What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Todd Greenberg has got to go!

Are you happy with Greenberg's performance as CEO?

  • Yes

    Votes: 6 5.9%
  • No

    Votes: 86 85.1%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 9 8.9%

  • Total voters
    101

Bezant

Juniors
Messages
178
Men make history and not the other way around. In periods where there is no leadership, society stands still. Progress occurs when courageous, skillful leaders seize the opportunity to change things for the better.
Harry Truman US President 1945-1953

Two major statements from NRL Todd Greenberg yesterday were IMHO deeply disturbing and are evidence that Rugby League does not currently have a leader who has the courage and skills to seize opportunities to change things for the better for the game. In fact if the statements are to be analysed in the context of recent events it seems as though Todd Greenberg has agreed to limit the games future opportunities. These are serious accusations to make of someone who specific role is to lead.

The two statements from Greenberg being put forward as displaying his lack of leadership are paraphrased below;
  1. Despite the recent RLWC proving that there is a strong interest in the broadcast of international rugby league and our nations captain and president of the players union asking for the NRL to get creative about including international games in the calendar, Greenberg responded to this great opportunity for additional growth/revenue by stating that we have existing contracts in place and that, due to concerns over player burn out, the NRL’s response would be limited...
  2. The great news about the new women’s NRL competition. Although very positive news I could not see anywhere any reference to the NRL potentially being paid for providing this additional media content. Is Nine getting this extra content for free?
The concern that Greenberg does not have the courage or skills to manage the undue influence that Channel 9 and some NRL power brokers have on the future of the game. Channel 9 would not at all be happy that the RLWC helped Channel 7 secure a ratings win over its competitors or that it was directly competing with 9’s cricket telecast. NRL power brokers would be concerned about player injuries rather that player burn out.

Sure, every business leader needs to understand and respect the concerns and interests of their major clients and management team. However, it is a leaders specific role to ensure that these interests do not damage the organisations ability to grow and thrive.

Greenberg’s statements, coming so soon after the end of the World Cup and those of Cameron Smith and at the same time as the announcement of the women’s competition seem predetermined, Ill considered and limiting. The do not exemplify an approach full of courage and skill.

My basic question is this; why has the leader of rugby league’s biggest competition so quickly foregone the opportunity to properly consider how we could generate additional revenue and growth from both the international and women’s games? What kind of leader either gives up or gives away two new exciting opportunities for their organisation in one day?

As an example of what can be done we only need to look at how cricket has grown from the inclusion of 20/20 (which 9 could not be happy about) and its women’s game.

The comment has been made on these forums and in the media time and again that rugby league has historically suffered from poor leadership. Surely, since we demand and are shown examples of exceptional courage and skill by professional rugby league players on a regular basis it should be expected that the games leaders reflect these levels of courage and skill.

Mr Greenberg, listen to your players, like Cameron Smith, and the fans that support the great game that you serve. Get Creative! Use your courage and skill to grow the international and women’s games for the betterment of all rugby league, not just the NRL or channel 9, otherwise do the right thing and go! Let a more courageous and skilful person take up the leadership role the game deserves!
 

POPEYE

Coach
Messages
11,397
Men make history and not the other way around. In periods where there is no leadership, society stands still. Progress occurs when courageous, skillful leaders seize the opportunity to change things for the better.
Harry Truman US President 1945-1953

Two major statements from NRL Todd Greenberg yesterday were IMHO deeply disturbing and are evidence that Rugby League does not currently have a leader who has the courage and skills to seize opportunities to change things for the better for the game. In fact if the statements are to be analysed in the context of recent events it seems as though Todd Greenberg has agreed to limit the games future opportunities. These are serious accusations to make of someone who specific role is to lead.

The two statements from Greenberg being put forward as displaying his lack of leadership are paraphrased below;
  1. Despite the recent RLWC proving that there is a strong interest in the broadcast of international rugby league and our nations captain and president of the players union asking for the NRL to get creative about including international games in the calendar, Greenberg responded to this great opportunity for additional growth/revenue by stating that we have existing contracts in place and that, due to concerns over player burn out, the NRL’s response would be limited...
  2. The great news about the new women’s NRL competition. Although very positive news I could not see anywhere any reference to the NRL potentially being paid for providing this additional media content. Is Nine getting this extra content for free?
The concern that Greenberg does not have the courage or skills to manage the undue influence that Channel 9 and some NRL power brokers have on the future of the game. Channel 9 would not at all be happy that the RLWC helped Channel 7 secure a ratings win over its competitors or that it was directly competing with 9’s cricket telecast. NRL power brokers would be concerned about player injuries rather that player burn out.

Sure, every business leader needs to understand and respect the concerns and interests of their major clients and management team. However, it is a leaders specific role to ensure that these interests do not damage the organisations ability to grow and thrive.

Greenberg’s statements, coming so soon after the end of the World Cup and those of Cameron Smith and at the same time as the announcement of the women’s competition seem predetermined, Ill considered and limiting. The do not exemplify an approach full of courage and skill.

My basic question is this; why has the leader of rugby league’s biggest competition so quickly foregone the opportunity to properly consider how we could generate additional revenue and growth from both the international and women’s games? What kind of leader either gives up or gives away two new exciting opportunities for their organisation in one day?

As an example of what can be done we only need to look at how cricket has grown from the inclusion of 20/20 (which 9 could not be happy about) and its women’s game.

The comment has been made on these forums and in the media time and again that rugby league has historically suffered from poor leadership. Surely, since we demand and are shown examples of exceptional courage and skill by professional rugby league players on a regular basis it should be expected that the games leaders reflect these levels of courage and skill.

Mr Greenberg, listen to your players, like Cameron Smith, and the fans that support the great game that you serve. Get Creative! Use your courage and skill to grow the international and women’s games for the betterment of all rugby league, not just the NRL or channel 9, otherwise do the right thing and go! Let a more courageous and skilful person take up the leadership role the game deserves!

Todd out . . . Cam in
 
Messages
2,857
Let's make it even

Fire Todd and hire former NRMA board member Geoff Toovey

He's not that well known so IBM has probably never heard of the f**ker
 

Saxon

Bench
Messages
2,545
Let's make it even

Fire Todd and hire former NRMA board member Geoff Toovey

He's not that well known so IBM has probably never heard of the f**ker
Too many Manly stooges already.

(And before you get smart; none is too many)
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,411
Sadly we seem to replace one numptie with another. Get rid of toddy and no doubt we will employ some other yes man gimp with no vision or balls. For such a dynamic strong sport on the field we are continually blighted by weak balless leaders. Maybe that’s the answer, a woman ceo!
 

Tiger5150

Bench
Messages
3,052
In all seriousness, google his business experience prior to working at the Bulldogs. Its almost non existent. from memory he was manager at some small club prior to Bulldogs. I remember vividly on the BSB when he got the gig at NRL, they asked his experience and he nearly choked and mumbled a couple of things.

I am seriously better qualified.

The guy is a complete fraud. He managed to bluff his way through with his patented tough talk persona espousing serious things with a comforting serious nod and some generic business terminology he remembers from his ass dip Business course. Pretender.
 

Brutus

Referee
Messages
26,174
Greenberg wouldn't have known anything about RL before his gig at the Dogs.

He was not a RL at all. A decent club cricketer though.
 

Tiger5150

Bench
Messages
3,052
Greenberg wouldn't have known anything about RL before his gig at the Dogs.

He was not a RL at all. A decent club cricketer though.

Agreed....but when he was given the gig the reasoning was giving it to "one of our own....who understands clubland". IMO this is code for "We know this guy has no ability, qualifications or experience compared to the last three guys who had the job but....anyway"
 

Eion

First Grade
Messages
7,601
Absolute imposter. The worst thing about it is we could see what he was all about at the dogs....and then under Smith....and then appointed him.

Sadly what we are getting is exactly what many expected.
 

Hello, I'm The Doctor

First Grade
Messages
9,124
Sadly we seem to replace one numptie with another. Get rid of toddy and no doubt we will employ some other yes man gimp with no vision or balls. For such a dynamic strong sport on the field we are continually blighted by weak balless leaders. Maybe that’s the answer, a woman ceo!

I see it similar to Turnbull running the Libs; it doesnt matter if he was Joe Bloggs or Jesus, the position demands so much time keeping the natives from rioting, no one could EVER do anything productive with the job.
 

Hello, I'm The Doctor

First Grade
Messages
9,124
In all seriousness, google his business experience prior to working at the Bulldogs. Its almost non existent. from memory he was manager at some small club prior to Bulldogs. I remember vividly on the BSB when he got the gig at NRL, they asked his experience and he nearly choked and mumbled a couple of things.

I am seriously better qualified.

The guy is a complete fraud. He managed to bluff his way through with his patented tough talk persona espousing serious things with a comforting serious nod and some generic business terminology he remembers from his ass dip Business course. Pretender.

TBF, DSmith was supper qualified and people hated him for it...

A totally unqualified numpty is exactly what we deserve.
 

Diesel

Coach
Messages
19,918
When’s his contract up? The ARLC have pissed up so much money against the wall, they probably can’t afford to pay him out
 

Hello, I'm The Doctor

First Grade
Messages
9,124
Arko had the last good administration

Ive never understood why Arko has such a brilliant reputation. I struggle think of a worse manager we have had that him...

He was probably the single biggest cause of SL and it got to the point where it was less "i cant believe it happened" and more "i cant believe it didnt happen sooner".

I guess events made him a bit of a hero, but, speaking objectively, he has a pretty terrible legacy....
 
Messages
14,139
Ive never understood why Arko has such a brilliant reputation. I struggle think of a worse manager we have had that him...

He was probably the single biggest cause of SL and it got to the point where it was less "i cant believe it happened" and more "i cant believe it didnt happen sooner".

I guess events made him a bit of a hero, but, speaking objectively, he has a pretty terrible legacy....
Yep. Arko caused Super League. That Murdoch fella had little to do with it.









The Arko/Quayle admin did more to grow the sport than all the NRL bosses since its inception put together.
 

thorson1987

Coach
Messages
16,907
Ive never understood why Arko has such a brilliant reputation. I struggle think of a worse manager we have had that him...

He was probably the single biggest cause of SL and it got to the point where it was less "i cant believe it happened" and more "i cant believe it didnt happen sooner".

I guess events made him a bit of a hero, but, speaking objectively, he has a pretty terrible legacy....

You are talking to a Manly fan.
 

Hello, I'm The Doctor

First Grade
Messages
9,124
Yep. Arko caused Super League. That Murdoch fella had little to do with it.

Did you ever think it was weird that Murdoch could come in, with no groundwork, and take full control of the game in a matter of weeks? Murdoch was obviously the final catalyst for SuperLeague, but the ground was set long before he had any interest...

Super League required 3 things to occur; the clubs rebelling, the players jumping ship and a big benefactor funding the breakaway. If just one of these things was missing, SL couldnt have happened.

- The players will always be greedy and self-interested, so anything short of centralised contracts would have been as useless as what we had.Cant fault Arko for this one.
- And, with Packer and Murdoch both wanting the same thing and not interested in sharing, it was difficult to placate ALL benefactors (if we had gone with Murdoch, it would have been a Packers-lead SL). Cant really fault him for this one either.
- The failure was in not securing the clubs, and this absolutely was Arko's fault. Arko was so sure the clubs had no where else to go, he left them free to wander. I understand the year-to-year contracts for the little sydney clubs, but why the expansion clubs we wanted to keep? Why not sign them up to 100 year deals?

Arko brought in these clubs and gave them huge profiles, but gave them the opportunity to jump ship at the first chance. The simple fact that the four '95 expansion club were able to go to SL just shows you how incompetent the ARL admin was...


The Arko/Quayle admin did more to grow the sport than all the NRL bosses since its inception put together.

Id never argue this, they made huge strides with the game...

Their problem was that they never made the hard choices (they expanded but never cut. They were just hoping the clubs would conveniently fall over) and they never secure the territory they already had (they were so focused on expansion, they never stopped to think about the homeland).

I loved Arko's vision for the game, but visions are a dime a doze. When it came to execution, you cannot deny his failures. I dont know if it was incompetence or timidity, but i feel confident in saying he was one of the worst we have had running the game....
 
Last edited:
Messages
14,139
Did you ever think it was weird that Murdoch could come in, with no groundwork, and take full control of the game in a matter of weeks? Murdoch was obviously the final catalyst for SuperLeague, but the ground was set long before he had any interest...

Super League required 3 things to occur; the clubs rebelling, the players jumping ship and a big benefactor funding the breakaway. If just one of these things was missing, SL couldnt have happened.

- The players will always be greedy and self-interested, so anything short of centralised contracts would have been as useless as what we had.
- And, with Packer and Murdoch both wanting the same thing and not interested in sharing, it was difficult to placate ALL benefactors (if we had gone with Murdoch, it would have been a Packers-lead SL).
- The failure was in not securing the clubs. Arko was so sure the clubs had no where else to go, he left them free to wander. I understand the year-to-year contracts for the little sydney clubs, but why the expansion clubs we wanted to keep? Why not sign them up to 100 year deals?

Arko brought in these clubs and gave them huge profiles, but gave them the opportunity to jump ship at the first chance. The simple fact that the four '95 expansion club were able to go to SL just shows you how incompitent the ARL admin was...




Id never argue this, they made huge strides with the game...

Their problem was that they never made the hard choices (they expanded but never cut. They were just hoping the clubs would conveniently fall over) and they never secure the territory they already had (they were so focused on expansion, they never stopped to think about the homeland).

I loved Arko's vision for the game, but visions are a dime a doze. When it came to execution, you cannot deny his failures. I dont know if it was incompetence or timidity, but i feel confident in saying he was one of the worst we have had running the game....
Four 1995 expansion clubs didn't go to SL. Credibility fail.

The reality is his admin brought in these clubs.

What the f**k have the muppets running the game since then done? The current mob of tards have a billion dollars and still can't grow the sport.
 
Messages
2,857
Ive never understood why Arko has such a brilliant reputation. I struggle think of a worse manager we have had that him...

He was probably the single biggest cause of SL and it got to the point where it was less "i cant believe it happened" and more "i cant believe it didnt happen sooner".

I guess events made him a bit of a hero, but, speaking objectively, he has a pretty terrible legacy....
Brisbane not getting their own way, the bulldogs and in particular their turncoat Bullfrog and Murdoch not automatically getting the rights created sewer league, the sharks were desperate for money and the others got lucrative offers or were created for the league

If the bulldogs never dog it sewer league never plays a game

The most annoying thing about football is anyone giving Tallis a microphone on the subject of DCE,DCE stayed with a club he never wanted to leave for massive coin

That f**kwit merkin Tallis sat a year out instead of honouring his contract, he has no right to whine about anyone else
 

Hello, I'm The Doctor

First Grade
Messages
9,124
Four 1995 expansion clubs didn't go to SL. Credibility fail.

The reality is his admin brought in these clubs.

What the f**k have the muppets running the game since then done? The current mob of tards have a billion dollars and still can't grow the sport.

Man, way to clutch at straws. Losing 3 out of 4 isnt that much better. And I said they were "able to", i didnt say "they did". (and, for the record, the reason the Crushers didnt jump wasnt ARL brilliance, they just werent wanted by SL)...

You preference for growth is an odd one. Is it better to bring in a new NRL team and have them jump ship to Union after a few year or just avoid the expansion all together.

Im not defending the current mob, but it doesnt make the ARL people any less shit at their jobs....

Brisbane not getting their own way, the bulldogs and in particular their turncoat Bullfrog and Murdoch not automatically getting the rights created sewer league, the sharks were desperate for money and the others got lucrative offers or were created for the league

If the bulldogs never dog it sewer league never plays a game


The most annoying thing about football is anyone giving Tallis a microphone on the subject of DCE,DCE stayed with a club he never wanted to leave for massive coin

That f**kwit merkin Tallis sat a year out instead of honouring his contract, he has no right to whine about anyone else

Why were they ever able to make the decision? Why did the fate of the league depend on the loyalty of the Clubs?

The answer is pretty simple: Because the ARL was too incompetent to secure the good clubs and take the option off the table.
 

Latest posts

Top