NRL faces major turmoil as clubs threaten breakaway league

[DiegoNT]

The club grants and a new breakaway comp are 2 different things and clubs would vote differently. If it gets to the nitty gritty, and clubs need to decide whether to accept 10-13 mil Grant from Nrl with backing of a 2billion dollars tv deal or the chance from someone like 7/10 to pay the same? Probably some would and some wouldn't.

I'm not going to bother replying to a hypothetical, because it's just that.

I don't believe the Nrl need the clubs more. The Nrl needs the players and clubs probably 50/50. The players need the Nrl if they want a competitive high paying job and the clubs need the Nrl to stay relevant. Otherwise there just another rsl.

A breakaway is highly unlikely. Everyone would lose money, the clubs, the players, the tv networks. But if it did happen the nrl would lose out the most. It's an extreme worst case scenario. To be honest i think the tv networks would pull the nrl into line and make them cave into the clubs before it even got to that point.

 

[Melodramatic Man]

lol the players would lose out the most. the execs and businessmen in the nrl would find another workplace and be fine.

the players would have to play for a pittance or play another sport - do you think they could hold a network over a barrel? not a chance, the network calls their bluff and what do the players do then?

 

[DiegoNT]

lol the players would lose out the most. the execs and businessmen in the nrl would find another workplace and be fine.

the players would have to play for a pittance or play another sport - do you think they could hold a network over a barrel? not a chance, the network calls their bluff and what do the players do then?

I'm talking about a situation where all 16 clubs broke away and formed their owm comp?
You don't think there's money out there for a 16 team comp featuring the broncos, bulldogs, roosters etc?
I don't think many players complained about the money they recieved during the super league

 

[Melodramatic Man]

They'd still get screwed over. Again, what happens if they say we want 2 billion and the networks say no. Then what? You can try all you like but you'd be laughed out of the building presenting a united front as a competition (considering they just nuked their predecessor) and then demanding a similar deal.

The breakaway competition would have no position of power to be bargaining from. They could simply say we will pay you 500mill but we will show games on delayed coverage and only 2 a week. Nice work, you just reduced your exposure, coverage, and income by 75%.

 

[Jatz Crackers]

feed starving people in backward countries

So you mean Todd Carney.

 

[Perth Red]

Clubs have had significant increases in grant revenue since 2011 and most have seen significant increases in self generated revenue in last few years. Despite this most still make losses (or rely heavily on significant pokie funding to remain viable). So how much is enough?

The AFL, being far smarter than us, recognised a decade ago that it would need to create a culture of unequal grants and ticket taxes if it was going to support the poorer clubs to keep them sustainable and competitive and allow for continued significant expansion plans. Whilst not everyone is happy with their income equalisation strategy it is hard to argue it hasn't worked out well for them.

Back in RL land the clubs don't want to help each other out, cant make ends meet despite significant revenue increases, now demand more of the pie from the NRL at the cost of expansion and want to play a game of dirty politics through the media.

You can easily see why corporates sponsors don't flock to RL like they do other codes.

 

[El Diablo]

(or rely heavily on significant pokie funding to remain viable).

nothing different to the way your beloved AFL clubs work except they rely on pokies even more

 

[BuffaloRules]

Definition of expansion. -The action of becoming larger or more extensive.

By that definition increasing the feeder teams footprint is classified as Rugby league expansion whether you like it or not. Maybe when you say expansion maybe add expansion of the number of Nrl teams. Might suit your opinion better. I want expansion but they have decided to shore up the clubs and expand the feeder footprint first.

Unlikely is just that. Could still happen by 2022/23. Neither of us know the real answer till then.

Love your pedantry here.. I think we both had an understanding about what was the meaning of expansion that was being debated in this thread until you went looking for a link and couldn't find anything to back up your point of view so had to use this straw clutch....

Here is your initial comment about Grant's plan as per the article you posted..... what a glowing endorsement...

Reasonable positive. Expansion can come in different forms I guess.

We don't know what will happen in 2022/23 but based on Grants comments in that article you posted, thankfully he will be long gone ....

 

[DiegoNT]

They'd still get screwed over. Again, what happens if they say we want 2 billion and the networks say no. Then what? You can try all you like but you'd be laughed out of the building presenting a united front as a competition (considering they just nuked their predecessor) and then demanding a similar deal.

The breakaway competition would have no position of power to be bargaining from. They could simply say we will pay you 500mill but we will show games on delayed coverage and only 2 a week. Nice work, you just reduced your exposure, coverage, and income by 75%.

Like i said, it won't get to this point, but if it did then of course there will be pain in the pocket.
So we have the breakaway comp formalise. The rlpa and the majority of players are with the clubs. You have one comp with all the clubs and players and one comp with the nrl logo and plastic clubs. Even though the tv companies already payed the 1.8 billion, they need to get that money back. Are they going to do that broadcasting a plastic league with no players? No.
So they'd have 3 options.
1. Help settle the differences between the clubs and nrl
2. Put more money into the nrl to help get these plastic clubs established and help get players. Even then it's a gamble if that would work. They'd surely be pissed at having to pay more money after already paying a high price for the rights initially and having to pay for plastic clubs and not the broncos and bulldogs they thought they were getting.
3. Pay for the rights for the new comp so they can at least get guarenteed eyeballs on their platforms.

 

[Melodramatic Man]

Even though the tv companies already payed the 1.8 billion, they need to get that money back. Are they going to do that broadcasting a plastic league with no players? No.

IF a breakaway league did ensure, the contract would be null and void between the NRL and CH 9/Fox - thus any money paid would not be able to be recouped (who would they sue if the rlpa and the clubs leave the NRL, it's just a shell company then), and any outstanding money simply wouldn't be paid, so it's not as if they've said ok here's 2 billion for 6 years in one installment. So, as a result, they actually don't have any product to broadcast, which is where my point comes in that they, whether it be 7, 9, 10 or whomever else will then be able to lowball because, well, what happens if you call our bluff? Networks would not be scrambling over the top of one another to pay through the nose for a renegade competition that would have broken ranks twice in a 30 year period.

So they'd have 3 options.
1. Help settle the differences between the clubs and nrl
2. Put more money into the nrl to help get these plastic clubs established and help get players. Even then it's a gamble if that would work. They'd surely be pissed at having to pay more money after already paying a high price for the rights initially and having to pay for plastic clubs and not the broncos and bulldogs they thought they were getting.
3. Pay for the rights for the new comp so they can at least get guarenteed eyeballs on their platforms.

1. Why would a tv network become involved in being an oversight administrator to a sporting code? it's not their business. their business is broadcasting. the two overlap but they are not mutual.
2. Refer to 1. Why would a network do that? Their job is to get the best product for exposure for the cheapest price. Ch 9 had to financially restructure big time to get the last deal over the line, do you think they'd risk doing their arse again if they didn't need to? You are looking at this through the eyes of a fan, not from a network exec
3. They would probably do this, but the amount they would pay/the renegade comp would receive would be vastly reduced in comparison to now. Again, position of power, the networks would have all of it, the breakaway comp zero. They'd have the choices of 1) ch 7, who would most likely favour the afl and thus lowball 2) ch 9 would most likely lowball but slightly above ch 7 3) ch 10 who couldn't afford even a partial bid the first time around 4. fox which then means FTA exposure is f**ked.

I know this is all hypothetical but a breakaway comp would f**k RL good and proper. You think SL was bad? If SL enabled the AFL to catch up and go past League when they were initially behind them, imagine what having a free reign would do to further entrench their spot as "Australia's code".

 

[Stormwarrior82]

Love your pedantry here.. I think we both had an understanding about what was the meaning of expansion that was being debated in this thread until you went looking for a link and couldn't find anything to back up your point of view so had to use this straw clutch....

Here is your initial comment about Grant's plan as per the article you posted..... what a glowing endorsement...



We don't know what will happen in 2022/23 but based on Grants comments in that article you posted, thankfully he will be long gone ....

Why thanks.

Don't try to understand me.

The Nrl are expanding their footprint and hopefully sooner rather than later theyll add Nrl teams but not at the expense of grassroots and current clubs. I posted the first article I found of Grant and expansion. He said its unlikely and dependent on lots of things. Your hatred for Grant is blinding you from the bigger picture. I never said it was a glowing endorsement but there are more than just one cog turning in this Nrl machine.

 

[Captain Apollo]

The reason a breakaway comp is unlikely? Under the ARLC Constitution, the clubs reportedly have the numbers to vote Grant out and to effect constitutional change. People seem to forget Grant and the Commissioners are elected to run the code on behalf of its members, which are the 16 NRL clubs, the NSWRL and the QRL.

In any organisation where you are elected, if you piss off your voters enough they will vote you out, which is what looks like will happen.

 

[El Diablo]

imagine what having a free reign would do to further entrench their spot as "Australia's code".

Rupert already is already on the record saying he prefers AFL

their CEO here has also stated he will be using their various media outlets to heavily promote AFL in NSW and Queensland

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...wscorp-seven-and-telstra-20150818-gj2648.html

"We have always preferred Australian rules but, I guess, we will engage with the NRL in time," Murdoch said. "However it ends up, this will be a much bigger investment. We have always believed this is the premium code in Australia. It is the national game and we are putting our money where we believe but we are also committing all our platforms' support in AFL everywhere in every state.

"We are very happy to be doing this. We believe in the strength of the game and we will do everything we can to make it stronger."

News Corp chief executive Robert Thomson also sent a warning to the NRL by declaring the company would do everything it could to help AFL's expansion into league's heartland.

"We will ensure that more people see more games of football and its reach is extended, particularly in NSW and Queensland, where there is obviously a growth opportunity and there is a growth opportunity because this is just a wonderful game," Thomson said.

 

[Stormwarrior82]

Now stop sulking and be good little children and we will see you on Thursday.

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...nt-stand-down-before-egm-20161129-gszslq.html

 

[DiegoNT]

IF a breakaway league did ensure, the contract would be null and void between the NRL and CH 9/Fox - thus any money paid would not be able to be recouped (who would they sue if the rlpa and the clubs leave the NRL, it's just a shell company then), and any outstanding money simply wouldn't be paid, so it's not as if they've said ok here's 2 billion for 6 years in one installment. So, as a result, they actually don't have any product to broadcast, which is where my point comes in that they, whether it be 7, 9, 10 or whomever else will then be able to lowball because, well, what happens if you call our bluff? Networks would not be scrambling over the top of one another to pay through the nose for a renegade competition that would have broken ranks twice in a 30 year period.


1. Why would a tv network become involved in being an oversight administrator to a sporting code? it's not their business. their business is broadcasting. the two overlap but they are not mutual.
2. Refer to 2. Why would a network do that? Their job is to get the best product for exposure for the cheapest price. Ch 9 had to financially restructure big time to get the last deal over the line, do you think they'd risk doing their arse again if they didn't need to? You are looking at this through the eyes of a fan, not from a network exec
3. They would probably do this, but the amount they would pay/the renegade comp would receive would be vastly reduced in comparison to now. Again, position of power, the networks would have all of it, the breakaway comp zero. They'd have the choices of 1) ch 7, who would most likely favour the afl and thus lowball 2) ch 9 would most likely lowball but slightly above ch 7 3) ch 10 who couldn't afford even a partial bid the first time around 4. fox which then means FTA exposure is f**ked.

I know this is all hypothetical but a breakaway comp would f**k RL good and proper. You think SL was bad? If SL enabled the AFL to catch up and go past League when they were initially behind them, imagine what having a free reign would do to further entrench their spot as "Australia's code".

Yes it's all hypothetical, with a 99.9% chance it'll never happen. It's the off seasons of course so these threads happen.
I never said a break away would be good for the game. We all know it'll do damage, we've seen it in the past. The question was asked if a breakaway comp by all current 16 nrl clubs was to happen, would it possibly succeed. Some in here think the clubs couldn't possibly succeed without the nrl but i don't think that's true.

If the contracts between the nrl and channel 9/fox become null and void if all 16 clubs pull out of the nrl then the nrl is as good as dead.

1. The nrl is a huge key for both fox and 9. Fox relies heavily on the nrl for subscribers. If the nrl was monumentally weakened you don't think fox would want to help fix it? They make a lot of money of the nrl, so it's in their interests to have the nrl run smoothly.
2. If fox brought the rights for nrl into the future, have business plans around the nrl being successful and attracting/keeping subscribers and suddenly the nrl started falling apart do you really think that fox will let it die? Without the nrl fox would lose about 500k of subscribers instantly. Channels are only making money off the nrl if people are watching the nrl.
3. Like i said, it's obvious that the clubs would lose money in this if a breakaway happens it's obvious that the game won't even get half of the 1.8b that's due to come in..but all the clubs would need is a start, somewhere to build from. Again this is all under the hypothetical that the game can't get its shit together and a very unlikely breakaway happens

 

[Perth Red]

Don't the NRL own the club brands now? How would clubs break away, are they going to change their names, logos and colours and form a 16 club league with new names?

The clubs know this is their last hurrah at getting more influence on the commission, once they sign up to perpetual licenses they will have no bargaining power to break away or not conform. They will be contractually obliged to the NRL. Whilst this also means clubs can be as sht as they like and not fear getting booted it also means they will no longer have a bargaining position, hence why they are desperate to get more control of the commission now through a new constitution giving them stronger representation.

I think the money is just part of the bigger concessions the clubs are trying to get here and putting pressure on Grant not Greenburg is a very interesting play and probably tells you who the clubs think they can control easier.

 

[El Diablo]

did Perth vote to get rid of Grant like most of the other clubs did?

 

[Melodramatic Man]

1. The nrl is a huge key for both fox and 9. Fox relies heavily on the nrl for subscribers. If the nrl was monumentally weakened you don't think fox would want to help fix it? They make a lot of money of the nrl, so it's in their interests to have the nrl run smoothly.

How far would they be prepared to go? Would they endanger their entire business model for one code? I don't think so. Truth be told cable tv is f**ked anyway so the NRL (and AFL) for that matter are going to have to look at other ways to diversify their broadcast income.

2. If fox brought the rights for nrl into the future, have business plans around the nrl being successful and attracting/keeping subscribers and suddenly the nrl started falling apart do you really think that fox will let it die? Without the nrl fox would lose about 500k of subscribers instantly. Channels are only making money off the nrl if people are watching the nrl.

Fox would be faced with a choice of going all-in on league or f**king it off. Considering how League spurned fox last time and how they reacted "We always preferred AFL", it isn't completely impossible to suggest they would revel in our misery, even if it meant some damage to their bottom line. Rupert can afford it.

3. Like i said, it's obvious that the clubs would lose money in this if a breakaway happens it's obvious that the game won't even get half of the 1.8b that's due to come in..but all the clubs would need is a start, somewhere to build from. Again this is all under the hypothetical that the game can't get its shit together and a very unlikely breakaway happens

Thing is yeah the clubs could reform, restructure, try again at a new starting point ... at an amateur or semi-professional level.

 

[BuffaloRules]

Why thanks.

Don't try to understand me.

The Nrl are expanding their footprint and hopefully sooner rather than later theyll add Nrl teams but not at the expense of grassroots and current clubs. I posted the first article I found of Grant and expansion. He said its unlikely and dependent on lots of things. Your hatred for Grant is blinding you from the bigger picture. I never said it was a glowing endorsement but there are more than just one cog turning in this Nrl machine.

No hatred for a man I don't know personally and probably thinks he is doing the right thing and might even be a nice guy...

Just don't think he is the right man to take the game forward and I am using his wishy washy indecision on NRL Expansion to highlight one area of his inadequacies which most of his supporters seem oblivious too..

 

[BuffaloRules]

did Perth vote to get rid of Grant like most of the other clubs did?

I remember when the Western Reds elected to join Super League before they had even played their first game in the ARL...

Loyalty at its finest..