Jump to content





Photo
- - - - -

Eagles for SL


  • Please log in to reply
549 replies to this topic

#181 Pottsy

Pottsy
  • Coach
  • 3,541 posts

Posted 10 October 2012 - 05:40 PM


Sheffield Eagles Director and former RFL President John Whaling has issued a statement expressing his concern over the RFL's commitment to Rugby League in South Yorkshire.


What's he after? A ticker tape parade through the streets of Burngreave?

To be fair to the RFL, they're keeping more people in jobs than Tesco right now, including a fair few in South Yorkshire/the East Midlands, so I'm not entirely sure what he's moaning about.

How many Eagles players have a day job in RL development? Are none of these posts funded in part by the RFL?

#182 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,891 posts

Posted 10 October 2012 - 05:42 PM

However, if say Featherstone had won or, down the road, Sheffield find the financing and win the championship, then they would know they were up, no ifs and buts and random licencing applications.


So we're setting Fev up an an example of prudent financial management ?
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#183 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,836 posts

Posted 10 October 2012 - 06:12 PM

So we're setting Fev up an an example of prudent financial management ?


I thought they were but don't go off on tangents. If they are not susbstitute any team that satisfies the criteria for a SL licence AND wins the championship. If there are none there would be no promotion. I thought I had made that clear.

#184 Tre Cool

Tre Cool
  • Coach
  • 475 posts

Posted 10 October 2012 - 06:39 PM

No fans, profile, stadium or money. Whats the point?

#185 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,506 posts

Posted 10 October 2012 - 07:51 PM

Why would (sheffield) suddenly spend money it doesnt have it was promoted under P&R?

Perhaps they would spend the significantly extra revenues from bigger crowds and sky money wisely?

Perhaps some players could stay part time - I would bet they'd still win at least as many as the ill prepared Widnes


OK so the extra crowd revenue and the SKY money spent "wisely" with some part time players helping to keep player costs down would have seen Sheffield stay up this coming year??

Whereas the cash rich "Ill prepared" Widnes who clearly have wasted shedloads of money on poor choices of player would have deserved to go down.

P & R would obviously have done a good job this year, and Sheffield would avoid relegation next year according to you.

There's therefore no need for promoted clubs to have money as they will only waste it, all they need is "wise choices" and several "part timers" to stay up?

Seriously???

#186 Tre Cool

Tre Cool
  • Coach
  • 475 posts

Posted 10 October 2012 - 07:54 PM

Its rubbish. The 'we exist therefore deserve to be in Super League' mentality of northern semi-pro RL clubs is really irritating.

#187 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,891 posts

Posted 10 October 2012 - 08:03 PM

I thought they were but don't go off on tangents. If they are not susbstitute any team that satisfies the criteria for a SL licence AND wins the championship. If there are none there would be no promotion. I thought I had made that clear.


Fair point.

Who though ?

Sheffield just about break even but have historical losses and no asset base. Fev make losses. Fax and Leigh -as far as I know - do OK these days but don't have any development structure.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#188 Lobbygobbler

Lobbygobbler
  • Coach
  • 5,829 posts

Posted 10 October 2012 - 08:04 PM

OK so the extra crowd revenue and the SKY money spent "wisely" with some part time players helping to keep player costs down would have seen Sheffield stay up this coming year??

Whereas the cash rich "Ill prepared" Widnes who clearly have wasted shedloads of money on poor choices of player would have deserved to go down.

P & R would obviously have done a good job this year, and Sheffield would avoid relegation next year according to you.

There's therefore no need for promoted clubs to have money as they will only waste it, all they need is "wise choices" and several "part timers" to stay up?

Seriously???


Widnes went up with a ###### team way off the pace for NL1 and were ill prepared. A team going up as champions or multiple champions (if automatic promotion with standards if not every year) would have the backbone of a team - especially so if they are already the best team after year 2 of the 3 year cycle.

#189 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,506 posts

Posted 10 October 2012 - 08:06 PM

1. I meant liscencing needed to be given a chance.

2. IF (sheffield) were granted a license the fact it is a 3 years license gives them the best chance of making it work.. but to rule out or even start the argument of "Sheffield do not produce Super League standard players" as a stick to beat us with us hugely unfair. Give them a chance before writing them off on junior development, they are doing what they can with what they have and doing a good job. There are plenty of other things to write Sheffield out of a liscence but I believe the Junior Development is making big strides forward and are putting some other clubs (in the heartlands no less) to shame. There is potential there.that is enough for other clubs.

3. Money wise, at the moment no.. but it doesnt mean it wont come and surely if in the proposal scrutineered by an accountant we can make it work without the massive backer that surely is a good thing.. there are plenty of clubs with a backer who are struggling. a club SHOULD work by spending what it earns.. and if we can do that and make it work surely we should be applauded not looked at with "where is the money coming from"..


1. Yes of course, sorry.

2. I am not beating Sheffield or writing them off on junior development. Never.

3. I have said that if they get a big backer then go for it. I am sure such a great club will come up with the goods.

But the catch 22 is Championship Rugby does not inspire the kids. A super league Sheffield would I am sure. But it has to be a Superleague Sheffield that competes in Super League and doesn't just lose most of it's games and sink financially.

Do the maths. Look at HKR losing half a million pounds a year on crowds Sheffield will never achieve in three years. How will anything positive come out of a three year license with a half million loss at least first year?? Then what do the club do second year?? Lower budgets but still add to the loss?? Where will they be year three??

A long sustained run competing in Superleague will see the club grow, but there isn't the money and the RFL cannot afford a three year disaster.....

#190 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,891 posts

Posted 10 October 2012 - 08:08 PM

How many Eagles players have a day job in RL development? Are none of these posts funded in part by the RFL?


As far as I know, the islanders have no work permit to cover anything but playing. Mitch Stringer and Hendo are employed - they're Scottish, obviously.

But is bidding for development work not something any club can do ? :huh:

Most of the "traditional" clubs just cover the few square miles surrounding their grounds. Up to them, obviously, but don't moan about others getting the work. <_<
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#191 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,891 posts

Posted 10 October 2012 - 08:15 PM

Widnes went up with a ###### team way off the pace for NL1 and were ill prepared. A team going up as champions or multiple champions (if automatic promotion with standards if not every year) would have the backbone of a team - especially so if they are already the best team after year 2 of the 3 year cycle.


There's an old adage that clubs get promoted, not players. Players tend to stay in the division they were in and just change clubs.

Even more true when moving between full-time and part-time.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#192 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,307 posts

Posted 10 October 2012 - 08:18 PM

Its rubbish. The 'we exist therefore deserve to be in Super League' mentality of northern semi-pro RL clubs is really irritating.


They did win just win the league below SL and that qualifies them to make a SL application.

#193 Pottsy

Pottsy
  • Coach
  • 3,541 posts

Posted 10 October 2012 - 09:43 PM

As far as I know, the islanders have no work permit to cover anything but playing. Mitch Stringer and Hendo are employed - they're Scottish, obviously.

But is bidding for development work not something any club can do ? :huh:

Most of the "traditional" clubs just cover the few square miles surrounding their grounds. Up to them, obviously, but don't moan about others getting the work. <_<


You're missing the point.

#194 a.n Other

a.n Other
  • Coach
  • 1,548 posts

Posted 10 October 2012 - 09:57 PM

Fair point.

Who though ?

Sheffield just about break even but have historical losses and no asset base. Fev make losses. Fax and Leigh -as far as I know - do OK these days but don't have any development structure.

Fax ran teams at u18 & u23 last year.

#195 shaun mc

shaun mc
  • Coach
  • 1,830 posts

Posted 10 October 2012 - 10:09 PM

Hull KR's 'losses' of circa £500k p.a are constantly being touted as the standard for SL clubs outside of the top 4, excluding Catalan and London.
However, how do we know what is in HKR's accounts to make that loss? What is their structure, their salary spending, their backroom staff levels and what is their overheads cost base? How do they benchmark against other clubs in terms of costs and overheads? How much do they pay in interest, band charges and how much capital repayment may be included in that £500k? How much are they paying in maintenance of Craven Park? What is their level of match-day income in comparison to other clubs? How much 'selective' spin is within Hudgell's statements, in order to back up his investment and perhaps paint a picture for the message he wants to portray?
Too many unknowns for me for the '£500k' loss to be the basis of a whole range of arguements on many threads recently.

#196 a.n Other

a.n Other
  • Coach
  • 1,548 posts

Posted 10 October 2012 - 10:34 PM

Hull KR's 'losses' of circa £500k p.a are constantly being touted as the standard for SL clubs outside of the top 4, excluding Catalan and London.
However, how do we know what is in HKR's accounts to make that loss? What is their structure, their salary spending, their backroom staff levels and what is their overheads cost base? How do they benchmark against other clubs in terms of costs and overheads? How much do they pay in interest, band charges and how much capital repayment may be included in that £500k? How much are they paying in maintenance of Craven Park? What is their level of match-day income in comparison to other clubs? How much 'selective' spin is within Hudgell's statements, in order to back up his investment and perhaps paint a picture for the message he wants to portray?
Too many unknowns for me for the '£500k' loss to be the basis of a whole range of arguements on many threads recently.


Pearson from Hull FC has said on the BBC Sport site, that he expects the club to lose £500k this year.

#197 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,836 posts

Posted 11 October 2012 - 03:09 AM

Pearson from Hull FC has said on the BBC Sport site, that he expects the club to lose £500k this year.


Oh,no, say it isn t so. Hull are one of Parksiders anointed ones.This will really upset his debating points. Let s hope none of the other big boys report a loss, that would be just too much to bear.

#198 dave the euph

dave the euph
  • Coach
  • 145 posts

Posted 11 October 2012 - 04:16 AM

They did win just win the league below SL and that qualifies them to make a SL application........
No fev won the league Sheffield won the play off's different competition

Edited by dave the euph, 11 October 2012 - 04:17 AM.

am i bovvered

#199 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,506 posts

Posted 11 October 2012 - 05:50 AM

Oh,no, say it isn t so. Hull are one of Parksiders anointed ones.This will really upset his debating points. Let s hope none of the other big boys report a loss, that would be just too much to bear.


So what is your point then other than to poke me with a silly stick?

Doesn't the fact that Superleague made £8,000,000 losses last year excite you more?

Whopee you say Superleague is struggling.

It may have gone "whoosh" and right over your head but most SL clubs make the losses up in directors loans. Some don't, like Cas who struggle or HKR this year who are starting to struggle.

Enjoying it are you?

As for upsetting debating points, this doesn't upset anything, rich directors will use their money to advance their clubs at the expense of neighbours, and that's been around longer than you or me.

#200 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,891 posts

Posted 11 October 2012 - 08:24 AM

They did win just win the league below SL and that qualifies them to make a SL application........
No fev won the league Sheffield won the play off's different competition


No it isn't, but even if it is, winning the play-offs (or getting to the final) is what qualifies you to make the application.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users