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
- - - - -

New league structure map


  • Please log in to reply
50 replies to this topic

#41 Blind side johnny

Blind side johnny
  • Coach
  • 9,758 posts

Posted 27 August 2014 - 11:54 AM

There are many ways to ensure competitiveness. 

 

Most American sports have the draft (as mentioned).

 

Speedway operate a system whereby at the start of each season, teams are built up to maximum points limit. The combined Calculated Match Average (CMA) of the seven riders declared in the team must not be higher than an agreed figure set at the British Speedway Promoters' Association (BSPA) Annual General Meeting. It's worth noting that in 17 years 9 different teams has won the league and there are only 10 teams in it. In that same period only 4 teams out of 14 have won Super League.

 

Bradford Bulls have gone from 14k average crowds to less than 5k in a few years. I honestly believe crowds would be better if all teams had a fair chance of success. Most fans will tolerate a season or two of disappointment but only the most hardy

 

You can't easily compare these sports nor what happens in the UK with the USA - entirely different cultures.

 

Big crowds flock to successful teams - i don't think that's rocket science. This new structure offersthe potential for  interest and excitement throughout the season fior most clubs.

 

.


Edited by Blind side johnny, 27 August 2014 - 11:57 AM.

Believe what you see, don't see what you believe.


John Ray (1627 - 1705)

#42 Lone Drinker

Lone Drinker
  • Coach
  • 270 posts

Posted 27 August 2014 - 12:20 PM

This new structure offersthe potential for  interest and excitement throughout the season fior most clubs.

 

.

 

You may well be proved right and I'll be happy if you are.



#43 DOGFATHER

DOGFATHER
  • Coach
  • 276 posts

Posted 27 August 2014 - 11:49 PM

I get all that and respect it but at the end of the day sport has winners and losers, it just so happens that using an argument whereby losers are even bigger losers doesn't wash, not with me anyway. Every Cas fan wanted to be at Wembley. I'm sure that whatever the scoreline they can cherish that, same for Batley last year and the NR final which I cherish even though I'm a Dewsbury fan. Losing is learning. If you only lose to a certain standard you stop learning.

 

The 3x8 gives an opportunity for clubs like Batley or Dewsbury an opportunity to push to a level they haven't been able to achieve for a long time. They can have a bash at 4 SL clubs if they can compete well in a strong division. Not a bad ambition even if they lose by 40 or 50 points, the club learns, the players learn, the fans learn what it takes. We'll learn how close or otherwise the lower reaches of SL and the rest are. IMO not far apart because you can only sign what's out there and the best are in the NRL or in RU.

 

So Batley get 4th, play 4 SL clubs get beat, pocket the cash, pocket the money for coming 4th, invest for next year. Next year come 4th, win a couple of games etc etc. 

 

Under normal P&R Batley remain in the Championship end of. No opportunity to learn.

 

If Batley get promoted in 2nd under normal P&R, promoted but likely relegated.

 

If Batley get 2nd in 3x8, Batley push SL clubs that bit harder but not quite up to standard. Go away invest a bit move on. After 2-3 seasons Batley have the consistency to be promoted.

 

IMVHO this has far more value to a Championship club than either missing out year on year or getting immediately relegated due to the lack of learning and improvement required.

 

This is why I like it.

You make some very good and compelling points, but I'm still not sure how much teams will learn from getting hammered by 40 or 50 points by far superior teams. It didn't help Runcorn for instance, they went several seasons without a win, by which time the fans had all but disappeared. I agree if the games are between fairly evenly matched teams, players and clubs will learn from losses, I'm not sure what teams like Rochdale have taken away from a couple of 50+ point beatings at the hands of Leigh this season, other than they have far better players than they have. 

 

The other thing to consider, without more equal funding, wealthier clubs will simply cherry pick your better players, like what has happened to us last season and like what has happened to Dewsbury over recent years with the likes of Crossley, Finn and many others over the years going to Featherstone.

 

Just supposing Dewsbury have a cracking season next year and you finish 4th as you suggest. Dewsbury don't have the financial clout to sign the players you have signed on 2 or 3 year deals, even if you could, the young talent often have a get out clause if other clubs comes sniffing around anyway. Is it not more likely, rather than building on your success, the teams with money like London, Leigh, Featherstone and Bradford, not to mention the 12 SL teams with there vast sums of cash won't simply pick off your better players just to bolster there squads, leaving you in a situation of constantly rebuilding if you have any sort of success or any player with promise? 

 

We are a perfect example of this, we lost 12 of our squad prior to this season starting. Victims of our own success you might say, we had a bit of success but not the finances to keep hold of the players we had, there were a couple of clubs with more financial clout and the rest is history, look at us now.

 

History suggests this will keep happening again and again, until the balance in money is redressed, smaller teams will never have any chance of progressing to the big time. The national side will continue to struggle unless all of the players play most league games against teams of a similar level every week.

 

I get the argument that the best players would disappear to RU etc. if you lowered the money going to the top, but sometimes you have to take a short term step backwards to move forward long term.


Edited by DOGFATHER, 29 August 2014 - 10:53 PM.


#44 DOGFATHER

DOGFATHER
  • Coach
  • 276 posts

Posted 27 August 2014 - 11:53 PM

You can't easily compare these sports nor what happens in the UK with the USA - entirely different cultures.

 

Big crowds flock to successful teams - i don't think that's rocket science. This new structure offersthe potential for  interest and excitement throughout the season fior most clubs.

 

.

I too hope you are right, but I can only see it offering interest to 4 clubs, Bradford, London, Leigh and Featherstone, but I'm not convinced there will be much interest to the other 8 teams in the division other than fighting off relegation every year.



#45 EQUALIZER

EQUALIZER
  • Coach
  • 1,558 posts

Posted 28 August 2014 - 01:02 AM

Not at all, the RFL are a great organisation that are doing absolutely all they can to ensure teams like Batley, Whitehaven, Keighley and Dewsbury etc. have a fighting chance and an easy path to the big time.

 

In fact, it is such a good idea that one day, maybe next season, these little clubs will be bigger and better supported than Leeds and Wigan are now, all hail the RFL!!!

 

After all, it will probably be really character building getting hammered in an uneven contest, I'm sure all of the fans are relishing the prospect of watching there team getting stuffed.

 

I for one can't wait, I'm not sure how I'm containing myself with all this excitement. The prospect of wondering just how points clear the top 4 will have pulled away from the rest of the division by the halfway stage is just too much for me to bare.

 

Oooh the excitement!!!

 

:no:                                                                 

                                                                                   :taunt:  :taunt:  :taunt:  :taunt:  :taunt:

well it wont bother you my friend will it.We wont and never will match the top four but dont you worry we will give the rest a run for their money.However should you play London on a challenge cup weekend what a Friday night you will have


Edited by EQUALIZER, 28 August 2014 - 01:08 AM.


#46 DOGFATHER

DOGFATHER
  • Coach
  • 276 posts

Posted 28 August 2014 - 07:47 AM

well it wont bother you my friend will it.We wont and never will match the top four but dont you worry we will give the rest a run for their money.However should you play London on a challenge cup weekend what a Friday night you will have

Well done tranquillizer, I think you might just have reached the dizzy heights of the other Dewsbury moron Eddie Rombo with your latest insightful post, you must be so proud. 



#47 Blind side johnny

Blind side johnny
  • Coach
  • 9,758 posts

Posted 28 August 2014 - 08:20 AM

You make some very good and compelling points, but I'm still not sure how much teams will learn from getting hammered by 40 or 50 points by far superior teams. It didn't help Runcorn for instance, they went several seasons without a win, by which time the fans had all but disappeared. I agree if the games are between fairly evenly matched teams, players and clubs will learn from losses, I'm not sure what teams like Rochdale have taken away from a couple of 50+ point beatings at the hands of Leigh this season, other than they have far better players than they have. 

 

The other thing to consider, without more equal funding, wealthier clubs will simply cherry pick your better players, like what has happened to us last season and like what has happened to Dewsbury over recent years with the likes of Crossley, Finn and many others over the years going to Featherstone.

 

Just supposing Dewsbury have a cracking season next year and you finish 4th as you suggest. Dewsbury don't have the financial clout to sign the players you have signed on 2 or 3 year deals, even if you could, the young talent often have a get out clause if other clubs comes sniffing around anyway. Is it not more likely, rather than building on your success, the teams with money like London, Leigh, Featherstone and Bradford, not to mention the 12 SL teams with there vast sums of cash won't simply pick off your better players just to bolster there squads, leaving you in a situation of constantly rebuilding if you have any sort of success or any player with promise? 

 

We are a perfect example of this, we lost 12 of our squad prior to this season starting. Victims of our own success you might say, we had a bit of success but not the finances to keep hold of the players we had, there were a couple of clubs with more financial clout and the rest is history, look at us now.

 

History suggests this will keep happening again and again, Until the balance in money is redressed, smaller teams will never have any chance of progressing to the big time. The national side will continue to struggle unless all of the players play most league games against teams of a similar level every week.

 

I get the argument that the best players would disappear to RU etc. if you lowered the money going to the top, but sometimes you have to take a short term step backwards to move forward long term.

 

 

You continually put up straw man arguments and cherry pick your favourite points to support your prejudice. Just realise that in the rosey days before there was any true financial distribution the big clubs were still the most successful and the lesser ones, including yours and mine, weren't. There were also regular hammerings in the league(s).

 

It's going to happen and the majority of fans that I have talked to about it think it's a good thing. What will you do - watch or walk?


Edited by Blind side johnny, 28 August 2014 - 08:21 AM.

Believe what you see, don't see what you believe.


John Ray (1627 - 1705)

#48 grumpyoldram

grumpyoldram
  • Coach
  • 2,770 posts

Posted 28 August 2014 - 08:40 AM

There are many ways to ensure competitiveness. 

 

Most American sports have the draft (as mentioned).

 

Speedway operate a system whereby at the start of each season, teams are built up to maximum points limit. The combined Calculated Match Average (CMA) of the seven riders declared in the team must not be higher than an agreed figure set at the British Speedway Promoters' Association (BSPA) Annual General Meeting. It's worth noting that in 17 years 9 different teams has won the league and there are only 10 teams in it. In that same period only 4 teams out of 14 have won Super League.

 

Bradford Bulls have gone from 14k average crowds to less than 5k in a few years. I honestly believe crowds would be better if all teams had a fair chance of success. Most fans will tolerate a season or two of disappointment but only the most hardy will tolerate year after year of it.

 

I'm a Rams fan LD - I've tolerated considerably more than a season or two of disappointment, yet here I am ;) I take your point though, but I reckon this could only happen in a closed league like the NFL - of course it's something SL might consider in the not too distant, but then everything outside that select group would be stuffed.



#49 DOGFATHER

DOGFATHER
  • Coach
  • 276 posts

Posted 28 August 2014 - 09:06 AM

4 different teams have won the league title in the last 25 years, Wigan have won 10, Leeds have won 6, Saints have won 5 and Bradford 4 times. How many international competitions have we won, or even looked like winning over that period in history, not many,  hardly a straw man argument. 

 

Statistically the best GB international teams were during the 50-70's, a time when lots of different teams had a chance of winning the title, 11 different teams won the competition between 1950 to 1975, with the most successful teams over the period, St Helens winning it 4 times and Leeds winning the title just 3 times, and a good mix of all sorts of teams winning it a couple of times.

 

What I'm getting at is, there would appear to be a direct correlation between the equality of the league competition and the success of the international game. The more teams you have in with a chance of winning the title, the better players and the game will be.

 

I'd also argue the best competition in recent years was Harrison's first year in charge at Batley, the 2009 season, when we narrowly avoided relegation. I'm not stating this from a Batley supporters point of view, but from the point of view of the game as a whole. Leigh would have been relegated that season, having won 9 out of 20 games had Gateshead not gone out of business. The team that won the title, Barrow, only won 13 out of 20 games. That showed that the league was equal and there was real jeopardy and real interest in the whole division, as anyone could have won the title right up to the wire. Surely you cannot argue this was far better than what we have now. Everyone could be absolutely certain who the top two teams were going to be this season after about 5 rounds, Fev and Leigh are so far in front of the rest ,it just isn't interesting.

 

In answer to your question, I will not walk away,I will continue to watch Rugby as long as Batley continue to play, I've watched them through some pretty sticky times in the early 80's so I'm no stranger to watching a losing side, and my argument is not about having Batley at the top of Super League, I really do not care if we ever achieve it, although I'd be lying if I didn't say I'd love to see it. I'm sure most fans of every club would agree, they would love to go in to a season with everyone having a good chance of winning the title, where a Hunslet or a Keighley or even Dewsbury to a point ;) could go in to a season and realistically have a chance of winning the Grand Final and getting to the very top, surely that is the very essence of all sport isn't it?

 

What keeps people coming back and indeed coming in the first place is the hope that the team they have chosen to support could do it and win that big prize. I'd like to see the game, where winning titles isn't absolutely reliant on how much money you can generate to spend on the team, it is about putting a good, competitive, skilful team on the field and the bounce of the ball, tactics or desire to win are the deciding factors in games, not simply outclassing everyone else because one or two teams can afford far better players than the rest.


Edited by DOGFATHER, 28 August 2014 - 06:16 PM.


#50 DOGFATHER

DOGFATHER
  • Coach
  • 276 posts

Posted 28 August 2014 - 09:11 AM

I'm a Rams fan LD - I've tolerated considerably more than a season or two of disappointment, yet here I am ;) I take your point though, but I reckon this could only happen in a closed league like the NFL - of course it's something SL might consider in the not too distant, but then everything outside that select group would be stuffed.

Why do you think this could only happen in a closed shop? 



#51 grumpyoldram

grumpyoldram
  • Coach
  • 2,770 posts

Posted 28 August 2014 - 09:13 AM

You continually put up straw man arguments and cherry pick your favourite points to support your prejudice. Just realise that in the rosey days before there was any true financial distribution the big clubs were still the most successful and the lesser ones, including yours and mine, weren't. There were also regular hammerings in the league(s).

 

It's going to happen and the majority of fans that I have talked to about it think it's a good thing. What will you do - watch or walk?

 

Both you and Dogfather make compelling arguments for both sides of the argument BSJ, and the new structure may well be a success, but one thing DF is absolutely right about, is what will be the makeup of the super eight, which will be four from SL, Bradford and London, and then take your choice of Fev. Leigh and Fax for the other two spots. It WILL almost certainly involve the resurrection of the yo-yo club. The main real interest for the remainder though will be who goes down, and SL will, I'm afraid, still be a pipe dream for the others. Despite all that though the new money will be welcome, and we haven't really lost anything. So here's my proposition to bring back some excitement to the RL competitions as a whole. The SL have already shown to us lesser mortals how exciting the competition becomes when five clubs are relegated, and playing for a safe mid table spot doesn't work, SO - let's have four clubs relegated from SL, NO parachute payment (contracted players to be paid off or to bite the bullet and take the cut in wages - after all they got the club relegated in the first place). Promoted clubs would then inherit the Sky payments from the relegated clubs. Just think how exciting it would be for Wakey, Hull, Hull KR and Salford if this system were already in progress - magic. What would the outcome of such a radical change be? - well four yo-yo clubs for a start, but you've got to admit it would add a little bit extra to SL, and Fev and Leigh could at last realise their dream. ;) :tongue:


Edited by grumpyoldram, 28 August 2014 - 09:25 AM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users