Super eight or relegate?

[RabbitRhinoovOZ]

My two bobs worth..Castleford's, Wakefield & Hull FC look to be in trouble for 2015 Leeds on the slide for next season but are a great club and will rebuild to be a force in 2016, Salford, Catalans & Hull Kr will be the big improvers., With Wigan,Warrington and the Saints top 4 certainty's. Just cant make my mind up on Huddersfield and Widnes, I'll say SL Pans out like this.

 

Warrington

Wigan

Staints

Catalan

Salford

Leeds

Hull Kr

Widnes

Huddersfield

Wakefield

Hull Fc

Castleford (Poor retention and very suspect recruitment a real shame after a great 2014)

[redjonn]

Can we really afford a draft system, you would have to offer something very tempting for young lads to move areas if they are assigned to say Workington or London. What sort of money can these clubs afford to pay draftees. If they can't offer enough are we in danger of pushing them out of the game. It works in American Football because the sport as a whole is very rich, RL is not, not by a long way.

 

The only real answer is for clubs to be bigger, that is what will generate more cash, and cash is the key.

 

I'm not suggesting a draft systems. I was just showing how another sport users a "dumb" system to bias an advantage to the "weaker teams" in order to try and make all the teams reasonable competitive.   My only point is that you need some form of bias to assist if priority (priority being the relevant word) is to have more competitiveness.

 

At the moment it seems to me that the RL and clubs are trying to achieve it by a lowest denominator approach. That is have a salary cap as low as possible to help the weaker clubs. Whilst the star players go off to NRL or union or where ever to gain higher reward, even though we have some clubs that could afford to keep some of the stars here for longer.  Thus weakening the whole competition, although having more equality of teams.

 

I'll be honest, their are no players that I get overly excited about the prospect of watching in any of the visiting teams or any to get me more likely to visit more grounds.   The last being Sam with the Wigan team.

[Ant]

Top 8

In no real order

Warriors

Saints

Wolves

Giants

Rhinos

Dragons

Vikings

Rovers

Rest:

Wildcats

Tigers

Red Devils

FC

[The Parksider]

I'm not suggesting a draft systems. I was just showing how another sport users a "dumb" system to bias an advantage to the "weaker teams" in order to try and make all the teams reasonable competitive.   My only point is that you need some form of bias to assist if priority (priority being the relevant word) is to have more competitiveness.

 

At the moment it seems to me that the RL and clubs are trying to achieve it by a lowest denominator approach. That is have a salary cap as low as possible to help the weaker clubs. 

 

I'm glad we can put away the "draft system" trying to equate to the American system where colleges are stuffed full of great young lads and the absolute cream are drafted across the league to big rich competitive teams, which equates in no way whatsoever to making Joe Burgess go join Wakefield because their academy doesn't work.

 

On the salary cap increasing it creates wage inflation and unevens the competition, stick it up to whatever and the richest of chairmen will win the trophies and the lowest clubs may not as well bother. Take care the eight club SL doesn't become a four club SL doing that.

 

Years ago Stevo said openly on TV it was a crime to come into Superleague and not spend the same as the other clubs. I think we all forget that without TV there'd be no pro-RL therefore it's a made for TV game and the game should  put on an exciting competition to meet that Contract. 

 

But the problem we had when most clubs were managing to spend the £1.65M full cap was some of  the best players would not move from the trophy winning clubs for better offers because they valued winning medals, in turn the best clubs could pay their up and coming stars from the academy relatively low wages for a high return.

 

Desperate for "names" the lower clubs would overspend on players who were frankly past it because they could not produce their own stars. Leon Pryce may well be worth it but may not.

 

To get an even competition we need all clubs to be able to spend the same and be able to produce their own stars too. If they cant match other clubs on wages then you get the Cas effect where as each star is created he's off out the door to a richer club. If they don't produce their own stars you get the Salford effect where the whole team has to be bought in at expensive prices.

 

The absolute lowest number of clubs we may be able to get away with in SL is ten - that's the opinion of several well respected commentators. We need to find or create or invest in ten clubs who can all run a decent junior set up and spend the same on salaries.

 

Instead we run an outdated P & R system, that has always proved ineffective, which when it comes to true business planning is just a lottery.

[redjonn]

I'm glad we can put away the "draft system" trying to equate to the American system where colleges are stuffed full of great young lads and the absolute cream are drafted across the league to big rich competitive teams, which equates in no way whatsoever to making Joe Burgess go join Wakefield because their academy doesn't work.

 

On the salary cap increasing it creates wage inflation and unevens the competition, stick it up to whatever and the richest of chairmen will win the trophies and the lowest clubs may not as well bother. Take care the eight club SL doesn't become a four club SL doing that.

 

Years ago Stevo said openly on TV it was a crime to come into Superleague and not spend the same as the other clubs. I think we all forget that without TV there'd be no pro-RL therefore it's a made for TV game and the game should  put on an exciting competition to meet that Contract. 

 

But the problem we had when most clubs were managing to spend the £1.65M full cap was some of  the best players would not move from the trophy winning clubs for better offers because they valued winning medals, in turn the best clubs could pay their up and coming stars from the academy relatively low wages for a high return.

 

Desperate for "names" the lower clubs would overspend on players who were frankly past it because they could not produce their own stars. Leon Pryce may well be worth it but may not.

 

To get an even competition we need all clubs to be able to spend the same and be able to produce their own stars too. If they cant match other clubs on wages then you get the Cas effect where as each star is created he's off out the door to a richer club. If they don't produce their own stars you get the Salford effect where the whole team has to be bought in at expensive prices.

 

The absolute lowest number of clubs we may be able to get away with in SL is ten - that's the opinion of several well respected commentators. We need to find or create or invest in ten clubs who can all run a decent junior set up and spend the same on salaries.

 

Instead we run an outdated P & R system, that has always proved ineffective, which when it comes to true business planning is just a lottery.

 

 

 I agree that we probably need to reduce the number of teams to help competitiveness. Not least helped by sharing the SL sky monies to a smaller pool.

 

My concern is that striving for equality has to be balanced in not driving the whole level of the competition downwards.  I don't want to get to a point that I may as just pay a TV fee to watch the best players in the NRL because here all I'm doing is watching potential stars before being at their peak... because before then they go off to the NRL or elsewhere.

[Dave T]

I'll be honest, their are no players that I get overly excited about the prospect of watching in any of the visiting teams or any to get me more likely to visit more grounds.   The last being Sam with the Wigan team.

that is an interesting point, tbh in my opinion it is more an issue that we have done little to sell our players and teams. We (the game) have been happy to be vocal about the fact that many of our exciting players have gone either to the NRL or to another sport. 

 

When I think about each team there is some real talent in most of them, but there is very rarely any story behind the game or the players. Part of this is an unfriendly media, look at what a story can do with something like the Burgess brothers, but then little has been done outside of the standard RL media about the likes of the Monaghan brother over here, playing in the same team, one being a top player and the other being the leading try scorer in SL - we make less fuss about these than the likes of the Paul brothers and our media efforts should be more sophisticated nowadays.

 

When Wigan are in town I want to hear about us trying to stop the pace of Burgess and Charnley, the flick passes from Sarginson, the brute force of Flower 

 

When Saints are in town we should be worrying about the flying finishes of Makinson, the scurrying hooker Roby, the giant Masoe.

 

Salford have some very exciting talent in Chase, Locke, plus the hated Hock.

 

And so on. We have some fabulously talented players, and tbh I think we take them for granted and don't sing their praises enough.

 

The RFL made a start with this on the RL of the Extraordinary - built a character for each team, then focused solely on a player that was leaving the comp and have done little with the rest.

[redjonn]

that is an interesting point, tbh in my opinion it is more an issue that we have done little to sell our players and teams. We (the game) have been happy to be vocal about the fact that many of our exciting players have gone either to the NRL or to another sport. 

 

When I think about each team there is some real talent in most of them, but there is very rarely any story behind the game or the players. Part of this is an unfriendly media, look at what a story can do with something like the Burgess brothers, but then little has been done outside of the standard RL media about the likes of the Monaghan brother over here, playing in the same team, one being a top player and the other being the leading try scorer in SL - we make less fuss about these than the likes of the Paul brothers and our media efforts should be more sophisticated nowadays.

 

When Wigan are in town I want to hear about us trying to stop the pace of Burgess and Charnley, the flick passes from Sarginson, the brute force of Flower 

 

When Saints are in town we should be worrying about the flying finishes of Makinson, the scurrying hooker Roby, the giant Masoe.

 

Salford have some very exciting talent in Chase, Locke, plus the hated Hock.

 

And so on. We have some fabulously talented players, and tbh I think we take them for granted and don't sing their praises enough.

 

The RFL made a start with this on the RL of the Extraordinary - built a character for each team, then focused solely on a player that was leaving the comp and have done little with the rest.

 

I agree we should be selling the virtues of the leading players we have, better promotion for sure.   However, the edge of seat... oh no he's got the ball and the players are panicking to cover what he is doing, etc... well I would still suggest that the list you quote are not quite at that Sam T level.

 

For sure they have levels of skill we can promote better. But they are either at this current stage... past their peak or are developing towards that peak ( not entirely but generally speaking).   My point being that today we see the players with the huge potential developing but then they go off for higher rewards (rightly so). For example Burgess at Wigan, before he gets to that peak he will be off else where. At least with likes of Sam Tomkins and similar we saw them at their peak.... excited to be able to watch them, no promotion or hard sell necessary - my bum on the edge of seat told me I couldn't wait to see him again pitted against the team I support.

 

Yep promote better but I'm sure I'm not much different than the average RL fan and the fact a need to hard sell to me says something when previously it wasn't needed.  Yep for attracting the not frequent spectator promote and sing the virtues.... but we are at the stage we need to keep and re-attract the RL enthusiast. That is excite them again.   My opinion is that by trying to create equality of competition we are preventing the leading clubs from being more able to keep the developing stars for longer and hence the excitement of seeing them at their peak- or whatever that peak performance gives.   

[Oxford]

Making more of the talent we have would help both in a marketing and engaging fans sense. I can agree with red john "equality has to be balanced in not driving the whole level of the competition downwards. " But I'm not sure that is even possible and maybe holds our sport back from grabbing the headlines and therefore sponsorship and attracting new fans through the gates. 

[Titaniuum]

 

 

say the NFL bias towards the poorer performing teams in their draft selection system... with the goal of leveling up competitive advantages or disadvantage as the case may be... that is disadvantaging the stronger teams in favour of the weaker.... or in your words ....  "punishing clubs for being successful by giving less successful clubs"  a weighted advantage.

 

My point being that maybe not the use of money as my example but a bias of some sort....

With a wider spread of talent and support, the NFL can afford the luxury of a draft system.

TV audience is a major factor in the strength of any NFL franchise.

Metro areas with around a million have a problem in retaining their position in the NFL, or gaining access. However, small metro area's aren't condemned to the weaker status.

Maybe the draft system helps those cities compete.

[Dave T]

I agree we should be selling the virtues of the leading players we have, better promotion for sure. However, the edge of seat... oh no he's got the ball and the players are panicking to cover what he is doing, etc... well I would still suggest that the list you quote are not quite at that Sam T level.

For sure they have levels of skill we can promote better. But they are either at this current stage... past their peak or are developing towards that peak ( not entirely but generally speaking). My point being that today we see the players with the huge potential developing but then they go off for higher rewards (rightly so). For example Burgess at Wigan, before he gets to that peak he will be off else where. At least with likes of Sam Tomkins and similar we saw them at their peak.... excited to be able to watch them, no promotion or hard sell necessary - my bum on the edge of seat told me I couldn't wait to see him again pitted against the team I support.

Yep promote better but I'm sure I'm not much different than the average RL fan and the fact a need to hard sell to me says something when previously it wasn't needed. Yep for attracting the not frequent spectator promote and sing the virtues.... but we are at the stage we need to keep and re-attract the RL enthusiast. That is excite them again. My opinion is that by trying to create equality of competition we are preventing the leading clubs from being more able to keep the developing stars for longer and hence the excitement of seeing them at their peak- or whatever that peak performance gives.

im not convinced its quite as doom and gloom as you suggest.

There are plenty of fabulous players playing our game, we'll lose a few, but thats life

[redjonn]

im not convinced its quite as doom and gloom as you suggest.

There are plenty of fabulous players playing our game, we'll lose a few, but thats life

 

Its the trend I'm concerned about.... that is its an increasing trend.  At least with the likes of James Graham he was towards his peak, although no doubt further improved playing in the NRL.  Now we have situations like Joe Burgess, who is just emerging but likely to be on his way to NRL.  Of course the players should go where the rewards are.  Never-the-less we have clubs, admittedly a few, that could afford to keep his talent or at least slow the drain.

 

Its great to see the England team being more competitive... but it won't be too long before almost the whole England team will not be playing here. By virtue of playing for England they are our best talent.   Of course we have money issues in the overall game but we do have clubs that can afford a bigger salary cap and hence keep our best talent somewhat longer. However in order to try and have equality we don't have the stronger clubs able to keep the best for longer.   OK if in doing that we still see the drain then not much the game here can do.

 

It just seems to me that it won't be that long before I'm watching an England team that I never see any players domestically.  Although I guess we may see them when their past their prime and moving back in their swan song.

 

Yep part of the answer may be fewer SL teams & hence sharing a greater proportion of the TV money. But a bigger salary cap or a prestige player allowance plus CAP allowance for own developed academy players may help.  Of course that favors the stronger clubs. But at least we may have more chance of keeping the top talent for longer and hence of a stronger top division that is more attractive to more people.

[The Parksider]

There are plenty of fabulous players playing our game, we'll lose a few, but thats life

 

It's a fabulous game. That's why for me top amateur games can pull crowds. Was talking to an ex Underbank lad yesterday, and he packed in because he couldn't give the dedication to training and therefore couldn't take the big hits from the more dedicated players. Star players help make the game even more attractive though. We will never know how far the drain of top talent to Australia leads to a drain of supporters here. It has to be a factor, whether it's negligble or significant I can't tell.....

 

Its the trend I'm concerned about.... that is its an increasing trend.  At least with the likes of James Graham he was towards his peak, although no doubt further improved playing in the NRL.  Now we have situations like Joe Burgess, who is just emerging but likely to be on his way to NRL.  Of course the players should go where the rewards are.  Never-the-less we have clubs, admittedly a few, that could afford to keep his talent or at least slow the drain.

 

Its great to see the England team being more competitive... but it won't be too long before almost the whole England team will not be playing here. 

 

It just seems to me that it won't be that long before I'm watching an England team that I never see any players domestically.  Although I guess we may see them when their past their prime and moving back in their swan song.

 

Yep part of the answer may be fewer SL teams & hence sharing a greater proportion of the TV money. But a bigger salary cap or a prestige player allowance plus CAP allowance for own developed academy players may help.  Of course that favors the stronger clubs. But at least we may have more chance of keeping the top talent for longer and hence of a stronger top division that is more attractive to more people.

 

You highlight the dilemma very well indeed.

 

As with Dave's post we will continue to attract big crowds to the professional games. How far these have or will go on to reduce because the fans perceive they are denied the best English talent being on show I don't know.

 

Conversely if you allow Dr. Koukash to bribe the soon to be absent in their entirety England team to play here and not in the NRL then you'd skew the Superleague competition.

 

You imagine an England side that don't play in England - an interesting scenario - maybe like the New Zealand team who don't play in NZ.

 

But the horror scenario for me would be Salford fielding the entire England side because Dr. K can afford them and him walking off with all the trophies in 1990's Wiganesque fashion!!!!!

 

Semi serious but tongue in cheek joking aside, I think we can find 10 clubs (radical decisions would need to be taken so forget it if the current RFL are in place to stay) who can all manage a certain level of spend and develop lads into stars. In turn I'd hope that they can all manage decent crowds.

 

But once you start "rewarding" clubs for producing international stars allowing them to up the money to try (some go for lifestyle and life experience too) to keep them, then you will badly skew the competition, and create a situation where D. Koukash will then realise if he picks out all the star 16 YO juniors along the M62 for his academy every year he'll not only get the very best English players now with his money but also in the future.

 

OK you could do "one per club" but again your asking the clubs to up the salary cap across the board by six figures, and even then the trophy winning clubs would likely be the only ones to pick these players up. Thus perpetuating success at certainclubs by over rewarding it by the back door.

 

I cannot for the life of me see how sacrificing the integrity of Superleague by skewing the competition would be good for the game. As we saw with the way in which the bottom half of Superleague collapsed this last few years, we cannot set it up again, still as an uneven competition. 

 

For me we have to grin and bear the player drain, James Graham and Sam Tompkins may have sat out the Grand Final but we still packed it out and had a fascinating contest.

[scotchy]

I'm glad we can put away the "draft system" trying to equate to the American system where colleges are stuffed full of great young lads and the absolute cream are drafted across the league to big rich competitive teams, which equates in no way whatsoever to making Joe Burgess go join Wakefield because their academy doesn't work.

 

On the salary cap increasing it creates wage inflation and unevens the competition, stick it up to whatever and the richest of chairmen will win the trophies and the lowest clubs may not as well bother. Take care the eight club SL doesn't become a four club SL doing that.

a draft would work perfectly fine. I think if Joe Burgess' options were Leigh in a semi-pro league, or Wakefield in SL nobody would be making him go anywhere. He would be jumping at the move.

 

The Salary cap by its definition is wage inflation. Wage inflation isn't a problem. Good knows how people have been sold such a Randian nonsense that we now have a portion of the game thinking the players earning more is a bad thing.

[Titaniuum]

a draft would work perfectly fine. I think if Joe Burgess' options were Leigh in a semi-pro league, or Wakefield in SL nobody would be making him go anywhere. He would be jumping at the move.

 

The Salary cap by its definition is wage inflation. Wage inflation isn't a problem. Good knows how people have been sold such a Randian nonsense that we now have a portion of the game thinking the players earning more is a bad thing.

A draft system would only work if there was no p&r. It would require a complete restucture of the game in this country. You'd require a level below SL from which to draw draftees. Americans go for college football, the AFL goes for lower level teams in the various state competitions.

[The Parksider]

a draft would work perfectly fine. I think if Joe Burgess' options were Leigh in a semi-pro league, or Wakefield in SL nobody would be making him go anywhere. He would be jumping at the move.

 

The Salary cap by its definition is wage inflation. Wage inflation isn't a problem. God knows how people have been sold such a Randian nonsense that we now have a portion of the game thinking the players earning more is a bad thing.

 

I really cannot see how the top clubs who run the game will even contemplate it in the first instance, I then cannot see how the players who want to play for certain clubs can be rail roaded and dictated to. I do not understand how salary capping is wage inflation by definition and not a problem, especially when clubs go into debt to pay wages?

 

A draft system would only work if there was no p&r. It would require a complete restucture of the game in this country. You'd require a level below SL from which to draw draftees. Americans go for college football, the AFL goes for lower level teams in the various state competitions.

 

With respect to Scotchy that's more understandable, and our problem is top SL clubs are the only ones developing young players in any number. All championship clubs and a few SL clubs feed off the top clubs rejects. If there is a "system" in place it's not sharing the up and coming players from the amateur game, its clubs sharing the players the top eight don't want.

[Ackroman]

I really cannot see how the top clubs who run the game will even contemplate it in the first instance, I then cannot see how the players who want to play for certain clubs can be rail roaded and dictated to. I do not understand how salary capping is wage inflation by definition and not a problem, especially when clubs go into debt to pay wages?

 

 

With respect to Scotchy that's more understandable, and our problem is top SL clubs are the only ones developing young players in any number. All championship clubs and a few SL clubs feed off the top clubs rejects. If there is a "system" in place it's not sharing the up and coming players from the amateur game, its clubs sharing the players the top eight don't want.

 

Ignoring the fact that many amateur clubs develop top class talent before SL get their hands on them.

 

No surprise Ronnie the Rhino was at Dewsbury Moor this week. Unless of course you class that as player development.

[Chronicler of Chiswick]

Two snags with a draft system:

(1) It would be illegal under restraint of trade legislation.

(2)Even if a work round could be found to evade point (1) it would only last as long as it didn't affect the dominance of the game by the oligarchs running the big clubs. Until some way can be found to break them I can't see anything happening to even out the competition.

[scotchy]

A draft system would only work if there was no p&r. It would require a complete restucture of the game in this country. You'd require a level below SL from which to draw draftees. Americans go for college football, the AFL goes for lower level teams in the various state competitions.

Certainly

[scotchy]

I really cannot see how the top clubs who run the game will even contemplate it in the first instance, I then cannot see how the players who want to play for certain clubs can be rail roaded and dictated to. I do not understand how salary capping is wage inflation by definition and not a problem, especially when clubs go into debt to pay wages?

 

 

With respect to Scotchy that's more understandable, and our problem is top SL clubs are the only ones developing young players in any number. All championship clubs and a few SL clubs feed off the top clubs rejects. If there is a "system" in place it's not sharing the up and coming players from the amateur game, its clubs sharing the players the top eight don't want.

Players do not get to play for the club they want to under any system. Joe Burgess would not be being rail roaded or dictated to by anything but circumstance. The same as now. In a draft there would be nothing to stop Burgess signing for Wigan, there would simply be a cost to Wigan to do so.

 

I worded the other part poorly. a salary cap by definition stops wage inflation, but wage inflation isn't a bad thing. Clubs do not go business because they pay wages, they go bust through poor business decisions. As has been proven, salary cap or no salary cap, clubs make bad business decisions and go bust. The SC doesn't protect them against poor business decisions, it simply means that players are the ones to take the hit from those poor business decisions.

[scotchy]

Two snags with a draft system:

(1) It would be illegal under restraint of trade legislation.

(2)Even if a work round could be found to evade point (1) it would only last as long as it didn't affect the dominance of the game by the oligarchs running the big clubs. Until some way can be found to break them I can't see anything happening to even out the competition.

restraint of trades are allowed. A contract, any employment contract is a restraint of trade. The question is whether that restraint is unfair.

 

and you could make a very strong argument that it isn't unfair to level the playing field. A draft wouldn't stop Joe burgess playing for Wigan, it would simply make Wigan pay a price for doing so, levelling the playing field.

[DimmestStar]

2015 will see both Hull clubs improve significantly. Both clubs plumbed the depths in 2014 so there is only one way to go even before you look at the vastly improved squads for 2015.

 

Salford too, so much quality they can only improve.

 

Super League has never been so competitive as it will be in 2015. The new fixture format is a mass culling of the meaningless fixture.

[Padge]

2015 will see both Hull clubs improve significantly. Both clubs plumbed the depths in 2014 so there is only one way to go even before you look at the vastly improved squads for 2015.

 

Salford too, so much quality they can only improve.

 

Super League has never been so competitive as it will be in 2015. The new fixture format is a mass culling of the meaningless fixture.

 

I very much doubt that.

 

Its a gimmick, if you want competitive fixtures let teams of equal ability compete. You will still have massive gaps in ability no matter what ridiculous fixture format you come up with.

 

The only way to make every game competitive is to ensure that clubs that don't have the money to compete generate more money so that they can.

 

Its about money not formats.

[rocksteady]

FWIW.

 

St Helens

Wigan

Wire

Catalans

Leeds

Hull FC

Huddersfield

HKR

______

Castleford

Widnes

Salford

Wakefield

Bradford

London

Leigh

Featherston

__________

Fax

Hunslet

Batley

Dewsbury

Sheffield

Haven

Workington

Doncaster

 

Saints to win the GF,

Wakefield to EASILY defeat Bradford in the Million Pound Game

Halifax to finish top of the bottom 8.

 

Attendances will climb slightly during the regular season across the 2 divisions, but will flatten out as we get to the 888 stage. The Million Pound game may well challenge the GF in terms of TV audience....

[Dave T]

The one thing turning me off the game is RL fans constantly telling anyone that'll listen that their system is best and any other us a joke.

[rocksteady]

The one thing turning me off the game is RL fans constantly telling anyone that'll listen that their system is best and any other us a joke.

To be fair, the RFL had to do something as tv audiences and crowds were in freefall. I doubt that we will be discussing the 888 system in 5 years time, by which time the folly of signing a premature tv deal will be apparent.

1 up 1 down with the same cap for all teams for me......