Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Lowdesert

Radders - RFL, financial strategy

75 posts in this topic

"I'm not telling people how to do thier jobs but the strategy is all wrong."

"Too much money being given to non-SL clubs"

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read an article by a players' agent saying clubs were sacred to sign marquee players.

Now Radders an SL coach says other parts of the game are getting too much money.

We could do with a little bit of neutral advice and comment in this sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the 40% of funds stat correct - how much does that add up to for the lower divisions? I didnt think it was anything like that.

 

If it isnt correct then he should apologise 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

16 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Is the 40% of funds stat correct - how much does that add up to for the lower divisions? I didnt think it was anything like that.

 

If it isnt correct then he should apologise 

Don't think so. The SL contract is worth around £143m I think. The other two leagues are nowhere near getting £56m; I think it's less than £20m. He's way off the mark.

EDIT: Detail here: http://www.totalrl.com/ins-outs-super-leagues-lucrative-new-tv-deal/

Just over 10%.

Edited by GeordieSaint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, GeordieSaint said:

Don't think so. The SL contract is worth around £143m I think. The other two leagues are nowhere near getting £56m; I think it's less than £20m. He's way off the mark.

EDIT: Detail here: http://www.totalrl.com/ins-outs-super-leagues-lucrative-new-tv-deal/

Just over 10%.

So his whole point is BS. 

Do journos check or challenge anything before allowing people to stir the brown stuff with things like this?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would be nice if journalist did more checking and challenge whatever figures someone presents as facts.   I agree in general it is rather BS the whole commentary.

One of his points Dubai - On the one hand I see potential cost of previously planned Dubai trip worthy of query, but then do we never get the England team together again outside of competition. What is say the difference in cost of going to Dubai against say getting whole team together in UK or Australia. Then again have no get together and what is the cost to overall game of not doing as much as possible to help England.   My point being he needs to quantify the perceived extra cost against what he thinks should be done.  I don't know what the difference may be but I wouldn't make a strong comment unless a)i gave preferred option and b)give comparative costs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dave T said:

So his whole point is BS. 

Do journos check or challenge anything before allowing people to stir the brown stuff with things like this?

My thoughts as well. Absolutely no truth in Radford's comments and they aren't slapped down by the journalist in question AND they print it! There are many people out there who'll actually believe this rubbish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dave T said:

So his whole point is BS. 

Do journos check or challenge anything before allowing people to stir the brown stuff with things like this?

No they don't but they're not bothered it seems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As ive said many,many times before..

If all the tv/sky money was put into one big pot and devided fairly instead of backhanders too SL chairmen,sky try ,staggered funding in the championship and league one which has seen a REDUCTION in funding...then all of RL would be on a sounder footing...it could have been split like this

SL clubs £1.825m,per season,which is what they get anyway.


Champ clubs £500k each per season.


League one clubs £250k each per season..

That comes to £31.9m of the £40m a year the tv deals are worth...which leaves the RFL a staggering £8.1m a year to use for developing the sport!

You could play about with that £8.1m..give the SL clubs a extra £175k,giving them £2m a year,i understand we need to keep the SL clubs happy...but of course that'll leave the RFL just £6m a year....

Also if championship clubs knew,absolutely, how much they where getting every year for the next 5 years instead of this stupid staggered system,then they could laydown some long term strategies and earmark monies for junior development..its absolutely scandalous theres not a proper under 16s,under 18s ,under 20s/21s/reserves leagues across all the leagues.....

Id actually say clubs could only get their full funding if they have junior teams!

SL teams should have three , 16s,18s & 20s/reserves

Champ teams two, 18s & 21s/reserves

League one,at least one, a under 21s/ reserves with a under 18s being optional.

The reason its u21s in the champ & league one is so they can pick up SL u20s that get cut..

Theres little wonder sport england funding has been cut when we don't even have proper junior development pathways in place for them to fund!!

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

11 hours ago, GeordieSaint said:

 Absolutely no truth in Radford's comments and they aren't slapped down by the journalist in question AND they print it! There are many people out there who'll actually believe this rubbish.

 
 

£14,576,000 or 8% were the figures from RL&LW.

But the point is a good one that the prize money element of that sum was supposed to assist the Championship clubs build teams capable of holding their own/competing with  SL clubs to make the P & R structure work.

Clubs who have been in receipt of the prize money include Featherstone, Batley and Halifax who have not used the prize money to compete for SL (it being inadequate to do so), Bradford of course used it and collapsed, 

So it's far from "rubbish" however Radford is Adam Pearson's man and Pearson and Hudgell are against the system, and they are right that it wastes the prize "money" element to an extent, but a significant element of the money is allocated to Championship Clubs as an operating subsidy across the board - £150K a season per club.

If that was removed Championship clubs would probably either collapse or have to restructure more in line with Championship One clubs, there'd be no chance of P & R ever working unless a club had a rich owner. Radford is a player and coach, not a finance man so I suspect Pearson (and Hudgell) have sent him out with this message to try to get the ball rolling on reviewing the system with a view to dumping it.  

HKR then go on to win auto promotion as erm. they have a rich owner.

Edited by The Parksider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Somebody claims that 40% is too high, it is proven to be c8% but it's still a good point? How can it be?

I suppose Radford has the same attitude to facts as Parky, that 40% number will be quoted again im sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, roughyedspud said:

As ive said many,many times before..

If all the tv/sky money was put into one big pot and devided fairly....

SL clubs £1.825m,per season,which is what they get anyway.

Champ clubs £500k each per season.

League one clubs £250k each per season..

That comes to £31.9m of the £40m a year the tv deals are worth...which leaves the RFL a staggering £8.1m a year to use for developing the sport!

You need a list of where the money is actually going, in that list £17,800,000 apparently goes to "coaching and charitable foundations" Another £20,042,000 (11%) is "paid for Internationals and Challenge Cup coverage". Monies also went to clubs relegated in 2014 (£1,575,00).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Championship clubs should be getting more equal funding with a small amount as an extra incentive.By getting in the middle 8's that is incentive enough with the extra gates that brings.

If certain SL clubs were getting £3m and others £500k there would be uproar-but on a smaller scale this is what is happening to the championship clubs.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of whether you agree with Radford or not he does raise some valid points.

Firstly in oversight from the RFL. If they've allocated money to a club (say £500K to a Championship club) then the RFL should be carrying out checks & audits to see how that money is being spent, a bit like how the National Lottery operates when it allocates money to projects. To give cash and then just walk away and leave the clubs to their own devices is just asking for trouble al la Bradford. The RFL needs to know how and where its money is being spent within clubs so it can plan for future spends by identifying areas that need improvement.

I have to agree with him on the whole Dubai thing. The fact they were willing to blow £200K plus on one trip while making cuts in other more vital areas is quite frankly unbelievable.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

10 hours ago, roughyedspud said:

As ive said many,many times before..

If all the tv/sky money was put into one big pot and devided fairly instead of backhanders too SL chairmen,sky try ,staggered funding in the championship and league one which has seen a REDUCTION in funding...then all of RL would be on a sounder footing...it could have been split like this

SL clubs £1.825m,per season,which is what they get anyway.


Champ clubs £500k each per season.


League one clubs £250k each per season..

That comes to £31.9m of the £40m a year the tv deals are worth...which leaves the RFL a staggering £8.1m a year to use for developing the sport!

You could play about with that £8.1m..give the SL clubs a extra £175k,giving them £2m a year,i understand we need to keep the SL clubs happy...but of course that'll leave the RFL just £6m a year....

Also if championship clubs knew,absolutely, how much they where getting every year for the next 5 years instead of this stupid staggered system,then they could laydown some long term strategies and earmark monies for junior development..its absolutely scandalous theres not a proper under 16s,under 18s ,under 20s/21s/reserves leagues across all the leagues.....

Id actually say clubs could only get their full funding if they have junior teams!

SL teams should have three , 16s,18s & 20s/reserves

Champ teams two, 18s & 21s/reserves

League one,at least one, a under 21s/ reserves with a under 18s being optional.

The reason its u21s in the champ & league one is so they can pick up SL u20s that get cut..

Theres little wonder sport england funding has been cut when we don't even have proper junior development pathways in place for them to fund!!

You mention all these teams (Reserves) and I agree that is what should be in place but in the real world where are you going to get these players from? Last season 5 under 18s Amateur teams played in Yorkshire for about 3 months, non in Cumbria take out the Hull teams (2 of) and there is one Yorkshire Club in the next tier of RL, NCL Premier, the whole amateur game is a mess. There is an "Embedded the Pathway System" but realistically there are not enough quality players for the system and the scholarship system has decimated the amateur game, both Chairman agreed to merge the academy's, yes to save money but both also said there are not enough quality players in Hull for 2 academy systems, historic clubs with ties to the Professional game are struggling which means the rest of the amateur clubs will be in more of a mess, you may ask why this matters but this is where the players come from.

A sad comment from Nick Pinkney giving summery on the Hull v Rovers game yesterday "I don't know what Hull are trying to achieve with the game, unless Hull have a massive injury crisis I cannot see the majority of these players picked for the game today ever playing for Hull FC" basically saying the reserve players are not up to Super league standard, I keep hearing the term young lads, some of these lads are now 22 if they are not ready now the majority never will be.

It will again be interesting to see if we have narrowed the gap in the upcoming games verses the Australian clubs, this is important as the RFL in their "Plan" have said we will endeavor to win the 2017 World Cup and will win every tournament up to 2021 (2016 4 Nations??) This will be against usually un-prepared teams some Super league teams have been back training for 1 month, have played friendlies and will compose of an average of 6 overseas players again meaning less British players in the team

 

Edited by Defender1
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, Saint Toppy said:

Regardless of whether you agree with Radford or not he does raise some valid points.

Firstly in oversight from the RFL. If they've allocated money to a club (say £500K to a Championship club) then the RFL should be carrying out checks & audits to see how that money is being spent, a bit like how the National Lottery operates when it allocates money to projects. To give cash and then just walk away and leave the clubs to their own devices is just asking for trouble al la Bradford.

The prize money allocations were £550K and £500K to the top two clubs.

Both clubs clearly and openly "played the game" and spent it on players for building SL/professional sides with a view to making the Qualifiers competitive.

That is what they were supposed to do and clearly they did it?........

 

Edited by The Parksider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Saint Toppy said:

Regardless of whether you agree with Radford or not he does raise some valid points.

Firstly in oversight from the RFL. If they've allocated money to a club (say £500K to a Championship club) then the RFL should be carrying out checks & audits to see how that money is being spent, a bit like how the National Lottery operates when it allocates money to projects. To give cash and then just walk away and leave the clubs to their own devices is just asking for trouble al la Bradford. The RFL needs to know how and where its money is being spent within clubs so it can plan for future spends by identifying areas that need improvement.

I have to agree with him on the whole Dubai thing. The fact they were willing to blow £200K plus on one trip while making cuts in other more vital areas is quite frankly unbelievable.

I agree with him 100% - 40% of sky money going to lower divisions is far too high.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really sure what Lee Radford's point is apart from another whinge at the RFL?

On the point of funding, while the RFL have no right to tell the SL clubs how to spend their money, perhaps a scaled method of funding should be applied to force clubs to spend more on junior development. Each club can get a base of £1.5m for the first team, you field an U/16 team in the league an extra £200,000 to the club. An U/18 team another £150,000, a reserve team you get another £150,000 etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, The Parksider said:

The prize money allocations were £550K and £500K to the top two clubs.

Both clubs clearly and openly "played the game" and spent it on players for building SL/professional sides with a view to making the Qualifiers competitive.

That is what they were supposed to do and clearly they did it?........

 

Really, where did Bradford's money go then ?

In 2015 they made the MPG, their prize money never went on strengthening their team and in 2016 their performances nose dived, resulting in missing out on the top 4 and ultimately in the clubs liquidation by the end of the year.

Of course there should be oversight from the RFL with them knowing where their money is being spent by each club. I'm not just talking Championship clubs, the £1.8M SL clubs receive they should be made to provide a detailed report to the RFL of where this money has gone. How they choose to spend the rest of their income is up to them, but if the RFL feels they are not investing their money in such a way that provides a benefit the they should have the right to withhold part of that money until they are satisfied.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Radford's "40%" has been demonstrated actually to be 8% +1%.  RL coach talking out of his arris shock.

But that is for the TV rights.  For up to 17 + 1 games.  Clever move by Sky: buy the rights and just hoard them, depriving anyone else the opportunity.

The TV rights that could have been sold elsewhere had the RFL not sold them to Sky.  So the Championship and C1 clubs are totally and absolutely entitled to a share of the money.

As I said, RL coach talking out of his arris shock.  But doubtless this mythical 40% will get quoted repeatedly in future. And believed by those it suits to believe it.

 

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

14 minutes ago, Saint Toppy said:

Really, where did Bradford's money go then ?

In 2015 they made the MPG, their prize money never went on strengthening their team and in 2016 their performances nose dived, resulting in missing out on the top 4 and ultimately in the clubs liquidation by the end of the year...

 

Disingenuous at best.  Monies WERE spent on the team. On building another chuffing great big squad.  By Mr "We don't need a scrum half" Lowes. But, your disingenuous use of "strengthening" is actually correct, if used in the correct context. It was quantity over quality. Again. No learning from the mistakes of 2015, even though we were promised it would be otherwise. Bradford frittered the opportunity, again a squad with far to many donkeys, or guys who were never given a game.  Hence the current debacle.

 

Edited by Adeybull

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

40% is way too high.... Luckily for Lee Radford it's less than 10% so problem solved.

The only issue with championship funding is the drop off in funding is way too steep which is creating the instability. Level this off more and the financial issues will lessen as clubs can plan more effectively. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

3 hours ago, LeytherRob said:

40% is way too high.... Luckily for Lee Radford it's less than 10% so problem solved.

The only issue with championship funding is the drop off in funding is way too steep which is creating the instability. Level this off more and the financial issues will lessen as clubs can plan more effectively. 

Spot on. The current funding incentivises some clubs to go for broke, make the Middle 8s as Fev did and your quids in, miss it as Bradford did and financial disaster. The Fev v Bradford game was probably a £0.5m game, had Fev lost where would they have been? And the Championship Prizemoney funding is nowhere near enough to get to SL standard. You still need a Derek Beaumont to put the same in again. 

Edited by Wakefield Ram
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

11 hours ago, Defender1 said:

You mention all these teams (Reserves) and I agree that is what should be in place but in the real world where are you going to get these players from? Last season 5 under 18s Amateur teams played in Yorkshire for about 3 months, non in Cumbria take out the Hull teams (2 of) and there is one Yorkshire Club in the next tier of RL, NCL Premier, the whole amateur game is a mess. There is an "Embedded the Pathway System" but realistically there are not enough quality players for the system and the scholarship system has decimated the amateur game, both Chairman agreed to merge the academy's, yes to save money but both also said there are not enough quality players in Hull for 2 academy systems, historic clubs with ties to the Professional game are struggling which means the rest of the amateur clubs will be in more of a mess, you may ask why this matters but this is where the players come from.

 

what we've done by cutting all the junior & reserve teams from a vast majority of clubs (pro & semi pro) is we've restricted the player pathway,its our own fault theres not the players coming through anymore cos they all stop playing seriously after the ages of 15-16 cos they've not been picked up by a pro or semi pro club..

 

that pathway needs opening up again.

Edited by roughyedspud

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.