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 / Kindle Buy Now £14.99 / Kindle Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards



Photo
- - - - -

Why the Hull clubs must merge


  • Please log in to reply
310 replies to this topic

#301 Ponterover

Ponterover
  • Coach
  • 1,786 posts

Posted 14 December 2013 - 04:13 PM

That's just the point isn't it, They didn't get their way did they, because I L and co were a jump ahead.

 

I would certainly like to see men with some idea of how to run a business successfully have a lot more control over SL, If that's unreal , so be it,  Are you happy with how it's been run up to now, New formats coming in every couple of years, each one of them going to save the game.

 

Regards Sky, Wait till the top sides are sticking 60 points on teams regularly and people are switching their TV's off, You will see how keen Sky are then.

 

I want to see all clubs doing well, I just don't think this is the way to do it.

 

I think there is a general misunderstanding of how the middle 8 will be funded (assuming Leneghan and co allow it) and salary capped that leads to assumptions like yours that the scores will be blowouts.  Some people seem to think it will be part-timers being led to slaughter against full time opposition, it won't.

 

Woods is on record as saying Sky love the idea.  They didn't become the leading pay tv operator by being idiots.


Edited by Ponterover, 14 December 2013 - 04:15 PM.


#302 oldrover

oldrover
  • Coach
  • 6,164 posts

Posted 14 December 2013 - 04:15 PM

That's just the point isn't it, They didn't get their way did they, because I L and co were a jump ahead.

 

I would certainly like to see men with some idea of how to run a business successfully have a lot more control over SL, If that's unreal , so be it,  Are you happy with how it's been run up to now, New formats coming in every couple of years, each one of them going to save the game.

 

Regards Sky, Wait till the top sides are sticking 60 points on teams regularly and people are switching their TV's off, You will see how keen Sky are then.

 

I want to see all clubs doing well, I just don't think this is the way to do it.

haven't we had successful business men running S/L clubs that have been in dire straights. not defending the RFL here, just saying it's not so simple.


joe mullaney is a god
the only good tiger is a stuffed tiger

Posted Image

#303 GIANTSTRIDES

GIANTSTRIDES
  • Coach
  • 1,610 posts

Posted 14 December 2013 - 04:22 PM

I think there is a general misunderstanding of how the middle 8 will be funded (assuming Leneghan and co allow it) and salary capped that leads to assumptions like yours that the scores will be blowouts.  Some people seem to think it will be part-timers being led to slaughter against full time opposition, it won't.

 

Woods is on record as saying Sky love the idea.  They didn't become the leading pay tv operator by being idiots.

 

What Woods says i would take with a pinch of snuff.

 

But if this format does come in ,I hope it is a big success, the last thing we need is another failure, I just don't see it being what they are claiming it will be.


Dont expect anything from a pig but a grunt

#304 GIANTSTRIDES

GIANTSTRIDES
  • Coach
  • 1,610 posts

Posted 14 December 2013 - 05:11 PM

haven't we had successful business men running S/L clubs that have been in dire straights. not defending the RFL here, just saying it's not so simple.

 

 You are absolutely right, we have , Usually I think because they have either not had enough money to see the job ( or club ) through, Not had the commitment to see it through, or thought it was going to be easy, just taking Sky' money. 

The real hard one to understand is London, The only reason i can think of for a club with so many people to draw on, to fail is the sheer cost of being down there, That said look at the number of failures up here.

 

There are also some outstanding records amongst the clubs up here, These are the ones we have to use as the benchmark in the modern game, It's not about disliking any particular club , ( like Fev or Fax ) I don't dislike either, It's about making clubs successful enough to compete.

 

If you take Wigan or Leeds, Saints Wolves whoever , whether you like or dislike them, you can not knock their success, They have not got where they are by divine right, people have worked hard over many years to make them what they are today.Their owners IMO are entitalled to have a big say in what happens.

 

For a club like Fev to get on anything like the same level IMO they will have to see off both Wakey and Cas as serious competition and the best of luck to them, It makes no difference who the clubs are in SL, It's whether they can deliver that matters, But we have to remember the aim is to take the clubs up to the level of the top teams ,not the other way round.

 

I remember seeing Fev put in a couple of really good games last season, They will have to perform like that every time they meet one of these top teams,  

 

I know we have to have enough teams in SL but for me It's vital the onfield standards don't go backwards, When they fall at a club like Hull for example, even with a wembley appearance, somebody pays the price, and that inevitably costs .

 

So should Fev get to SL I wish them nothing but the best, I hope they are a big success.

 

 

 

So you are right it is not simple in any way, But if i was thinking of putting heavy money into a League club, these are the people i would be talking to ,  rather than anybody at the RFL


Dont expect anything from a pig but a grunt

#305 Rover and out

Rover and out
  • Coach
  • 108 posts

Posted 14 December 2013 - 06:12 PM

What you may consider Les is that if Mr. Campbell and Mr. Nahaboo had rescued a Wakefield based "Calder" their ability to improve a tired old ground as they have with POR, and ability to revitalise a club as they have with Rovers, would have far more return, and far more potential to build a club to Challenge Leeds and Wigan, given Wakefield even in the state they are in, can attract 8,000 crowds?

Not having a go at all, it just seems like Wakefield is the better vehicle for a successful club if the three refuse to merge which is most likely. Same for Hull, if Hudgell had joined the Hull board you may have seen a competitive Hull now.

But the game can't put the money men where they would be most effective.

If wakefield are such a huge club or sleeping giants then why didn't nahaboo or Campbell go there instead of little old Fev that have no hope or prospects of ever challenging the big clubs?

Edited by Rover and out, 14 December 2013 - 06:21 PM.


#306 Terry Mullaney

Terry Mullaney
  • Coach
  • 1,991 posts

Posted 14 December 2013 - 07:08 PM

Well you didn't ask it but it may help if we look at that:-

Club (crowd second tier) (crowd in Superleague)

1997 Salford up from 3495 to 5202
1998 Hull down from 6365 to 5741
1999 Wakefield up from 2018 to 4235
2003 Widnes up from 3781 to 6511
2006 Leigh up from 2166 to 4750
2007 HKR up from 3300 to 7160

Average 3,520 up to 5,600 an increase of 59%

Featherstone are currently on 2,400 crowds so add the average 59% on to that clubs get when they go up from the Championship to Superleague for the first time and it comes to 3,816.

But Parky, you've got an example in your list of Wakefield increasing their crowd by more than 100% and that was back in 1999. Why wouldn't Rovers achieve at least that considering that their home average was higher than Trinity's in 98? How can you apply a 59% increase to Rovers when that figure doesnt apply to any of the clubs you've quoted above? The best comparison for Fev surely has to be that of Wakefield as we are in the same area.

Edited by Terry Mullaney, 14 December 2013 - 07:12 PM.

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

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

#307 Les Tonks Sidestep

Les Tonks Sidestep
  • Coach
  • 1,584 posts

Posted 15 December 2013 - 08:16 AM

What you may consider Les is that if Mr. Campbell and Mr. Nahaboo had rescued a Wakefield based "Calder" their ability to improve a tired old ground as they have with POR, and ability to revitalise a club as they have with Rovers, would have far more return, and far more potential to build a club to Challenge Leeds and Wigan, given Wakefield even in the state they are in, can attract 8,000 crowds?

 

Not having a go at all, it just seems like Wakefield is the better vehicle for a successful club if the three refuse to merge which is most likely. Same for Hull, if Hudgell had joined the Hull board you may have seen a competitive Hull now.

 

But the game can't put the money men where they would be most effective.

 

As Rover And Out says they could easily have chosen Wakefield but didn't. Ever thought to ask why? Or why Jack F at Cas has never tried to get it together with either Fev or Wakefield? The assertion that's it's only 'Sid and Doris' holding back any merger is clearly flawed.

 

The redevelopment at POR is completely different to building a new stadium to hold the 18000 (more like 20-30000 going by the oft put forward view that people'd be flocking to see a merged side) needed to maintain the numbers watching RL in the area.

 

In the case of Mr Nahaboo, Cas had their chance to become the 'dominant' team in the area through his involvement with the club but failed to capitalise - if rumours are true Glasshoughton would be very much a reality by now.......



#308 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,705 posts

Posted 15 December 2013 - 08:30 AM

As Rover And Out says they could easily have chosen Wakefield but didn't. Ever thought to ask why? Or why Jack F at Cas has never tried to get it together with either Fev or Wakefield? The assertion that's it's only 'Sid and Doris' holding back any merger is clearly flawed.

 

The redevelopment at POR is completely different to building a new stadium to hold the 18000 (more like 20-30000 going by the oft put forward view that people'd be flocking to see a merged side) needed to maintain the numbers watching RL in the area.

 

In the case of Mr Nahaboo, Cas had their chance to become the 'dominant' team in the area through his involvement with the club but failed to capitalise - if rumours are true Glasshoughton would be very much a reality by now.......

 

Thanks for your view Les.



#309 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,705 posts

Posted 15 December 2013 - 08:36 AM

If wakefield are such a huge club or sleeping giants then why didn't nahaboo or Campbell go there instead of little old Fev that have no hope or prospects of ever challenging the big clubs?

 

I'd guess because Mr. Nahaboo felt happiest there, like Mr. Hudgell feels happy at HKR and Mr. Hughes loves throwing money at the Broncos. All I am saying is private money is so important to our game but it isn't spent strategically the best way for the game, but it's their money so fair enough.

 

Wakefield are a big club historically, in a big city and can attract 8,000 fans without doing much. They simply have far more potential IMVHO than Rovers, but as I have always said if Rovers were the only SL club in the area then they'd have a chance of going places.

 

IMVHO to want wakefield and Cas in SL as well as Rovers is to want to stifle the clubs best chance of growth. But then again whatever makes people happy. Those derbies are enticing as we see in Hull.


Edited by The Parksider, 15 December 2013 - 08:38 AM.


#310 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,705 posts

Posted 15 December 2013 - 08:44 AM

But Parky, you've got an example in your list of Wakefield increasing their crowd by more than 100% and that was back in 1999. Why wouldn't Rovers achieve at least that considering that their home average was higher than Trinity's in 98? How can you apply a 59% increase to Rovers when that figure doesnt apply to any of the clubs you've quoted above? The best comparison for Fev surely has to be that of Wakefield as we are in the same area.

 

Oh Terry, last time I said that the general concensus of opinion was that if Rovers went OK in Superleague you may get crowds of 5,000 you were arguing for more.

 

Make of the stats what you will but my answer to the question you pose is that if a club creates more interest in paying fans across a bigger population/fanbase they are likely to get a bigger increase in fans.

 

However as another individual stat shows Hull didn't get an increase (I've still to check that), so the average stats are just a guide.

 

Rovers may do great and pull as many as 7,000 - I'd be shocked, Rovers may flop and end up on 3,000 again I'd be shocked. I think 5,000 is a good estimate and Mr. Nahaboo will just have to write an annual seven figure cheque and you'll be up there with the big boys.



#311 yipyee

yipyee
  • Coach
  • 1,362 posts

Posted 17 December 2013 - 09:32 PM

Oh Terry, last time I said that the general concensus of opinion was that if Rovers went OK in Superleague you may get crowds of 5,000 you were arguing for more.

Make of the stats what you will but my answer to the question you pose is that if a club creates more interest in paying fans across a bigger population/fanbase they are likely to get a bigger increase in fans.

However as another individual stat shows Hull didn't get an increase (I've still to check that), so the average stats are just a guide.

Rovers may do great and pull as many as 7,000 - I'd be shocked, Rovers may flop and end up on 3,000 again I'd be shocked. I think 5,000 is a good estimate and Mr. Nahaboo will just have to write an annual seven figure cheque and you'll be up there with the big boys.


Mr nahaboo should invest in wakey and then the need to write big would disappear when their crowds hit 10k




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users