Mushy

Coach
  • Content count

    274
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

167 Excellent

About Mushy

Recent Profile Visitors

1,908 profile views
  1. This thread really has been dragged down. And I thought we all loved rugby league and might get along? Why can't we find some joy in what we watch and what we write? 😉
  2. Some people have WAY too much time on their hands! As I said, this deal is a good thing, not an incredibly sooper dooper thing, but if anyone feels so strongly negatively that they want to spend 15 minutes on a post to make us all know the deal hasn't solved world hunger then that's the benefit of free speech I suppose! I love this game, and so far I am loving Toronto!
  3. This is a big positive isn't it, even if it is for free? I'm confused...
  4. Not sure we are getting anywhere new now with this. The debate has been had, issues been discussed, and I think there is a clear majority view on here. No one could expect any more from a forum that both celebrates diversity of opinion and includes quite a few stubborn blighters.
  5. It wasn't a farce as I wrote earlier in the thread. There were indications that if they'd been given the same funding as the other clubs and the merger incentives hadn't been around they would have been able to transform the business into a going concern within 3-4 years. They had carved out a niche in the local sporting scene and were in many ways out performing Newcastle Falcons at the time. They certainly wouldn't have folded when they did. The game didn't 'go for it' at all really, Shane Richardson went for it himself with his own money. And despite their demise, money wasn't wasted any more than it was on Workington, or Oldham or Leigh first time around, as there was still a legacy of a phoenix club in the north east and the beginning of a supporter and player production line too.
  6. It's a digression but since Gateshead were mentioned I thought I'd chip in on that. I lived there for a decade and invested in Thunder Mk2. If the original Gateshead had been given the same funding as the other SL clubs they would not have gone under and merged with Hull. Whilst the immediate resurgence of Hull was great for the game, I think it more likely than not that Gateshead would have grown a lot and been a solid fixture in SL by now with its own supply of players and a large new market for our game. Others can disagree and there's no surety to this of course, but the there were indications that the extra £250k per year could have made them break even within perhaps 3-4 years, and that the general awareness of the game in the region and the positive associations it was already generating would also have steadily built crowds and the local game. Something to ponder as we debate raising the drawbridge, making an exiting new venture fend for itself, or seizing and supporting a fabulous opportunity to grow our game.
  7. I'd almost forgotten how this thread started, glad someone reminded me. For what it's worth I reckon it is possible that some clubs might be against TWP joining SL, that some might say it's because of fewer away fans, and that perhaps even someone actually believed that despite the evidence suggesting otherwise. However what seems more likely to me is that existing clubs don't like threats to their positions, and a cashed-up TWP would potentially be one even if they weren't relegated at their expense. We are right to canvass the'clubs' opinions, but since they appear unable to work collectively for their common good on anything (unlike NA sports organisations) and often come across as looking after their own short-term interests only, I'd hope our game's leadership was strategic enough to not just decide things on a show of chairmen's hands. The key word here is hope! That being said, if the TWP do continue their progress and tear up the Championship, I'd expect their momentum to be such that they'd have to be promoted regardless, and that enough people would see the enormous potential that they would offer for our game. I certainly do.
  8. This whole thread reminds me of the scientific process. People put forward hypotheses that are peer reviewed and supported, modified or rejected. Not everyone agrees with everything but as with climate change you do reach an uncomfortable truth when the vast majority of informed folk agree sufficiently with what is being put forward. You can either ignore and become increasingly isolated or get on board with. As I mentioned before, some people only believe what they want to believe, and diversity of opinion is actually a good thing. But I think the debate here has actually used some meaningful evidence which is great to see, and I do feel like there is something approaching a majority view on here now. I want TWP to be a success and although they still have some way to go, it's quite a ride already isn't it? Being supportive of them doesn't mean I don't want to replace an entire league of existing clubs with made up ones. I do think there is enormous potential for our game locally, nationally and internationally that I'd love us to grasp, whereas becoming increasingly parochial will be a disaster. It's all about balance. Being guardedly optimistic of TWP's future isn't costing me a penny, nor is it disenfranchising 7000 existing fans enough to walk away from the game. I didn't enjoy last year that much but partly because of the Wolfpack I'm loving 2017. Long may it last.
  9. Sorry that can't be true. Parky says TWP don't find or develop any new players. 😉
  10. I don't think TWP should be in SL next year unless the structure changes to accommodate new teams. If TWP do end up in SL there will be a substantial increase in media exposure if what we've seen of their entry to C1 is anything to go by, which it is. Which the clubs and the league could easily use to improve their sponsorship returns unless they really are that useless. There, that's one thing they would bring. People only believe what they want to believe though.
  11. Let's not let facts get in the way here.
  12. I think the revenue might be about £300k for a club for an entire season's away fans, maybe £400k if they own the stadium and get bar recipts etc. That's only 10% of their income at a small turnover club, maybe 5% at a larger one, so although not to be ignored it's hardly the one a club should be looking at hardest. And the potential loss of one lot of away fans would be then less than 1% of a club's turnover if they didn't manage to compensate with creative marketing like the C1 clubs. It's almost embarrassing for clubs to even mention it to be honest. If we don't increase our other forms of revenue the game is shafted as a professional sport. All the evidence around the world of major sports demonstrates that whilst we need general admission fans to generate an atmosphere, their contribution to revenue is relatively modest, especially away support. Grow your sponsorship portfolio, grow other sales, grow your non-match day venue usage, and grow your broadcast deals. The key is balance - from the make up of the league to looking after the loyal existing fans Alas many clubs and potentially our leadership have limited ambition and even more limited capabilities if they think pulling up a drawbridge will get them any more money and enable the game to survive in the face of really strong competitors. TWP shouldn't just stroll in to SL at all, and its way too soon to be thinking of other transatlantic teams, but a league with them and Toulouse and Catalans at least has the potential to elevate us as a game with access to new markets, and much increased revenue. Staying in Yorkshire and Lancashire exclusively certainly won't.
  13. I think so and I suspect he might have gone with Widdop at fullback too. England's attack looks so much better with a ballplayer at the back.
  14. Interesting. Gale, Widdop, Hardaker and Tomkins have all played fullback or are currently playing fullback, so we do have some equivalent versatility even before you look at the likes of Ratchford or the guys who play centre/second row. Agree I am not sure about the Oz centre selections to be honest, but the all round skill set of those players must be very high for it even to be considered. Would we/should we be considering shoe-horning in somewhere arguably our 5 most skilful backs for the World Cup?
  15. Been following the selections for the state of origin and one thing that leaps out at me is how they seem comfortable selecting their talented players out of position. Whisper the possibility of this on here for England and you'll be shouted down and feel like apologising for being so stupid. Our national team went crazily the wrong way a decade ago with I think 5 loose forwards in a team at one point, and we us avoiding picking any natural stand offs for series after series, so that's where I suspect most of our aversion comes from understandably. That being said, I think we'd be shortsighted not to even consider trying to find places for our best players who might happen to play the club game in the same positions. Perhaps by the end of the year we will be looking at some of our best players being Hardaker, Tomkins, Gale, Widdop and Williams, for instance, whereas we might be struggling to fill some other positions. For me it's about the overall blend of the team and getting the right balance rather than dogmatically sticking to rigid club positions or going the other way entirely. Form and fitness permitting (v early days for Tomkins) I'd have all 5 of the above stars in the 17 rather than picking someone else who is solid rather than spectacular. No doubt plenty will dispute these are actually stars but that shouldn't devalue the overall suggestion that perhaps we can play a player or two out of position for the national team. If it's good enough for QLD and NSW...