Jump to content

Dave T

Coach
  • Posts

    34,786
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    152

Posts posted by Dave T

  1. 5 hours ago, Saint Toppy said:

    I'd say one of the biggest factors the best young players choose Saints, Wigan & Leeds over other clubs is opportunity. Over the course of SL all 3 have consistently brought through their youngsters into the 1st team and given them the opportunity to establish themselves, there's a culture difference. All 3 primarily buy in players to supplement their home grown, many other clubs see it the other way round in that they try to buy the best players then then supplement the team with their youngsters.

    Look at the make up of the 1st team squads of Saints, Wigan & Leeds over recent years and see just how many home grown players they've had playing regularly in their 1st team, its significantly higher than most other clubs. Young players know if they choose one of these 3 clubs then their chances of being able to progress and establish themselves in the 1st team are significantly higher

     

    5 hours ago, RS said:

    To be fair they get the oppertunities because they sign the best kids 

    I think there is something in both of these points. I do think it is clear that these clubs use younger players that they develop - but is that as a result of hoovering up much of the best talent because they are seen as the 'best' clubs because they win the trophies? It's all a little chicken and egg - but in reality the majority of clubs, including Saints sign in far more players that they develop themselves. As you would expect. 

    The bit I am interested in is do Saints, Wigan and Leeds do anything vastly different to other clubs (the top end ones I mentioned in particular) - or are they on a bit of a treadmill, benefiting from the grassroots game in their towns, benefitting from the historic success of the first team?

    Of course it is all interlinked - but would it be possible for Salford to buy out Saints' youth setup and start winning comps because of it? My view is that no, they couldn't. And if that is the case - I'm not sure how strong the argument is that these clubs win because they have the best youth development.

     

    • Like 2
  2. On 04/12/2021 at 09:32, Tommygilf said:

    Course they will, just as we would have done for 50k at Anfield for the World Cup game(s) there. 

    I agree, at the current time, exposure is the most valuable thing for the World Cup.

    Funnily enough, we don't do that, we try and find the lowest number possible. We talk about the record being 4.2k, yet the women's final in 2019 was part of the triple header which got 24k. On wiki for example it has the women's crowd as 4k (est). 

    I do think the Cup Final day should include the women's Cup final if they are sticking with this double header format. 

    • Like 3
  3. 1 minute ago, Tommygilf said:

    Even football propogate and encourage a massive media circus. And many Football clubs actually do lots of stuff on matchdays.

    Football clubs have embraced match day presentations that suit them. We are seeing more and more light shows and the music is often specifically chosen for the event. We do see more fanzones and bars where clubs want a piece of the action too. 

    This is on top of the improved food and drink options and massive facility improvements. 

    • Like 2
  4. 8 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

    Maybe more people should open their eyes and their minds and actually see what we are trying to achieve 

    Do football ' embellish ' their regular games in the ways being suggested ? , Apart from the odd few fireworks occaisionally ?

    I think you are being too focused on a fanzone or a singer on the pitch. In football, there has certainly been a lot of focus on improving the fan experience, as there has at RU and other sports. 

  5. 2 hours ago, Kirmonds pouch said:

    Asus sponsor Trinity because it's incredibly good value and their UK marketing man said he didn't understand why other companies were not joining in.

    Even during a poor season like last years, Trinity still appeared on SKY and on BBC highlights 20+ times in a season. That is a lot of exposure for way way less than say football for the same minutes and outside the PL viewing figures. Exposure minutes for every pound spent was way better than any other team sport. He paid Trinity what they asked which is about standard for RL and he bit our hands off because it was simply too good to resist for the price.

    Don't think he cared which club it was at the time he just wanted the TV exposure but I hear he's developed a soft spot for the old girl. Truly it all nonsense about big crowds and flashy stadiums, so long as the viewing figures stack up it doesn't seem to matter, at least not to ASUS.

    I think different brands have different viewpoints on stuff like this. And sometimes it can just be down to an individual. I think RL does well from a pure numbers point of view, it will be great value, considering the TV coverage we can offer, but that does lead us to a certain kind of sponsor rather than those looking for a bit more prestige. 

    We are very poor at converting sponsors from the more prestigious international game to the club game. 

    I think we do get a number of sponsors like Asus over the years who value the numbers and the value over the prestige side of things, and that is where we do ok. 

    • Like 1
  6. 35 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

    So there it is folks , we need more fireworks , dancers , go carts and elephants 

    As with all of these things, there is a balance. We shouldn't be disparaging of people demanding more than 80m rugby as we shouldn't of those who feel away fans are important. 

    The magic here is getting the balance right between wasting money and it being a vanity product and making your events work so well that everything trickles down from there. 

    People use Bradford as an example, but it wasn't the marketing budgets that killed them, it was the underlying business model that wasn't working for them. Each club is unique and have to work in a way that suits them. Some will own grounds, some have a rich director, some have huge fanbase, some tiny, some in affluent areas, some less so. 

    But in all cases, the quality of the event really needs to be a major focus, and that includes the stuff on the grass and off it. At SL level I don't think we do a bad job (I haven't been to Championship games), but at Internationals and major events I think we have fallen behind now, mainly due to being too thrifty imho. 

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  7. 3 hours ago, Dallas Mead said:

    Absolutely the former, but so what?  Grow the game to get more £s in, if you’re basing your financial survival on an extra £10,000 or so a year via team A bringing a few hundred more fans then team B once a year then the business model is flawed.  It’s total small time thinking to depend on away fans for survival…..

     

    Grow the game or die guys…

    Nobody ever depends on away fans for survival, so people should stop saying it. 

    The point is though that we should be very careful about recklessly throwing away rivalries that have been built up over decades that contribute to the atmosphere and finances. 

    If Wire had 13 games like those against Catalans at home, that wouldn't be a draw and we do need to make sure that any shifts are done in a considered way. 

    We have plenty of space for expansion thankfully, so it is a long way off becoming an issue, but if we sleepwalk into a 10 team league that includes Catalans, Toulouse, London, York and Newcastle then you risk losing some of the real positive elements of RL's top flight. 

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
  8. 1 hour ago, redjonn said:

    Don't agree for all games, yes the bigger one's like internationals and finals etc

    For the average club games yes you want better facilities for sure but not always looking for an event... of course depends upon definition of event.

    Every match is an event. It takes a few hours of people's precious time and their money. 

    That doesn't mean every event needs a band, singer etc. but they do all need to be staged well, have good catering, facilities and be presented well. 

    Gubrats has a point in that the match is the core entertainment, but that match needs to be staged well. 

    • Like 4
  9. 28 minutes ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

    Which is our biggest problem most RL fans in England support the clubs and NOT the game.

    This is why we need England internationals and plenty of them played outside of the heartlands to tap into new fans.

     

    Paul

    I disagree and find your post contradictory. For a sport with such a modest footprint, many of the regular club fans are the ones going to the internationals and event games. They do support the wider game, more than many other sports I would argue. 

    I do agree with your conclusion though - we rely too much on this modest sized pot and need to work on new populations. 

    • Like 4
  10. Just now, The Rocket said:

     

    The reason that both Catalans and Salford both achieved extraordinary ratings was that both clubs were able to capture the imagination of the wider public. Salford have been unable to capitalise on that -  Catalans have.

    The difference being that Salford were unable to build upon that one good year whereas the Catalans figures are an accumulation of a number of good years: CC victors; the Nou Camp game; and of course consistent top 5 finishes and the GF.

    I think it is justified to go slightly ' over the top with the benefits ", Catalans are obviously turning consistent success into greater investment and in turn using that into building a team that will be in a position to have a red hot go at winning the competition next year. I expect their viewing figures will to continue to reflect that.

    Sky and Channel 4 will be watching.

     

    If you do some analysis, you'll find that Catalans games were often some of the lowest viewing figures too. The two high games often referenced were a season opener that went to golden point, and the semi final/lls game (I forget which). 

    And you ignored the modest GF figure that I highlighted. 

  11. 18 minutes ago, Damien said:

    This is it really. Some of the greats of the game came from RU but there were also many complete flops and many who just turned out to be average RL players.

    Clubs not being able to sign RU players as simply as before has certainly made them focus more on youth development, which is no bad thing.

    This is a good point. Considering we no longer have Union stars and short-term Aussies and Kiwis, we have certainly done well to plug the gaps. 

    There were an awful lot duffs from Union, but it's those absolute gems that we now miss out on I think, we have some players who could be classed as legends from Union. 

    • Like 1
  12. 5 minutes ago, Chris22 said:

    I think our first aim, as stated earlier in this thread, should be getting lapsed fans back. Near enough all top flight sides had lower crowds from when capacity restrictions were lifted in July. That may be due to not having a season ticket, falling out of the habit, covid related concerns or a variety of other reasons. We need to get these fans back and rebuild the base of season ticket holders. 

    Looking ahead, any impact of having more matches of TV will only be felt in 2023 onwards. The issue is how do we capitalise on, for example, the large numbers of locals in London, Newcastle, Coventry who may attend a match for the first time (or for a long time) at the World Cup?

    You also have the issue that, whilst many more eyeballs are on the sport next year, for fans in large swathes of the country, the sport is inaccessible. If you lived anywhere from the North Midlands southwards, you will have to travel a hell of a distance to see a top flight match. Any upturn in viewing will always be limited by that.  

    Agree with much of that, but in reality I don't think your last para is an issue. We are here to build up three types of audience. 

    The regular weekly attendee. These will generally come from local areas, and we know that we have millions within half an hour of our grounds who do not attend regularly. 

    Then we have the TV audience. Make a compelling comp and present it well through the right channels and we can grow that. 

    Finally we have the event crowds - this is where those from further afield are served. Major events and the world cup will be key for them. 

    There is a lot of growth to be had even if our comp always looks like it does now. 

    • Like 3
  13. 3 minutes ago, Futtocks said:

    Plus the risk is so much less for the players, since the end of shamateurism and RU's life bans. I'm sure there are players out there who'd like to try RL.

    I think the counter to that is that relatively average players can do pretty well for themselves in Union - there are more opportunities worldwide to earn a career and you can do some pretty huge stuff internationally considering the size of the sport. 

    • Like 1
  14. 48 minutes ago, ELBOWSEYE said:

    Dave since the close season I have just received my first contact, as a long term season ticket holder its poor 

    Mate, I'm not saying we are perfect, and I agree with your overall point that we all need to do better (I made the point on a different thread that we need to leave no stone unturned this year), but just offering some context around 2021.

    We bought a ticket for a match this year and it had to be rolled over twice before it could be used for a third game. I can't criticise clubs for last year, but 2022 is a different matter. 

    As somebody who has recently moved back to the area I must admit I have found the presence of RL clubs to be high, but that is likely because I lived in Edinburgh for the last decade. 

    As a fan I've been engaged with a fair bit so far, plenty of noise around signings, new manager, a brilliant kit launch, Ratchford's testimonial game, the World Cup, etc. My experience is slightly different to yours at the moment. 

    • Like 1
  15. 6 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

    Its definitely easier to sell something with a positive vibe surrounding it.

    Hopefully the negativity has largely been used up in 2020/2021. My only concern is that an incoming restructure or something like that could undermine the renewed positivity.

    Yeah, the structure piece is still the dark cloud hanging over the game. At a time where the world cup is the Ray of sunshine, this is an example of our self-harming again by having this hanging over us. 

    • Like 5
  16. 47 minutes ago, ELBOWSEYE said:

    We can't keep looking at big event crowds until the clubs actually try to entice the people on their own doorstep to come to games. After crowd's returned post lockdown I thought we would see a good reaction, but at Warrington all I saw were little or no effort from the club. They won't learn its not just the on field entertainment that matters but the whole experience, then the sport as a whole needs to grasp this. 

    It wasn't worth investing in matches that were still being called off at random. 

    Warrington didn't just forget how to hold events in the last 18m, there were clear reasons they were staged as they were. 

×
×
  • Create New...