Why doesn't the AFL finally put the NRL back into its place?!

[bzparkes]

You do know there’s a professional league competition in the UK right? Where they just had crowds of 60,000 and 50,000 attend international games…

League may not be a major worldwide sport and way less so than union, but it has a solid niche and growing.

I had a look at the averages across all domestic rugby league games earlier today and combinrd, they average around 10k being massively propped up by the NRL's average of just over 20k.

As a domestic competition, it's very small in the countries it's played in, outside of Australia.

 

[hampton]

I had a look at the averages across all domestic rugby league games earlier today and combinrd, they average around 10k being massively propped up by the NRL's average of just over 20k.

As a domestic competition, it's very small in the countries it's played in, outside of Australia.

That’s wrong because Super League in the UK averaged 10k by itself this year. Not propped up by the NRL average.

Only the French rugby union club comp gets a higher average than that, which is around 15k.

Super league is expanding to 16 teams next year including its second French club.

The NRL is the biggest rugby club competition worldwide of either code.

Yes League is not a major worldwide sport but the union international scope is majorly overplayed while the league scope is underplayed.

 

[bzparkes]

Super league in the UK averaged 10k by itself this year. Not propped up by the NRL average.

The other leagues drag the overall average down, although there aren't any other major domestic leagues so if you want to just use the UK and NRL leagues, it's roughly 15k average between the 2.

Only the French rugby union club comp gets a higher average than that, which is around 15k.

Super league is expanding to 16 teams next year including its second French club.

The NRL is the biggest rugby club competition worldwide of either code.

The union international scope is majorly overplayed while the league scope is underplayed.

I'm sure the game has its niche overseas and will continue to slowly grow. Will take a long time for any other domestic League comp to rival the NRL anytime soon though and none of them will come close to the AFL as a domestic comp, which I guess was the OP's point, although the AFL will never 'blow' the NRL away, nor should it. People are always going to prefer one or the other and plenty enjoy both.

 

[hampton]

The other leagues drag the overall average down, although there aren't any other major domestic leagues so if you want to just use the UK and NRL leagues, it's roughly 15k average between the 2.

Yes sure, which means both comps combined average is still higher than any other club rugby competition in the world.

I'm sure the game has its niche overseas and will continue to slowly grow. Will take a long time for any other domestic League comp to rival the NRL anytime soon though and none of them will come close to the AFL as a domestic comp, which I guess was the OP's point, although the AFL will never 'blow' the NRL away, nor should it. People are always going to prefer one or the other and plenty enjoy both.

NRL is arguably equal to or greater than the AFL on many metrics bar crowds and total revenue. Both important metrics to be fair. The revenue metric will become much much closer in the next couple years though, and keeping in mind nrl needs less revenue to run with its smaller team rosters and not propping up clubs like the afl does. NRL and AFL not very distant from each other let’s not kid ourselves.

Yes I agree there’s room for all codes to thrive in this country without it taking away anything too meaningful from the other. The player body types mostly differ between union (big and fat), league (strong, quick) and afl (lean, tall) with small overlaps only. The fans watch multiple codes with ease. The sponsors and advertisers want to maximise their reach and get across all codes.

League does has a meaningful and expanding international presence which is the future of the game. The NRL will likely buy / takeover super league and revitalise the game over there, looking for a worldwide media deal as well.

 

[bzparkes]

NRL is arguably equal to or greater than the AFL on many metrics bar crowds and total revenue. Both important metrics to be fair.

So, not ahead on any metric that matters then? Membership numbers aren't even remotely close either.

The revenue metric will become much much closer in the next couple years though, and keeping in mind nrl needs less revenue to run with its smaller team rosters and not propping up clubs like the afl does. NRL and AFL not very distant from each other let’s not kid ourselves.

The AFL earnt 39% more than the NRL in 2024. Sure, the NRL had a higher profit because it costs half what the AFL does to operate but this is mostly due to the league being contained in 2 states + Melbourne and being played at smaller grounds. Both administrations are not for profit anyway, so as long as neither code is in the red, the only thing affected are the bonuses the executive teams gets.

The AFL and NRL far apart currently and I can't really see the NRL making any serious inroads to AFL states, unless they're prepared to prop those clubs up like the AFL does with the NSW/Qld clubs, which would reduce their overall profit margin.

They'll also need fans to start actually attending games if they want to boost their revenue in any significant manner.

If they really want to grow, they need to boost junior participation in non-traditional states the way the AFL has done, especially in Qld.

Yes I agree there’s room for all codes to thrive in this country without it taking away anything too meaningful from the other. The player body types mostly differ between union (big and fat), league (strong, quick) and afl (lean, tall). The fans watch multiple codes with ease. The sponsors and advertisers want to maximise their reach and get across all codes.

League does has a meaningful and expanding international presence which is the future of the game. The NRL will likely buy / takeover super league and revitalise the game over there, looking for a worldwide media deal as well.

Power to them if they can do that.

 

[Retzlaff]

Under the carpet?

 

[hampton]

So, not ahead on any metric that matters then? Membership numbers aren't even remotely close either.

Memberships aren’t super relevant because of the bastardised memberships clubs are offering and that the nrl has not had and still doesn’t put a large focus on memberships. What even is a member these days it’s essentially not much different than counting mailing lists.

I’d say tv viewer metrics matter much more, where the nrl is ahead.

Revenue matters to the bean counters. Crowds and tv audience are the big ones.

The AFL earnt 39% more than the NRL in 2024. Sure, the NRL had a higher profit because it costs half what the AFL does to operate but this is mostly due to the league being contained in 2 states + Melbourne and being played at smaller grounds. Both administrations are not for profit anyway, so as long as neither code is in the red, the only thing affected are the bonuses the executive teams gets.

The AFL and NRL far apart currently and I can't really see the NRL making any serious inroads to AFL states, unless they're prepared to prop those clubs up like the AFL does with the NSW/Qld clubs, which would reduce their overall profit margin.

They'll also need fans to start actually attending games if they want to boost their revenue in any significant manner.

If they really want to grow, they need to boost junior participation in non-traditional states the way the AFL has done, especially in Qld.

The afl earnt 39% more revenue with a much larger media deal than the nrl and requiring like you said almost double the money to keep teams and aflw rosters afloat. The next nrl media deal could match the afl one which would dramatically decrease this difference, without the same level of overheads the afl has.

The inroads of afl in NSW and QLD are real but overstated (Auskick numbers…), however even if the nrl never got out of NSW and QLD it’s still enough to compete with the afl considering NSW and QLD make up 55% of the population. however league is in Victoria and growing, its in NZ and already large there, its coming to PNG population 10m and league is already massive there and its coming to WA which will mean league is in the 4 largest states of Australia.

AFL being big in small states like SA and TAS doesn’t really account for a whole heck of a lot in comparison.

The AFL, desiring to be a true national competition, have no choice but to overspend in NSW and QLD and gain more relevance there to grow beyond a niche sport. Without being strong in NSW and QLD, 2 of the big 3 states, it’s hard to be able to call it a real national competition.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

The thread title reminds me of a quote from True Romance: "He said Sicilians were spawned from N-words so Don Vincenzo bleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeewwwwwwwwwwwwww him away."

In response to the topic, it's unfortunate that back in the late 1800s and early 1900s NSW and Queenslander insecurity instilled an ingrained hatred for the Great Indigenous Australian game just because it originated in Victoria.

They preferred supporting pretty lacklustre, mediocre, boring, repetitive Pommy sports in the form of the thugbies than support an exciting home grown one (unlike SA, WA, Tassie, etc.. so good on them I guess), like I said all because it committed the grave sin of having roots in Melbourne.

The way to win the hearts of sports lovers in NSW and Qld is to convert children early on when they begin to take an interest in sports (around the ages of 7 and 12) but unfortunately the biases and prejudices of their parents and adult legal guardians get in the way of these children embracing the Great Game, hence why it's been very difficult for footy (unquestionably a vastly superior game to either of the thugbies) to have taken a significant foothold in those states to date.

Targeting anyone over 16 is pointless as by that stage very few people (less than 5% would be my guess) are willing to give other sports a chance.

If I were in charge of promoting footy in NSW/Qld I would put a lot of funding on focusing and targeting young thugbies hopefuls (between the ages of 10 and 15) that are turned away from the thugbies because they don't have the right body type (burly and no neck security stooge body type) and entice them to play a game that their body type (taller, athletic, lean, etc) is more suited to.

And yes it is absolutely important that the AFL blows the NRL away because as long it is the dominant sport in NSW and Qld it is sadly robbing footy (a vastly superior game) of potential super stars. The sooner those rubbish so-called games disappear, the better.

Much as I enjoyed your post I’m not sure your version of why Aussie Rules didn’t take hold in NSW/QLD bears much relation to actual history.

 

[hampton]

Much as I enjoyed your post I’m not sure your version of why Aussie Rules didn’t take hold in NSW/QLD bears much relation to actual history.

Indeed. VFL became popular in WA with the spread of folks from the Victorian gold rush days and in SA and TAS having close proximity to Melbourne. NSW being our oldest state and having earlier generations of rugby followers with supporting infrastructure, rugby and later rugby league as their favourite local sport, with qld having close proximity and alignment.

While parochialism was for sure a thing, there was no conspiracy to stamp out afl in nsw and qld. We’re talking about times of radio and local tv only, with limited opportunities of exposure to different sports outside of the ones popular in the local community.

 

[Hoops]

NRL is arguably equal to or greater than the AFL on many metrics bar crowds and total revenue.

And participation

 

[Hoops]

Memberships aren’t super relevant because of the bastardised memberships clubs are offering and that the nrl has not had and still doesn’t put a large focus on memberships. What even is a member these days it’s essentially not much different than counting mailing lists.

I’d say tv viewer metrics matter much more, where the nrl is ahead.

Revenue matters to the bean counters. Crowds and tv audience are the big ones.


The afl earnt 39% more revenue with a much larger media deal than the nrl and requiring like you said almost double the money to keep teams and aflw rosters afloat. The next nrl media deal could match the afl one which would dramatically decrease this difference, without the same level of overheads the afl has.

The inroads of afl in NSW and QLD are real but overstated (Auskick numbers…), however even if the nrl never got out of NSW and QLD it’s still enough to compete with the afl considering NSW and QLD make up 55% of the population. however league is in Victoria and growing, its in NZ and already large there, its coming to PNG population 10m and league is already massive there and its coming to WA which will mean league is in the 4 largest states of Australia.

AFL being big in small states like SA and TAS doesn’t really account for a whole heck of a lot in comparison.

The AFL, desiring to be a true national competition, have no choice but to overspend in NSW and QLD and gain more relevance there to grow beyond a niche sport. Without being strong in NSW and QLD, 2 of the big 3 states, it’s hard to be able to call it a real national competition.

Do you what matters the most? Revenue.
All metrics flow back to revenue and AFL wins hands down.
Qld + NSW population btw is less than 52% of Australia's population

 

[Seeds]

Daicos would be a bit too soft to be a soccer player.

Yeah the lack of tackling, bumps and diving when breath is blown on someomes back is really tough.

 

[hampton]

Do you what matters the most? Revenue.
All metrics flow back to revenue and AFL wins hands down.
Qld + NSW population btw is less than 52% of Australia's population

AFL would need to be well ahead in revenue with the much bigger playing roster size exacerbated by an 18 team W comp as well, and the inequal prop up grants given to northern state clubs and struggling victorian ones.

So that’s correct that nsw and qld together make more than half of Australia population, now add ACT as well. That’s also assuming zero league interest outside of those states which isn’t true at all.

 

[Football Tragic]

Memberships aren’t super relevant because of the bastardised memberships clubs are offering and that the nrl has not had and still doesn’t put a large focus on memberships. What even is a member these days it’s essentially not much different than counting mailing lists.

I’d say tv viewer metrics matter much more, where the nrl is ahead.

Revenue matters to the bean counters. Crowds and tv audience are the big ones.

Memberships and attendance are massively important. The clubs gain huge revenue from game attendance and memberships, plus the league does, the venues, local businesses and sponsors. It encourages passion and interest which then flows into merchandise sales, business and corporate events. The clubs do get money from the league through their TV Rights but it is a much smaller percentage than what the NRL has to give to their clubs.

Revenue is the number one indicator whiche the AFl is miles in front.

The NRL have done everything in their power to try and pump up their game as a TV Spectacle; holding their GF at the number one weekly prime time slot of a Sunday night on a sport free weekend, holding their SOO on Wednesday nights, copying the AFL by playing Thursday night games, yet their ratings are rarely higher than the AFLs.

If you feel the TV ratings are the most important, which they aren't, the biggest question remains - why does the AFLs TV rights dwarfed the NRL for almost two decades now? Perhaps the networks don't value the numbers the NRL constantly throw out for ratings as much as the league hope they do?

I don't think its even close and with the AFL gaining increasing popularity in Queensland, NSW will soon be the only state that has the NRL as its number one sport....for the time being

 

[Hoops]

AFL would need to be well ahead in revenue with the much bigger playing roster size exacerbated by an 18 team W comp as well, and the inequal prop up grants given to northern state clubs and struggling victorian ones.

So that’s correct that nsw and qld together make more than half of Australia population, now add ACT as well. That’s also assuming zero league interest outside of those states which isn’t true at all.

You are forgetting that that is just revenue for the league. The clubs football revenue gap is equally substantial. The AFL spend that money because they can.

 

[hampton]

You are forgetting that that is just revenue for the league. The clubs football revenue gap is equally substantial. The AFL spend that money because they can.

The AFL grant is larger to clubs than the NRL partly because they can and also because there's a need with the larger men and women rosters. Also some clubs getting larger shares of the grant and also player picks makes the comp unequal which wouldn't fly if that happened in the NRL. The club revenue model between NRL and AFL clubs are quite different, pure football yes afl clubs generate more but most NRL clubs have more variety and depth of revenue streams and assets outside of pure football. Things like Leagues clubs, property/commercial assets, hospitality venues etc. A new NRL club like The Dolphins, for example, is an extension of the Redcliffe Dolphins QRL club, which has an asset portfolio of 100m+, owns it's own stadium, has a big leagues club, shopping centre, aquarium, etc. Existing clubs like the Panthers have league clubs and hospitality venues all around NSW, they basically have multiple casinos.

Very different to new AFL clubs like GWS who would have gone bankrupt if the AFL weren't bankrolling them.

Hence why AFL clubs have a large need to focus on memberships and crowds to drive revenue because they're way more dependant on it than NRL clubs.

 

[PhatBoy]

Memberships and attendance are massively important. The clubs gain huge revenue from game attendance and memberships, plus the league does, the venues, local businesses and sponsors. It encourages passion and interest which then flows into merchandise sales, business and corporate events. The clubs do get money from the league through their TV Rights but it is a much smaller percentage than what the NRL has to give to their clubs.

Revenue is the number one indicator whiche the AFl is miles in front.

The NRL have done everything in their power to try and pump up their game as a TV Spectacle; holding their GF at the number one weekly prime time slot of a Sunday night on a sport free weekend, holding their SOO on Wednesday nights, copying the AFL by playing Thursday night games, yet their ratings are rarely higher than the AFLs.

If you feel the TV ratings are the most important, which they aren't, the biggest question remains - why does the AFLs TV rights dwarfed the NRL for almost two decades now? Perhaps the networks don't value the numbers the NRL constantly throw out for ratings as much as the league hope they do?

I don't think its even close and with the AFL gaining increasing popularity in Queensland, NSW will soon be the only state that has the NRL as its number one sport....for the time being

Sorry copied the AFL with Thursday night football? Both codes have sporadically scheduled the odd game on a Thursday but the NRL announced in 2012 that they would be doing it as part of the draw in 2013 having kicked the season off with a one off game in 2012. The NRL also had Monday night football around the same period.

The NRL GF has always been on a Sunday, and it’s been a quarter of a century since they moved it back to night time. Probably time people realised it’s not a new thing. It’s about as relevant as the arrival of day night cricket, now. So is state of origin. It’s been around nearly 50 years and aside from a brief foray to stand alone weekends in the early 2000s. Yes the name is clearly lifted from the AFL concept but they didn’t sit there going ‘let’s copy what the afl were doing.’

Rugby league competition between Queensland and NSW had gotten so one sided that Queensland had won one series in something like 25 years and the games were getting barely 1000 people to Sydney venues. The game’s commission decided it would simply be fairer if all the Queensland players who were being paid by gaming machine money to play for Sydney clubs - which Brisbane clubs couldn’t match - were allowed to play for Queensland instead of NSW. That’s it. And it was immediately successful. Arthur Beetson captained them from Parramatta’s reserve grade side and thumped his own club mate Mick Cronin and the whole idea took off. So yeah the name came from AFL but claiming the concept was just ‘let’s do what they are doing’ is like saying Premier League darts is the same as the EPL because they share a similar name.

I don’t doubt that the rights deal would be bigger anyway, but for the majority of this century the AFL has had an extra game to sell. For a few years after the Titans arrived and before the Giants did, both codes had 8 matches a week but aside from that the AFL has always had an extra game to sell so that has given the AFL an automatic head start in terms of what they can sell so it does explain part of the gap.

 

[hampton]

Memberships and attendance are massively important. The clubs gain huge revenue from game attendance and memberships, plus the league does, the venues, local businesses and sponsors. It encourages passion and interest which then flows into merchandise sales, business and corporate events. The clubs do get money from the league through their TV Rights but it is a much smaller percentage than what the NRL has to give to their clubs.

Revenue is the number one indicator whiche the AFl is miles in front.

The NRL have done everything in their power to try and pump up their game as a TV Spectacle; holding their GF at the number one weekly prime time slot of a Sunday night on a sport free weekend, holding their SOO on Wednesday nights, copying the AFL by playing Thursday night games, yet their ratings are rarely higher than the AFLs.

If you feel the TV ratings are the most important, which they aren't, the biggest question remains - why does the AFLs TV rights dwarfed the NRL for almost two decades now? Perhaps the networks don't value the numbers the NRL constantly throw out for ratings as much as the league hope they do?

I don't think its even close and with the AFL gaining increasing popularity in Queensland, NSW will soon be the only state that has the NRL as its number one sport....for the time being

AFL clubs are way more reliant on crowds, memberships and central revenue distrubution than NRL and it's clubs are. That's because most NRL clubs are independently well off outside of football revenue. When you add TV grants/central distribution, sponsors, crowds, merch, memberhips etc they're doing very well. It's all excacerbated for the AFL because their cost base is a lot higher to run a football club.

That's why we'll probably have a bunch of clubs forever propped up by their unfair allotment of AFL central distribution. Hello Kangaroos, St Kilda, GWS, Suns, Lions. This doesn't happen in the NRL, except for a couple of specific time-boxed cases in the past.

In terms of the other things you mentioned, I don't think TV ratings is the most important metric, but it's probably the most important in gauging general interest of a sport, and also being it's the major source of revenue.

Why are AFL TV rights much larger, few reasons. NRL has been in a funk for the last few decades post Super League where the AFL has capitalised, this includes an implosion of the competition, off field incidents, poor adminstration etc. This impacted the desirability to broadcasters and advertisers, even though TV ratings for NRL have always been strong. The last TV deal was conducted at the poor time in the height of Covid. We will see what happens now with the next tv deal, as it looks like the NRL has weathered this storm, has a way more positive image and direction, has an exciting product and even competition, is expanding locally and globally, and coming into a golden age. But the proof will be in the pudding because there's no more excuses now for the NRL not to get a massive tv deal.

Also independantly of this, there are other factors why an AFL media deal might be higher. Firstly and most obviously, the game is significantly longer and with many more ad breaks due to frequent scoring. I would not be surprised if there's double the amount of ads shown in an AFL game than an NRL one. The other factor is that the AFL has more spread across capital cities, which has historically been an important factor in commercial deals.

The NRL has had a sunday night grand final for the past quarter of a century, it's not a recent move to address ratings. Wednesday origin has also been a common fixture for a long time. The AFL can also schedule their games whenever they want noone is stopping them from wednesday night or sunday night games.

Lastly you're wrong that the NRL rarely beats AFL in tv ratings, it's quite the reverse, especially in 2025. And AFL will never be the number 1 code in QLD, it's far far far away from that, only Victorians think that is a possibility.

 

[Football Tragic]

The AFL grant is larger to clubs than the NRL partly because they can and also because there's a need with the larger men and women rosters. Also some clubs getting larger shares of the grant and also player picks makes the comp unequal which wouldn't fly if that happened in the NRL. The club revenue model between NRL and AFL clubs are quite different, pure football yes afl clubs generate more but most NRL clubs have more variety and depth of revenue streams and assets outside of pure football. Things like Leagues clubs, property/commercial assets, hospitality venues etc. A new NRL club like The Dolphins, for example, is an extension of the Redcliffe Dolphins QRL club, which has an asset portfolio of 100m+, owns it's own stadium, has a big leagues club, shopping centre, aquarium, etc. Existing clubs like the Panthers have league clubs and hospitality venues all around NSW, they basically have multiple casinos.

Very different to new AFL clubs like GWS who would have gone bankrupt if the AFL weren't bankrolling them.

Hence why AFL clubs have a large need to focus on memberships and crowds to drive revenue because they're way more dependant on it than NRL clubs.

That's a whole other issue - how the Government allows sporting clubs to use Pokies and others misery to fund them. AFL clubs are moving away from relying on gambling to fund them, NRL clubs are still massively reliant upon them.

 

[hampton]

That's a whole other issue - how the Government allows sporting clubs to use Pokies and others misery to fund them. AFL clubs are moving away from relying on gambling to fund them, NRL clubs are still massively reliant upon them.

It's not just pokies, it's food, hotels, entertainment, bistros, hosting events, real estate holdings, etc They are self-sufficient commercial entities. Most AFL clubs are reliant on their football gate, member takings, and the AFL hand outs. Few exceptions in AFL like collingwood and weagles.

 

[Football Tragic]

The NRL GF has always been on a Sunday, and it’s been a quarter of a century since they moved it back to night time. Probably time people realised it’s not a new thing. It’s about as relevant as the arrival of day night cricket, now. So is state of origin. It’s been around nearly 50 years and aside from a brief foray to stand alone weekends in the early 2000s. Yes the name is clearly lifted from the AFL concept but they didn’t sit there going ‘let’s copy what the afl were doing.’

Rugby league competition between Queensland and NSW had gotten so one sided that Queensland had won one series in something like 25 years and the games were getting barely 1000 people to Sydney venues. The game’s commission decided it would simply be fairer if all the Queensland players who were being paid by gaming machine money to play for Sydney clubs - which Brisbane clubs couldn’t match - were allowed to play for Queensland instead of NSW. That’s it. And it was immediately successful. Arthur Beetson captained them from Parramatta’s reserve grade side and thumped his own club mate Mick Cronin and the whole idea took off. So yeah the name came from AFL but claiming the concept was just ‘let’s do what they are doing’ is like saying Premier League darts is the same as the EPL because they share a similar name.

I don’t doubt that the rights deal would be bigger anyway, but for the majority of this century the AFL has had an extra game to sell. For a few years after the Titans arrived and before the Giants did, both codes had 8 matches a week but aside from that the AFL has always had an extra game to sell so that has given the AFL an automatic head start in terms of what they can sell so it does explain part of the gap.

Which is my point - the NRL have always tried to maximize their ratings, prioritizing that over trying to increase attendance etc. Yet, despite all this, the codes ratings are still rarely higher than the AFLs. According to the NRL Braintrust, their league has been the dominate TV Sport forever. They were putting up graphics and figure building up to the last two rights deals they failed on. The remember how the NRL media celebrated when they achieved their landmark deal in the past only for the AFLs deal to embarrassingly, subsequently dwarf it.

I don't buy the whole - 'This Rights Deal will be the biggest of all' because nothing has changed. If anything, the AFL has pushed further ahead and, if they decide to move their Grand Final to become a twilight figure and bring in two more teams, the divide will only continue to grow.

 

[PhatBoy]

Which is my point - the NRL have always tried to maximize their ratings, prioritizing that over trying to increase attendance etc. Yet, despite all this, the codes ratings are still rarely higher than the AFLs. According to the NRL Braintrust, their league has been the dominate TV Sport forever. They were putting up graphics and figure building up to the last two rights deals they failed on. The remember how the NRL media celebrated when they achieved their landmark deal in the past only for the AFLs deal to embarrassingly, subsequently dwarf it.

I don't buy the whole - 'This Rights Deal will be the biggest of all' because nothing has changed. If anything, the AFL has pushed further ahead and, if they decide to move their Grand Final to become a twilight figure and bring in two more teams, the divide will only continue to grow.

I literally just pointed you to a blatant example of the NRL reinventing their interstate competition to prioritise their attendances: and it worked

Even in Queensland where the existing matches were getting at least SOME crowds - they immediately doubled and Lang Park sold out.

 

[hampton]

Which is my point - the NRL have always tried to maximize their ratings, prioritizing that over trying to increase attendance etc. Yet, despite all this, the codes ratings are still rarely higher than the AFLs. According to the NRL Braintrust, their league has been the dominate TV Sport forever. They were putting up graphics and figure building up to the last two rights deals they failed on. The remember how the NRL media celebrated when they achieved their landmark deal in the past only for the AFLs deal to embarrassingly, subsequently dwarf it.

I don't buy the whole - 'This Rights Deal will be the biggest of all' because nothing has changed. If anything, the AFL has pushed further ahead and, if they decide to move their Grand Final to become a twilight figure and bring in two more teams, the divide will only continue to grow.

What do you mean the tv ratings are rarely higher for NRL, they are generally higher and well higher on pay TV.

If you take the 2025 finals series for both AFL and NRL, all NRL finals games rated higher than their equivalent AFL final. Regardless of the day or timeslot. Which puts your argument to bed that the NRL are prioritising tv friendly time slots and are still not rating higher, completely untrue.

Yes we'll have to see what the next NRL media deal is like, based purely on ratings the NRL far exceeded the AFL in ratings in 2025 so it should be at least as high. But when you factor in the length of AFL games etc it might bring it down a bit. But the expectation in NRL circles now is that the media deal should be around on par with that of the recent AFL deal.

 

[woosha26]

AFL turnover per year is around $950,000.000, NRL around $550,000.000. Your honour the defence rests! Enough said.

 

[Football Tragic]

AFL clubs are way more reliant on crowds, memberships and central revenue distrubution than NRL and it's clubs are. That's because most NRL clubs are independently well off outside of football revenue. When you add TV grants/central distribution, sponsors, crowds, merch, memberhips etc they're doing very well. It's all excacerbated for the AFL because their cost base is a lot higher to run a football club.

That's why we'll probably have a bunch of clubs forever propped up by their unfair allotment of AFL central distribution. Hello Kangaroos, St Kilda, GWS, Suns, Lions. This doesn't happen in the NRL, except for a couple of specific time-boxed cases in the past.

In terms of the other things you mentioned, I don't think TV ratings is the most important metric, but it's probably the most important in gauging general interest of a sport, and also being it's the major source of revenue.

Why are AFL TV rights much larger, few reasons. NRL has been in a funk for the last few decades post Super League where the AFL has capitalised, this includes an implosion of the competition, off field incidents, poor adminstration etc. This impacted the desirability to broadcasters and advertisers, even though TV ratings for NRL have always been strong. The last TV deal was conducted at the poor time in the height of Covid. We will see what happens now with the next tv deal, as it looks like the NRL has weathered this storm, has a way more positive image and direction, has an exciting product and even competition, is expanding locally and globally, and coming into a golden age. But the proof will be in the pudding because there's no more excuses now for the NRL not to get a massive tv deal.

Also independantly of this, there are other factors why an AFL media deal might be higher. Firstly and most obviously, the game is significantly longer and with many more ad breaks due to frequent scoring. I would not be surprised if there's double the amount of ads shown in an AFL game than an NRL one. The other factor is that the AFL has more spread across capital cities, which has historically been an important factor in commercial deals.

The NRL has had a sunday night grand final for the past quarter of a century, it's not a recent move to address ratings. Wednesday origin has also been a common fixture for a long time. The AFL can also schedule their games whenever they want noone is stopping them from wednesday night or sunday night games.

Lastly you're wrong that the NRL rarely beats AFL in tv ratings, it's quite the reverse, especially in 2025. And AFL will never be the number 1 code in QLD, it's far far far away from that, only Victorians think that is a possibility.

The AFL clubs aren't reliant on that money (regardless of that some clubs whine that they are). It is a luxury the league can afford. That is why the AFL pumped so much money into grassroots programs such as AusKick which the NRl hasn't been able to do. It's why the AFL Venues are infinitely better than the NRL grounds and facilities. The money and investment difference is not comparable. To run an AFL Club is higher because it can be not because it has to be.

The general interest in the sports isn't just based on tv ratings - its based off attendance, membership, participation, sponsorship, functions, merchandise and then tv ratings, exposure and rights. Its one of the NRLs major flaws - they put too many of their eggs in one basket.

The AFLs TV Rights are much bigger and more valuable because of all that you mentioned, so why is the ratings the only measure the NRL use to argue that their product is better than the AFL?

I think you are in denial about the AFLs growth in Queensland. The AFL had little to no presense in the state when it first moved up there. Today, it has grown expendentually. Its participation numbers are larger than South Australia's (are die hard AFL state) and they sell out their stadium weekly. Ratings are growing too from the state and we now have a huge influx of players drafted from the state that would have been NRL players in the past. How many NRL players come from Victoria, Tasmania, SA or WA? The number is tiny compared to the amount coming into the AFL from NSW and Queensland.

It's not Victorians who think this way. Unlike NRL that is a two state competition, the AFL live up to their name - they are Australia wide. The AFL are dominant in Tasmania, Western Australia, South Australia, Northern Territory and Victoria plus have a large footprint in NSW and massive one in Queensland. Its not a Victorian game - far from it, and its growing faster than the NRL by almost every matrix.