Archived

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

Sports Prophet

Broncos, Skolars Merger

67 posts in this topic

I think people may be jumping the gun here. Even if the two clubs pool resources with the RFL at NRS, what would be to stop them retaining separate identities at their respective levels?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need teams worthy of playing in the top division. Ideally with a good geographical spread but if a team for what ever reason and whereevr they are from are not good enough they shouldn't be in. If we managed our sport properly and let things grow organically like we may be starting to do. ALL new clubs should start in C1 NO MATTER where they are from. Point being if the Broncos were relegated, there could be an Oxford, Hemel, Dewsbury or Barrow to take their place. That is how it should be.

 

This

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Organic growth simply doesn't exist, it's always driven, in the il days it was a rich benefactor starting a team, new teams tend to be started by exiles from the north, I'm talking in the pro ranks anyway.

As dr koukash seems to have quickly noticed, to gain support, you need something to support, without competitive and successful top end teams, the development will struggle.

I have a couple ideas of how I think the game in London should go, either 2, maybe 3 top end teams in an ideal world, geographically spread in London and responsible for developing teams under them.

In the reality we have, I think that the rfl, or London broncos need to become a nz warriors type set up, creating te best paths for local talent to play in superleague. Not just in the London league, but in the south, they need to own this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Organic growth simply doesn't exist, it's always driven, in the old days it was a rich benefactor starting a team, new teams tend to be started by exiles from the north, I'm talking in the pro ranks anyway.As dr koukash seems to have quickly noticed, to gain support, you need something to support, without competitive and successful top end teams, the development will struggle.

That's the conclusion I have come to based on the events, facts and figures of the history of the game post war.

There is no organic growth of the professional game because there is very limited numbers of quality players and people who want to pay to watch RL.

Gateshead brought the north east into Superleague with "top down" growth of a sixth place in SL finish and a 4,000 crowd to start with. Top down worked then the money ran out.

In 2001 Gateshead tried the organic route 700 fans watched them come 29th.

Last year they came 34th. on 300 crowds.

The only time they ever grew in this period was when money again was thrown at them, again when that ran out they again collapsed.

There is no "organic growth" of the professional game (forget the amateur game) because the professional game needs money to grow as you say. More money than the small clubs can generate, and when I say small clubs that list is very very long and includes some clubs in Superleague, hence you see them going backwards.

If anyone can actually explain how organic growth of professional RL you keep talking about will work, with examples, start a thread on it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the game is to grow organically then it will come from the amateurs. Once clubs are established as Hemel are then that's when we might be able to look at some of them moving into the semi pro ranks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In common with Heartland posters, I would feel no loyalty to any proposed merged club. Those who propose mergers have no understanding of the nature of British sports fans. This is not Australia.

 

Well said

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well said

So you would be lost to the game rather than follow a merged team? That kind if thinking is why we are perceived in such a negative light by neutrals to our sport, a bunch of northern villages.

What are you afraid of? That your new team may actually win something?

A team represents your area, so what you are saying is that you won't support a team name or team colours with which you are unfamiliar, a team which still represents the area you support. I struggle with the logic to be honest.

I'm not having a dig, I just really don't get it, I understand loyalty to your team, but if your team becomes part of a bigger, more competitive outfit, why turn your back on them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you would be lost to the game rather than follow a merged team? That kind if thinking is why we are perceived in such a negative light by neutrals to our sport, a bunch of northern villages.

What are you afraid of? That your new team may actually win something?

A team represents your area, so what you are saying is that you won't support a team name or team colours with which you are unfamiliar, a team which still represents the area you support. I struggle with the logic to be honest.

I'm not having a dig, I just really don't get it, I understand loyalty to your team, but if your team becomes part of a bigger, more competitive outfit, why turn your back on them?

 

There's nothing logical about it, it's entirely emotional and therefore irrational.

 

My team is my team and if they cease to exist, or are consumed by a larger entity, then they're not longer my team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's nothing logical about it, it's entirely emotional and therefore irrational.

 

My team is my team and if they cease to exist, or are consumed by a larger entity, then they're not longer my team.

 

Spot on. There are a host of complex, historical, social and geographical reasons why people support the clubs they do.

 

Although may people may have another team whose results they follow as Parksider has said with regards to Hunslet and his other team, it is not the same as your club. It's also true that within the British sporting public in print, and on messageboards, most venom is reserved for those "fans" who abandon their club to follow more successful clubs.

 

Logically we should all follow successful clubs at the top end of the table but logic never determines the sporting preferences of the majority of us, or for that matter why we are on this message board debating what is a minority sport in the Northern Hemisphere. We do it because we like this game and not other sports with a bigger media profile. The same principle applies.

 

Back on topic, this thread is still running I see by way of a thread-killer, I give you this quote from Gus Mackay CEO of the club which in fact does represent the official position http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/22600442

 

Mackay is keen to stress that London should retain a representative in the top division.

"That's fundamentally a big part of Super League and it has to be," Mackay said.

"We have to do whatever we can, working with the governing body and other parties, to make sure that there is a Super League club in London.

"Otherwise it just drifts and becomes a sport that is only played in the heartlands, which is wrong."

 

The real problem faced by the Broncos - in which they are not alone at the bottom end of Super League - is that the uncertainty over the League Structure. It is preventing any new investor / consortium putting money into the club and replacing David Hughes, as before you put money in you want to have an idea how much and what problems you would face with your Business Plan. This is also affecting the choice of new venue for next year and whether there is an next year which is a distinct possibility should the unworkable option 3 be chosen.

 

The 8/8/8 option favoured by the West Yorkshire clubs for the local derbies it would produce would be a club-killer for London, The club could live with the same structure as at present with 1 up 1 down P&R. The minimum disruption method but not the one favoured apparently...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you would be lost to the game rather than follow a merged team? I struggle with the logic to be honest.

Older fans are lost to the game every year and new younger fans come in every year.

Out of 17-20,000 people who follow Cas, Fev, Wakey who knows how many would follow a merged team now, who knows how many would walk away, who knows how many of the thousands of new fans coming in would follow that merged club in another 17 years.

The easier option is give them only one SL club to watch. May or may not work who knows. Other option is to stick with what we have which isn't working but fingers crossed.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Older fans are lost to the game every year and new younger fans come in every year.

Out of 17-20,000 people who follow Cas, Fev, Wakey who knows how many would follow a merged team now, who knows how many would walk away, who knows how many of the thousands of new fans coming in would follow that merged club in another 17 years.

The easier option is give them only one SL club to watch. May or may not work who knows. Other option is to stick with what we have which isn't working but fingers crossed.....

 

Here you go again with your mythical Calder community.

 

Wave your Parky's magic wand, you like big clubs but you have no clue how to create them, but plenty of muck to chuck at those who want to see the game propser at all levels.

 

Do you even like rugby league?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The London broncos really need to find a place they can call home not just the ground but somwere the club can really associate with the local community. If the London club are to stay in super league then I generally believe that they need to hav a higher salary cap to allow them to b successfull on the field they need the help of the rfl but I'm not sure other fans would b happy with this they generally need special treatment as its very difficult for them to compete.

The question Is where is the best place for the London broncos to call home and grow, gillingham, orient, Fulham I don't know thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll admit I know very little about the machinations behind the scenes at both clubs but what little I have picked up over the past couple of years would suggest to me that there's two chances of the two London clubs wanting to merge - one is no chance and the other begins with f.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@RBS, it would seem that you might be right

 

From RLfans (copy/paste job nowt to do wi' me)

 

This is the situation with London Skolars:

The club has been approached by the council and offered the chance to purchase the ground.

They would like to build a home for Rugby League in London.

London Broncos refuse to even meet to discuss this opportunity.

This was confirmed to me in person today at the Skolars v Gloucester game from one of the Directors & Senior team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rfl should bite the councils hand off if that's the case! I'll throw in a couple hundred quid no problem :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the London club are to stay in super league then I generally believe that they need to have a higher salary cap to allow them to be successful on the field they need the help of the rfl but I'm not sure other fans would be happy with this they generally need special treatment as its very difficult for them to compete.

Well they were Superleague runners up and RL Cup finalists something five other superleague clubs won't manage either unless the Superleague is radically changed. So they have been sucessful on the field.

You can remove the cap for London, but as it stands they can't afford to splash millions. The "special treatment" they need is a Dr. Koukash.

London simply suffer the same problems as several SL clubs (unless a bias view is taken), they can't get a decent enough crowd hanging around the bottom end of Superleague and they haven't developed enough enough local talent. Only four Londoners in the first team squad at the start of the season.

Like any other SL club these deficiencies as per several other SL clubs are partly covered by private money which is a. not enough, and b. about to be withdrawn. So to go forward someone has to bankroll them properly, which in reality is not just enough to pay full cap (it being the latest myth on here that full cap = success), but two to three million a year to have the full SL set up (top medical and training facilities, effective marketing department etc) probably for a lot of years yet whilst players come through the professional set up.

Of course £30,000,000 is nothing to many soccer owners, but this ain't soccer. If the Broncos go as a pro club London becomes like any other part of the country outside the M62, somewhere to keep the best foothold we can for the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You got it on one. 2 clubs sharing the same stadium. Common and economical sense.

 

You could do a bit of all sorts. Broncos pass holders could be offered entry into Skolars games for a fiver or have Skolars game as curtain raisers to Broncos games etc.

 

Pull in the resources, work together, form partnerships, build more relationships with local amateur clubs, see about advertisements at football league grounds, offer free tickets to local sportsmen and women and advertise that.

 

In short, do everything to keep Rugby League alive and building in London.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



League Express - Mon 10th April 2017

Rugby League World - April 2017