Jump to content


TotalRL.com Shop Alert: Last Ordering Date for Free Pre-Xmas Delivery within UK: 2pm Thursday 18th December!!
Rugby League Yearbook 2014/15 The Forbidden Game League Express League Express Gift Card Rugby League World Rugby League World Gift Card
Buy Now £14.99 Buy Now £14.99 / Kindle Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards



Photo
- - - - -

Peacock shows support for two tens


  • Please log in to reply
44 replies to this topic

#1 sweaty craiq

sweaty craiq
  • Coach
  • 1,778 posts

Posted 17 April 2013 - 10:22 PM

http://loverugbyleag...ake-action.html

 

Get it announced soon and lets make our sport the best it can be, together



#2 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,307 posts

Posted 17 April 2013 - 10:29 PM

I think there are too many changes in RL. Why not stick with what we have?

 

Only maybe bring back the 50% rule on the salary cap and then maybe clubs wouldn't go bust.



#3 sweaty craiq

sweaty craiq
  • Coach
  • 1,778 posts

Posted 17 April 2013 - 11:06 PM

Franchising was the change, so go back to pre franchising but 2x10's would be my preference


Edited by sweaty craiq, 17 April 2013 - 11:07 PM.


#4 Pottsy

Pottsy
  • Coach
  • 3,541 posts

Posted 18 April 2013 - 06:17 AM

Totally agree with what Jamie has written. Time to freshen things up and stop hobbling ambition.

#5 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,703 posts

Posted 18 April 2013 - 06:20 AM

http://loverugbyleag...ake-action.html
 
Get it announced soon and lets make our sport the best it can be, together

I'd guess peacock speaks a lot to Hetherington about the format of the elite game.

Are we reading Hetherington's thoughts here?

#6 RoytonRoughyed

RoytonRoughyed
  • Players
  • 91 posts

Posted 18 April 2013 - 07:18 AM

Why stop at 2 league of 10? why not go the whole hog and have 4 leagues of 10 and 1 or 2 up 1 or 2 down thoughout the tiers provided you meet specific ground requirements, make it a sport again rather than a business.

 

Always makes me laugh that as it stands an Oldham Rugby Union an amaetur team in the 10th tier provided they were good enough could get promoted to the Premiership but Oldham Rugby League no matter how good they may get one day couldnt get back in Super League.



#7 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,703 posts

Posted 18 April 2013 - 08:28 AM

1. Always makes me laugh that as it stands an Oldham Rugby Union an amaetur team in the 10th tier provided they were good enough could get promoted to the Premiership but Oldham Rugby League no matter how good they may get one day couldnt get back in Super League.

2. Why stop at 2 league of 10? why not go the whole hog and have 4 leagues of 10 and 1 or 2 up 1 or 2 down thoughout the tiers provided you meet specific ground requirements, make it a sport again rather than a business.

1. That's not the case at the moment is it? If Someone has the millions (the guy at Cardiff City has put in £60,000,000 so far) Oldham would be in Superleague. I seem to remember going to Boundary park to watch them in SL 1996 against Cas. The only problem oldham have is they are skint.

2. I'm sure they will organise leagues below, but your again assuming that you just throw in P & R and everything will be wonderful.

Put the ten richest clubs in Superleague, on £2,000,000 salary cap and £6,000,000 turnovers, and you then have what in the second tier??

You have clubs on £300K salary cap and £900,000 turnovers.

The gap your ignoring is totally immense financially.

It's not between the premiership and the championship in soccer is it because the guy leading Cardiff and the guy leading QPR and others in the same area are rich people so there's an even competition for getting promoted or avoiding being relegated.

It's NOT soccer mate......

#8 Old Frightful

Old Frightful
  • Coach
  • 13,123 posts

Posted 18 April 2013 - 08:56 AM

Peacock needs to relax a bit if he's feeling like that.

                Lee Radford rang me the other week....I knew Hull FC were a bit desperate but I had no idea it had got that bad.


#9 hindle xiii

hindle xiii
  • Coach
  • 21,168 posts

Posted 18 April 2013 - 09:01 AM

Peacock needs to relax a bit if he's feeling like that.

Get.

 

Out.

 

:rolleyes:


If you use "should of", "would of" or "could of", you are a moron.

On Odsal Top baht 'at.

 


#10 saints10coach

saints10coach
  • Moderator
  • 1,685 posts

Posted 18 April 2013 - 10:20 AM

What you must remember. The more money you give to a team, the more they are allowed to go into debt. Parksider said put the ten richest clubs in Super League on a £2m cap. If you said put the ten richest clubs in the league on a £2m cap, the league would be turned on its head, as even Oldham's debts are probably less than most SL clubs. That makes them richer than the SL clubs.



#11 PREPOSTEROUS

PREPOSTEROUS
  • Coach
  • 682 posts

Posted 18 April 2013 - 10:30 AM

I guess playing less games and Sky having a reduced number of fixtures to broadcast, players who are advocating such measures would be happy to take a pay cut.

#12 League Chatter

League Chatter
  • Players
  • 2 posts

Posted 18 April 2013 - 10:44 AM

For all those that are interested,please have a look at our blog entry for our veiws on these sort of challenges facing our game.



#13 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,831 posts

Posted 18 April 2013 - 10:49 AM

I guess playing less games and Sky having a reduced number of fixtures to broadcast, players who are advocating such measures would be happy to take a pay cut.

Nowhere in his proposal does it mention reducing the number of games and Sky broadcasting fewer games (apologies if I missed that point).



#14 PREPOSTEROUS

PREPOSTEROUS
  • Coach
  • 682 posts

Posted 18 April 2013 - 10:56 AM


Nowhere in his proposal does it mention reducing the number of games and Sky broadcasting fewer games (apologies if I missed that point).

Unless his proposals are for top fight teams to play selected clubs for the 8 games they need to make 27 rounds instead of 19 (assuming the ridiculous Magic weekend should survive the cull) then it stands to reason there will be less games.

In itself playing teams a third time in the season became tedious and often drew smaller crowds as the games became saturated. Given Peacock has moaned about the number of games the players play I doubt he wants to see that happen again.

Edited by PREPOSTEROUS, 18 April 2013 - 10:59 AM.


#15 hindle xiii

hindle xiii
  • Coach
  • 21,168 posts

Posted 18 April 2013 - 11:18 AM

For all those that are interested,please have a look at our blog entry for our veiws on these sort of challenges facing our game.

Under those proposals I can wait to watch that 6-team Super League.


If you use "should of", "would of" or "could of", you are a moron.

On Odsal Top baht 'at.

 


#16 hindle xiii

hindle xiii
  • Coach
  • 21,168 posts

Posted 18 April 2013 - 11:21 AM

... and by that bloggers own admittance this season could see one of 7 teams win SL, 50% of the league are capable of winning the big one. Seems ok by me.


If you use "should of", "would of" or "could of", you are a moron.

On Odsal Top baht 'at.

 


#17 cookey

cookey
  • Coach
  • 1,171 posts

Posted 18 April 2013 - 11:44 AM

Yes,reduce it to 10 Clubs,kick out say,Cas,London,Hull K.R.plus a.n.o.,don't allow in Toulouse,Featherstone,Halifax etc,then after say 3/4 seasons when Widnes or Salford have finished bottom a couple of times and the owner decides to pull out,no doubt some bright spark will suggest an 8 team league!

 

Anyone thinking Sky will pay the same money or more,for a 10 team league,as opposed to 14 teams is clueless.MM will disappear.All that will happen,is that the same players will be paid a bit more,the team finishing top/Grand Final will just about break even and the team at the bottom will be losing money.

 

Peacock is a good player,could be a decent administator,but I would hate him to be running my finances.



#18 boxhead

boxhead
  • Coach
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 18 April 2013 - 11:51 AM

For all those that are interested,please have a look at our blog entry for our veiws on these sort of challenges facing our game.

Pretty good read that.

#19 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,831 posts

Posted 18 April 2013 - 12:13 PM

Unless his proposals are for top fight teams to play selected clubs for the 8 games they need to make 27 rounds instead of 19 (assuming the ridiculous Magic weekend should survive the cull) then it stands to reason there will be less games.

In itself playing teams a third time in the season became tedious and often drew smaller crowds as the games became saturated. Given Peacock has moaned about the number of games the players play I doubt he wants to see that happen again.

Fixtures can be arranged however we want to get the required number of fixtures.

 

You may be right about a reduction in crowds for the third fixture, but I suspect a third Wigan v Saints game would get more than a Wigan game v 14th ranked team.



#20 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,703 posts

Posted 18 April 2013 - 12:21 PM

Yes,reduce it to 10 Clubs,kick out say,Cas,London,Hull K.R.plus a.n.o.,don't allow in Toulouse,Featherstone,Halifax etc,then after say 3/4 seasons when Widnes or Salford have finished bottom a couple of times and the owner decides to pull out,no doubt some bright spark will suggest an 8 team league!
 
Anyone thinking Sky will pay the same money or more,for a 10 team league,as opposed to 14 teams is clueless.

Peacock is a good player,could be a decent administator,but I would hate him to be running my finances.

I don't think that Peacock is actually saying SKY will pay more at all.

He is not saying SL1 clubs WILL spend £20,000,000 in wages.
He is not saying SL2 clubs WILL spend £10,000,000 in wages

and nor is he saying that the current SKY annual payment of £16,800,000 will be split between 20 clubs.If that happened then top clubs would be being asked to spend £350K more yet they would be given £280,000 less. Peacock is talking about these top ten being armed to pay salaries to keep our best players.

To create an Elite and to raise wages where the SKY contract may not produce the extra money you have to give the 10 clubs in SL1 £1,680,000 each. They get all the money and the extra £480,000 will enable these clubs to spend £2,000,000 keep more of our best players and all without having to find another penny.

That gives you the Elite league with the stars and the high wages.

One has to be clueless to think SKY is going to give a penny to a second division.

Now you have outlined the usual moan about reducing from 16 to 14 to 12 to 10 in that if you start that you'll end up with 8 then 6 then collapse. I just think that's not a reasonable argument.

And the formation of a second tier will provide I would guess clubs like, HKR, London, Cas, Widnes, Halifax, Featherstone, Leigh, Sheffield, Toulouse somewhere to compete for a Superleague place away from the dual registered clubs who have given up on Superleague.

Peacock sets them a £1,000,000 cap only. He doesn't say SKY will subsidise them, why would they as they only subsidise an Elite League.

So you can pick out who in "SL2" would be chasing that promo spot - It'd be Toulouse with their alleged municipal funding, or Mr. O'Connor at Widnes or Mr. Nahaboo. Clubs which provide you with the answer to the question what if someone goes bust in SL.

This is how I see the finances working, it makes the most sense in terms of how these people operate....

Apologies to Hindle X111 for not saying all that in two sentences.

Edited by The Parksider, 18 April 2013 - 12:29 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users