Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 402

Try our Fantastic 5-Issue Bundle Offer! For just £18, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:
The Play-offs Issue - pictured (out 12 Sept) – Covering the climax of the Super League & Championship seasons
The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final excitement from both sides of the world plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
* * * * - 1 votes

Super League Restructure Discussion (Many Merged Threads)


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
730 replies to this topic

#381 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,375 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 03:34 PM

1. But there are big changes proposed by people who know what the finances are and what effect the changes will have on clubs. We know eight clubs are well in front of the rest because they have the rich men in charge all putting in.

Superleague itself says there's not enough money for 14 clubs, but going to 12 could badly knock back the two clubs who get relegated, in addition it will knock back the only clubs left who can be serious about an SL application albeit there's no proof either Fax or Fev have the money to compete either.

The Championship isn't a place you rebuild for Superleague if you have no money, it's a place that leads to falling crowds and fortunes if nobody rich comes to the rescue.

How four remaining clubs without much money will go in a 12 club SL we don't know but we do see the big eight picking off any players they want off those clubs who don't have a chairman with the money to resist matters.

2. The fixture formulae is fine, as is the idea of 2x12 with P & R, but with the deepest of respect this is just re-arranging the deckchairs, and I truly think the restructure isn't based on going back to P & R again because it's exciting and vibrant and the fans will flock to it. It's based on the financial state of the clubs.

We have changed fixture formats for decades now and each change leads to more and more alienation of clubs at the top from those below them. In 1996 our Elite was a 16 club Fist division. Now the first point of dividing the clubs is proposed to be at club number 8.

Is this because finances are at breaking point or is it because it will simply stimulate crowds into rising which is what the P & R tells us.

 

All well and good but,in my opinion, 8 teams is too small a number to interest the fans or the TV stations and will make an already small and parochial sport even more irrelevant to the general public.

 

The trick is to enable more teams to compete at the top level. Even at 14 teams that is small number to present as the totality of a sport especially given the paucity of the international game.

 

Given the seemingly imposibility of achieving a league wide 10,000 per club or anything near it, maybe the time has come to restructure so that top level teams can compete successfully with crowds of 5,000 and above..



#382 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,758 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 04:00 PM

The trick is actually to propose a plan for which clubs will vote.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#383 my missus

my missus
  • Coach
  • 4,805 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 04:00 PM

i don't know how the NRL pick the six teams they don't play twice but wouldn't there be with this format the chance to give the weaker teams in our league an easier fixture list.


What does it mean
This tearjerking scene
Beamed into my home
That it moves me so much
Why all the fuss
It's only two humans being.


#384 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,151 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 04:30 PM

i don't know how the NRL pick the six teams they don't play twice but wouldn't there be with this format the chance to give the weaker teams in our league an easier fixture list.

 

Maybe, but I fear we are heading for the top clubs being light years in front of the bottom clubs and certainly on a 16 club format the difference between the Leeds and Wigans and the bottom two clubs will become immense.

 

We have to IMHO take account of the player drain and what sort of side clubs in the lower reaches of SL will end up turning out. As we see at London and Salford regular losers lose their regular crowds.

 

No money = the sort of result Halifax had in 2003 ending the season on no points and their crowds decimated.



#385 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,758 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 04:31 PM

i don't know how the NRL pick the six teams they don't play twice but wouldn't there be with this format the chance to give the weaker teams in our league an easier fixture list.


The big clubs generally like a tougher fixture list. There's more money in it.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#386 my missus

my missus
  • Coach
  • 4,805 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 05:02 PM

The big clubs generally like a tougher fixture list. There's more money in it.

exactly, and the lower clubs get a few wins amongst themselves helping them to improve their crowds, it's easy this restucturing malarki.


What does it mean
This tearjerking scene
Beamed into my home
That it moves me so much
Why all the fuss
It's only two humans being.


#387 redjonn

redjonn
  • Coach
  • 872 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 07:20 PM

1. But there are big changes proposed by people who know what the finances are and what effect the changes will have on clubs. We know eight clubs are well in front of the rest because they have the rich men in charge all putting in.

Superleague itself says there's not enough money for 14 clubs, but going to 12 could badly knock back the two clubs who get relegated, in addition it will knock back the only clubs left who can be serious about an SL application albeit there's no proof either Fax or Fev have the money to compete either.

The Championship isn't a place you rebuild for Superleague if you have no money, it's a place that leads to falling crowds and fortunes if nobody rich comes to the rescue.

How four remaining clubs without much money will go in a 12 club SL we don't know but we do see the big eight picking off any players they want off those clubs who don't have a chairman with the money to resist matters.

2. The fixture formulae is fine, as is the idea of 2x12 with P & R, but with the deepest of respect this is just re-arranging the deckchairs, and I truly think the restructure isn't based on going back to P & R again because it's exciting and vibrant and the fans will flock to it. It's based on the financial state of the clubs.

We have changed fixture formats for decades now and each change leads to more and more alienation of clubs at the top from those below them. In 1996 our Elite was a 16 club Fist division. Now the first point of dividing the clubs is proposed to be at club number 8.

Is this because finances are at breaking point or is it because it will simply stimulate crowds into rising which is what the P & R tells us.

 

 

But surely an issue is that no one will be prepared to invest in the championship because no route to promotion.  If little hope of getting a licence no point in overly investing in the team until get a licence - hence the lack of preparedness if your get a licence.  If building for promotion then will build a stronger team to ensure the opportunity of playing for promotion and thus team will be starting from stronger base if do achieve it.  Currently no point as you know no licence for at least a number of years and then little chance anyway.

 

Only way to get any real investment into championship is if you have a realistic aspiration to gain promotion otherwise why bother investing at all.

 

For me the league structure just needs to be x2 divisions of 12 with P&R. Need to work harder at attracting corporate facilities to bring in money (as a successful business person myself I am often appalled by lack of business, commercial and marketing acumen by some in the game) and work at international game which increases exposure - we have always suffered from only ever being interested in clubs and hence paying the penalty for no real international exposure to widen interest and to bring in revenues.   Rugby Union has the huge advantage of massive monies from international game that supports the foundation and enables investment in strategic area's to raise the game.



#388 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,151 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 09:12 PM

Given the seemingly impossibility of achieving a league wide 10,000 per club or anything near it, maybe the time has come to restructure so that top level teams can compete successfully with crowds of 5,000 and above..

 

That's a dropping of the cap as we discussed before.

 

12 clubs x £1.65M spend = £19.8M  divide by 12 x 25 man squad  = £66,000 wage

 

16 clubs x £1.00M spend = £16.0M  divide by 16 x 25 man squad  = £40,000 wage

 

1. Slashing wages may push more top players toward NRL & RU

 

2. SKY may devalue a game shorn of top pros

 

3. As Griff says the top clubs may well not wear this



#389 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,151 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 09:38 PM

1. But surely an issue is that no one will be prepared to invest in the championship because no route to promotion.  If little hope of getting a licence no point in overly investing in the team until get a licence - hence the lack of preparedness if your get a licence.  If building for promotion then will build a stronger team to ensure the opportunity of playing for promotion and thus team will be starting from stronger base if do achieve it.  Currently no point as you know no licence for at least a number of years and then little chance anyway.Only way to get any real investment into championship is if you have a realistic aspiration to gain promotion otherwise why bother investing at all.

 

2. For me the league structure just needs to be x2 divisions of 12 with P&R. Need to work harder at attracting corporate facilities to bring in money (as a successful business person myself I am often appalled by lack of business, commercial and marketing acumen by some in the game) and work at international game which increases exposure - we have always suffered from only ever being interested in clubs and hence paying the penalty for no real international exposure to widen interest and to bring in revenues.   Rugby Union has the huge advantage of massive monies from international game that supports the foundation and enables investment in strategic area's to raise the game.

 

1. P & R is fine between 2 x 12 we had it for years, all I'm saying is it wasn't anything special in terms of pulling crowds so to pretend bringing it back via 2x12 = 3x8 will make the game more vibrant and attractive to supporters has no real basis.

 

The route to SL has never been blocked Steve O'Connor and Neil Hudgell took Widnes and HKR into Superleague with their millions. We are re-hashing old ground, but if you have the money how can you build a professional team playing in a semi pro competition? How do you stay up within one season in a pro competition if you gain promotion from a semi pro competition??

 

The licensing process gave HKR and Widnes time to establish, but the bottom line is if anyone wants to put millions into any club the RFL will snap their hands off as too few choose to do so even those who are in Superleague. Only 8 clubs have wealthy backers now prepared to carry on investing. The way is open for anyone to throw millions at a club and Nigel Wood will take you racing into the bargain. Under the 3 x 8 system four "championship" clubs get chance to have a crack at four Superleague failures.

 

The SKY funding will be disparate, but do you think any club will be blocked putting in private investment to try to make the 1-4 promotion slots? I don't and so I feel 2x12=3x8 is a better format for a rich man to get to Superleague than 2x12.

 

2. Well I think your being very pragmatic and a realist here. The game has great disadvantages, investors realise it's not investment it's just chucking money at clubs for fun, and of course we "could do better" but for many it's a slog with little return.

 

Business wise we want to see as many clubs succeed as possible but like any industry if it's short of people wanting to invest in it, if it lacks enough employees with the skills and the market is cornered by a handful of businesses with the rest struggling then that's how it is, and it's stuck in a rut.

 

The only changes possible are radical changes, but when the big businesses don't want to change anything if it affects them thank you, then we have what we have.



#390 LordCharles

LordCharles
  • Coach
  • 736 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 10:14 PM

Here's a thought......................

 

Taken from the Watkins report.....................
 
"The central television contract is split 16 ways: - each Super League club receives a share, one share is paid to the Championship clubs and one share is received by the RFL (as a contribution towards the Sport’s central costs). In addition, the Super League and the two divisions of the Championships share equally a further £2million per annum. SLE retains all revenues net of direct costs from its Play-offs, its title sponsorship and other commercial income generated by its competition. Historically SLE also shared the profit from the World Club Challenge match each year, although in the past two years this has been retained by the competing clubs".
 
In a nutshell there is £27 Million a year available, plus a further £2 Million, so why not create the following structure?
 
 
Currently I think each SL club gets £1,687,500 per season plus an equal share of the other £2 Million, with £1,687,500 going to the RFL and £1,687,500 being split between all 23 Championship clubs, giving you the 135 Million over the next 5 years.

If the SLE/RFL had anything about them they would restructure the Leagues and then broker a deal that benefited the sport as a whole instead of just the top end.

For example............................

SL 1 - 10 teams getting £1,687,500 each (Plus a further £67,000 from the share of £2 Million)

SL 2/Championship - 10 teams getting 75% of the remaining £9,767,500 (£8,437,500 + £1,330,000)...........so that's £732,562.50 each

Championship 1 - 2 Divisions of 10 Teams (North & South) getting the remaining 25% between them £2,441,875.00...........So that's £106,168.00 each
 
** Please Note - The amounts currently received by Championship and Championship 1 Clubs if far less than allocated above **

Championship 1 clubs would also save on travel costs as it would be regionalised to an extent, also meaning players would be less effected in their professional work lives by their participation in Semi pro sport, plus lots of other common sense benefits and solutions to problems faced by Championship 1 clubs and their players.

Play offs for Championship 1 would be top 4 North & Top 4 South, 8 team format, i.e......1 (N) v 4 (S), 2 (S) v 3 (N) etc, straight knockout, Q-Finals , Semi - Finals & Final with GF Winner getting a home tie in a P & R playoff against Bottom placed Championship Team, Whoever wins either remains in, or joins Championship.

Championship Play offs - Top 6 - GF winner gets promotion to SL

SL Play offs - Top 6 (Similar to current format of 8 but with 6)

Challenge Cup to remain as it currently is.

SL1 & SL2/Championship to have an additional Cup Competition to include all teams in both Leagues with fixtures to be played from 1st April - 31st July

Format - 4 Pools of 5 to be drawn giving 8 fixtures per team per group (Alternate draw to be used - SL club then C/ship club per group), 4 home and 4 away. 
 
** All SL 1 teams in this competition must name a minimum of 9 British born U23's in their 19 man match day squad **
 
The principle is simple, SL1 Clubs by having to name a minimum of 9 British born U23's in their 19 man squad will assist in promoting the development of the home grown talent pool, it also allows senior players to be rested and rotated without having any direct bearing on the SL League table, creates a more balanced competition for the SL2/Championship teams and supporters, whilst also delivering a minimum of 26 intense fixtures (18 League & 8 Cup) for the top 20 teams in the competition.

Top 2 teams at the end of each Group stage to compete in Q-Finals, ie G1 winner v G4 Runner Up etc, Semi- Finals are open Draw and to be played at Neutral Venue, same for the Final.

Championship 1 to have an additional Cup Competition to include all teams in both Leagues played from 1st April - 31st July

Two groups of 5 from North - Two Groups of 5 from South giving 8 fixtures per team per group, 4 home and, 4 away. 

Top 2 teams at the end of each Group stage to compete in Q - Finals, ie G1 winner v G4 Runner Up etc, Semi- Finals are open Draw and to be played at Neutral Venue, same for the Final.

Again, minimum fixtures for any Championship Club in any division is 26.

This would produce a much more balanced competition all round, be more cost effective in many areas, be financially for more viable for most clubs and see revenue being generated and distributed more effectively to the benefit of the game as a whole.

It would also create a competition for 40 teams, open up opportunities for more players to develop at an appropriate level, particularly if SL clubs run Academies at U17s & U19's, Championship clubs ran an U21's reserves competition and Championship 1 clubs just focus on a first grade squad.

SL Clubs, whilst not running U21's/Reserve teams would be granted the opportunity to retain up to 8 players in total at any one time from their academies on intermediate contracts for a maximum of 3 years (if coming out of the U19's) or until they turned 21 years of age. These 8 players would not form part of the first team quota of 30 players, but would train full time and be part of the first team squad as "project players" and could be part of any dual registration agreement between the SL club and a SL2/Championship Club in order to give them regular game time in an environment which will assist their development and they can be monitored.

All too straight forward I know, but it would be a much better option and close the gap between clubs looking to play SL1 from SL2/Championship status.

So based on this year it could potentially look something like this...............

Super League

Wigan Warriors
Warrington Wolves
St Helens
Catalan Dragons
Leeds Rhinos
Hull FC
Huddersfield Giants
Wakefield Wildcats
Bradford Bulls
Hull KR

Championship

Salford City Reds
London Broncos
Castleford Tigers
Widnes Vikings
Featherstone
Leigh Centurions
Halifax
Sheffield
Batley
Whitehaven

Championship 1 - North

Dewsbury
Oldham
Rochdale
Hunslet
York
Barrow
Workington
Keighley
Gateshead
Swinton

Championship 1 - South

London Skolars
Crusaders
South Wales
Doncaster
Oxford
Hemel Hempstead
Gloucester
Northampton (Example)
Coventry (Example)
Nottingham (Example)
 
As I said................just a thought!

Edited by LordCharles, 01 July 2013 - 10:17 PM.


#391 Hornetto

Hornetto
  • Coach
  • 3,140 posts

Posted 02 July 2013 - 08:21 AM

 

Here's a thought......................

 

Taken from the Watkins report.....................
 
"The central television contract is split 16 ways: - each Super League club receives a share, one share is paid to the Championship clubs and one share is received by the RFL (as a contribution towards the Sport’s central costs). In addition, the Super League and the two divisions of the Championships share equally a further £2million per annum. SLE retains all revenues net of direct costs from its Play-offs, its title sponsorship and other commercial income generated by its competition. Historically SLE also shared the profit from the World Club Challenge match each year, although in the past two years this has been retained by the competing clubs".
 
In a nutshell there is £27 Million a year available, plus a further £2 Million, so why not create the following structure?
 
 
Currently I think each SL club gets £1,687,500 per season plus an equal share of the other £2 Million, with £1,687,500 going to the RFL and £1,687,500 being split between all 23 Championship clubs, giving you the 135 Million over the next 5 years.

If the SLE/RFL had anything about them they would restructure the Leagues and then broker a deal that benefited the sport as a whole instead of just the top end.

For example............................

SL 1 - 10 teams getting £1,687,500 each (Plus a further £67,000 from the share of £2 Million)

SL 2/Championship - 10 teams getting 75% of the remaining £9,767,500 (£8,437,500 + £1,330,000)...........so that's £732,562.50 each

Championship 1 - 2 Divisions of 10 Teams (North & South) getting the remaining 25% between them £2,441,875.00...........So that's £106,168.00 each
 
** Please Note - The amounts currently received by Championship and Championship 1 Clubs if far less than allocated above **

Championship 1 clubs would also save on travel costs as it would be regionalised to an extent, also meaning players would be less effected in their professional work lives by their participation in Semi pro sport, plus lots of other common sense benefits and solutions to problems faced by Championship 1 clubs and their players.

Play offs for Championship 1 would be top 4 North & Top 4 South, 8 team format, i.e......1 (N) v 4 (S), 2 (S) v 3 (N) etc, straight knockout, Q-Finals , Semi - Finals & Final with GF Winner getting a home tie in a P & R playoff against Bottom placed Championship Team, Whoever wins either remains in, or joins Championship.

Championship Play offs - Top 6 - GF winner gets promotion to SL

SL Play offs - Top 6 (Similar to current format of 8 but with 6)

Challenge Cup to remain as it currently is.

SL1 & SL2/Championship to have an additional Cup Competition to include all teams in both Leagues with fixtures to be played from 1st April - 31st July

Format - 4 Pools of 5 to be drawn giving 8 fixtures per team per group (Alternate draw to be used - SL club then C/ship club per group), 4 home and 4 away. 
 
** All SL 1 teams in this competition must name a minimum of 9 British born U23's in their 19 man match day squad **
 
The principle is simple, SL1 Clubs by having to name a minimum of 9 British born U23's in their 19 man squad will assist in promoting the development of the home grown talent pool, it also allows senior players to be rested and rotated without having any direct bearing on the SL League table, creates a more balanced competition for the SL2/Championship teams and supporters, whilst also delivering a minimum of 26 intense fixtures (18 League & 8 Cup) for the top 20 teams in the competition.

Top 2 teams at the end of each Group stage to compete in Q-Finals, ie G1 winner v G4 Runner Up etc, Semi- Finals are open Draw and to be played at Neutral Venue, same for the Final.

Championship 1 to have an additional Cup Competition to include all teams in both Leagues played from 1st April - 31st July

Two groups of 5 from North - Two Groups of 5 from South giving 8 fixtures per team per group, 4 home and, 4 away. 

Top 2 teams at the end of each Group stage to compete in Q - Finals, ie G1 winner v G4 Runner Up etc, Semi- Finals are open Draw and to be played at Neutral Venue, same for the Final.

Again, minimum fixtures for any Championship Club in any division is 26.

This would produce a much more balanced competition all round, be more cost effective in many areas, be financially for more viable for most clubs and see revenue being generated and distributed more effectively to the benefit of the game as a whole.

It would also create a competition for 40 teams, open up opportunities for more players to develop at an appropriate level, particularly if SL clubs run Academies at U17s & U19's, Championship clubs ran an U21's reserves competition and Championship 1 clubs just focus on a first grade squad.

SL Clubs, whilst not running U21's/Reserve teams would be granted the opportunity to retain up to 8 players in total at any one time from their academies on intermediate contracts for a maximum of 3 years (if coming out of the U19's) or until they turned 21 years of age. These 8 players would not form part of the first team quota of 30 players, but would train full time and be part of the first team squad as "project players" and could be part of any dual registration agreement between the SL club and a SL2/Championship Club in order to give them regular game time in an environment which will assist their development and they can be monitored.

All too straight forward I know, but it would be a much better option and close the gap between clubs looking to play SL1 from SL2/Championship status.

So based on this year it could potentially look something like this...............

Super League

Wigan Warriors
Warrington Wolves
St Helens
Catalan Dragons
Leeds Rhinos
Hull FC
Huddersfield Giants
Wakefield Wildcats
Bradford Bulls
Hull KR

Championship

Salford City Reds
London Broncos
Castleford Tigers
Widnes Vikings
Featherstone
Leigh Centurions
Halifax
Sheffield
Batley
Whitehaven

Championship 1 - North

Dewsbury
Oldham
Rochdale
Hunslet
York
Barrow
Workington
Keighley
Gateshead
Swinton

Championship 1 - South

London Skolars
Crusaders
South Wales
Doncaster
Oxford
Hemel Hempstead
Gloucester
Northampton (Example)
Coventry (Example)
Nottingham (Example)
 
As I said................just a thought!

 

Like this a lot. Our Blog had a look at a similar structure with criteria-based promotion and relegation, about a year ago http://theseladscanr...n-for-life.html - clearly, placings were based on the tables then. We didn't have the financials then, but the £102k you propose for Ch1 sides is more than we get now.

 

We still like our idea of a three year 'promotion licence' -  a half-way-house twixt licensing and open P&R.

 

But I do like yours a lot - well considered, structured for the benefit of all clubs. Nice job.


Posted Image
These Lads Can Run for 80 Minutes - the infamous Hornets fanzine is back from the dead: and just as biased as ever!
Match reports, previews and other stuff that comes into our heads at
http://theseladscanr...ns.blogspot.com


#392 LordCharles

LordCharles
  • Coach
  • 736 posts

Posted 02 July 2013 - 08:53 AM

We have to deliver a more balanced structure, financially and competitively if the sport is to progress, using my example and others it can be achieved if people are willing to accept that short term loss for some will be long term gain for everyone.



#393 robinson2

robinson2
  • Coach
  • 102 posts

Posted 02 July 2013 - 09:11 AM

The old link to the Watkins report doesn't work for me. Could anyone upload it somewhere please or even send me a message on here?



#394 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,151 posts

Posted 02 July 2013 - 04:23 PM

We have to deliver a more balanced structure, financially and competitively if the sport is to progress


The progress we have made in terms of attracting more fans and rich owners to the game has been via showcasing professional Rugby League, i.e. Superleague. That success generates the ongoing TV contract that exists to support Superleague. Currently Superleague is short of several £million a year to be self sustaining and so there isn't any spare cash to prop championship clubs up who have lost half their fans since 1996.

Superleague is where the growth in fans and quality players is and so until a surplus can be found from the Superleague operation there'll be little money for the championship clubs who sadly are a poor investment nowadays because fans don't want second tier RL.

If ever our 14 club superleague went into surplus/profit to the tune of seveal million a year they would add two more clubs to it and not rescue the championship clubs. This would be good business sense.

#395 LordCharles

LordCharles
  • Coach
  • 736 posts

Posted 02 July 2013 - 05:47 PM

I think that is a very short sighted view.



#396 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,758 posts

Posted 02 July 2013 - 05:54 PM

Superleague is where the growth in fans and quality players is and so until a surplus can be found from the Superleague operation there'll be little money for the championship clubs who sadly are a poor investment nowadays because fans don't want second tier RL.


Ah - one big league is the solution. Everybody in the top tier.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#397 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,151 posts

Posted 02 July 2013 - 09:32 PM

I think that is a very short sighted view.

 

I don't really have a view, I just put on record what has happened

 

1. SKY wanted an Elite league and pay £90,000,000 a time for it

 

2. Tens of thousands of fans turned on to the elite league and championship club attendances halved.

 

3. Superleague club areas produce the bulk of British pro-RL players who were born in those areas. Few players born in championship club areas play Superleague

 

The facts seem to speak for themselves.



#398 LordCharles

LordCharles
  • Coach
  • 736 posts

Posted 02 July 2013 - 09:41 PM

I don't really have a view, I just put on record what has happened

 

1. SKY wanted an Elite league and pay £90,000,000 a time for it

 

2. Tens of thousands of fans turned on to the elite league and championship club attendances halved.

 

3. Superleague club areas produce the bulk of British pro-RL players who were born in those areas. Few players born in championship club areas play Superleague

 

The facts seem to speak for themselves.

 

Few players born in Championship areas play SL............what on earth is that supposed to mean?

 

Cumbria does'nt produce many SL players does it?

 

Leigh has produced a seriously good number of top SL players! 

 

Halifax, Fev, Oldham?

 

Apart from Harris, Sinfield, Baz Mc etc etc etc who has Oldham ever produced?

 

You might want to rethink that!



#399 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,151 posts

Posted 02 July 2013 - 10:21 PM

You might want to rethink that!

 

Of the top 222 players in superleague at the start of the season 117 were born in Superleague club areas, 72 were overseas imports inc 3 from wales and 30 were born in championship club areas.

 

Cumbria 5

Leigh 2

Halifax 4

Fev 4

Oldham 4

 

You need to work on more accurate actual figures


Edited by The Parksider, 02 July 2013 - 10:23 PM.


#400 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,038 posts

Posted 02 July 2013 - 10:55 PM

But surely an issue is that no one will be prepared to invest in the championship because no route to promotion.  If little hope of getting a licence no point in overly investing in the team until get a licence - hence the lack of preparedness if your get a licence.  If building for promotion then will build a stronger team to ensure the opportunity of playing for promotion and thus team will be starting from stronger base if do achieve it.  Currently no point as you know no licence for at least a number of years and then little chance anyway.

 

Only way to get any real investment into championship is if you have a realistic aspiration to gain promotion otherwise why bother investing at all.

 

For me the league structure just needs to be x2 divisions of 12 with P&R. Need to work harder at attracting corporate facilities to bring in money (as a successful business person myself I am often appalled by lack of business, commercial and marketing acumen by some in the game) and work at international game which increases exposure - we have always suffered from only ever being interested in clubs and hence paying the penalty for no real international exposure to widen interest and to bring in revenues.   Rugby Union has the huge advantage of massive monies from international game that supports the foundation and enables investment in strategic area's to raise the game.

 

 If little hope of getting a licence no point in overly investing in the team until get a licence

 

Under P nd R not much hope of getting promoted.  Under licencing, clubs still have to have a record of on-field success so they still need to have players good enough to win. 

 

The think to bear in mind id that its not investment in any case, iits a donation.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users