NRL Look To Adopt EPL Business Model

[B-Train]

NRL clubs are agitating for a major overhaul of the way rugby league in Australia is structured when the game emerges from the coronavirus crisis, using the English Premier League as a template for a new landscape in which they would have much more power.

The clubs will be briefed on Monday morning by the NRL following a meeting of the ARL Commission, with pay cuts for players and executives expected to be rubber-stamped as the code attempts to survive the COVID-19 lockdown in the absence of broadcast income from Nine Entertainment and Foxtel, whose next instalments are due on Wednesday.

The English Premier League is seen as an ideal model by clubs and a document that lays out its operating structure has been circulating for months among them.

While the Premier League, as arguably the most successful sporting competition on the planet outside the US, is light years away from the NRL in terms of size and scope, clubs believe it provides a world’s best-practice guide for how the game in Australia should be run in a post-coronavirus landscape.

The document, obtained by the Herald, spells out how much greater weight clubs have in the game there than over affairs in the NRL here, with the Premier League "reporting to 20 member clubs”, who are each equal shareholders, and 14 out of the 20 required to vote on a particular issue to affect change.

It describes the role of the Premier League management as "to manage and govern the league, monetise the rights globally for clubs, distribute the money equitably amongst clubs to reinvest in talent, stadium and local communities, provide responsible support to lower league clubs and wider football and community development.”

According to the document that has been passed around by NRL clubs, 83 per cent of all revenue that flows into the Premier League is passed on to its clubs.

The NRL’s 2019 annual report says 43 per cent of all revenue was distributed to the 16 clubs – a pool of $228.1 million from total revenue of $528.5m.

The NRL has wider responsibilities than simply the country’s elite competition, pumping $48m into the states and $40m to development and employs about 400 staff.

However, there is a belief among some clubs that the NRL should be a significantly leaner operation.

According to the Premier League document they are using as a model, only a penny out of every pound that flows into the game there is spent on operating costs and the Premier League head office has only 140 staff.

While uncertainty has gripped the NRL and its clubs over the past fortnight, particularly since the competition was shut down on Monday, there was some good news on Friday when Telstra confirmed it would not pull back from its major sponsorship and from its role as the code's digital broadcast partner while there were no games.

"Telstra is a very strong supporter of Australian sport and we remain committed to all of our partnerships across NRL, AFL, netball and FFA, and will continue with our support regardless of season interruptions," a Telstra spokesman said.

 

[B-Train]

I've mentioned on here numerous times how I've seen first hand how many staff the NRL employs on good money that do nothing, have no qualifications and have a role created for them because they're an ex player or a friend of someone.

400 staff is proof of this and when the NRL receives 57% of billions of dollars and only has a few million to show for it during this crisis, the numbers are even more damning..

If a global sporting league like the EPL has a third of the staff and survives on 40% less of the revenue generated than the NRL does, then you know you have a flawed business model.

Again, the best thing to come out of all this is that hopefully the NRL will be a professionally run organisation one day. The more they copy the business models of the other successful leagues around the world, the better.

 

[Alan79]

That all sounds pretty promising. It seems like the NRL has operated with virtually no financial oversight since the record breaking rights deals were implemented. And the governing body makes changes according to whims regarding rules. They are very inconsistent with discipline. They clearly favor a few teams with sympathetic people in the top echelon of the organisation.

The clubs are the lifeblood of the game and they should have a massive say in the running of the game.

 

[Baby Blues]

That all sounds pretty promising. It seems like the NRL has operated with virtually no financial oversight since the record breaking rights deals were implemented. And the governing body makes changes according to whims regarding rules. They are very inconsistent with discipline. They clearly favor a few teams with sympathetic people in the top echelon of the organisation.

The clubs are the lifeblood of the game and they should have a massive say in the running of the game.

I actually prefer the NFL model but any change that makes the NRL more accountable is a good thing.

 

[Trafford10]

One small consultation is that Berrie & Gerrard Sutton will hopefully get a 100% pay cut.

 

[flamebouyant]

I've mentioned on here numerous times how I've seen first hand how many staff the NRL employs on good money that do nothing, have no qualifications and have a role created for them because they're an ex player or a friend of someone.

400 staff is proof of this and when the NRL receives 57% of billions of dollars and only has a few million to show for it during this crisis, the numbers are even more damning..

If a global sporting league like the EPL has a third of the staff and survives on 40% less of the revenue generated than the NRL does, then you know you have a flawed business model.

Again, the best thing to come out of all this is that hopefully the NRL will be a professionally run organisation one day. The more they copy the business models of the other successful leagues around the world, the better.

Greenturd probably earns as much as any top player and seemingly does fuck all. And what he does do, he does badly. It definitely is a terribly run sport. The constant changing of rules is a real issue, and the clear favouritism is a massive issueas well!!!

 

[bricktamland]

Ye

I've mentioned on here numerous times how I've seen first hand how many staff the NRL employs on good money that do nothing, have no qualifications and have a role created for them because they're an ex player or a friend of someone.

400 staff is proof of this and when the NRL receives 57% of billions of dollars and only has a few million to show for it during this crisis, the numbers are even more damning..

If a global sporting league like the EPL has a third of the staff and survives on 40% less of the revenue generated than the NRL does, then you know you have a flawed business model.

Again, the best thing to come out of all this is that hopefully the NRL will be a professionally run organisation one day. The more they copy the business models of the other successful leagues around the world, the better.

yep I shit you not a bloke from Brisbane became a rugby league selector . Was shit as at footy and believe it or not now talent scout for the dogs .. won’t say no more but yeh he’s average never played past 16 and didn’t make rep

 

[bricktamland]

Greenturd probably earns as much as any top player and seemingly does fuck all. And what he does do, he does badly. It definitely is a terribly run sport. The constant changing of rules is a real issue, and the clear favouritism is a massive issueas well!!!

Legit dumbest people at the helm for years , dumb decisions , favouritism , it’s fucked

 

[silva]

This would probably lead to higher salaries for players and less overpaid hacks at the nrl who do nothing

 

[Alan79]

This would be a great time for the clubs to have discussions about this kind of thing. I'm sure that more than a couple of them would have some grievances about the way the game is being run. Given that multiple clubs have been on the brink of financial collapse when the administration is raking in the money makes me wonder why they haven't already. Once this is all over, the NRL will need them to be ready to go. If they threaten to withhold their services in enough numbers they'll have the administration over a barrel. This is the best time to make a play for more power over the running of the game.

 

[Smartseal]

This would be a great time for the clubs to have discussions about this kind of thing. I'm sure that more than a couple of them would have some grievances about the way the game is being run. Given that multiple clubs have been on the brink of financial collapse when the administration is raking in the money makes me wonder why they haven't already. Once this is all over, the NRL will need them to be ready to go. If they threaten to withhold their services in enough numbers they'll have the administration over a barrel. This is the best time to make a play for more power over the running of the game.

Didn't they have that chance & demanded more money. The clubs are the worst candidates for running the game, most of them can't run their own clubs.
Pretty sure Vlandys admitted on the news the other night, that the NRL was badly run and that that would have to change drastically moving forward.

 

[Alan79]

Didn't they have that chance & demanded more money. The clubs are the worst candidates for running the game, most of them can't run their own clubs.
Pretty sure Vlandys admitted on the news the other night, that the NRL was badly run and that that would have to change drastically moving forward.

To a large extent the fact that clubs aren't making money while the governing body is, points at greed from the governing body. It may not bother the talking heads in the administration if clubs are close to folding, but it would devastate many fans if teams they obsess over fold. So I'm all for the governing body to be under greater scrutiny. The administration apparently needs to be streamlined if they're blowing $280 million dollars per year. I can't imagine how that money is being spent. I'm sure that the average employee in the 400 strong group employed in the running of the game isn't on close to $700k. I'd assume that those at the top are on significantly above that wage though.

 

[Nasheed]

Nasheed here,
Yeah as if that's going to work here

firstly, stop trying to 'copy' other leagues.
EPL is famous because Britain is a big country and rich. And soccer mad. That's why it's successful. A different country, different mentality and even a different sport.

Secondly, imagine promotion and relegation here.
If warriors get demoted all of a sudden sponsors are lost and then RTS and Blake Green wriggle our of their contract because they want to be 'challenged in the NRL' or 'homesick' or something and will just move to the promoted Newtown Jets.

 

[B-Train]

Nasheed here,
Yeah as if that's going to work here

firstly, stop trying to 'copy' other leagues.
EPL is famous because Britain is a big country and rich. And soccer mad. That's why it's successful. A different country, different mentality and even a different sport.

Secondly, imagine promotion and relegation here.
If warriors get demoted all of a sudden sponsors are lost and then RTS and Blake Green wriggle our of their contract because they want to be 'challenged in the NRL' or 'homesick' or something and will just move to the promoted Newtown Jets.

Clearly you didn't read the article. They're looking at following the EPL business model and how the governing body itself operates.

It has nothing to do with promotion or relegation or how popular a league it is.

The point of the article is that the EPL is a way bigger league but needs less money and staff to run itself compared to the NRL. Which points out just how much money the NRL wastes on wages and operational costs.

 

[Tassie Devil]

One thing to point out with the EPL model that we're apparently aiming for.

The concept that the EPL "reporting to 20 member clubs”, who are each equal shareholders, and 14 out of the 20 required to vote on a particular issue to affect change.

Even though this is true in that the clubs essentially control the running of the game, the stronger clubs get a much greater share of the takings with profits not being cut equally in the slightest .... as far as I know. Obviously the EPL is a great structure to learn from however I think it's dangerous to jump in without seeing the pitfalls also.

Happy for other EPL experts to correct me on these things but I honestly feel that the top clubs in the EPL control the direction, while the remainder are there to feed off the scraps. The top clubs have personel in important positions within the EPL & FA which enables them to get more for their own club.

Think it's a really positive step forward by copying the EPL but there's a lit to discuss if I'm honest. @coach any other comments on this as I think you know a fair bit yourself?

 

[Tassie Devil]

Clearly you didn't read the article. They're looking at following the EPL business model and how the governing body itself operates.

It has nothing to do with promotion or relegation or how popular a league it is.

The point of the article is that the EPL is a way bigger league but needs less money and staff to run itself compared to the NRL. Which points out just how much money the NRL wastes on wages and operational costs.

With the clubs having so much power it can also lead to a little bit of 'conflict of interest'? Anyway, think it's definitely something to work towards although don't know enough about the NRL structure to really comment. Can anyone give an overview on the management positions in the NRL?

 

[Sleeky]

One thing to point out with the EPL model that we're apparently aiming for.

The concept that the EPL "reporting to 20 member clubs”, who are each equal shareholders, and 14 out of the 20 required to vote on a particular issue to affect change.

Even though this is true in that the clubs essentially control the running of the game, the stronger clubs get a much greater share of the takings with profits not being cut equally in the slightest .... as far as I know. Obviously the EPL is a great structure to learn from however I think it's dangerous to jump in without seeing the pitfalls also.

Happy for other EPL experts to correct me on these things but I honestly feel that the top clubs in the EPL control the direction, while the remainder are there to feed off the scraps. The top clubs have personel in important positions within the EPL & FA which enables them to get more for their own club.

Think it's a really positive step forward by copying the EPL but there's a lit to discuss if I'm honest. @coach any other comments on this as I think you know a fair bit yourself?

I’m pretty sure it’s shared equally for all clubs but the more you win the more you get (not much in comparison to the equal rights money though). Where the other money comes in is the owners, UEFA comps, tickets sales, corporate, merchandise etc. Obviously the bigger clubs get a bigger bank account as they have their name that has been built up since how long ago.

 

[Sleeky]

In the EFL (division below EPL) they get equal money too but the more your club gets chosen to play by the broadcaster, the more you get. £40k if you’re the home team, £10k if you’re away. So essentially, the bigger your club is and more viewers you pull in, the more the broadcaster wants to pull in so obviously they would go in that direction, with the odd shit club here and there

 

[Nasheed]

NRL In '95 was close to the strongest it ever was.
There may be other seasons that eclipsed it, or in some ways some season got components better, but mid nineties was strong.

This tells you everything.

we have had three massive jumps in tv deals since then. If we can get things largely right in 95 without much Christopher ash, then just go back to those days and do the rest right!

For me, Bunker has to go. Or limited.
Have a mindset that it's to stop the howler, not because a Sutton brother is 99 percent sure but just wants to make sure he's 100.
Make it skippers challenge twice a game.