Jump to content

dealwithit

Coach
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    406

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by dealwithit

    The General 'Toronto Wolfpack' Discussion Thread

    in The General Rugby League Forum

    Posted

    17 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

    Sorry been away but will work through these then I think I've said all I have to add to this topic. I would go 14 or 15 maximum teams with the protected spots for France and Canada with no relegation for them. I think Toulouse need to be given time to grow and develop players and the game, free of worry. 

    On the TV, it isn't whatabboutism, it is a fact. International viewers that you can't monetize (for Sky) are meaningless. You contribute zero to that deal.  Across a variety of sports and intra country competitions in Europe, that is the settled formula. It is the reason Juventus one season got more money than Barcelona in the association football champions league(despite Barca beating Juve in the final). Why? Because Italian viewers put more into the TV pot and thus their clubs could take out more. It's a common distribution formula which you are against because it doesn't benefit the clubs you care about most. Fine, it's natural self-interest but doesn't make for a convincing case. It works the other way in that I wouldn't expect UK clubs to be allowed to take any money from a French or Canadian TV deal.

    On the minimum player quota (I would have 4/5 in the matchday squad as a rule), if the club only pays "lip service" in your words, well they are going to struggle to compete at the top end of SL. So you are incentivised via force to change that, this will be beneficial to the long term growth of the game. It is not for the clubs selfish interest the rule exists and explaining that they would prefer to pick whoever they want (no sh*t) doesn't make it best for the game. Again, you sound as if you want all the benefits (protected spot, tv money) with absolutely none of the trade offs. As recent events have made clear, you aren't viable at the championship so if you want to be protected you have to accept some restraints. Again, if the club can't find 4 people out of the 1.6 million canadian men who could be passable, well tough. Find them. 

    Yes, I do know the NA franchise system. I also know that the NFL has repeatedly leeched money from the public sector to pay for massive new stadiums to the tune of 100's of millions of dollars or threat to leave the town. It also used LA and Vegas as threats to do this for years and has left a trail of teams (San Diego, Oakland, St Louis) dead when they moved them somewhere else, destroying a generation of fans who were treated as nothing move than a commodity. It is what makes me nervous that Ottawa brought a club then moved it, it is a horrible precedent I do not want anywhere near sport. 

    Overall, I think you are keen to demand 'fair' when it economically benefits your clubs and then want the special exemptions when it , again, benefits your clubs. If you won't even accept minimum player quotas or to pay for travel when you are literally on another continent I fear that you are making no attempt to build bridges at a time when Toronto just took the pish massively out of everyone who would support expansion. Remember, it would be fair to boot Toronto into the Championship and to (now that the potential new owner has said he'll only pay debts on condition of a Super League place) extinction. 

    So that would be it. 14 teams, 4 protected sports, minimum home grown quotas  and get your own tv deal. If you can't generate your own tv deal anyway then the economics would show that expansion into NA isn't viable. Even if you got a lesser deal to start with split between two clubs (say 2 million canadian dollars a year so roughly half a million british pounds each) that would still be a significant boost to your budgets and somewhere to grow from. 

     

     

       

    What about in the NRL, where the NZ tv contract is worth circa $20M but the Warriors only get the same amount as the other nrl teams, roughly 10-12M. 

    • Like 1

    The General 'Toronto Wolfpack' Discussion Thread

    in The General Rugby League Forum

    Posted

    I get that they only gave 13 days notice that they were withdrawing, but would it have been better if they started the season and then pulled out after a game or two?

    The NZ Warriors were nearly at breaking point, despite receiving circa $10M from the NRL and having the government bend over backwards for them. The RFL and SL are hardly in a position to wield such influence or have the financial resources to replicate. Covid isn’t easy. 

    • Like 2

    Ian Lenaghan - London Broncos

    in The General Rugby League Forum

    Posted · Edited by dealwithit

    On 25/08/2020 at 12:36, nadera78 said:

    There's a loudmouthed club employee on the other forum who stated that going part-time is one option for next season.

    It would be a disaster, as far as I'm concerned. We struggle to get players to move to London as it is, going part-time would make it next to impossible. As good as the academy is we simply don't produce enough players to fill an entire squad.

    Yeah that would be James Milner, from the failed JM Sports UK. Took money from fans without manufacturing merchandise, did the dirty on a few minnow nations/teams , his store in Hull went belly up, absolute c*** of a bloke. 

    Scored a job with BSK I think before landing a gig with Broncos. 

    He has mouthed off on forums plenty of times. I’m surprised Broncos hired him. 

    The General 'Toronto Wolfpack' Discussion Thread

    in The General Rugby League Forum

    Posted · Edited by dealwithit

    Just a side thought... should the RFL have to ensure o/s teams secure support from the governing body of France/Canada before accepting such a team? 

    If that were the case then the CRL/FFRxiii could mandate a minimum of home players before providing such endorsement. 

    Surely there should be such a process in hindsight. And how differently the wolfpack (and catalans) could have been! 

    Nrl to expand again

    in The General Rugby League Forum

    Posted

    10 hours ago, Eddie said:

    Does any know (and this is a serious question, I have no idea), is there a thriving RL scene in Melbourne with various clubs and a local league etc, or is it pretty much Storm and nothing else?

    Edit; found it, there are apparently 13 clubs with 700 registered players (500 adult and 200 junior) in the whole of Victoria. So despite Storm being there and being successful for decades the game hasn’t taken off at grass roots level. This really begs the question of what would the point of putting a team in cities like Perth and Adelaide if it won’t do a great deal to increase participation?

    But there is a thriving grassroots scene in WA. The first grade comp is a high standard and WA have had a team in SG Ball for years. 

    Nrl to expand again

    in The General Rugby League Forum

    Posted

    On 16/02/2020 at 22:51, Copa said:

    I’m referring to Redcliffe. It’s part of greater Brisbane area. Many people there already go to Lang Park and it’s no big deal.  The stadium in Redcliffe is a small suburban stadium.

     

    They got an upgraded stadium prior to the comm games 9s. 

    Jamaican Sponsorship

    in The General Rugby League Forum

    Posted

    Just now, Whippet13 said:

    Further down the page it states:

    "To support the cause, Dev Inno Ltd will not only be administering the donations but will contribute to Jamaica RL by offering $500+ in kind donation by way of a fully funded scholarship to its '3xE: Employment, Education, Entrepreneurship' © program."

    So I think it's not club sponsorship, but will be available to help improve the life of one or more player through funding some of their education or helping them into employment.

    That’s very cool

×
×
  • Create New...