The never-ending League Restructure debate (Many merged threads)

[Dave T]

Too dark to see ......

Who says the Top Twelve will be the $uperleague ? Has that been decided yet ?

to be fair they can call it what they want, itll be a twelve team comp is my point.

12 teams will be at the start line.

[yipyee]

Its interesting that the latest suggestions around Bolton Wanderers is that if you are in debt to your owner then its not a real debt.........

 

They say there debt is just what they owe the bank.... i.e.. what realistically can be recalled......

 

Therefore how much of the 68 mill is actually proper debt?

 

 

Another point is if the playoffs proper only consist of 2 games how will they raise the winners money.....I was under the presumtion that this is where that pot came from?

[The Parksider]

To me, it's been patently obvious for the last few seasons that the game cannot afford to be a full time professional operation except at two or three clubs. To regain financial health at the majority of clubs, I think it is inevitable that part time professionalism will have to return. In turn this should help to eliminate the gap between the Championship and many of the lower level SL teams.

It's just a plea for a return to 1995 my old friend. We have a SKY contract to meet, please don't forget that, and you yourself agreed in the thread we had on the SKY contract that there's no going back to 1995, without it we're going back to amatuer i.e. 1895.

[The Parksider]

http://www.loverugbyleague.com/blogpost_616-bring-in-toulouse-and-relegate-three-from-super-league.html

I was fascinated by Barraclogh's thought that there are 14 SL clubs plus Toulouse and only one place left for a championship club (Featherstone) in the top two "eights" as we stand.

I have suggested before that nobody is discussing what these proposals will really mean for championship clubs......

So is it really a "Whole game approach"

[The Parksider]

Therefore how much of the 68 mill is actually proper debt?

It's all proper debt. Some is owed to directors who won't take it back (Salford), some is owed to directors who may take the assets on default (cas), some is owed to the bank (Bradford).

Behave yourself! Where are you going with this!!!! Winding up orders all round?? RFL to appoint an in house administrator,to accelerate debt clearance?

believe me a debt free SL paying it's way is the business model, and on that model we could get growth, which debt certainly is not.

[Griff]

Its interesting that the latest suggestions around Bolton Wanderers is that if you are in debt to your owner then its not a real debt.........

 

They say there debt is just what they owe the bank.... i.e.. what realistically can be recalled......

 

Therefore how much of the 68 mill is actually proper debt?

 

 

Another point is if the playoffs proper only consist of 2 games how will they raise the winners money.....I was under the presumtion that this is where that pot came from?

 

It's all proper debt. Some is owed to directors who won't take it back (Salford), some is owed to directors who may take the assets on default (cas), some is owed to the bank (Bradford).

Behave yourself! Where are you going with this!!!! Winding up orders all round?? RFL to appoint an in house administrator,to accelerate debt clearance?

believe me a debt free SL paying it's way is the business model, and on that model we could get growth, which debt certainly is not.

 

There is actually some doubt as to what was included.  The implication was that - yes - it was all money owed out but took no account of assets.  To put it simply, if I've got creditors of £10000 and I've got £20000 at the bank, then I'm not too worried.  If I've got creditors of £10000 and nothing at the bank, I'm less well placed.  Yet the study seemed to include just the creditors in full.

 

Another issue is the treatment of season ticket receipts for the next season.  Any money received before the year end will be treated as a creditor.  But the club isn't liable to repay it - so is it fair to include it ?

 

Much more information needed.  All we got was some stark headline.

[Griff]

but what's different tgere?

 

It's a fair point, Dave, and well made.

 

However, I was hoping for an outcome which would ameliorate the position, not worsen it.

[keighley]

2. We can't run the game on the hope rich men may one day come riding over the hill. We have 37 clubs - who is putting the £Millions in?? Davey, Moran, Koucash. That is just three and two came along when there WAS P & R. You've given me nothing to back the idea annual on the field P & R attracts rich investors

1. I welcome your pragmatic approach here to finally admit clubs at the top of the championship are just as likely to be as weak in SL as the named weak SL clubs in Superleague. I also welcome you now realising Sheffield have no resources to become a true SL club.

We have made some serious progress. It's been worth keeping this thread open

Now how do we get a strong Superleague given you also admit we only have eight strong clubs?

The game is already being run on the backs of rich men who came riding over the hill. Check out which clubs don't have rich backers. Only Bradford and look at the state of them.

Five years ago, the line you love to push was still that no money men would ever invest in Championship Clubs and, at that time, it appeared that this might be correct even though stupid dreamers like myself believed it was possible to reverse this trend if an opportunity to get to the top level was opened up.

Fast forward to today and Fev, Fax and Leigh have found rich men riding in over the hill. Doncaster have just been boosted by investment from the soccer club. Widnes found a saviour whilst in the championship as did Hull KR. These arguments about being no money for upwardly ambitious Championship clubs appear to be increasingly a false premise.

I am not stating that the top level CC clubs are as weak as the bottom level SL clubs. I am saying that they just might be stronger and that this premise should be tested by allowing p and r and seeing what happens. The additional benefits to this approach are that the still frozen waters of a ring fenced , dammed SL, are stirred and re-oxygenated and new energy and life is added to the mix and the waters might spill from the pond and irrigate the wider landscape.

I have never said Sheffield have the resources to be a SL club. I have said and continue to say that Sheffield have the potential to be a SL club. The success they have had since their reformation in CC1 is nothing short of amazing and they have a proposed new rugby specific stadium planned and they are located in a big city away from the heartlands. They are one big investor away from being a SL contender. Given the CC1 status of Fev and KR and the total melt down that was Fax before all three pulled themselves off the bottom, how can anyone say that Sheffield cannot join this bracket. They may or may not find financing but they are certainly not to be written off.

As I have written elsewhere I think the game is not big enough to support full time professional clubs in any numbers. I think the future will have to be a mixture of full time and part time. This may perpetuate an elite top four but there has always been a top elite group since the dawn of the game. Entry or exit from this group will depend on success or failure on the field on the field probably determined by access to new money as and when it appears.

[keighley]

It's just a plea for a return to 1995 my old friend. We have a SKY contract to meet, please don't forget that, and you yourself agreed in the thread we had on the SKY contract that there's no going back to 1995, without it we're going back to amatuer i.e. 1895.

If the losses continue to mount and 10 out of 14 SL clubs go to the wall, there will be no need for a SL contract with Sky. I think the game had contracts with John Player, the BBC, ITV and Stones Bitter etc when all clubs but Wigan were part time and huge attendances were still the norm for the big games. I think you overestimate the importance of a full time professional league to Sky. If there is s a good level of competition played before good crowds providing gripping TV, then I don't see why Sky would care whether it was full time or not.

If the game cannot sustain full time professionalism and he evidence seems to be mounting that it cannot, there would seem to be only two solutions. 1, Give up the fight and let the game die at the top level OR 2. Reduce expenditures until the game operates at a sustainable level and that means reducing the most massive expenses and that is wages and moving on to the future on that basis.

I am not saying my hopoe is for part time RL to return. I am saying that all businesses must make ends meet eventually or they will not survive and RL is no different.

[GIANTSTRIDES]

If the losses continue to mount and 10 out of 14 SL clubs go to the wall, there will be no need for a SL contract with Sky. I think the game had contracts with John Player, the BBC, ITV and Stones Bitter etc when all clubs but Wigan were part time and huge attendances were still the norm for the big games. I think you overestimate the importance of a full time professional league to Sky. If there is s a good level of competition played before good crowds providing gripping TV, then I don't see why Sky would care whether it was full time or not.

If the game cannot sustain full time professionalism and he evidence seems to be mounting that it cannot, there would seem to be only two solutions. 1, Give up the fight and let the game die at the top level OR 2. Reduce expenditures until the game operates at a sustainable level and that means reducing the most massive expenses and that is wages and moving on to the future on that basis.

I am not saying my hopoe is for part time RL to return. I am saying that all businesses must make ends meet eventually or they will not survive and RL is no different.

 

1 Sky would very soon care if people started to cancel subscriptions, And that is a danger.

 

2 I see that as taking the game backwards, Why in an age when most sport seems to be going forwards ( some more than others ) do we even talk of going backwards,

 

Like you i would prefer SL with 10 or 12 clubs  and straightforward P&R if we have to have it, I think we would have a repetition of clubs going bust but they would know the rules, They know the cost of SL, surely It's up to them to get up to that level, not reduce the level to suit them. Sounds harsh but the game has to go forward not backwards, ( nothing to do with my club at all ) It's just the reality of the game.

[keighley]

1 Sky would very soon care if people started to cancel subscriptions, And that is a danger.

 

2 I see that as taking the game backwards, Why in an age when most sport seems to be going forwards ( some more than others ) do we even talk of going backwards,

 

Like you i would prefer SL with 10 or 12 clubs  and straightforward P&R if we have to have it, I think we would have a repetition of clubs going bust but they would know the rules, They know the cost of SL, surely It's up to them to get up to that level, not reduce the level to suit them. Sounds harsh but the game has to go forward not backwards, ( nothing to do with my club at all ) It's just the reality of the game.

1.It is a danger but if the action on the screen remained entertaining and gripping, I fail to see why it would spur cancellations

2. This is not a preferred option BUT if the alternative is mass, i.e. 75%, bankruptcies and closures, then some reduction of expenses is an absolute imperative. For those two or three who can afford it then, by all means let them stay full time but for the rest, downsizing is unavoidable if they want to survive. The last time we had this scenario, even the most successful RL team ever and the full time professionals that were Wigan eventually went belly up.

[yipyee]

As I have written elsewhere I think the game is not big enough to support full time professional clubs in any numbers. I think the future will have to be a mixture of full time and part time. This may perpetuate an elite top four but there has always been a top elite group since the dawn of the game. Entry or exit from this group will depend on success or failure on the field on the field probably determined by access to new money as and when it appears.

The same could be said for soccer or union but they manage just fine! Once the country is out of this depression top level RL will be fine!

There is of course the pyramid system for each area. .....but let's not go there......

[yipyee]

1.It is a danger but if the action on the screen remained entertaining and gripping, I fail to see why it would spur cancellations

2. This is not a preferred option BUT if the alternative is mass, i.e. 75%, bankruptcies and closures, then some reduction of expenses is an absolute imperative. For those two or three who can afford it then, by all means let them stay full time but for the rest, downsizing is unavoidable if they want to survive. The last time we had this scenario, even the most successful RL team ever and the full time professionals that were Wigan eventually went belly up.

I think you would prefer point 2....to be fair its the only logical way to bridge the gap and keep the status quo....

There are other ways but at present there is too much resentment for it to happen,

[Dave T]

It's a fair point, Dave, and well made.

However, I was hoping for an outcome which would ameliorate the position, not worsen it.

im not sure there is a great solution. I think all you can do is create an environment for the game to grow ie. attractive to sponsors, investors and fans, and hope the clubs can grow themselves.

[keighley]

The same could be said for soccer or union but they manage just fine! Once the country is out of this depression top level RL will be fine!

There is of course the pyramid system for each area. .....but let's not go there......

Oh well, that's great then.

Why are we even discussing the problems of the game then ?

We will just wait for the return of the golden age and Bradford will buy back the Burgess brothers and the SL will average 15,000 and bank millions in profits.

[yipyee]

Oh well, that's great then.

Why are we even discussing the problems of the game then ?

We will just wait for the return of the golden age and Bradford will buy back the Burgess brothers and the SL will average 15,000 and bank millions in profits.

profits isnt an issue, clubs dont set out to make millions.....

to be fair when people have jobs and feel secure and have actual pay rises they will start to support again!

When businesses feel secure they will try to expand again and largen their sponsorship budgets....ITV has claimed they are struggling for revenue because of this!!

RL isn't imune to the economy and the service/ entertainment industry has took a pounding as the high street as theres a lack of disposable income. ....I read on average familys are around 2k a year worse off.....

[Terry Mullaney]

I'm struggling to see how your plan could possibly work Martyn. Let's say London, Wakey and Widnes are the three clubs who finish bottom during the three year period. What would happen if the first two qualified for the GF play offs in year three? Would they have to play in two play off tournaments and Could one of them theoretically be crowned SL champions but be relegated to the Championship at the same time? It wouldn't be fair to just relegate Widnes as they might have made the GF play offs in the previous two seasons.

Conversely, let's say Fax, Fev and Sheffield win Grand Finals but one of them end up in a Championship relegation spot in year three but win the promotion play off final. Do they go into SL or Championship 1?

You've accused the RFL of not properly thinking through the 2 into 3 system but I'm not sure you have thought this one through very well either. It's unworkable in my opinion Martyn

[Terry Mullaney]

Just been reading the league Express and I'm struggling to see how Martyn Sadler's plan could possibly work. Let's say London, Wakey and Widnes are the three clubs who finish bottom during the three year period. What would happen if the first two qualified for the GF play offs in year three? Would they have to play in two play off tournaments and Could one of them theoretically be crowned SL champions but be relegated to the Championship at the same time? It wouldn't be fair to just relegate Widnes as they also might have made the GF play offs in the previous two seasons.

Conversely, let's say Fax, Fev and Sheffield win Grand Finals but one of them end up in a Championship relegation spot in year three but win the promotion play off final. Do they go into SL or Championship 1?

He's accused the RFL of not properly thinking through the 2 into 3 system but I'm not sure Martyn has thought this one through very well either. It's unworkable in my opinion Martyn unless I've missed something.

Edited January 13, 2014 by Terry Mullaney

[The Parksider]

Just been reading the league Express and I'm struggling to see how Martyn Sadler's plan could possibly work. Let's say London, Wakey and Widnes are the three clubs who finish bottom during the three year period. What would happen if the first two qualified for the GF play offs in year three? Would they have to play in two play off tournaments and Could one of them theoretically be crowned SL champions but be relegated to the Championship at the same time? It wouldn't be fair to just relegate Widnes as they also might have made the GF play offs in the previous two seasons.

Conversely, let's say Fax, Fev and Sheffield win Grand Finals but one of them end up in a Championship relegation spot in year three but win the promotion play off final. Do they go into SL or Championship 1?

He's accused the RFL of not properly thinking through the 2 into 3 system but I'm not sure Martyn has thought this one through very well either. It's unworkable in my opinion Martyn unless I've missed something.

 

We both made points on this earlier today.

 

Taking 2009-2011 Cats would not have got to play Crusaders because by 2011 they had collapsed. Equally by 2011 Barrow who may have played Fev were bottom of CC and heading for CC1. What an odd play off series that would have been?? 2011-2014 would probably see Sheffield, Sheffield and maybe even Sheffield again play off to see who goes up!!, and Salford, Widnes and probably London play off to see who goes down. The thing could end up with a skint sheffield replacing a skint London.

 

Martyn's plan suffers IMVHO because it fails to work out the realities of the actual events as they happen, and the state of the actual clubs likely to be involved. Good "on paper" though!

Edited January 13, 2014 by The Parksider

[The Parksider]

If the game cannot sustain full time professionalism and the evidence seems to be mounting that it cannot......

 

What evidence??

 

The clubs have confirmed they cannot sustain 14 clubs playing at top level but have confirmed the top 8 will be OK to be fully professional £6M turnover Superleague clubs. Simple as that.

 

Dave is so right IMVHO saying "I think all you can do is create an environment for the game to grow ie. attractive to sponsors, investors and fans, and hope the clubs can grow themselves".

 

17 years tell us that environment is in a traditionally strong RL area within Superleague, My point is that Toulouse, and just one club in the Wakey area and just one in the Bradhuddersfax area could grow into as big a club as any.

 

Just on a cold business view I think we can have a 10 club evenly competitive professional league, all clubs on £6M turnover and minimum 10K crowds.

[bobbruce]

I've not seen the article but could we have a scenario whereby one or even two of the SL losers(presumably the teams who finish bottom) are taking part in both the GF play offs and also the relegation play offs in year three?

In that system you could have a team winning the grand final and getting relegated in the same season.

[keighley]

What evidence??

 

The clubs have confirmed they cannot sustain 14 clubs playing at top level but have confirmed the top 8 will be OK to be fully professional £6M turnover Superleague clubs. Simple as that.

 

Dave is so right IMVHO saying "I think all you can do is create an environment for the game to grow ie. attractive to sponsors, investors and fans, and hope the clubs can grow themselves".

 

17 years tell us that environment is in a traditionally strong RL area within Superleague, My point is that Toulouse, and just one club in the Wakey area and just one in the Bradhuddersfax area could grow into as big a club as any.

 

Just on a cold business view I think we can have a 10 club evenly competitive professional league, all clubs on £6M turnover and minimum 10K crowds.

The evidence that every year a club seems to get into serious financial difficulties. This season it was three clubs. Other clubs, Hull KR, Widnes, Castleford give out cautionary information that they cannot sustain current investment levels for much longer. Did you not remember all these troubles,?

[Martyn Sadler]

Terry, if we had a system where clubs were likely to finish top and bottom of the league in successive seasons, then we wouldn't have too much to worry about and we probably wouldn't need my system or the one proposed by the RFL.

 

Unfortunately we're a long way from achieving that, as you obviously know.

 

Of course if a team won the Championship in year one, but then declined sharply in years two and three, it would be unlikely to win the promotion place at the end of the third year.

 

I would be surprised if that happened, though, because under the system I'm proposing there would be a massive incentive for clubs to maintain high standards throughout that period.

 

I think on another thread someone has made reference to Barrow's decline a few years ago, but that came after they were found to have cheated the salary cap, so inevitably a club would not be able to qualify for promotion if it was found, subsequent to winning a Grand Final, to have broken the rules.

 

What I'm proposing would bring drama, passion, big matches and a much higher profile to the Championship.

 

But it would also avoid the problem of a club becoming a yo-yo team, earning promotion, then relegation, and running into the old financial problems that have always dogged yo-yo clubs.

 

The chance for a club like your to consolidate with three years in Super League, if it wins promotion, would be a massive factor in being able to achieve sustainable growth.

 

The trouble with the RFL's proposal is that I can only see it leading to disillusion, when the same eight clubs continue to be the ones in the end-of-year top eight, and no Championship club gets into the top 12.

 

It's also worth bearing in mind that under the RFL's proposals there will be a massive disparity in the financial handout to clubs in the second tier of 12 clubs, with some receiving probably more than five times what some of the others will be given.

 

That will lead to a very unbalanced competition.

 

Is that what you want?

[Terry Mullaney]

Terry, if we had a system where clubs were likely to finish top and bottom of the league in successive seasons, then we wouldn't have too much to worry about and we probably wouldn't need my system or the one proposed by the RFL.

Unfortunately we're a long way from achieving that, as you obviously know.

Of course if a team won the Championship in year one, but then declined sharply in years two and three, it would be unlikely to win the promotion place at the end of the third year.

I would be surprised if that happened, though, because under the system I'm proposing there would be a massive incentive for clubs to maintain high standards throughout that period.

I think on another thread someone has made reference to Barrow's decline a few years ago, but that came after they were found to have cheated the salary cap, so inevitably a club would not be able to qualify for promotion if it was found, subsequent to winning a Grand Final, to have broken the rules.

What I'm proposing would bring drama, passion, big matches and a much higher profile to the Championship.

But it would also avoid the problem of a club becoming a yo-yo team, earning promotion, then relegation, and running into the old financial problems that have always dogged yo-yo clubs.

The chance for a club like your to consolidate with three years in Super League, if it wins promotion, would be a massive factor in being able to achieve sustainable growth.

The trouble with the RFL's proposal is that I can only see it leading to disillusion, when the same eight clubs continue to be the ones in the end-of-year top eight, and no Championship club gets into the top 12.

It's also worth bearing in mind that under the RFL's proposals there will be a massive disparity in the financial handout to clubs in the second tier of 12 clubs, with some receiving probably more than five times what some of the others will be given.

That will lead to a very unbalanced competition.

Is that what you want?

But Im not particularly talking about clubs finishing top then bottom in successive years Martyn, that would be an extreme I agree, although not impossible. However, It would be perfectly possible for a SL club to finish bottom one year and then reach a play off position a year later. If that happened in the first two years of your cycle you're left with one isolated club. How could you justify relegating that club if it had been a top eight side for the previous two years? It would create an enormous amount of bad feeling and be perceived as unfair, rightly so in my opinion.

What about the Championship end of season play offs? Wouldn't there need to be two play off competitions in year three, one to determine the Champions followed by the promotion round Robin tournament? Could we ask part time players to do that? They're generally out on their feet by GF day as it is. Also, why would the two previous champions bust a gut in the year three GF play offs? Surely they'd save themselves for the promotion tournament.

If we're having promotion and relegation it has to on an annual basis so that every club knows what it has to do before the first ball is kicked. The proposed funding distribution devised by the RFL ensures a soft landing for the relegated clubs, enabling them to survive the drop financially and have as much chance as anyone else of being promoted the year after.

I'm interested to read your possible solutions to the points I've made Martyn

Edited January 14, 2014 by Terry Mullaney

[The Parksider]

The evidence that every year a club seems to get into serious financial difficulties. This season it was three clubs. Other clubs, Hull KR, Widnes, Castleford give out cautionary information that they cannot sustain current investment levels for much longer. Did you not remember all these troubles,?

 

I remember every last one of them in detail and it merely shows we cannot sustain 14 professional SL teams. The first cut to 12 is very likely, a cut to 10 could eventually come. Your cut to Nil professional clubs has no reason or logic to it, as does the idea SKY will love a semi professional game in which we will lose all our stars. Let's agree to wholly disagree.