Pre-season trials: The NRL is losing money

[insert.pause]

This has been touched on before, but why do we have our clubs playing in February, not televised, not sponsored, when only a month later networks will pay these same clubs hundreds of millions of dollars to play?

IF we are going to have trials why not formalise them in a competition structure that can be monetised through the sale of the broadcast rights & competition naming rights? The increased media exposure & marketing of a preseason competition would also help clubs sell tickets to these games and be an additional source of exposure for club sponsors.

We have these games already, it doesn't involve adding to an already packed pre-season, just tidying up the adhoc nature of it.

The NRL is literally losing money by not leveraging an asset it already has.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Because they're bullshit games. People whinge about weakened teams at origin time and the generally poor standard of games across 25 or 26 weeks. Running half arsed pre season games on tv would hardly promote the main comp. It would put people off if anything. And if clubs started actually fielding full strength teams the elite players will be playing even more games, which is asking for trouble.

The pre-season offers at least some morsels of product that are different to NRL teams playing each other week in week out. The Nines, WCC and All Stars could be improved on but I'd rather see them than more NRL teams playing standard games, except worse because the best players don't play.

If the NRL wants to leverage more money or create more tv content, expand the f**king comp, not the season.

 

[T-Boon]

I agree with Sterlo and/or insert.pause - either get rid of them or do something structured with them where they can make a bit of money.

 

[mxlegend99]

Fans would like to see the games televised. I expect a lower quality of performance from teams through the trials, but seeing how some of those younger guys are performing in a game with NRL players around them is exciting in a different way.

Most fans know mostly what to expect from their teams in Round 1. I would love to see how some of the other options are looking. Watch some of the experiments the coach tries with players in trials etc. At that point in the pre-season I think many fans would take any fix they could get.

 

[GongPanther]

Some teams last year streamed their pre-season games on YouTube.

I'm sure the Dogs did.

 

[no name]

You're clutching at straws if you think trials can generate $ outside of attendance at places that don't have an NRL team.

 

[Clifferd]

Play a trial in my back yard. I'd watch that

 

[Timbo]

We're playing one trial match and it'll mostly be fringe players. No point in risking injury in 35 degree February heat.

Which network will pay to show that?

 

[POPEYE]

Trials were for players that had a day job, they too should be relegated to the past, professionals shouldn't need them

 

[kbw]

Sorry nothing beats match fitness, Trials are needed for the clubs.
The fact people are talking about getting rid of them due to not raising any revenue, then it just shows what a shit place RL is in

Next thing will be people calling training as unnecessary as it robs our game of elite players injured during training (where most players are injured)

 

[adamkungl]

Pre-season games in some form are necessary for match fitness and finalising combinations. If they weren't, cautious coaches and clubs wouldn't bother with them.

There's money to be made in interesting events like Nines.

I doubt there's any TV money to be made watching 35 man squads run around. Trial matches are barely a step up from training sessions. I don't see the point in adding a competitive structure to them, certainly not if it's at the cost of the pre-season events we already have.

I'm of the view that trial matches should be played in areas that do not receive NRL matches, wherever possible. Not everything needs to be a money making exercise.

 

[DiegoNT]

If clubs are relying on trials to make them money then the game is in trouble.
It's an incredibly stupid thing to say trials should be scrapped because they don't make money because at the end of the day they have huge Value for teams. Clubs make money from winning. More success means more sponsors, means more fans through the gates means more eyes on tv. Trials are a big step towards that. Most stars will get a bit of vital match fitness ( which can't be beat). Players on the fringes get a chance to prove themselves. Youngsters and new recruits get an introduction to a teams systems in a game environment. Players on trials can get there contracts finalised. You can see how certain players go in new positions. You can see what makes your players tick. There's so much you can find out in a trial, especially in a loss. Take souths this week. We've picked a team unlikely to beat the sea eagles, but that's not point. Braiden Burns gets a try at fullback this week. The coaches can determine if he is a suitable replace for GI if GI gets injured. Young Dietz gets practice playing with and against nrl standard forwards. Luke Kelly gets practice controlling the team under a Maguire Gameplan, practice for if he is called upon due to injury. Rochow, G.Burgess, Chricton, Clark and Cherrington are probably trying out for a possible 3 bench spots for round 1. There would be hundreds of other little things maguire will learn from that game. These lessons learned before round 1 are more important than making money from a pointless Trials comp or a 9s tournament

 

[Cockadoodledoo]

Trials are necessary, pre-season comps are not. Teams generally want 2 reasonably proper trials before the season begins. If you play a pre-season comp, the teams that make the final have that extended to 4 matches, which is far too many when playing in the heat of February.

Also half the teams will get knocked out after week one, and with next to no time, will have to organize teams to play an additional trial against, secure venues and all the other logistics required etc. The current format is right from a playing point of view, the problem is there is not enough interest in the trials from the general public for the NRL to leverage more money out of the networks to broadcast them.

It is not as if the NRL will throw that carrot to the networks and monetize them. It is additional cost to Foxtel for example to broadcast all 8 trials a weekend, some being played out the back of woop woop and I doubt they would re-coup the expenses from selling advertisements.

Also how do we integrate the teams flying to the UK for the World Club Challenge? Do they play that in addition to the potential 4 trials plus Nines?

 

[DiegoNT]

Name 1 major sport that doesn't have pre season trials?
F1 teams spend Millions on Pre season Testing that isn't televised, doesn't attract exposure for sponsors and isn't designed for the public to attend. Nba and nfl have pre season games with skeleton teams, soccer have exhibition games, the big clubs can make money but most don't, the list goes on

 

[The Mad Hatter]

Trials should be free too.

 

[siv]

Sorry nothing beats match fitness, Trials are needed for the clubs.
The fact people are talking about getting rid of them due to not raising any revenue, then it just shows what a shit place RL is in

Next thing will be people calling training as unnecessary as it robs our game of elite players injured during training (where most players are injured)

Thats ok

We already canned U21's U19s reserve grade and at end of this year third grade/u23/u20s as well

 

[muzby]

tooheys challenge pre-season cup.

bring it back.

now that's a team!

and back in the day where if you didn't have a big f**king mustache, you couldn't be a f**king coach.

 

[steggz]

The benefits of match practice and country exposure outweigh any possible financial downfall

 

[POPEYE]

Match fitness means being able to withstand however many minutes you are expected to play each game of the season. Stamina is not always an integral part of trials and if it is those players who undergo the full torment are just adding another game to their season

Instead of pre-season trials why not play 30 rounds, each team plays each other twice . . . the coach can rest players that can't handle the truth in mid season games

 

[muzby]

The benefits of match practice and country exposure outweigh any possible financial downfall

unless of course all 34 players do their ACL in a game due to playing on a sub-standard pitch, and can never return to play, launching legal cases against the NRL to recover lost earnings..

on top of that, fans riot in the streets because the game finished early, causing $400m of damage, and the local mayor decides to send the bill to greenberg..