Jump to content

redjonn

Coach
  • Posts

    4,549
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by redjonn

  1. I guess that is were a strong marketing organisation in all its different aspects helps to identify what it is that does not turn enough people to want to watch RL. Looking at the whole product. We are a country that has a large sports interested population, maybe not so sports minded as the USA, and to say the obvious we must be able to capture a larger portion of them. Part of that is making it easier for them to watch, assuming the action on the field gets them interested enough. One thing I have always hated is the tag line "the greatest game" which I think has caused some to sit back and think the game on the field is so good to all and sundry. Plus if somebody likes another sport that tag line is surely saying something to them about their choice of sport. As to your question... I take more interest in both Saints and Leeds. My wife is an avid Leeds fan and hence that's the games we mostly attend given where we live. As supporters of RL and certain clubs we tend to be a little insular as to what a new audience may want to see. As a fan all games whether lacking lots of passing and elusive running and just simple 5 drives and a don't know what else to do high kick will always have some interest. Even if just the anxiety that comes from not wanting your club/team to lose.
  2. The real problem may be that the game itself isn't what enough people like to watch... Even though I attend virtually every week a game it doest really excite often... just imagine only getting a glimpse and that has to persuade people to followup...
  3. Maybe but a large area around those clubs will have, most people in Liverpool or Manchester, or Sheffield etc etc will know those towns. I am not saying they are interested in the sport but they will know the towns. A good marketing organisation would help in identifying the barriers and opportunities from those close by cities or bigger towns. We have what we have as the starting point. I don't follow rugby union but I know where the premiership clubs are even if they have non location names, e.g saracens, etc.
  4. Thanks for response... if nothing else it causes discussion. That is whatever our personal views we all want rugby league to be financial sustainable for the long term.
  5. Mind you thats what some private equity houses do... sell the property and give themselves huge dividends from the income whilst loading the business with debt... Didn't that happen to many care homes that subsequent went bust once the first private equity firm sold on and the property owner raising the rent/lease, etc. Then again it often works well initially... I can see the HMRC selling property and then renting back less space whilst the other space is rented out by the new property owner. I guess what I am saying it depends on the contracts and ability to see ahead... in the case of a RFL club I suspect they wouldn't be looking ahead too well... sorry to side track...
  6. Often the problem with many grand ideas or suggestion is the practical or pragmatic getting from current to the all singing vision/idea without the whole edifice collapsing.
  7. Yes, I agree. It's a horse and cart scenario... We would have media stars because the sport has the profile. Stars alone will not create the sports profile and we won't have stars without the sports profile being higher.
  8. thanks for the reply. Yep fair comment, although its a poorer spectacle and hence not so good from a sport selling point perspective, if stuck to watching the up and coming and often the just out the academy players.
  9. Thanks for your response. Agree in general but to bear in mind that yep the player pool is huge but also a massive club pool to fill. Rugby League has a relative small professional club pool to fill with that limited player pool. So relatively I'm not sure how limiting the player pool really is or has been to the professional game. All-be-it if it continues drying up as seems to be it or if our better young players continue go off to NRL then its all part of the downward spiral here and inter-related..
  10. well maybe but as we know with RL things can quickly change... for reasons beyond our comprehension, I've more chance of understanding the changing technology face of nuclear fusion then RFL/SL,,,,
  11. of course media comes into it, but that media huge interest is because of the standard of players leading to the glamour of the football in this country. That relative high standard is because of the money. That money is because of originally the top 4, then top 6 and now the top 8. That is the top clubs have been the key catalyst bringing in the big deals, which subsequently is big enough so that even the lower standard clubs of the PL are now able to bring in international level players - thus raising those clubs playing standards. The PL success has been spurned by the Man Utd, Liverpool's, etc leading to the huge profile and subsequent investments by multi billionaires leading to likes of Chelsea, Man City greatly adding to the competition at the top and further glamour of the sport. If the PL had gone the SL way in limiting the top clubs to a salary cap so low as to help the poorest/weakest clubs (or to have shared it out across the whole of the professional league structure) I don't think the huge monetary success of the PL would be as it is now.
  12. but they didn't just one day decide to expand into other area's. They created a market of high demand that meant they could chose to move franchises/clubs to suit or able to attract fans from a wider geographical footprint than previous. On this forum its like a magic formula that suddenly we should expand or create clubs in cities. First we have to create that demand - that takes time. We need a pragmatic solution that enables us to take those choices if wanted in the longer term. Until then we may have to prune to create that chance - I haven't seen anything better proposed than some sort of pruning as a first step. as in prune with regards to money allocation to less clubs.
  13. could look at it another way... pay a pittance to the up and coming youngsters expecting them to stay around to be be coached to improve. We as in SL tend to use the young academy players as fill in... not guiding and manging their exposure whilst improving them through coaching at a higher level. It seems to me we just want a fair number of academy players as just temporary make weights. Its not surprising so many move on/out
  14. I'm not against SL going to ten clubs, but I don't agree with some views that their are only a few strong teams. Yes only a few have won silverware but that's no different than soccer. From my perspective we have x5 relatively strong financial clubs that could go beyond the salary cap. On top of that we have Hull FC whom could be added, we have Castleford who ignoring this Covid year are very competitive to any of the clubs. We have Hull KR building well and Huddersfield. To me we have seven to nine competitive clubs, that's a fair percentage of the current 12 and even more so if 10 clubs. All-be-it only a few have won silverware. That's no different than soccer whom have gone from top 4, to top 6 and now top 8 over the decade or so, with only x3 or x4 winning the main prize.. Yep, I think the standard on the field could be improved but that to me is a salary cap issue. Either unable to keep the "best" for longer o attracting higher standard as well as playing a good sum to young players coming through as an incentive to stay in the sport and improve - don't think I would be highly incentivised to stay in SL if a young inexperienced player to maintain the focus on improving if getting relative pitiful money. Not surprised we lose so many, given themselves a chance to reach peak performance.
  15. maybe, but their was and continues huge demand for soccer grounds attendance. So that doing Monday isn't a big hit due to that demand. We have never had such demand so it is/was more risky to ground attendance. Don't blame Sky for wanting to fill its schedules but RFL/SL for allowing non of its own control over prime fixtures. Although I recognise that may have been difficult given need for money, short term v mid to longer term impact.
  16. Yep, agree as per my comment on the family section of stand at Headingly the other day. Look forward to the cricket approach... without the blazer and tie
  17. Agree in general, but the flip side our enjoyment was spoiled the other day at Headingly having a bunch of drunks sitting behind... all thinking their comments funny but in essence abusive, balancing drinks that spilled as they moved and went back for more... My family often don't attend much saying such is a factor, especially for the little un's. It is/was good that Headingly had a family stand section... Always seems to me for some and seems to me drinks is the only factor getting them their. Never-the-less the above are a minority and the social drinking is a key part of my enjoyment normally. I just don't impose any drunken behaviour on others. I guess it comes down to stewarding, like a barman of old who knows when somebody is going to be a pain in the backside.
  18. Probably the only pass he got off his centre Newman... have to say for all the hype he is a centre that doesn't like to pass... he would rather come back inside... practically every time..
  19. I assume except those playing in the internationals... or does he mean a window and no games so they can all rest... seems odd if only a sub set can rest but not the others as it would not be from a health perspective.
  20. no vision - often the problem isn't a vision, its given were you are and how best to get their. That means some pragmatic steps. Most of which upset many...
  21. chuckle - looked as if they are really enjoying themselves. Liked some of the flamboyant diving tries... Beach RL, why not. Whatever innovative new concept all you need to do is keep a backward pass and a simple restart rather than a faffing PTB with opposition players having to be square - just have them having to return to defending line and the attacking player having to touch with foot and pass.... then it can be a fast paced short game. The rest is about what you build around the play on the field to make a compelling product.
  22. I agree, in the short term it doesn't provide an answer. In the long term it will do better I think than the current ideology in the sport that we seem stuck with. In the short term, going down to 10 clubs as a sort of holding pattern with a view to growing again after a period for me is as good a restarting point as anything I've seen or can think of. Despite many peoples reaction to it. For me it is a pragmatic solution.
  23. The idea a alternative competition aimed to attract new fan base and excite the existing of itself is a good idea - especially following the example of the cricket. Although many have been saying similar in this forum for years but if it takes another sport to show what can be done and we copy that's fine Pity we don't have the innovation the sport use to have to do something before the rest. Anyway whilst not clear why 8 players I like the name Lightening Rugby as a start and the discussion as to try and achieve something. The number exact number of players is immaterial. Key is coming up with a format then the number of players. A format that can be marketed appropriate and to be exciting and sufficient different. Of course have to come up with a set of rules that help achieve that fast based game...try's only game, limit number of tacklers, no need for PTB just a foot touch to restart... whatever, whatever, whatever... The focus on the number of players just to make wider spaces wouldn't be my starting point, my start would be the format and rules, then the number.
  24. not in the short term for sure... but it might have enabled those clubs to keep the stars coming through or attract back the stars that have left. That in itself may help in the long term to improve standards, initially within those few clubs but then further down if it brings increased media and sponsorship money. As I've said before its an ideology issue... constraining the stronger clubs to the level of the weakest in the hope more even games versus allowing the few elite clubs to drive the sport in the field from which increased interest arises and eventually benefits other clubs. Of course now we can't afford to wait for the long term benefit that in my opinion is likely to accrue, whereas we may have been able to with the previous sky broadcast deals.
  25. Hope you get inspiration to keep the enthusiasm going...
×
×
  • Create New...