seem to do just fine such a set up.

There are a heap of time slots that the Nrl could have chosen. They got rid of Monday night but they came to agreement at Friday at 6. It's shit but the decision is made.

The Afl clubs complain all the time but never gets airtime due the media lovefest. They have the same issues with the same clubs getting FTA.

 

[Stormwarrior82]

he's the f**king Chairman

the buck stops with him and he is the only one the clubs have said they have a problem with

Thanks Captain Obvious.

And As f**king Chairman he has to front the media about the decisions that the commission has formed. Right? I'm not sure why Greenberg has been left out of this media campaign. He stood beside Grant and agreed with him.

And Dibs email to Grant seemed directed at the Nrl and commission. Then Dean Ritchie decided to take the news limited poetic license and smear Grant.

 

[Canard]

Most decent sports have their own fine and punishment system to try and keep these issues out of courts.

Can you explain what in your opinion the ARL commission is legally bound to do?

And what if any action could be legally taken against them if they don't?

 

[adamkungl]

No other code has self-interest consumed a code like it does for rugby league. How much money do the clubs truly need considering they majority of them are incompetent and running losses. Giving them more grant money is just throwing money away unless it is properly utilized.

It's amateur hour how clubs can rack up losses despite getting gifted millions of dollars from the NRL, if it wasn't for administration past or present a good portion of those clubs would be long gone. So for the clubs to chuck a tantrum they should look at themselves as there the reason for a great money drain from the TV deal.

Every word of this is garbage.

1) The clubs are running losses for the most part because they have been underfunded since 1998.
Why don't they just spend within their means?

Ok, let's say Mr Doust decides to spend $1mil less than most other clubs on player salaries and another $1mil less on football operations, and a bit less on marketing and admin too.
Suddenly his club is coming last 3 or 4 years in a row.
If Dragons fans boycott after finishing 9th, how do you expect them to react to this?
What about someone like Melbourne even more dependent on success due to being an an AFL city?

It doesn't work. Any club that fell behind that far would bleed fans and thus money and die within 5 years. Cronulla came close in 2009-11.

It's a completely ridiculous proposal and wouldn't be an issue if they got a fair share of the sport's worth.


2) "GIFTED millions of dollars by the NRL"
Hold the f**king phone, who earns this money for the NRL? Do people pay for Foxtel to watch Greenberg vs Grant, or Souths vs Broncos?
Clubs (via the players they employ) earn the money. The NRL is the middleman.


3) The NRL in using the clubs to earn money for the competition actively sabotages individual clubs ability to earn money, which would probably help them break even.
Last year if a club got 3 Monday or Thursday night games they've likely missed out on close to 30,000 paying fans compared to a Sunday afternoon. That could be worth well over $1 million directly.
Indirectly, it affects their sponsorship value through lower crowd averages.
Speaking of sponsorship value, how about that FTA TV exposure they aren't getting unless their name happens to be "Brisbane Broncos".


Stop peddling the myth that clubs are incompetent money black holes. If they were paid their worth they'd be profitable.
As i said earlier, this is akin to saying a poor person should be paid 60% of their actual salary because being poor is evidence they can't be trusted with the whole lot.

 

[DiegoNT]

Every word of this is garbage.

1) The clubs are running losses for the most part because they have been underfunded since 1998.
Why don't they just spend within their means?

Ok, let's say Mr Doust decides to spend $1mil less than most other clubs on player salaries and another $1mil less on football operations, and a bit less on marketing and admin too.
Suddenly his club is coming last 3 or 4 years in a row.
If Dragons fans boycott after finishing 9th, how do you expect them to react to this?
What about someone like Melbourne even more dependent on success due to being an an AFL city?

It doesn't work. Any club that fell behind that far would bleed fans and thus money and die within 5 years. Cronulla came close in 2009-11.

It's a completely ridiculous proposal and wouldn't be an issue if they got a fair share of the sport's worth.


2) "GIFTED millions of dollars by the NRL"
Hold the f**king phone, who earns this money for the NRL? Do people pay for Foxtel to watch Greenberg vs Grant, or Souths vs Broncos?
Clubs (via the players they employ) earn the money. The NRL is the middleman.


3) The NRL in using the clubs to earn money for the competition actively sabotages individual clubs ability to earn money, which would probably help them break even.
Last year if a club got 3 Monday or Thursday night games they've likely missed out on close to 30,000 paying fans compared to a Sunday afternoon. That could be worth well over $1 million directly.
Indirectly, it affects their sponsorship value through lower crowd averages.
Speaking of sponsorship value, how about that FTA TV exposure they aren't getting unless their name happens to be "Brisbane Broncos".


Stop peddling the myth that clubs are incompetent money black holes. If they were paid their worth they'd be profitable.
As i said earlier, this is akin to saying a poor person should be paid 60% of their actual salary because being poor is evidence they can't be trusted with the whole lot.

 

[El Diablo]

Thanks Captain Obvious.

And As f**king Chairman he has to front the media about the decisions that the commission has formed. Right? I'm not sure why Greenberg has been left out of this media campaign. He stood beside Grant and agreed with him.

And Dibs email to Grant seemed directed at the Nrl and commission. Then Dean Ritchie decided to take the news limited poetic license and smear Grant.

get your hand off it, John

your junket days are over

 

[Danish]

Totally agree re the terrible scheduling of KO times, AFL managed to get more money and fan friendly game times, this was a massive failure on the NRL's part.

The forced reduction on spending is not in areas such as marketing, game day experience or membership promotion. It is on coaching, supplement programs, wrestling technicians, highly paid water boy ex players etc etc. Indeed the plan was to have $1.5mill additional funding for club business development budgets. Given most clubs are losing money I don't think putting a cap on non playing football related budgets is going to make them suddenly have excess profits!

i wonder what the current elite coaches of the NRL will choose:

1) take a huge pay cut so they can maintain their current coaching program under an NRL cap
2) no hit on their salary, but fire most of their coaching staff and replace them with bottom of the barrel hacks
3) go coach in another code where they can maintain their salary and professional programs

 

[Jatz Crackers]

Hold the f**king phone

Mr Grant is unable to talk with you right now because he is actually holding the other phone. We need another secretary in here and a few less phone lines.

 

[siv]

Every word of this is garbage.

1) The clubs are running losses for the most part because they have been underfunded since 1998.
Why don't they just spend within their means?

Ok, let's say Mr Doust decides to spend $1mil less than most other clubs on player salaries and another $1mil less on football operations, and a bit less on marketing and admin too.
Suddenly his club is coming last 3 or 4 years in a row.
If Dragons fans boycott after finishing 9th, how do you expect them to react to this?
What about someone like Melbourne even more dependent on success due to being an an AFL city?

It doesn't work. Any club that fell behind that far would bleed fans and thus money and die within 5 years. Cronulla came close in 2009-11.

It's a completely ridiculous proposal and wouldn't be an issue if they got a fair share of the sport's worth.


2) "GIFTED millions of dollars by the NRL"
Hold the f**king phone, who earns this money for the NRL? Do people pay for Foxtel to watch Greenberg vs Grant, or Souths vs Broncos?
Clubs (via the players they employ) earn the money. The NRL is the middleman.


3) The NRL in using the clubs to earn money for the competition actively sabotages individual clubs ability to earn money, which would probably help them break even.
Last year if a club got 3 Monday or Thursday night games they've likely missed out on close to 30,000 paying fans compared to a Sunday afternoon. That could be worth well over $1 million directly.
Indirectly, it affects their sponsorship value through lower crowd averages.
Speaking of sponsorship value, how about that FTA TV exposure they aren't getting unless their name happens to be "Brisbane Broncos".


Stop peddling the myth that clubs are incompetent money black holes. If they were paid their worth they'd be profitable.
As i said earlier, this is akin to saying a poor person should be paid 60% of their actual salary because being poor is evidence they can't be trusted with the whole lot.

But if he doesn't manage his finances

He ends up like Newtown

Boom in 1981

Bust in 1983

 

[WaznTheGreat]

Jarryd Hayne comes back and the NRL dies instantly lmao

 

[CowboyFuriousFury]

So in spite of grants increasing, clubs are still making major losses to constantly run into red despite grants increasing show how poorly run clubs are. It also seems the clubs want the money to themselves and not bother with expanding the game and the bigger picture. The inwards, insularity self-interest is why league has been standing still while other codes expand.

2016 and still no team in WA and only one team in Brisbane is ridiculous, the admin lack long-term vision.

 

[siv]

Every word of this is garbage.

1) The clubs are running losses for the most part because they have been underfunded since 1998.
Why don't they just spend within their means?

Ok, let's say Mr Doust decides to spend $1mil less than most other clubs on player salaries and another $1mil less on football operations, and a bit less on marketing and admin too.
Suddenly his club is coming last 3 or 4 years in a row.
If Dragons fans boycott after finishing 9th, how do you expect them to react to this?
What about someone like Melbourne even more dependent on success due to being an an AFL city?

It doesn't work. Any club that fell behind that far would bleed fans and thus money and die within 5 years. Cronulla came close in 2009-11.

It's a completely ridiculous proposal and wouldn't be an issue if they got a fair share of the sport's worth.


2) "GIFTED millions of dollars by the NRL"
Hold the f**king phone, who earns this money for the NRL? Do people pay for Foxtel to watch Greenberg vs Grant, or Souths vs Broncos?
Clubs (via the players they employ) earn the money. The NRL is the middleman.


3) The NRL in using the clubs to earn money for the competition actively sabotages individual clubs ability to earn money, which would probably help them break even.
Last year if a club got 3 Monday or Thursday night games they've likely missed out on close to 30,000 paying fans compared to a Sunday afternoon. That could be worth well over $1 million directly.
Indirectly, it affects their sponsorship value through lower crowd averages.
Speaking of sponsorship value, how about that FTA TV exposure they aren't getting unless their name happens to be "Brisbane Broncos".


Stop peddling the myth that clubs are incompetent money black holes. If they were paid their worth they'd be profitable.
As i said earlier, this is akin to saying a poor person should be paid 60% of their actual salary because being poor is evidence they can't be trusted with the whole lot.

Sorry I disagree

Today NRL grants equal Salary Cap

So a club can't spend more than another club on players and no need to spend less

The trick then is to manage off field costs within budget. And not set false revenue expectations

Anyone who budgets for finals success is just asking for trouble when it doesnt eventuate for half of the clubs

Clubs need to have achievable financial goals

And if the revenue pie is not big enough, they need to be smarter on how they grow the pie

Going from a LC handout approach to deal with overspends to a NRL handout approach will never work

It will $X this year
Then $2X next year
Then $3X the year after

All it will do is send the admin broke

The NRL set a poor precident when they bailed out those 4 clubs

Club members need to be responsible to vote out poor club management

 

[BuffaloRules]

So in spite of grants increasing, clubs are still making major losses to constantly run into red despite grants increasing show how poorly run clubs are. It also seems the clubs want the money to themselves and not bother with expanding the game and the bigger picture. The inwards, insularity self-interest is why league has been standing still while other codes expand.

2016 and still no team in WA and only one team in Brisbane is ridiculous, the admin lack long-term vision.

And your Cowboys CEO is leading the charge apparently the greedy merkin!

Get down the Leagues Club tonight and let them know how you feel..

 

[Von Hipper]

But if he doesn't manage his finances

He ends up like Newtown

Boom in 1981

Bust in 1983

This is what I think. I know we're not thinking about it on here right now, but the thing the guy missed above is simply - what does it matter about positioning on the table when every other club is scaling back finances?

 

[Von Hipper]

Every word of this is garbage.

1) The clubs are running losses for the most part because they have been underfunded since 1998.
Why don't they just spend within their means?

Ok, let's say Mr Doust decides to spend $1mil less than most other clubs on player salaries and another $1mil less on football operations, and a bit less on marketing and admin too.
Suddenly his club is coming last 3 or 4 years in a row.
If Dragons fans boycott after finishing 9th, how do you expect them to react to this?
What about someone like Melbourne even more dependent on success due to being an an AFL city?

It doesn't work. Any club that fell behind that far would bleed fans and thus money and die within 5 years. Cronulla came close in 2009-11.

It's a completely ridiculous proposal and wouldn't be an issue if they got a fair share of the sport's worth.


2) "GIFTED millions of dollars by the NRL"
Hold the f**king phone, who earns this money for the NRL? Do people pay for Foxtel to watch Greenberg vs Grant, or Souths vs Broncos?
Clubs (via the players they employ) earn the money. The NRL is the middleman.


3) The NRL in using the clubs to earn money for the competition actively sabotages individual clubs ability to earn money, which would probably help them break even.
Last year if a club got 3 Monday or Thursday night games they've likely missed out on close to 30,000 paying fans compared to a Sunday afternoon. That could be worth well over $1 million directly.
Indirectly, it affects their sponsorship value through lower crowd averages.
Speaking of sponsorship value, how about that FTA TV exposure they aren't getting unless their name happens to be "Brisbane Broncos".


Stop peddling the myth that clubs are incompetent money black holes. If they were paid their worth they'd be profitable.
As i said earlier, this is akin to saying a poor person should be paid 60% of their actual salary because being poor is evidence they can't be trusted with the whole lot.

Excuse me, but is a family member of yours at the club??

I dont see how you can label that garbage without a lot of mental gymnastics.

These clubs do NOT exist on their own - they exist within a league!

People have to stop pretending they have a market economy. They don't. Only the players have a skills based one, the rest is dubious at best.

 

[Canard]

Adams 10th alt.

 

[BuffaloRules]

Every word of this is garbage.

1) The clubs are running losses for the most part because they have been underfunded since 1998.
Why don't they just spend within their means?

Ok, let's say Mr Doust decides to spend $1mil less than most other clubs on player salaries and another $1mil less on football operations, and a bit less on marketing and admin too.
Suddenly his club is coming last 3 or 4 years in a row.
If Dragons fans boycott after finishing 9th, how do you expect them to react to this?
What about someone like Melbourne even more dependent on success due to being an an AFL city?

It doesn't work. Any club that fell behind that far would bleed fans and thus money and die within 5 years. Cronulla came close in 2009-11.

It's a completely ridiculous proposal and wouldn't be an issue if they got a fair share of the sport's worth.


2) "GIFTED millions of dollars by the NRL"
Hold the f**king phone, who earns this money for the NRL? Do people pay for Foxtel to watch Greenberg vs Grant, or Souths vs Broncos?
Clubs (via the players they employ) earn the money. The NRL is the middleman.


3) The NRL in using the clubs to earn money for the competition actively sabotages individual clubs ability to earn money, which would probably help them break even.
Last year if a club got 3 Monday or Thursday night games they've likely missed out on close to 30,000 paying fans compared to a Sunday afternoon. That could be worth well over $1 million directly.
Indirectly, it affects their sponsorship value through lower crowd averages.
Speaking of sponsorship value, how about that FTA TV exposure they aren't getting unless their name happens to be "Brisbane Broncos".


Stop peddling the myth that clubs are incompetent money black holes. If they were paid their worth they'd be profitable.
As i said earlier, this is akin to saying a poor person should be paid 60% of their actual salary because being poor is evidence they can't be trusted with the whole lot.

Talking a lot of sense in this thread...

It would be great if people could get past their biases of NRL Clubs = GreedyJabba The Hutts and NRL Admin = Underfunded Robin Hood crusaders who's only interest is the poor grassroots and expansion ( has Grant ever said anything positive about expansion!?)

 

[Von Hipper]

Adams 10th alt.

what would you do with the clubs

 

[unforgiven]

http://crlnsw.com.au/major-changes-announced-for-crl-senior-mens-country-championships/

I'm sure few people would care about the actual detail of this or what impact it might have on bush football, but it relates very heavily to what the NRL is doing as part of this "pathways" crap it's currently forcing everyone to agree to based around the scrapping of the NYC and the ridiculous "platinum league" type plans for the state cups. Basically it just shows how bad the admin of the game is getting. They really have lost the plot.

I won't post the whole story because few if any will be bothered, but in summary they're turning the "senior" country championships into under 23s. So no player over 23 will be able to represent their division and therefore Country. So not only has country lost its Origin team, we don't even have proper Country Firsts or Seconds anymore either.

So they are taking away players over 23 being able to play representative football above group level?
Wow what a slap in the face for country rugby league players.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

So they are taking away players over 23 being able to play representative football above group level?
Wow what a slap in the face for country rugby league players.

Actually they probably won't be able to play at group level either because they pick the regional sides from the group sides. Unless groups decide to play separate games for proper senior teams and effectively have senior and u23 teams, of which only the 23s will be considered for further honours.