Jump to content





Photo
- - - - -

Next round of Licences


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 BringBacktheBiff

BringBacktheBiff
  • Coach
  • 197 posts

Posted 24 July 2010 - 08:54 PM

Id love to see the competition expand to 16 teams as I feel there are a number of candidates outside SL with strong cases to be included. The only problem is there arent enough SL quality players to go around. However I feel the following clubs all have good enough fan bases and have good enough youth development set ups to warrant inclusion:

Barrow: Stadium could be an issue, shame they cant get together with the other Cumbrian clubs to form a new franchise.

Featherstone: Very close to Cas and Wakefield, could generate a lot of income from sale of land to build a new stadium without council funding.

Widnes: Surely dead certs. Leading the way in terms of stadium and youth development. Great History.

Halifax: The Shay looks great with the new stand, Im sure many old fans would return if the club got back into SL. seriously doubt the RFL is looking for an other franchise in West Yorks though.

Would love to see a South Yorkshire side but dont think either Doncaster or Sheffield are anywhere near as stand alone clubs, merger? neither fans hate each other so may be feasible.

#2 eddo

eddo
  • Coach
  • 104 posts

Posted 24 July 2010 - 11:14 PM

This merger stuff keeps regurgatating not a goer with any clubs full stop.

#3 Terry Mullaney

Terry Mullaney
  • Coach
  • 1,991 posts

Posted 25 July 2010 - 12:33 AM

On the Wakefield/Cas ground share issue, do we assume that the RFL have indicated to these panic stricken clubs that their licenses will be renewed if they share a new stadium? If so, which other current SL club will have to go in order to make way for Widnes?

It seems like one hell of a gamble to sacrifice their current homes without any such assurance from the RFL. What if one or both fail in their bids to remain in SL despite a shiny new stadium?

Edited by Terry Mullaney, 25 July 2010 - 12:35 AM.

Wedding Films For The Discerning by Picture House
Free Showreel DVD On Request

http://www.pictureho...ingfilms.co.uk/

#4 steef

steef
  • Coach
  • 1,476 posts

Posted 25 July 2010 - 01:15 AM

QUOTE (Terry Mullaney @ Jul 25 2010, 01:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
On the Wakefield/Cas ground share issue, do we assume that the RFL have indicated to these panic stricken clubs that their licenses will be renewed if they share a new stadium? If so, which other current SL club will have to go in order to make way for Widnes?

It seems like one hell of a gamble to sacrifice their current homes without any such assurance from the RFL. What if one or both fail in their bids to remain in SL despite a shiny new stadium?


if one or both clubs ended up in the championship in a shiny new stadium they would have one more box ticked for future liscence applications than they would without it.

Looking at the list of candidates in the OP would three years in the championship be so bad for either club? presuming Widnes get in this time, I wouldn't be suprised if missing out on a liscence 1st time round will eventually be viewed as a blessing in disguise as time goes buy. Would Widnes have invested in youth as much as they have (and successfully it seems) if they'd been in SL the past 2 seasons? or would they have invested more of it trying to compete at first team level? I'd guess the latter. I'd wager that Widnes may well end up succeeding in SL partly as a result of missing out first time round as well as the way they have approached the liscenceing process as a club since then. Any SL club cut this time round would be wise to follow a similar plan to thw one widnes have in my opinion.
"surely they've got to try somthing different now, maybe the little chip over the top?2


http://www.flickr.com/photos/stufod/

http://www.facebook....156268557729980

#5 Dirk Diggler

Dirk Diggler
  • Coach
  • 1,218 posts

Posted 25 July 2010 - 08:17 AM

Unless the wheels come off the wagon in Wrexham it is odds on that either Wakefield or Castleford will get the bullet to let Widnes in next time round. If there is another viable (French) candidate they may both cop for it, the stadium situation does not change that.

#6 Terry Mullaney

Terry Mullaney
  • Coach
  • 1,991 posts

Posted 25 July 2010 - 08:43 AM

QUOTE (steef @ Jul 25 2010, 02:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Would Widnes have invested in youth as much as they have (and successfully it seems) if they'd been in SL the past 2 seasons? or would they have invested more of it trying to compete at first team level? I'd guess the latter. I'd wager that Widnes may well end up succeeding in SL partly as a result of missing out first time round as well as the way they have approached the liscenceing process as a club since then. Any SL club cut this time round would be wise to follow a similar plan to thw one widnes have in my opinion.

But surely both Wakefield and Castleford have successful youth structures already in place together with high quality community programmes etc. I'd like to hear the RFL's plan for when and if the day arrives where we've 20 clubs which all tick the right boxes.
Wedding Films For The Discerning by Picture House
Free Showreel DVD On Request

http://www.pictureho...ingfilms.co.uk/

#7 Chronicler of Chiswick

Chronicler of Chiswick
  • Coach
  • 2,544 posts

Posted 25 July 2010 - 08:46 AM

With David Hughes rumoured to no longer be prepared to continue financing Quins at the present rate, our future's looking a bit wobbly.

#8 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 15,306 posts

Posted 25 July 2010 - 09:19 AM

QUOTE (Dirk Diggler @ Jul 25 2010, 09:17 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Unless the wheels come off the wagon in Wrexham it is odds on that either Wakefield or Castleford will get the bullet to let Widnes in next time round. If there is another viable (French) candidate they may both cop for it, the stadium situation does not change that.



Are the wheels on the wagon in Wrexham ATM?
"Your a one trick pony Trojan" - Parksider 10th March 2013

#9 bowes

bowes
  • Coach
  • 11,164 posts

Posted 25 July 2010 - 09:22 AM

QUOTE (Chronicler of Chiswick @ Jul 25 2010, 09:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
With David Hughes rumoured to no longer be prepared to continue financing Quins at the present rate, our future's looking a bit wobbly.

I'd expect you to get a franchise moving out to Oxford or MK on condition you keep up London player development, though hard to see who to chop. Salford as things are would seem obvious but the new stadium may help things a lot, especially if Cas and Wakey don't.

#10 Exiled Wiganer

Exiled Wiganer
  • Coach
  • 6,333 posts

Posted 25 July 2010 - 10:01 AM

If Cas, Wakey and Salford score new stadia points, and Cru and Quins/London/sarf stay in as expansion clubs, isn't Bradford the bottom club - old ground, crowds less than 10k, youth development no better than anyone else, turnover low, not finishing above 8th on average. Would they score any points?

#11 bowes

bowes
  • Coach
  • 11,164 posts

Posted 25 July 2010 - 10:04 AM

QUOTE (Exiled Wiganer @ Jul 25 2010, 11:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
If Cas, Wakey and Salford score new stadia points, and Cru and Quins/London/sarf stay in as expansion clubs, isn't Bradford the bottom club - old ground, crowds less than 10k, youth development no better than anyone else, turnover low, not finishing above 8th on average. Would they score any points?

They got a B last time so no, might go down to a C but won't be last

#12 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 15,306 posts

Posted 25 July 2010 - 02:52 PM

QUOTE (bowes @ Jul 25 2010, 10:22 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Salford as things are would seem obvious but the new stadium may help things a lot, especially if Cas and Wakey don't.


Plus of course BBC Breakfast are moving to Salford. Which should raise their profile considerably.
"Your a one trick pony Trojan" - Parksider 10th March 2013

#13 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,706 posts

Posted 25 July 2010 - 02:57 PM

QUOTE (Trojan @ Jul 25 2010, 03:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Plus of course BBC Breakfast are moving to Salford. Which should raise their profile considerably.

Why?

#14 Bulletproof

Bulletproof
  • Coach
  • 2,242 posts

Posted 25 July 2010 - 03:21 PM

QUOTE (Dave T @ Jul 25 2010, 03:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Why?


Certainly remains to be seen whether it will make any difference whatsoever to their profile. I couldn't tell you personally which london football club is currently closest to BBC Television Centre. I think the London clubs are on the whole treated with bias but I couldn't tell you which one.

It could be good for the sport but I don't understand what it will do for Salford City Reds in particular which wont apply to Wigan, Wire or St Helens especially since relatively little Rugby League is shown on BBC.

#15 bobbruce

bobbruce
  • Coach
  • 6,160 posts

Posted 25 July 2010 - 03:29 PM

QUOTE (Terry Mullaney @ Jul 25 2010, 09:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
But surely both Wakefield and Castleford have successful youth structures already in place together with high quality community programmes etc. I'd like to hear the RFL's plan for when and if the day arrives where we've 20 clubs which all tick the right boxes.

We had 17 that were a grade C or better last time.This time I wouldn't be surprised if there are 20 clubs that reach that level.

#16 Adeybull

Adeybull
  • Coach
  • 497 posts

Posted 25 July 2010 - 03:52 PM

QUOTE (Exiled Wiganer @ Jul 25 2010, 11:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
If Cas, Wakey and Salford score new stadia points, and Cru and Quins/London/sarf stay in as expansion clubs, isn't Bradford the bottom club - old ground, crowds less than 10k, youth development no better than anyone else, turnover low, not finishing above 8th on average. Would they score any points?


Bulls hold a B licence, and scored 7 last time. Only reason we did not score 8, and get an A licence, was because of the salary cap issue over the treatment of Harris' image rights (something the club still regards as very contentious).

Note that Bulls were NOT one of the 5 clubs warned about their grounds. That may happen next time round, but it was not an issue for the present round.

Bulls junior development is now as good as any club in the game, and the facilities probably the best in the game. Many of you dear readers are going to be shocked at what is coming through the Odsal pipeline now, at long last.

Bulls turnover is still much higher than a number of clubs. And, unlike nearly every club apart from Leeds, the Bulls are solvent - although apparently the RFL no longer regard this as important - maybe because of the embarrassing situation of most SL clubs being technically insolvent?

I understand anyway that its only C-Licence holders who are vulnerable to the drop this time.

On previous criteria, you needed 5-7 for a B licence.

Bulls scored 7.

Since then:

Bulls gain 1 for salary cap.
Bulls now lose 1 for ground < 40% full
Bulls now lose 1 for crowd <10k
Bulls may lose 1 for "not making major contribution to the game", if finishing <8th is how that is assessed.

That means Bulls probably score 5 and keep B Licence, if previous criteria are applied.

Of course, if the goalposts are moved significantly then who knows? My worry has always been that Leeds will find some way of getting the goalposts moved, that would bring about Bradford's ejection and immediate plunge into oblivion.

But unless such should happen, rumours of the Bulls' demise continue to be seriously exaggerated.

#17 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 15,306 posts

Posted 25 July 2010 - 04:00 PM

QUOTE (Adeybull @ Jul 25 2010, 04:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
My worry has always been that Leeds will find some way of getting the goalposts moved, that would bring about Bradford's ejection and immediate plunge into oblivion.


Why would Leeds do that and lose the big derby match payday?
"Your a one trick pony Trojan" - Parksider 10th March 2013

#18 Exiled Wiganer

Exiled Wiganer
  • Coach
  • 6,333 posts

Posted 25 July 2010 - 04:05 PM

I thought the Bulls' turn over had dropped significantly, hence their being unable to spend up to the cap? I think SL without the Bulls would be awful and an injustice, but if they get 1 point for abiding by the rules (which everyone will get), and 1 for junior development, which I had not particularly seen the evidence for, but am happy to concede, then I still can't see where the rest of their points would come from if everyone got new grounds. Of course that is v unlikely, but I could see 2014 being a nervous year.

#19 Adeybull

Adeybull
  • Coach
  • 497 posts

Posted 25 July 2010 - 04:13 PM

QUOTE (Trojan @ Jul 25 2010, 05:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Why would Leeds do that and lose the big derby match payday?


I did not actually say that Leeds would do that with the intent of getting Bulls knocked out. Even if it transpired that that became the result (e.g through support for wider expansion allowing more new clubs in, at the expense of closely-concentrated heartland clubs.)

But, taking your point, I don't think Leeds would see Bulls at home as a major derby payday any more, to be honest. Gone are the days when Bulls took 5k or more there, and their crowds swelled accordingly. Be interested to hear what sensible Leeds fans (not the likes of NE) think about that? Maybe that's OT for this thread though.

#20 Adeybull

Adeybull
  • Coach
  • 497 posts

Posted 25 July 2010 - 04:25 PM

QUOTE (Exiled Wiganer @ Jul 25 2010, 05:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I thought the Bulls' turn over had dropped significantly, hence their being unable to spend up to the cap? I think SL without the Bulls would be awful and an injustice, but if they get 1 point for abiding by the rules (which everyone will get), and 1 for junior development, which I had not particularly seen the evidence for, but am happy to concede, then I still can't see where the rest of their points would come from if everyone got new grounds. Of course that is v unlikely, but I could see 2014 being a nervous year.


Bulls turnover HAS dropped, but remember it used to be the highest in the competition - so we have a long way to fall to where the likes of Quins are. But the inability to spend up to the cap is nothing to do with turnover directly - it is because the club cannot make losses since we have no wealthy owner to underwrite them. Unlike those clubs bankrolled by wealthy owners, many of which have clocked up huge losses and are generally technically insolvent and survive by owing a shedload to the owner.

The other main reason the Bulls have not been able to spend up to the cap is the big investment in the new training complex. Again, this has to come out of current revenue since we have no-one to run to for funding.

Have you a list of the ten criteria (for the current round, anyway?) I don't have it to hand, but you'd see the areas where Bulls DO score well there.

Don't forget that the Bulls too have new ground plans. Its sadly likely that public spending cuts will put paid to that scheme though. Remember, Bulls were denied a new ground because of local politics - our ground, with a big Tesco attached, was ruled out. How come other people's grounds, with a big Tesco attached, were allowed? Absolutely no sodding difference other than local politics.

But as for 2014 and the 2015 round - yes, if Bulls contrive to continue as they are - on and off the field - then I would expect ejection at the end of the 2014 season.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users