Archived

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

flyingking

Super League teams to discuss 2 tier SL with P+R

154 posts in this topic

So basically the plan is to get rid of 4 teams from SL, but to make those 4 teams feel better about it they'll rebrand the 2nd division so it's called SL2 or something. [/Quote]

I think the plan is more about making a full time second tier as well as a closer, more competitive top tier. If its not, then I agree with you.

Whatever you call it, it won't be the top division.

I don't think anyone is pretending otherwise.

The best players will still want to be in the top flight, and that's where all the money will go.

I think that's the intentions for the players to go to the top and make it more intense.

But if the money isn't there to strengthen the 2nd tier, then it's pointless.

I would question whether Sky would even be interested in showing any sort of 2nd tier competition, so all this talk of getting Sky to pay for it is nothing but wishful thinking.

Well they show 2nd-4th tier football, as well as 2nd tier union.

I'd also agree with the above comments about how the RFL should be discussing this and making the decisions - not the clubs involved.

The RFL should make the final decisions, but clubs should be allowed to discuss ideas and at least poll their opinions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been thinking about this and have also discussed it with some of my mates on Twitter etc and it seems to be that a lot will have to change for this to become a success.

Firstly, if we are going to have 'SL1' and 'SL2' the salary cap and Sky revenue should be equal for all sides, therefore, the Sky deal will have to improve.

It seems this idea has come out simply to satisfy those who want a return to promotion and relegation (I must admit, I'm getting bored of this argument now) to give 'smaller' sides a chance to get into the top flight. At present we have one league cut off from the bottom two. To change things up we would effectively have two league cut off from the remaining sides. Not much of a difference there.

If we are struggling to sustain a competition with 14 teams how can we make sure we can do this with 20? Where are the other six sides going to come from? Where is the finance to aid these new clubs in getting up to speed? (And that is a whole different subject in itself)

I'm not sold on this idea yet, but will keep researching it.

I guess the question has to be 'is it genuinly viable?'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not seeing anything about this in today's papers. Is this a real story ? :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not seeing anything about this in today's papers. Is this a real story ? :huh:

Basically Gatcliffe said that the clubs will be discussing the structures as they always have to review what they are doing and make sure they have the best fit. He acknowledges that we don't currently have the solution to everything so they will discuss it. He then puts forward his personal preference. The current structure is locked in until 2014, so the time is naturally now to discuss.

Not really much of a story, however it makes for interesting discussion, until people start demanding that Gatcliffe provides facts, figures etc!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As somebody who has an idealogical preference for P&R I would make the following observations:

It makes no practical sense for any solution to only address the top 2 divisions.

The sort of ideas being knocked around on this thread are the only way back to P&R between the top 2 tiers. Unless money is devoted to narrowing the gap movement between the top two leagues is unrealistic.

People are knocking fugures around based on money available from the current tv deal & its a leap of faith to get them to add up. It would require the elite 10 clubs to either agree to receive less than they currently do or an increase in the tv deal with the increase being spread across SL2 and below, imho.

Noises coming out of Sky at the mo suggest they have paid rather more than they wanted to for the latest football rights & need to cut costs in other areas, dropping speedway & snooker have already been suggested. Any plan that assumes the next SL tv rights will net the same never mind more money may be short lived.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Noises coming out of Sky at the mo suggest they have paid rather more than they wanted to for the latest football rights & need to cut costs in other areas, dropping speedway & snooker have already been suggested. Any plan that assumes the next SL tv rights will net the same never mind more money may be short lived.

Well they won't be having the RU Premiership in a couple of seasons time, so that will save them some cash. Still can't work out whether or not they'll have the Heineken Cup to pay out for, which potentially could save some more.

I think the really big issue for RL is the need to get another party interested in at least making a bid for the rights to keep Sky on their toes. If Sky are the only one's interested next time round, then they will hold all the aces.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.

No you won't, unless poor clubs become richer you will have no upsets, you can arrange division, scramble places re-invent the wheel and make the sceptical believe in fairies, what you won't do is make a rugby club viable without a lot of money in SL.

So you don't think (providing the funding model/distribution of central funds allows it) that an increased number of full time clubs will create the possibility of more upsets?

I think you're wrong and I think there's past evidence to back this up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love reading the 'experts' on here talking with absolute certainty about things that all of us are second guessing and speculating about.

I also love the way some of our experts are able to brush over other issues where they had absolute conviction about but were subsequently and categorically proven wrong.

It makes for entertaining reading!

As for the issue at hand, my personal opinion is that if it is possible to adequately fund 20 full-time franchised clubs, then a 2 divisions of 10 with automatic promotion and relegation is absolutely the way to go.

If we can't fund it then it's a nonstarter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the plan is more about making a full time second tier as well as a closer, more competitive top tier. If its not, then I agree with you.

But if you make the 2nd tier full time, you simply move the problem down a tier. You'll have a 3rd tier with the other 17 semi pro sides which will inherit the same problems, perceived or otherwise, that the Championship has now. All that changes is 6 more sides get to be full time. You'll still have a semi pro competition beneath it, with teams which may want to progress up the pyramid. I've got no problem with attempting to make all the divisions closer and more competitive, but this just sounds like a way of reducing SL but with the sweetner of more teams being in a SL branded full time competition.

Well they show 2nd-4th tier football, as well as 2nd tier union.

And they used to show 2nd tier RL as well, but decided to drop it. As they appear to have done with internationals outside the World Cup or 4 Nations. (That's assuming that Sky are going to sign a deal to show the World Cup of course.) The audience figures may have been reasonable, but I assume the cost of covering the matches didn't stack up with the income from advertising.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we can't fund it then it's a nonstarter

A point frequently overlooked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if you make the 2nd tier full time, you simply move the problem down a tier. You'll have a 3rd tier with the other 17 semi pro sides which will inherit the same problems, perceived or otherwise, that the Championship has now. All that changes is 6 more sides get to be full time. You'll still have a semi pro competition beneath it, with teams which may want to progress up the pyramid. I've got no problem with attempting to make all the divisions closer and more competitive, but this just sounds like a way of reducing SL but with the sweetner of more teams being in a SL branded full time competition.

There's a few ways of looking at this though.

You could argue that by extending to include 20 teams in a Pro structure that you are including all of the teams that have that desire to be in a full-time structure. Many clubs have now jumped into a partnership which may suggest that they are happy to stay alive and play at the level they are at (not in all cases of course).

If teams want to progress from the '3rd tier' then they can follow the current process that we have between CC and SL, but I do feel that if there is a better way of including the teams at the top of the CC that haven't simply resigned to being a semi-pro club then we should explore it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a few ways of looking at this though.

You could argue that by extending to include 20 teams in a Pro structure that you are including all of the teams that have that desire to be in a full-time structure. Many clubs have now jumped into a partnership which may suggest that they are happy to stay alive and play at the level they are at (not in all cases of course).

If teams want to progress from the '3rd tier' then they can follow the current process that we have between CC and SL, but I do feel that if there is a better way of including the teams at the top of the CC that haven't simply resigned to being a semi-pro club then we should explore it.

There's always going to be a line drawn and clubs will be one side of it or the other. You can't assume that there'll always be 20 clubs who haven't "resigned to being a semi-pro club". Draw the line at 20 and there'll be someone else weanting to jump it one way or the other. What do you do then ? Draw yet another line ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a few ways of looking at this though.

You could argue that by extending to include 20 teams in a Pro structure that you are including all of the teams that have that desire to be in a full-time structure. Many clubs have now jumped into a partnership which may suggest that they are happy to stay alive and play at the level they are at (not in all cases of course).

If teams want to progress from the '3rd tier' then they can follow the current process that we have between CC and SL, but I do feel that if there is a better way of including the teams at the top of the CC that haven't simply resigned to being a semi-pro club then we should explore it.

But the make up of a full time 2nd tier would (I assume) be based on placings in SL and the CC. So there could be teams who miss the cut who do have the ambition to go full time. It's only 5 years ago that Featherstone were in NL2, but the ambition to return to the top flight would've still been there. And just because teams have formed a partnership with a SL club now doesnt mean they dont have ambitions. Perhaps it just means they dont want to be left on the outer.

As Griff says, there will always be a cut off point between a full time competition and a semi pro one (unless everyone goes full time which really is pie in the sky). All this proposal would do is shift the position of that cut off point. The biggest sticking point though is how it would be financed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the make up of a full time 2nd tier would (I assume) be based on placings in SL and the CC. So there could be teams who miss the cut who do have the ambition to go full time. It's only 5 years ago that Featherstone were in NL2, but the ambition to return to the top flight would've still been there. And just because teams have formed a partnership with a SL club now doesnt mean they dont have ambitions. Perhaps it just means they dont want to be left on the outer.

As Griff says, there will always be a cut off point between a full time competition and a semi pro one (unless everyone goes full time which really is pie in the sky). All this proposal would do is shift the position of that cut off point. The biggest sticking point though is how it would be financed.

yep, agree with much of that. What it looks like to me personally though is that there are a few teams simply not contributing masses to SL as it stands. There is then a group towards the top of CC who appear to have different levels of ambition to most of the others, yet you could argue that they are being held back.

I think the 2nd SL with some funding and increased SC allows a group of clubs to play at a more relevant level for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really much of a story, however it makes for interesting discussion, until people start demanding that Gatcliffe provides facts, figures etc!

It makes for more "Fantasy Rugby League" so people are right to ask for details about how it may work, even the sketchiest of details may keep this thread off the fantasy stuff.

Surely Three divisions of 12 would be far more "interesting" to discuss.

I like my fantasy Rugby League to be all inclusive Dave.

Why should all those great trad sides and new teams be locked out of dreamland - it's usually a place free for all to inhabit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love reading the 'experts' on here

If it is possible to adequately fund 20 full-time then (it) is absolutely the way to go.

If we can't fund it then it's a nonstarter

Nice bit of expert opinion there Mr. P :D

Exactly my thoughts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So basically the plan is to get rid of 4 teams from SL, but to make those 4 teams feel better about it they'll rebrand the 2nd division so it's called SL2 or something. Whatever you call it, it won't be the top division. The best players will still want to be in the top flight,

And the fans won't be as interested in second division stuff with the four clubs who drop going down to 2,000-3,000 attendances, and losing all the best players from their playing rosters.

Still if they are given £1,000,000 a season or whatever they can pay semi pro players inflated wages as they scramble to assemble the side that is going to go up and have one year to get turnovers that will have dropped by a couple of million back up to SL1 standard and find a team that can pick up enough wins to stay up.

Still in the world of fantasy RL the RL World's analysis of how P & R doesn't get the fans excited won't count so no doubt there'll be massive promotion and relegation clashes bringing the fans in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the make up of a full time 2nd tier would (I assume) be based on placings in SL and the CC. So there could be teams who miss the cut who do have the ambition to go full time. It's only 5 years ago that Featherstone were in NL2, but the ambition to return to the top flight would've still been there. And just because teams have formed a partnership with a SL club now doesnt mean they dont have ambitions. Perhaps it just means they dont want to be left on the outer.

As Griff says, there will always be a cut off point between a full time competition and a semi pro one (unless everyone goes full time which really is pie in the sky). All this proposal would do is shift the position of that cut off point. The biggest sticking point though is how it would be financed.

Well you can work it out.....

London would be sacrosanct so after that add Leeds, Fartown, Bradford, Wakey, Hull, Saints, Wigan and Wire plus Les Cats.

That little lot or SL1 would be on a near 11,000 average gate per game. They would have all the money men - Hughes, Caddick, McManus, Moran, Lenegan, Pearson & Davey etc.

So no danger of them not turning over around £5M each and signing up every quality senior or junior professional.

Now switch to SL2

Salford (skint) Cas (Skint) HKR (skint) Widnes (jury out), all of whom will have their fan bases devastated by relegation, then Fev (skint) Leigh (Skint) Sheffield (Skint) Fax (skint) Keighley (skint) and Batley (don't care about SL). Average crowds about 2,000.

Yes GRIFF was absolutely spot on a two tier Superleague with a cut off based on current club fortunes leaves all the skint losers in a lower league of 2,000 crowds, with all the rich mens big clubs on 11,000 crowds in the higher league.

That leaves a gap of at least a couple of million pounds between the two leagues.

So we now need to sort that out by playing Fantasy RL. What happens in my fantasy is SKY increase the annual funding to £20,000,000 a season and RFL/SLE give the 10 SL2 clubs £2,000,000 each to balance the competition. The SLI clubs get nothing.

The promoted club also get nothing and so go straight back down every year.

All for the good of the game.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There needs to be money coming in from somewhere to pay for things. I cant see where it is coming from. Theres a big leap from being a part time team to be full time in many areas that cost a lot of money. The game is in a real situation where its built on sand and could collapse if things are not done correctly. We have seen 4 or 5 sl teams in deep trouble in the past couple of years. Add in another 6 clubs and I think it could see massive problems if the TV Money, Sponsors and crowds are not there and for me they are not!

The world is in recession and people are cutting back. The UK is not that badly affected but it could be and end up seeing many job cuts etc. That means less money in general and people paying to watch RL. I would rather the game stay as it is and see how the world financial situation goes first. Instead of expanding the number of clubs in SL and watering down the quality both on and off the field I would rather less teams be in SL and a commitment to improve the standards at first grade as well as academy and off the field. If clubs cant afford to be in Utopia/SL then there is no disgrace to come to the Championship where clubs can make small profits, still run academy teams and play a good brand of rugby. I have yet to see any evidence to suggest SL 1 & 2 will be actually good for the game when many clubs cant afford to be full time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have yet to see any evidence to suggest SL 1 & 2 will be actually good for the game when many clubs cant afford to be full time

Evidence spoils the dream Lizzy. We don't want any of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes GRIFF was absolutely spot on a two tier Superleague with a cut off based on current club fortunes leaves all the skint losers in a lower league of 2,000 crowds, with all the rich mens big clubs on 11,000 crowds in the higher league.

You're welcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we can't fund it then it's a nonstarter

We cant fund clubs in SL now.

Look how many have gone into admin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It makes for more "Fantasy Rugby League" so people are right to ask for details about how it may work, even the sketchiest of details may keep this thread off the fantasy stuff.

Surely Three divisions of 12 would be far more "interesting" to discuss.

I like my fantasy Rugby League to be all inclusive Dave.

Why should all those great trad sides and new teams be locked out of dreamland - it's usually a place free for all to inhabit?

I'm not sure why you keep going on about it but I will acknowledge the Fantasy RL thing. This is a fans forum. When we talk about what people would like, then of course it is fantasy stuff. We aren't the ones who need to put a plan in place, or understand the merits, but that doesn't make people's ideas any worse than yours - perhaps you can hold off with the patronising stuff.

In terms of Gatcliffe, then he is absolutely right to raise whatever he thinks will be the best structure. I'm glad some people on here don't work with me, as some people are so closed minded it's unreal.

The starting point for any discussion on the long term future of the game should be based on what is the best option, with all barriers removed. If you start with a constraint like budget then we will stay as we are, or make cuts.

The fact is that pretty much everything should be put on the table, and then the detail worked through in terms of what is realistically achievable. A 2 division SL is not unachievable. The simple fact is that we could run a game with a Salary Cap of £1m, or add whatever rules in we want, so again, people's thought's shouldn't be driven by the hurdles this would cause.

For every negative point, it can be countered with a positive point, and the other way round.

If it is decided that the best thing for the game is to have two divisions of 10, which would assist in clubs playing at a more relevant level for them and personally I feel it would help expansion, then that needs to be the plan, and the detail to be worked on how it will be delivered after that. The plan may take 10 years to deliver, but it shouldn't be dismissed based on the fact that some people think we don;t have the funding in place.

Take finance out of it, come up with the ideas, then add the finance back in and create a plan which will allow it to be delivered.

By instantly dismissing ideas due to funding we are probably overlooking a lot of positive decisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you can work it out.....

London would be sacrosanct so after that add Leeds, Fartown, Bradford, Wakey, Hull, Saints, Wigan and Wire plus Les Cats.

That little lot or SL1 would be on a near 11,000 average gate per game. They would have all the money men - Hughes, Caddick, McManus, Moran, Lenegan, Pearson & Davey etc.

So no danger of them not turning over around £5M each and signing up every quality senior or junior professional.

Now switch to SL2

Salford (skint) Cas (Skint) HKR (skint) Widnes (jury out), all of whom will have their fan bases devastated by relegation, then Fev (skint) Leigh (Skint) Sheffield (Skint) Fax (skint) Keighley (skint) and Batley (don't care about SL). Average crowds about 2,000.

Yes GRIFF was absolutely spot on a two tier Superleague with a cut off based on current club fortunes leaves all the skint losers in a lower league of 2,000 crowds, with all the rich mens big clubs on 11,000 crowds in the higher league.

That leaves a gap of at least a couple of million pounds between the two leagues.

So we now need to sort that out by playing Fantasy RL. What happens in my fantasy is SKY increase the annual funding to £20,000,000 a season and RFL/SLE give the 10 SL2 clubs £2,000,000 each to balance the competition. The SLI clubs get nothing.

The promoted club also get nothing and so go straight back down every year.

All for the good of the game.....

SL2 with 2 up 2 down to SL1 would get far more than 2k crowds. Chances are youd have a couple of the big Cumbrian teams in there. Not sure why you say everyone would be skint. New investors would find SL2 more attractive than a promotionless NL1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why you keep going on about it but I will acknowledge the Fantasy RL thing. This is a fans forum. When we talk about what people would like, then of course it is fantasy stuff. We aren't the ones who need to put a plan in place, or understand the merits, but that doesn't make people's ideas any worse than yours - perhaps you can hold off with the patronising stuff.

In terms of Gatcliffe, then he is absolutely right to raise whatever he thinks will be the best structure. I'm glad some people on here don't work with me, as some people are so closed minded it's unreal.

The starting point for any discussion on the long term future of the game should be based on what is the best option, with all barriers removed. If you start with a constraint like budget then we will stay as we are, or make cuts.

The fact is that pretty much everything should be put on the table, and then the detail worked through in terms of what is realistically achievable. A 2 division SL is not unachievable. The simple fact is that we could run a game with a Salary Cap of £1m, or add whatever rules in we want, so again, people's thought's shouldn't be driven by the hurdles this would cause.

For every negative point, it can be countered with a positive point, and the other way round.

If it is decided that the best thing for the game is to have two divisions of 10, which would assist in clubs playing at a more relevant level for them and personally I feel it would help expansion, then that needs to be the plan, and the detail to be worked on how it will be delivered after that. The plan may take 10 years to deliver, but it shouldn't be dismissed based on the fact that some people think we don;t have the funding in place.

Take finance out of it, come up with the ideas, then add the finance back in and create a plan which will allow it to be delivered.

By instantly dismissing ideas due to funding we are probably overlooking a lot of positive decisions.

At last, a bit of sanity in the discussion.

People are far too quick to dismiss hopes and ambitions using finance as the sole reason.

I'm not daft enough not to realise just how hard it will be to get more equity in the system and trying to get some clubs to even consider a freeze or reduction in their income will be a 'mare but we must look at all possibilities with open minds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



League Express - Mon 24th July 2017

Rugby League World - August 2017