Archived

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

saints10coach

Oldham /Salford

836 posts in this topic

Man U, Chelsea, Arsenal, ...and the very short term, so far, Man City....their fans world wide never cease to tire...

Drop the four football teams you mention to the Championship and then deny promotion and see how long it takes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Batley The Gallant Youth and Rochdale Hornets success in the 20's says they did.

I could well be wrong here but I thought Rochdale had never won a trophy? And even if so, there's been plenty of time since the 1920's to develop.(not a dig at Rochdale this)

Batleys success came in a different world practically, although they had some recent silverware in the NRC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Drop the four football teams you mention to the Championship and then deny promotion and see how long it takes.

Not a valid comparison at all. Any team that gets relegated from the PL gets more money than the whole of RL. So they aren't exactly going to struggle for spare change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Answer me this then Parky, why does what you call sporting communism work in every other competitive sport in this country?

2. Sport is all about change not maintaining the status quo.

1. In other sports they do not share the sponsorship and TV money out from the top to the bottom of the pile. Your confused here and I do not mean that nastily.

2. It's also about attracting money to promote the sport and make it a strong sport that people want to watch and play. Again your obsessed here for P & R. I do not mean that nastily. P & R won't solve all the games I'lls or create a vibrant sport. History shows that but stuff history eh?

I'm all for "change, not maintaining the status quo".

Ackroman acccuses me (I assume) of being one of "Those on here defending entrenchment into a 12 club comp". What I defend is the logic of doing this in the absence of the money or will for better solutions, and this is always the problem on here. It's so easy to moan at everything but not easy to pick out a solution that stands some scrutiny.

Keighley and I had a decent debate about this once he'd stopped trying to have a go at me because he thought I was an SL apologist like you and Akroman do. We agreed that one idea to get P & R going was to increase SL to 16 clubs and cut the salary cap to about £1M.

That way the gulf between SL and the CC would be reduced by £600,000. I've toyed with the idea of providing some funding to clubs serious about SL. I personally feel those who talk about it just to get their fans going and those who try to do it through great efforts and expense are worlds apart. Sheffield and Fev are serious for instance. halifax and Leigh - Maybe?

But if the game can recognise a club serious for Superleague who cannot get there because their non-performing SL rivals are busy failing in SL then maybe some SL money should be given to give the CC club a chance of staying up if they win promotion. So I'm against the crackpot idea of giving Hunslet a penny but I'd be happy to see Fev get a £1M for entry to SL.

I don't see P & R as this great thing at the moment because it will be an utter mess unless the structure of both funding and competition is changed.

The discussion I had with keighley wasn't one anyone (including you) bothered to enter into. Probably because on here you have to be "all for superleague" or "all for the championship".

This leads to stupid ideas like lets share SKY money amongst every club, or stupid ideas like Parky doesn't want CC clubs to go up lets all have a go at him :lol: .

I've posted long and hard about Fev going up ( another whoosh over the heads of people like you) and said they should just go up purely on fairness alone - they have never had a go and stuff "minimum standards" which amazingly you support :huh: ). I just wish they could go up with a targetted SKY payment to give them a start . I'd also wish for them to have 3 years to get going and build up.

But oh no, we can't have that they have to sink or swim in one year because the next applicant is waiting behind them, and so it will come to pass that the same clubs will pass each other up and down year on year. Back to stupid again.........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could well be wrong here but I thought Rochdale had never won a trophy? And even if so, there's been plenty of time since the 1920's to develop.(not a dig at Rochdale this)

Batleys success came in a different world practically, although they had some recent silverware in the NRC.

Hornets won the Challenge Cup in 1922, they are celebrating by wearing a kit of the same design next season. I think they may have one the Lancashire Cup in the 70's as well. I think Batley were the first club to win the CC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Drop the four football teams you mention to the Championship and then deny promotion and see how long it takes.

Trojan's point was that "the fans will tire of the same old same old winning every year." My contention is that it is not true.

On your completely separate point of fans deserting relegated teams, that certainly was not the case with Wigan RLFC nor with Manu and Man C

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hornets won the Challenge Cup in 1922, they are celebrating by wearing a kit of the same design next season. I think they may have one the Lancashire Cup in the 70's as well. I think Batley were the first club to win the CC.

OK. So what prevented them being a big club from there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. In other sports they do not share the sponsorship and TV money out from the top to the bottom of the pile. Your confused here and I do not mean that nastily.

Not sure its an entirely relevant comparison given the actual sums of money involved & available but in football that does actually happen, with tv money if not sponsership.

Under the current premier league deal around £100m per season is paid to football league clubs under what are broadly termed solidarity payments. A large amount of this is parachute payments to relegated clubs, which can total £48m over 4 years but each championship club not in receipt of parachute payment gets over £2m per year, league 1 & 2 clubs getting around £250k. It looks like roughly 10% of total tv revenue is 'shared'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have for a long time now conceded p and r should have standards attached. Your arguments did, in fact, persuade me that that was essential.

We do not have standards based p and r now. We have a standards based licencing system. This is not guaranteed to promote suitably qualified candidates.

First it is a three yearly excercise which is too long to ensure any significant movement from one competiton to the other.

Secondly, although a club might satisfy the criteria, it's application might be deemed to be not as strong as an incumbent SL club, and it might be rejected in favour of that incumbent.

Under p and r with standards that would not happen. Provided a club won the CC grand final and met the minimum agreed standards it would be in SL the next season. The club which finished bottom of SL, whether or not it was deemed to have a slightly more qualified business plan than any propsective promotee, would be relegated.

So what standards? Currently it's............

2500 fans average

Working academy

£1,000,000 turnover

That currently rules all Championship clubs out of superleague. So that's it under your system there's no P & R at all?????

"Provided a club won the CC grand final and met the minimum agreed standards it would be in SL the next season".

OK so not only does a club have to spend money on attaining the minimum standards, they have to also spend money to win the Grand final - is this because it's what is done on the pitch that counts??

OK you relegate a club. Under the current system Les catalans could have gone down, Widnes could have gone down, Salford could go down. If Superleague clubs like this go down who goes up next year???

It used to be Salford, Huddersfield and Cas who always bounced straight back up. They'd meet your "standards" no problem.

All we would get with this "standards" nonsense is Championship clubs with no money replacing SL clubs with money one year, with the bottom SL club going down (like Widnes would have done this time and they HAVE MONEY).

Now to year two - who goes up? I'd guess Widnes they have the standards and the money.......

Who goes down??? The poor Championship club who only had one year to make or break most likely .

Sure they may just squeeze in in 13th. place (which is where your destructive wishful thinking comes in), but the likelihood is down back to the championship. Then what do they do because they have no money - it's all gone on standards, winning the grand final AND to that one year tilt at SL.

So who then meets the standard?? Certainly not Widnes because they have gone back up.

Nobody?? There's the problem with standards all you will get in ten years is approximately nowhere. In fact you may ruin the best championship clubs such that they bog off to be feeder clubs to survive.

All your doing is thinking of an idea and not following it all the way through. If we want P & R we have to create the right conditions for it.

Not wishful think a system that will probably destroy Sheffield and Featherstone, and knock back the development of widnes as a force again for no great reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In football that does actually happen, with tv money

But not evenly across the clubs from top to bottom. Sorry i confused you.

I do think the idea of some money for clubs outside SL is good but not parachute payments - more promotion payments - because surely if we have annual P & R we will all want the promoted club to succeed???

And I mean succeed in reality, not in wishful thinking dreams.

And let's not have anyone dredging up that tired old argument - "well HKR did it" :rolleyes: (they did it with £millions of investment)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trojan's point was that "the fans will tire of the same old same old winning every year." My contention is that it is not true.

On your completely separate point of fans deserting relegated teams, that certainly was not the case with Wigan RLFC nor with Manu and Man C

Nor was it with Oldham, when we used to have the opportunity of winning our place back immediately. Any team that comes down now has to wait 3 years before they even get a chance of being assessed for re-entry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK. So what prevented them being a big club from there?

What or who is to say they were not. Their honours board does not suggest they were. But I always remember them as being a competitive team. They used to attract decent crowds in the past too.

Challenge Cup Winners: 1921-22.

Lancashire League Winners: 1918-19

Lancashire Cup Winners: 1911-12, 1914-15, 1918-19

Runners-up: 1912-13, 1920-21, 1965-66, 1991-92

Stones Bitter Division 2 Runners-up: 1989-90, 1997

John Player Trophy Runners-up: 1973-74

BBC Floodlit Trophy Runners-up: 1971-72

Salford Sevens Winners: 1990.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not knocking them for one second but big team they never have been. Pretty famous, yes but they've never been a Wigan or a Saints have they? The question is, how come if everything was much more equal back then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not knocking them for one second but big team they never have been. Pretty famous, yes but they've never been a Wigan or a Saints have they? The question is, how come if everything was much more equal back then?

Rochdale had a football team in the Football League back then, St Helens and Wigan did not. So as RL became the predominant sport in the other two towns, in Rochdale it did not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rochdale had a football team in the Football League back then, St Helens and Wigan did not. So as RL became the predominant sport in the other two towns, in Rochdale it did not.

Leeds and Bradford had dominant soccer teams in town. In Bradfords case two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could well be wrong here but I thought Rochdale had never won a trophy? And even if so, there's been plenty of time since the 1920's to develop.(not a dig at Rochdale this)

Batleys success came in a different world practically, although they had some recent silverware in the NRC.

Last winners of the 'Northern Union' Challenge Cup in 1922.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leeds and Bradford had dominant soccer teams in town. In Bradfords case two.

I still would say that soccer is still dominant in at least Leeds. Remember there were 2 Rugby teams and one soccer team when Manningham were about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What should have put you off was the tortuous process before the team you bought got into the top flight.

Still peddling that same old bike - If we had annual P & R more rich men would invest in CC clubs because they could be easily promoted?

What about the rich owners of SL clubs (who really exist) do they just accept being relegated then??

Because they can walk away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 years of licencing also allows the following scenario to happen.

The nearest club we have to this is Featherstone, so apologies to their supporters but its to emphasis the point.

Year 1 of Licencing - Fev win the League easily, run a SL club close in Challenge cup, academy team does well, attendances average 2,300 and they start to formulate plans to develop the ground on the back of their success.

Year 2 - Again the Championship comps are won easily, and Fev also take 2 SL scalps in the Challenge Cup, one of them screened by BBC. Academy replicates the success and hands out a number of beatings to SL academy teams. Crowds rise to a 2,800 average, the club lottery does well and three-quarters of the way through the year the club announce plans to put a roof on one end of the stadium and build a new stand in the off season.

End of year 2 - due to Fev's success at both levels, the first team and academy have trouble holding on to their better players. There are a lot of offers on the table for full-time contracts at various SL clubs and their academies. Fev lose 50-60% of their playing roster.

Year 3 - below average win/loss ratio, crowds down to 2,000. Academy team scratch a few fixtures. Fev lose by 70 points to Wakefield in the Challenge Cup (sorry!). SL licence application goes into the bin.

My point here is that the bar is being pushed very high for the Championship clubs to even make the application and their is a chasm between the levels of SL and CC. The Championship clubs will work very hard to improve the playing record, their back office and their facilities. Too much success (sometimes showing SL clubs up along the way) and the above can happen in a 3 year licencing period.

Should it be 2 years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 years of licencing also allows the following scenario to happen.

The nearest club we have to this is Featherstone, so apologies to their supporters but its to emphasis the point.

Year 1 of Licencing - Fev win the League easily, run a SL club close in Challenge cup, academy team does well, attendances average 2,300 and they start to formulate plans to develop the ground on the back of their success.

Year 2 - Again the Championship comps are won easily, and Fev also take 2 SL scalps in the Challenge Cup, one of them screened by BBC. Academy replicates the success and hands out a number of beatings to SL academy teams. Crowds rise to a 2,800 average, the club lottery does well and three-quarters of the way through the year the club announce plans to put a roof on one end of the stadium and build a new stand in the off season.

End of year 2 - due to Fev's success at both levels, the first team and academy have trouble holding on to their better players. There are a lot of offers on the table for full-time contracts at various SL clubs and their academies. Fev lose 50-60% of their playing roster.

Year 3 - below average win/loss ratio, crowds down to 2,000. Academy team scratch a few fixtures. Fev lose by 70 points to Wakefield in the Challenge Cup (sorry!). SL licence application goes into the bin.

My point here is that the bar is being pushed very high for the Championship clubs to even make the application and their is a chasm between the levels of SL and CC. The Championship clubs will work very hard to improve the playing record, their back office and their facilities. Too much success (sometimes showing SL clubs up along the way) and the above can happen in a 3 year licencing period.

Should it be 2 years?

Do we get to win a sodding final, for a change?! I could be tempted ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Soccer and RU have sporting communism?

:laugh:

I wonder if the Glazers know about this?

The Glazers own the Tampa Bay NFL franchise, one of the weakest in the league, and have greatly benefitted from the revenue sharing schemes, aka sporting communism, operated with humongous success by the NFL for many years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone answer me this then? Why did RL not thrive and become a nationwide sport during the many years when everything was decided on the pitch? (even allowing for RU bans)

Why did the serious money men not come forward instead of the chancers that (in general) appeared? Why did someone like Batley or Rochdale never become big teams?

You might well also also ask the question, why is RL not thriving and becoming a nationwide sport today, even in the absence of the RU ban ? Even with big money men, London has not become a big team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could well be wrong here but I thought Rochdale had never won a trophy? And even if so, there's been plenty of time since the 1920's to develop.(not a dig at Rochdale this)

Batleys success came in a different world practically, although they had some recent silverware in the NRC.

It's not really relevant to the discussion but you need to know your RL history a little before you jump into uncharted waters. Rochdale won the RL cup once. They were also in the 1st division in the past and got to the final of the Players no 6 cup competiton, a big deal in it's day.

Not only did batley win those first two Challenge Cups but in 1924 ( I think that's right) they won the RL Championship beating Wigan in the playoffs and in that same era attracted over 20,000 to Mount pleasant for a third round cup tie in the middle of the great Depression no less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You might well also also ask the question, why is RL not thriving and becoming a nationwide sport today, even in the absence of the RU ban ? Even with big money men, London has not become a big team.

Er, it is becoming a nationwide sport. It just takes more than 5 minutes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not really relevant to the discussion but you need to know your RL history a little before you jump into uncharted waters. Rochdale won the RL cup once. They were also in the 1st division in the past and got to the final of the Players no 6 cup competiton, a big deal in it's day.

Not only did batley win those first two Challenge Cups but in 1924 ( I think that's right) they won the RL Championship beating Wigan in the playoffs and in that same era attracted over 20,000 to Mount pleasant for a third round cup tie in the middle of the great Depression no less.

Sorry, did you not see the bit about 'I could be wrong...'?

The times you mention are so irrelevant it may as well happened on Mars. Anyway why didn't they kick on and become huge clubs after that? It wasn't due to other clubs having more money and paying more money to attract the best players was it? Not very communist like of them and jolly unfair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - June 2017

League Express - Mon 17th July 2017