The ARL Commission is exploring one of the biggest scheduling shake-ups in the code’s history in a move that could see the NRL have a 19-round premiership draw.
This masthead can reveal the NRL is considering cutting the number of premiership rounds from 27 to 19 as part of the code’s march towards a 20-team league by the 2032 Brisbane Olympics. The reduction would represent one of the most significant changes to the premiership draw in 40 years, when the Winfield Cup expanded from 13 to 16 teams with the addition of Newcastle, Gold Coast and the Broncos in 1988.
Under the plan:
• State of Origin could become a stand-alone series following repeated calls for the NRL premiership to be suspended during the code’s $100 million showpiece;
• The international calendar will be expanded with the NRL keen to capitalise on a Test match boom after the success of the recently-completed Ashes and Pacific Championships;
• Byes will be scrapped and the regular-season shortened to enable more scheduling flexibility under a 20-team league; and
• The NRL is mulling over a conference system - successfully used in American sports - to maximise rivalry matches, gates and revenue for clubs.
The NRL released its 2026 premiership draw on Friday and for the fourth consecutive season, the 17 clubs will play 24 games each across a regular season spanning 27 rounds.
But there is a view 27 rounds is too long, onerous and a potential injury-hazard to NRL stars in a gruelling calendar that saw the code’s elite playing Test matches in England and Australia in early November.
A 20-team league would enable clubs to play each other once per season, alternating home-and-away fixtures over two years, ensuring equality after decades of criticism over unfair and unwieldy draws under a 27-round format.
The NRL’s current TV rights deal expires at the end of 2027, the year in which the Perth Bears enter the league. The following season, Papua New Guinea will become the NRL’s 19th franchise in the first year of the NRL’s new broadcast deal, expected to be formalised in 2026 and tipped to be worth north of $3 billion.
But it’s the addition of a 20th team, as early as 2030, that will have game-changing ramifications for the premiership draw and the future direction of the league. The challenge for the NRL is whether broadcasters will accept a major reduction in rounds given that more rounds means more games, more content and more visibility for the clubs’ commercial partners.
The Rugby League Players Association is mindful of the NRL’s 500-plus contracted players suffering burnout with a 27-round draw.
The NRL’s most experienced mentor, Souths super coach Wayne Bennett, hopes a cutback in rounds doesn’t cost the ARL Commission millions at the broadcast negotiating table.
“I don’t care how many rounds we play, but it’s about the money,” Bennett told this masthead. “Players won’t accept being paid less and clubs won’t want to get less with NRL grants and if we play less games. If you go from 27 rounds to 19 rounds, it’s a pretty fair reduction. If the broadcasters are happy to pay the same amount of money, fair enough, but I’m not sure if it will really happen. Less games certainly means players aren’t as tired at the end of the season, but they tend to recover pretty well now. It will be a decision made by the clubs and the RLPA because at the end of the day it (reducing rounds) could have an impact on the amount of money they get paid now and what that means for the salary cap down the track.”
The slashing of rounds would not be as marked as it seems. This year, the 27-round NRL delivered 204 regular-season games, plus nine finals fixtures for 213 premiership matches. A 19-round, 20-team competition would produce 190 regular-season games and 199 fixtures, only 14 fewer than the 2025 Telstra Premiership.
More matches won’t necessarily guarantee more broadcasting bucks. The NRL’s record for fixtures came nearly three decades ago in 1998, when the 20 clubs played 24 matches apiece, plus finals, in a whopping 253-game calendar.
The NRL has played 201 matches in 15 of its past 19 seasons, a workload in line with a prospective 19-round, 20-team, 199-game competition.
The 17 clubs currently have contracts in place to stage 12 home matches a season that would have to be renegotiated under a revised NRL competition draw.
South Sydney chief executive Blake Solly said the existing clubs are open to dialogue with broadcasters and ARL Commission bosses on changes to the draw as the code prepares for the entry of Perth and PNG. But he warned of the dangers of major surgery to the premiership draw, which saw reduced rounds of 18 and 22 respectively during the Super League and ARL war in 1997.
“Reducing the number of games in search of draw equality is a mirage that is unachievable,” Solly said. Particularly when we are playing Origin mid-season and with a schedule that disrupts the NRL regular season so badly. There will also be a huge financial impact on club commercial programs and venue-hire deals, and potentially broadcast revenue from less games. Everyone has to remember that the NRL competition provides the ARLC with 90 per cent of its revenue, too. The clubs are always open to any discussion that improves the season schedule and player recovery.
But it has to be sensible and based on the economic reality of our sport.”
In a wide-ranging interview with this masthead last month, ARL Commission boss Peter V’landys confirmed 20 teams is on the code’s agenda amid speculation the NRL would be capped at 19 clubs.
“Yes, we are looking at 20 teams, absolutely,” he said. “That is the Commission’s aim, because 20 teams opens up so many doors. It’s the perfect format for all elements of the game. We don’t want to lose the integrity of the competitions because when Origin is on, we are hellbent on growing the international game and having the 20 teams helps us to achieve all that. But we won’t be rushed into it, it has to be the right fit and it has to meet the business plan.”
Replies
Yeah great, players don't complain when their salaries are lowered from less product for tv.
People will still complain because they will have more away games against better teams compared to other teams or different turn around times.
I think a shorter season and stand alone rep period is the best option and over due though.
Issue is since they have done this they cannot go back. Dan Ginnane said that last year once you go to 27 rounds you cannot go back. If you do it is to 26 rounds.
Shorter season is exactly what Bennett is saying is the issue, i have said it for years. The less product the less money. They say only 14 less games, but if you do 24 games per team that is 240 regular season games. If you include semis that is 249. Up to 50 more games a year, broadcasters would be frothing at the mouth over that. Having 10 games a week and more broadcasting. 5 days a week of NRL footy? It is a broadcasters dream.
The idea of a stand alone rep weekend is stupid to me, not saying you are stupid FMP just the idea. You shut the game down for 3 weeks, AFL play and get all the media while all the talk for us is mainly Origin. Did you see the pre Origin content? I would rather watch paint dry, it was disgraceful. It reminded me of boxing, where opponents do forced jabs to sell the fight, most of the time it is faked to garner a reaction. Imagine 3 weeks of that? Fans will drop off. Plus coaches and trainers have admitted an entire squad having 3 straight weeks off you need a tiny pre-season to get them back to where they need to be. Mid-season you can't have that.
With more teams it's almost exactly the same amount of games in total.
Its 14 less. Have they go with the same amount of rounds with more teams its 50 more games.
Are you going to pay more money as a tv station or streamer for almost the same amount and less weeks overall of TV content?
The TV stations will say we get 2 extra games a week for less weeks?
LB, the networks will pay whatever the product is worth. If they have NRL ratings up the wazoo then the price will go up to get the audience. NRL will undoubtedly play one off against the other. Larger audience in the new areas except PNG, where I doubt a lot of punters actually have a TV.
If they run origin etc say once a month May, June, July, August and just have a week off here and there and have NRLW on those it should be OK. Networks can pay for exclusive rights to each series or even game. Big $$ for the potential decider in origin or Pacifica Cup final etc.
I would not place too much credence in Dan Ginnane's thoughts. He is a second rate commentator and not the GM of a network.
Yes networks will pay what they believe the product is worth, that is like everything. But if take away from the product of what you are producing it is worth less. Like anything. You have a high rating TV show, it is worth more the longer it goes on as you get more ads playing for that show each week. You make more money with 14 weeks than 10 weeks as more ads play and the bigger the show the more you can charge for ads. Having events like a Tonga v Samoa is great but networks want more product. The NRL itself made $770 mil this year, origin made $100mil added. For the money lost with the limited games if you add a Tonga v Samoa series with wont get back what is lost.
Having a week off with NRLW and some international games is fine. But 3 weeks off for reps games would be a killer. Having it once in a while is ok as a bye round substitute i admit though NRL is the big money maker itself, club games. Not sure if broadcasters want 3 weeks in a year of no NRL at all. Plus you said potential decider or final, potential doesn't always happen. If a series is a dead rubber people will just be waiting for NRL to come back on. They play exclusive right now as it is for GF and Origin. But the NRL is their money cow as it is longer of course. The NRLW does not bring in extra revenue at the moment, but it can.
Dan Ginnane speaks as most of the media do and his takes are pretty good when you think about it. He is right, you cannot go backwards in amount of product. You can go with 27 rounds to 26 with a rep round as something is filling in the missing NRL week. Look at other sports around the world, none of them limit the amount of games played. NFL recently added an extra week.
You are right they pay what the product is worth, but the NRL are valuing their product more than what the networks do and with less games and less time on TV over certain months the value is less. Imagine with season tickets the club goes you paid $500 for 12 games last year, this year it is $600 for 10 games and get different seats further down. It is hard to justify paying more or even the same for that matter.
more games doesn't equate to a better quality spectacle. I highly doubt V'Landys is into any decision that will cost the game revenue. The fact it has gotten this far would indicate that there's merit in it.
It's not about quality it's about quantity. TV don't care about quality as no guarentees the less product you get is going to be top quality. But what is for sure is people are going to watch footy regardless so getting more games and more things to put on tv over time is better for TV.
V'Landys is relying on the game being so good right now they think TV will do whatever to get it, he will look at streaming platforms too but that would be bad for fans.
Shrinkflation is real. Smaller product same amount or more. Sold as better quality than the old one.
Hell, the network boffins and NRL can do what the AFL do and have mandated ad breaks after each try and goal etc. Sell more advertising equals more $$ for all.
The game will go for 2 hrs but who cares when $$ are in play.
The players will have so many tests no-one will fatigue and the RLPA will be satisfied from that perspective.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next