Jump to content

JAG

Coach
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    150

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by JAG

  1. JAG
    Fair enough. Don't see how a change of 3-4 teams every four years is boring compared to seeing the smallest variation of SL fixtures every other year. Or witnessing another bland season becasue of some SL club's sole ambition is to just not finish last every year. Or see Leigh Centurions yo-yo between leagues alternating with an expansion teams who after 10+ years of hard work are only afforded one cameo SL season, all while Featherstone Rovers are left being perpetual bridesmaids in The Championship. Its also way less intrusive than the restructures that seems to take place in that same time scale. Imagine 4 years of Wigan v Leigh, Toulouse v Catalan, Featherstone v Castleford. Followed by 4 years of York v Hull FC, Newcastle v Leeds, London v Toulouse. Every single result counting towards a P&R league table spread over 4 years instead 1. Freeing clubs of suffering from the anxiety that one bad season could mean relegation.
  2. JAG
    That only further emphasises my point! Why judge them in exceptional circumstances with the same P&R system as before? Toulouse as you say lost half their spine and have still gone on to win 5 games. Leigh (In full knowledge of funding deficit) got relegated after one season and are now putting 100 points passed play-off rivals. Imagine if they were both promoted with Featherstone for e.g and were judge on results over 4 seasons instead of 1? - You'd have a stronger SL and a more competitive Championship.
  3. JAG
    So after this weekend's results it's becoming safe to presume two things are likely to happen: 1. Toulouse will be relegated after one season in Super League. 2. Leigh Centurions will be promoted to Super League after one season back in The Championship. Doesn't this demonstrate the utter pointlessness of having one up one down P&R every year? It further demonstrates the bridge from SL to Championship cannot be bridged in one season and that clubs need more time to develop their teams/clubs over a longer period of time. Rugby League will not only miss out on being able to fully harvest the potential of Toulouse Olympique but have already missed out on Leigh Centurions developing a formidable squad and seeing them playing the best teams in Super League. Leigh putting 100 points passed play-off rivals York is a failure of the P&R system. Toulouse winning five games in a SL debut season only to be relegated is another failure of the system. The 4 year P&R system benefits everyone.
  4. JAG
    So at this stage of the season we have one of the most promising clubs to have ever been promoted to SL at the bottom of the league, while one of the more successful and high profile clubs have fallen into territory where relegation is a real threat. How does one up one down P/R system help either of these clubs should their worst fears be realised? The hybrid system I propose would protect both clubs short term future while not completely dis-regarding their poor performances this season. It's the best of both worlds (Franchising & P/R) it's fair to every club in SL and Championship and rewards sustainable club growth.
  5. JAG
    I love the enthusiasm but this is just pure nostalgia, it's exactly the opposite of what RL needs to survive. In the spirit of the thread I will offer some suggestions as to how to improve engagement with the Challenge Cup. European Challenge Cup - Create routes for teams on the continent to qualify for competition. All SL, Championship, League one teams enter in Round 1. Professional and semi professional teams to play with handicap of first team players against amateur opposition until quarter-final stage. E.G - St Helens v Rochdale Mayfield (Amateur). St Helens can only pick a squad containing 50% of first team players. The next round St Helens v Bradford Bulls (Semi pro) St Helens can pick a squad of 75% first team players. Against SL or full time opposition no handicap is applied or against any opposition at the quarter final stage. St Helens v Warrington (Round 3) - no handicap or St Helens v Halifax (Quarter final) - no handicap. The main issues of the Challenge Cup is that SL teams only have to win 3 games to reach a final. It's hardly creating the stuff of dreams or the sense of an epic journey to reach a Wembley final when they can play a weak championship team then only two SL teams and then they're a Challenge Cup finalist. It's a given SL teams will compete a CC final but we've devalued the competition to the point that big clubs only sense jeopardy in the semi finals and Championship Clubs are completely out of the running by round 6. There needs to be more fixtures with a genuine sense of peril and achievement for advancing into the next round.
  6. JAG
    And licensing ring fences the SL. This model can expand or contract the number of team in SL if so desired without the need for a 'back to the drawing board' restructure. It's all about creating successful, sustainable clubs with long term thinking and aspirations. Imagine a SL of 12 teams with 4,5 or maybe even 6 Championship teams with SL ambitions fighting for promotion. Right now there's an arms race between Leigh and Featherstone to create a Grand Final winning team to get promoted. What will happen to the team that doesn't get promoted? We've witnessed the temperamental nature of Derek Beaumont before and how long can Featherstone maintain being bridesmaids for? Now imagine if Leigh, Featherstone, York and Toulouse all went up in the same year and were exempt from relegation for 4 years?
  7. JAG
    You've highlighted one of the main issues of with one up one down P&R. SL clubs can be successful providing the baptism of fire that is their first season. London, Toronto, Leigh and now Toulouse are all examples of what could have been if just given a little more time. The era league system provides both security and peril for SL clubs. The fact that relegation is determined by a league standing made up of 4 years of results means every game truly matters. If you're far from the play-offs one year it's still in your clubs best interests to compete as ultimately their long term future depends on it.
  8. JAG
    If the era league model is implemented the team at the top of Championship era league during season four will know before the end of the season they're pretty much destined for SL and can make the appropriate changes. Same goes for the club rock bottom of the SL era table during season four, they will have time to restructure and players will have time to let players know where they stand. It won't be within the last weeks or week of the season like in the MPG scenario.
  9. JAG
    That's a fair comment. It might not be feasible to have all 4 teams promoted but I think giving, for arguments sake, Halifax and York SL status four years isn't going to give you any less success than Wakefield have given in 24 years of SL status or Huddersfield have given in the last 9.
  10. JAG
    I go watching Bradford (when I can) and they aren't close to getting promoted nor have been for a long time. It's not franchising becasue it's judged solely of on field performance and any club that can sustain a successful competitive club for 4 years running is a demonstrating their credentials of being a well run club. This model is giving you exactly what you're asking for. It gives P&R but only to clubs who have consistently played well or consistently played poorly. It's possible Leigh Centurions & Toulouse could swap places in super league year in year out for 4 years, while Wakefield, Castleford & Salford just tread water by not finishing bottom. Why not see 4 ambitious, well run, competitive championship clubs promoted at once and judge them over a longer period e.g 4 years?
  11. JAG
    Yes it is great, it's even better when the chance of upward mobility applies to more clubs. The pathway to getting 14 teams in SL is achieved by this model, fairly and based on sustained, consistent performances on the pitch. After 4 years: Bottom of SL era league Leeds, Salford, Wakefield, Toulouse. Top of Championship era league Featherstone, Leigh, York, Halifax. Losing Wakefield & Toulouse is considered fair but losing Leeds & Salford is a step too far. The answer; relegate 2 & promote all 4. Bingo! 14 team Super League.
  12. JAG
    Not to turn this into another League restructure thread but... 16 team super league - 15 games 8 team play-off system - 1-4 games Challenge cup (currently 1-4 games) Round 4 entry - 1-6 That's 16 games minimum and 25 games maximum. It's always been said the equivalent of an 80min game of rugby is a 30mph car crash. Why are we asking players to their bodies through that week in week out over 30x a year? Boxers and other combat sports however more dangerous than rugby they may be are not putting their fighters in as much danger as often as rugby players. Look at the Easter schedule for instance. It's the frequency that's the problem. It's player welfare not competition welfare. Imagine playing a team knowing now would be your only chance to beat them. That's way more exciting than playing the same team 3, 4 or possibly 5 times a season. And imagine how much more intriguing a season would be with more fit players to choose from because they were being properly looked after? Even the added aspect of the dropping players for certain games is intriguing. St Helens do it and are reigning SL champions for three years, why shouldn't there be an element of choosing your battles wisely? I'm not saying this is a perfect answer but something along these lines needs to be done.
  13. JAG
    So all Halifax, Bradford, Widnes, Barrow, Workington, Whitehaven, Dewsbury, London, Sheffield and Newcastle fans are mugs becasue their team can't/won't get promoted? Toronto Wolfpack fans feel like mugs becasue they got behind a team that wasn't sustainable in SL or given a chance to thrive. New fans of Toulouse are going to feel like mugs after this season for getting behind a team that wasn't given a true crack at SL. Leigh fans might feel like mugs for being the best in the League one year then get embarrassed the next, living in limbo all the time. Featherstone Rovers fans might feel like mugs if they lose their 3rd Grand Final in a row meaning the last few season still counts for nothing. Imagine the fans/investments that could have been made if London and Toulouse could have brought to the game if their stay in SL was for 4 years? Think how much SL would lose including fans if Leeds got relegated for one bad season?
  14. JAG
    That's your choice. M proposal doesn't need to change as the problems have been consistent year on year, teams can't bridge the gap between SL and Champ in one year. We can't afford to lose big clubs for one season slumps or lose potentially successful clubs too quickly and we need to engage more clubs into challenging for realistic promotion possibilities. The example of changing how many teams can come up or come down demonstrates the model's flexibility. If we could have a 14 or 16 team SL full of genuine strong contenders who'd want to see 4 of them relegated? It can be managed without a full scale restructure. This model rewards off field consistency and on-field performance, this is the pathway to a stronger, more competitive and expanded SL.
  15. JAG
    Yes Toulouse & London could be relegated after 4 guaranteed years in SL after the inevitable windfall that would produce. Leigh could spend 4 years in SL and get relegated. That would be more time spent in SL than in the last 26 years of trying. I appreciate your input, I really do. I like having this idea critiqued and tested. This beauty of the model means it can incorporate changes as and when needed without a massive restructure or overhaul. The number of teams promoted or relegated and be changes to fit the times or landscape. It might be best for 4 teams to go up/down one cycle then only 2 the next, it's adaptable.
  16. JAG
    If I took every SL supporters opinion as golden then RL has been fixed for the past 30 years, summer rugby will never work and it's definitely going to be Warrington's year this year.
  17. JAG
    If Toulouse go down will they end up like London? If Leeds go down, how big a loss would that be to Super League? If Leigh go up was their relegation necessary? The current P&R system creates a bottle neck for ambitious clubs in The Championship and an unfair advantage for those in Super League. "...I therefore think that consistency is probably more important so that clubs, fans and new viewers know where they stand for the foreseeable future and can plan accordingly..." They can do that if their club or newly supported club is guaranteed SL status for four years. They can't do that if they team they support goes bust like Toronto Wolfpack or gets relegated straight away London & probably Toulouse.
  18. JAG
    There's lots of people who don't seem to like it, but that doesn't mean it's a bad idea. There's nothing in this proposal that doesn't address some or try to address some of the most fundamental issues in RL today. Expansion, League Restructure, Promotion/Relegation, Licensing, Upward Mobility of Ambitions Clubs, World Cup Prestige, Creation of New Competitions/Trophies. Long Term Stability of Clubs.
  19. JAG
    Four years is a long enough time to prove your a serious and good enough club of getting into SL and four years is long enough to prove you can survive thrive their. Toronto Wolfpack only lasted 4 years in total, that seems to be the life span of boom and bust clubs. It's better to know which clubs are fundamentally unsustainable before we put them in super league, 4 years is a decent stretch. There has to be mobility between the Super League & The Championship. We tired licensing it didn't work, one up one down P&R doesn't work. This is a hybrid model, the best of both worlds.
  20. JAG
    Because I've yet to hear a convincing argument against it. And yes people were in favour of it someone even cited a south american football league with a having a similar approach, which was surprising. What has changed since September? What has changed to prove the current system is working? There is a very credible scenario of Super League's most successful club being relegated or one of the more hopeful and potentially successful expansion clubs we've had enter our leagues Toulouse being relegated. It's the fact that I proposed this model 7 months ago as a way to prevent this from happening made me want to re-ignite the debate.
  21. JAG
    It's not random, four years is a world cup cycle. What better way to start a new four year cycle era then directly after the heightened interest of a World Cup with brand new invigorated leagues. At some point during the fourth season of a four year cycle a club(s) will know they will be relegated, it wouldn't be after the shock of a MPG defeat and it probably wouldn't be final game of the season. This would give those clubs the time to prepare themselves for outside of SL. I think one of the reasons Leigh haven't imploded is becasue they knew there fate long before the end of the season. You could finish bottom of SL in year 4 and not get relegated for having been successful in the previous 3.
  22. JAG
    And now look at London since they came straight back down. If you had a bad first year you've got 3 more to get right. If you have one great year you've got 3 more years to back it up and solidify your promotion. If you're a play-off worthy team in any particular year you're definitely capable of gaining promotion, you wouldn't have to go on a crazy/amazing run of results and win a GF, but you still could. what's not to like
  23. JAG
    We've lost Toronto, we're on the verge of losing London. Widnes and Bradford have been in trouble in recent years. Same thing could happen to Toulouse if we're not careful. Catalan survived a MPG for one bad season, imagine if they weren't so lucky. This model helps protect clubs hard work while not resigning other clubs to an endless existence in the championship. Absolutely nothing random about it, it's performance based. St Helens didn't randomly win Super League and Leigh didn't randomly finish bottom. This model would ensure clubs like Toulouse, York, Newcastle have a fair crack at SL when their time comes which would only encourage other franchises to spring up, the only thing to keep parochial clubs happy would be a ring fenced SL.
  24. JAG
    How dos any team maintain interest when they know they can't or more than likely won't get promoted? How does Bradford, Widnes, Halifax, York maintain interest when over the years Toronto, Toulouse, Leigh and now Featherstone have been so dominant? In this system your performances are counted over 4 years and the pay-off is four years of Super League. Leigh centurions could end getting promoted and relegated twice over in the course of a four year period, how does that help anyone? Why can't the mobility between SL & The Championship be realistically applicable to more clubs? Why should SL promotion be a dog fight between 2 clubs in a GF every year (more than likely featuring the same 4 teams over 4 years) than between potentially 10 different clubs over a four year period? In one up one down P&R the Championship Grand Final will be combination between Leigh, Featherstone, a newly relegated SL team (Toulouse) and one other team lets say York over the next four years. In a four year cycle P&R the list of teams to potential to get promoted could be Leigh, Featherstone, York, Bradford, Widnes, Newcastle, Halifax, Batley, Barrow, Sheffield.
  25. JAG
    As for the number of games argument I agree and I've just started a topic on Player Welfare in the general forum that touches upon number of games being played a year, my general philosophy is less is more. The less opportunities to play an opponent the more valuable and exciting that opportunity becomes. As for the two leagues of ten, I'm the same it doesn't make sense to me at all. As for promoted teams not being competitive in SL is because we're not giving them time to become competitive. You can spend 4-5 years trying to get in super league and if you don't get it right as soon as you're there you're relegated and all that hard work is lost. A 4 year cycle gives clubs the opportunity to adapt to the rigors of SL and test themselves with against promoted clubs in a similar position. And in a 4 year cycle a SL club having one particularly bad year e.g Catalan, Hull KR in the past Leeds Rhinos this seasons aren't overly punished by getting relegated. Only over a course of 4 years could you genuinely say to a SL club that has consistently finished at the bottom or lower half of the league it's time to make way for someone else. As for the size of the SL this system would give greater indication of just how many seriously competitive RL clubs there are in SL & Champ. Leigh are a temperamental club and Toronto have come and gone we need clubs who can prove they're well run and competitive over a longer period of time rather than boom and bust clubs of the past. Featherstone are proving to be one such club but if the don't win a GF they'll stay in The Championship, seems a waste whereas you might accuse Wakefield of being a bit of a non entity in SL. But becasue there's always a weaker newly promoted club to rely on getting relegated they don't have to do much.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.