Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

GeordieSaint

Eagles for SL

550 posts in this topic

Basically (Sheffield) has only really been going after youth for the same length of time as say London, who are only just starting to see the fruits of its labour, and London have had the Super League club + umpteen development officers etc to help them out.. Sheffield have not.

Thanks for your views and the usual well balanced and thoughtful approach to them.

Certainly London have had several advantages over Sheffield and of course you forget the biggest one. Mr, Hughes and up to £1,500,000 of private money each year to run an SL club and fund the academy player development - to a point.

The reason for London producing several quality SL players whilst Sheffield have produced none is that London has the money and Sheffield do not. It may also be as you say there's more development officers in London than in Sheffield.

If all things were even who would produce the most SL quality juniors? If anyone wants to argue Sheffield then that's fine.

BUT it doesn't change the realty on the ground that Eagles have a very small junior RL base, and no money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did it a bit ago.. pointing out that both (licensing and P & R( have their merits and that maybe its time to give a different way of working a chance before burning it like a heretic!

I do not understand the "different way" is that P & R??

If so we gave it a chance for 34 years.

RL World analysed it's value recently and declared it was right to burn it at the stake.

You yourself stated it would not have worked this year.

Clubs who missed out on being promoted in recent years have had the exact same lack of money Sheffield have which you cited was the reason it would not work this time.

I don't understand "give it a chance"? To do what? Put clubs into SL who can't afford it and remove clubs who can??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not understand the "different way" is that P & R??

If so we gave it a chance for 34 years.

RL World analysed it's value recently and declared it was right to burn it at the stake.

You yourself stated it would not have worked this year.

Clubs who missed out on being promoted in recent years have had the exact same lack of money Sheffield have which you cited was the reason it would not work this time.

I don't understand "give it a chance"? To do what? Put clubs into SL who can't afford it and remove clubs who can??

Can i suggest that you ask the first question, wait for the answer, then go on with the rest of the post.. as my answer would have been that i meant liscencing needed to be given a chance which is my normal and general stance... i normally get a "your clubs in there" retort from some which i never understand.. i think the "london" in my username is confusing some..

i agree with you on this that P&R didnt work and it would not have done sheffield any good this time around IMO and that IF they were granted a liscence the fact it is a 3 years liscence gives them the best chance of making it work..

Thanks for your views and the usual well balanced and thoughtful approach to them.

Certainly London have had several advantages over Sheffield and of course you forget the biggest one. Mr, Hughes and up to £1,500,000 of private money each year to run an SL club and fund the academy player development - to a point.

The reason for London producing several quality SL players whilst Sheffield have produced none is that London has the money and Sheffield do not. It may also be as you say there's more development officers in London than in Sheffield.

If all things were even who would produce the most SL quality juniors? If anyone wants to argue Sheffield then that's fine.

BUT it doesn't change the realty on the ground that Eagles have a very small junior RL base, and no money.

I hope you dont mind me putting the two posts together to make one "super" post..

with regards the other post (above) I dont know who would have the strongest set of juniors all things being equal, its impossible to say but i can say the Sheffields would be stronger than it is now.

I also agree that it doesnt change the reality on the ground... however, chicken and egg... over the past god know show many years and posts that you and i have discussed all things RL and Junior RL/Development we often speak about the potential of an area rather than what is actually happening at the moment. What i have seen in Sheffield from moving away in the mid 90's first to uni then London and moving back now is an utter sea change in what is offered to the kids in terms of sport. Rugby has grown exponentially (and personally until about 14-15 i dont see the two as massivly different) there are schools playing the sport now that would not have been able to before becuase there are umpteen companies offering lessons and outside help for the schools. I have seen development and helped out with it (not as much as i would have liked but family takes priority). It is totally different. How different could this be with the resources say London has and spread across the whole of south Yorkshire and the North Midlands.. arguablly from this Doncaster and Sheffield could benefit along with the potential rise of other clubs in other areas..

This is an argument i could roll out in London with the names of hte areas changing.. the difference being the mileage.. and the sounds of the names.. when someone is named as a Sheffield product people say he is from Barnsley... and they are not wrong.. but LMS was from Greenwich not from Brentford/Twickenham.. totally different boroughs etc.. we have to remove the towns and cities and see what work is being done within the clubs.

now all this is huge speculation and very open to people picking holes in it becuase we frankly do not and cannot know what would happen if things were different (very nature of the beast) but to rule out or even start the argument of "Sheffield do not produce Super League standard players" as a stick to beat us with us hugely unfair as that is not in Sheffields remit, and there are plenty of other areas that do not either.. but could Sheffield given the opportunity.. hell yes.. they open up an area to RL, they have a big catchment to which they are already working etc..

Give them a chance before writing them off on junior development, they are doing what they can with what they have and doing a good job. There are plenty of other things to write Sheffield out of a liscence but I believe the Junior Development is making big strides forward and are putting some other clubs (in the heartlands no less) to shame. There is potential there, and that is enough for other clubs..

Money wise, at the moment no.. but it doesnt mean it wont come and surely if in the proposal scrutineered by an accountant we can make it work without the massive backer that surely is a good thing.. there are plenty of clubs with a backer who are struggling. a club SHOULD work by spending what it earns.. and if we can do that and make it work surely we should be applauded not looked at with "where is the money coming from"..

Eagles have said they are a ways off.. and maybe that is the money man.. but for the moment how about we praise what is happening in Sheffield and the potential of this area that may be about to start growing as it didnt even with a Super League team rather than at the first mention saying boooo go away you have no money and no junior development booo.. there are plenty like us who have had 150 years to get this right.. no one at Eagles is running before they can walk but there are a few people on here (i know you are not one) who assume we are trying to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no it wouldnt... we would have had a year of getting shelackings (thanks stevo) and crowds dwiddling becuase we are getting tonked week in week out.. spending money we dont have on players to try and stay up instead of concentrating on the important things like academies and sustainability.

Yes the first paragraph is tough if that attitude prevails but from talking to people in the city (shocking this) they dont see an issue when you tell them how it actually works, many see it as eminantly sensible.. its just then getting those people through the gates, and they are working hard on that to be honest..

you have a very negative view on liscencing but it is not necessarily true of many..

Why would the club suddenly spend money it doesnt have it was promoted under P&R?Perhaps they would spend the significantly extra revenues from bigger crowds and sky money wisely? Perhaps some players could stay part time - I would bet theyd still win at least as many as the ill prepared Widnes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just started reading this thread. Got here and thought i ought to reply so sorry if this has already been mentioned.

Was talking to a friend about this over the weekend.. What has changed? the football sides have plumeted down the leagues, Wednesday have nearly gone under and United are pretty poor at the moment. when we won the challenge cup Wednesday had had a good run in the Premier League, the league cup win of 91 and the final of 93 along with the FA Cup final of 93 were not that distant a memory banks along wth good years in the premiership, United also had years in the premiership to remember, an fa cup semi in 93 and one against newcastle in the not too distant. People really thought the football teams were going to kick on.

Now both are rubbish and many many moons away from any chance of glory (unless wednesday some how have a run in the fa cup this year ala millwall from a few years ago) but with the right marketing etc the fans could (but i stress could) turn their attention to RL for success..

a few people have said on here about moving fans away from football and to RL.. but that doesnt really make sense.. why do we have to move them away from football??? what we need to do is make them go and watch RL.. its not an either/or situation.. the seasons overlap a bit yes but why cant we have both..

If you look at the coverage in Sheffield it is pretty shocking.. but this can be worked on, 2 grand finals and 1 win can be used to try and attract the fans.. this is some of the hard work that the club have to do over the winter. Last couple of years the club has been getting into the schools.. that may ramp up a setp or two and with this success it may help. My little boy does a "play ball Rugby" session which Jack Howeison runs with help from some of the other players on a Saturday morning (my boy is only 4).. I take him and chat to some of the other dads, some of which i have known through nursery etc. All of which now that their kids are getting into Rugby are showing an interest in the club Jack is playing for, i am try to take advantage of that and next year will take a trip of these dads to a game. 1 anecdote yes but Jack does these sessions all over Sheffield, how many others may be doing the same as me. Some of these sessions are into the private schools here too.. money men starting to get an interest perhaps..

again its very much clutching at straws and anecdotes but its interest and from small acorns etc. yes a lot of work has to be done, but its not necessarily all done and dusted just yet..

What i would say is that Eagles ought to apply this time around, with a view to the next one but to get an idea of where they are and what they need to do.. but i dont see why Sheffield cannot grow into a good club with a good solid base.. just as good as umpteen clubs already in the league who have had a good long time to become "power houses".

for those on P&R bandwagons.. it would be THE WORST thing to happen to sheffield next year IMO, they would desperately try to stay up spending money on the team and not having any to spend on the more important aspects of a "club"... more than that with P&R who ever came down last year would probably have won this year and so clubs like the eagles wouldnt have the chance for a bit of success to try and build things from...

anyway fact is box is ticked, they are allowed to apply so let them.. if they fall well short then so be it, if they dont and they get let in the lets, as this big RL family every so "admires", get behind them and hope it succeeds.

The problem with licence applications is that it is very difficult to dislodge an entenched SL incumbent ( In fact, it has never been done ). Any applicant is starting from a point of weakness in that they are competing against SL clubs who have had years to solidify their position and have had the benefit of Sky cash to help them along.

P and R however with automatic promotion, as you states, puts you on the yo/yo syndrome ladder spending money you don't have in order to survive.

To me, the obvious answer is promotion with standards. In other words, any club wanting promotion to SL has to win the championship and then satisfy the same criteria as are required of a licence applicant. If they don't, there is no promotion that season.

The difference between the two scenarios is that, if you win the Championship AND satisfy the licencing criteria, you will be guaranteed promotion and not be thrown into the crapshoot licencing process with no guarantee of SL due to the vagaries of that system, competing with existing SL clubs with friends in high places.

The bottom SL club should go down due to their lack of success on the field. If this sometimes throws up a yo yo team, then so be it. It will not always.

Thus this season, since Sheffield cannot tick all the boxes, especially on finance, then they would not be eligible for promotion. However, if say Featherstone had won or, down the road, Sheffield find the financing and win the championship, then they would know they were up, no ifs and buts and random licencing applications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's he after? A ticker tape parade through the streets of Burngreave?

To be fair to the RFL, they're keeping more people in jobs than Tesco right now, including a fair few in South Yorkshire/the East Midlands, so I'm not entirely sure what he's moaning about.

How many Eagles players have a day job in RL development? Are none of these posts funded in part by the RFL?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However, if say Featherstone had won or, down the road, Sheffield find the financing and win the championship, then they would know they were up, no ifs and buts and random licencing applications.

So we're setting Fev up an an example of prudent financial management ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we're setting Fev up an an example of prudent financial management ?

I thought they were but don't go off on tangents. If they are not susbstitute any team that satisfies the criteria for a SL licence AND wins the championship. If there are none there would be no promotion. I thought I had made that clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would (sheffield) suddenly spend money it doesnt have it was promoted under P&R?

Perhaps they would spend the significantly extra revenues from bigger crowds and sky money wisely?

Perhaps some players could stay part time - I would bet they'd still win at least as many as the ill prepared Widnes

OK so the extra crowd revenue and the SKY money spent "wisely" with some part time players helping to keep player costs down would have seen Sheffield stay up this coming year??

Whereas the cash rich "Ill prepared" Widnes who clearly have wasted shedloads of money on poor choices of player would have deserved to go down.

P & R would obviously have done a good job this year, and Sheffield would avoid relegation next year according to you.

There's therefore no need for promoted clubs to have money as they will only waste it, all they need is "wise choices" and several "part timers" to stay up?

Seriously???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its rubbish. The 'we exist therefore deserve to be in Super League' mentality of northern semi-pro RL clubs is really irritating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought they were but don't go off on tangents. If they are not susbstitute any team that satisfies the criteria for a SL licence AND wins the championship. If there are none there would be no promotion. I thought I had made that clear.

Fair point.

Who though ?

Sheffield just about break even but have historical losses and no asset base. Fev make losses. Fax and Leigh -as far as I know - do OK these days but don't have any development structure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK so the extra crowd revenue and the SKY money spent "wisely" with some part time players helping to keep player costs down would have seen Sheffield stay up this coming year??

Whereas the cash rich "Ill prepared" Widnes who clearly have wasted shedloads of money on poor choices of player would have deserved to go down.

P & R would obviously have done a good job this year, and Sheffield would avoid relegation next year according to you.

There's therefore no need for promoted clubs to have money as they will only waste it, all they need is "wise choices" and several "part timers" to stay up?

Seriously???

Widnes went up with a ###### team way off the pace for NL1 and were ill prepared. A team going up as champions or multiple champions (if automatic promotion with standards if not every year) would have the backbone of a team - especially so if they are already the best team after year 2 of the 3 year cycle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. I meant liscencing needed to be given a chance.

2. IF (sheffield) were granted a license the fact it is a 3 years license gives them the best chance of making it work.. but to rule out or even start the argument of "Sheffield do not produce Super League standard players" as a stick to beat us with us hugely unfair. Give them a chance before writing them off on junior development, they are doing what they can with what they have and doing a good job. There are plenty of other things to write Sheffield out of a liscence but I believe the Junior Development is making big strides forward and are putting some other clubs (in the heartlands no less) to shame. There is potential there.that is enough for other clubs.

3. Money wise, at the moment no.. but it doesnt mean it wont come and surely if in the proposal scrutineered by an accountant we can make it work without the massive backer that surely is a good thing.. there are plenty of clubs with a backer who are struggling. a club SHOULD work by spending what it earns.. and if we can do that and make it work surely we should be applauded not looked at with "where is the money coming from"..

1. Yes of course, sorry.

2. I am not beating Sheffield or writing them off on junior development. Never.

3. I have said that if they get a big backer then go for it. I am sure such a great club will come up with the goods.

But the catch 22 is Championship Rugby does not inspire the kids. A super league Sheffield would I am sure. But it has to be a Superleague Sheffield that competes in Super League and doesn't just lose most of it's games and sink financially.

Do the maths. Look at HKR losing half a million pounds a year on crowds Sheffield will never achieve in three years. How will anything positive come out of a three year license with a half million loss at least first year?? Then what do the club do second year?? Lower budgets but still add to the loss?? Where will they be year three??

A long sustained run competing in Superleague will see the club grow, but there isn't the money and the RFL cannot afford a three year disaster.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many Eagles players have a day job in RL development? Are none of these posts funded in part by the RFL?

As far as I know, the islanders have no work permit to cover anything but playing. Mitch Stringer and Hendo are employed - they're Scottish, obviously.

But is bidding for development work not something any club can do ? :huh:

Most of the "traditional" clubs just cover the few square miles surrounding their grounds. Up to them, obviously, but don't moan about others getting the work. :dry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Widnes went up with a ###### team way off the pace for NL1 and were ill prepared. A team going up as champions or multiple champions (if automatic promotion with standards if not every year) would have the backbone of a team - especially so if they are already the best team after year 2 of the 3 year cycle.

There's an old adage that clubs get promoted, not players. Players tend to stay in the division they were in and just change clubs.

Even more true when moving between full-time and part-time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its rubbish. The 'we exist therefore deserve to be in Super League' mentality of northern semi-pro RL clubs is really irritating.

They did win just win the league below SL and that qualifies them to make a SL application.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know, the islanders have no work permit to cover anything but playing. Mitch Stringer and Hendo are employed - they're Scottish, obviously.

But is bidding for development work not something any club can do ? :huh:

Most of the "traditional" clubs just cover the few square miles surrounding their grounds. Up to them, obviously, but don't moan about others getting the work. :dry:

You're missing the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair point.

Who though ?

Sheffield just about break even but have historical losses and no asset base. Fev make losses. Fax and Leigh -as far as I know - do OK these days but don't have any development structure.

Fax ran teams at u18 & u23 last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hull KR's 'losses' of circa £500k p.a are constantly being touted as the standard for SL clubs outside of the top 4, excluding Catalan and London.

However, how do we know what is in HKR's accounts to make that loss? What is their structure, their salary spending, their backroom staff levels and what is their overheads cost base? How do they benchmark against other clubs in terms of costs and overheads? How much do they pay in interest, band charges and how much capital repayment may be included in that £500k? How much are they paying in maintenance of Craven Park? What is their level of match-day income in comparison to other clubs? How much 'selective' spin is within Hudgell's statements, in order to back up his investment and perhaps paint a picture for the message he wants to portray?

Too many unknowns for me for the '£500k' loss to be the basis of a whole range of arguements on many threads recently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hull KR's 'losses' of circa £500k p.a are constantly being touted as the standard for SL clubs outside of the top 4, excluding Catalan and London.

However, how do we know what is in HKR's accounts to make that loss? What is their structure, their salary spending, their backroom staff levels and what is their overheads cost base? How do they benchmark against other clubs in terms of costs and overheads? How much do they pay in interest, band charges and how much capital repayment may be included in that £500k? How much are they paying in maintenance of Craven Park? What is their level of match-day income in comparison to other clubs? How much 'selective' spin is within Hudgell's statements, in order to back up his investment and perhaps paint a picture for the message he wants to portray?

Too many unknowns for me for the '£500k' loss to be the basis of a whole range of arguements on many threads recently.

Pearson from Hull FC has said on the BBC Sport site, that he expects the club to lose £500k this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pearson from Hull FC has said on the BBC Sport site, that he expects the club to lose £500k this year.

Oh,no, say it isn t so. Hull are one of Parksiders anointed ones.This will really upset his debating points. Let s hope none of the other big boys report a loss, that would be just too much to bear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They did win just win the league below SL and that qualifies them to make a SL application........

No fev won the league Sheffield won the play off's different competition

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh,no, say it isn t so. Hull are one of Parksiders anointed ones.This will really upset his debating points. Let s hope none of the other big boys report a loss, that would be just too much to bear.

So what is your point then other than to poke me with a silly stick?

Doesn't the fact that Superleague made £8,000,000 losses last year excite you more?

Whopee you say Superleague is struggling.

It may have gone "whoosh" and right over your head but most SL clubs make the losses up in directors loans. Some don't, like Cas who struggle or HKR this year who are starting to struggle.

Enjoying it are you?

As for upsetting debating points, this doesn't upset anything, rich directors will use their money to advance their clubs at the expense of neighbours, and that's been around longer than you or me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They did win just win the league below SL and that qualifies them to make a SL application........

No fev won the league Sheffield won the play off's different competition

No it isn't, but even if it is, winning the play-offs (or getting to the final) is what qualifies you to make the application.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.