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

[gingerjon]

The bit about the further £17.8m being paid for coaching and into club's charities during the contract is interesting.

 

Is this just for Sl clubs?

 

If it was, over 5 years that is a further £300k per SL club pa. if split evenly.

 

There's a bit in the proposal about funding for academies and/or centres of excellence.  They would get direct payments from the RFL.  Is it that?  (And I'm assuming it's ringfenced.)

[Griff]

There's a bit in the proposal about funding for academies and/or centres of excellence.  They would get direct payments from the RFL.  Is it that?  (And I'm assuming it's ringfenced.)

 

Definitely would be if it's paid into the club's charity.

[GIANTSTRIDES]

1. Warrington have a history of poor player development, but they now have a good academy and are improving, and they turn 10,000 crowds in a modern stadia. They beat Fartown on both these important points, fans and player development.

 

2. KD can do what he wants, but you tell me what would be left if he did clear off?? Don't you remember what was left at Salford when Mr. Wilkinson cleared off. The best players cleared off and many fans cleared off.

 

3. No I would not want a millionaire at Hunslet tell me what the point would be?? He would not build us a ground, he could not spend any more than the cap and would not be able to attract young players.

 

Perhaps think about how limited untold riches is when your in a game of very limited resources and financial caps?

 

4. Salford again. Nobody is financially sound simply from sugar daddies, that's where you have it wrong.

 

Financial soundness comes from a big fanbase and a great local junior scene/academy  that produces players.

 

 

I So are we using Wolves as the benchmark then, or should we be using Wigan or Leeds, I mean are Warrington good enough because they are better than the Giants, Or not good enough because they fall short of Wigan. 

 

 2 You said it would be good for Bradford if KD pulled out. I asked you how Bradfords troubles could be his fault, and you answer me by saying he can do what he wants. 

 

3  You just don't know that , A man with enough money can attract just about anything he wants, According to that MK at Salford is bad for the game,. What if Salford have a great next 10 years, with only 5.000 fans.

 

4 You claim that finacial soundness comes from a big fanbase and great local juniors, "Just like bradford " they had a bigger fan base than half the league last season , With ex players in Oz and other clubs, and they are struggling to survive.  If what you say is true we would only have maybe 2 really sound clubs.

 

I do know what your views are , And i agree about the desirabillity of big crowds and good acadamies, But what are we supposed to do suspend the game till we have 12 clubs that are in that catagory , That's not an option is it,

 

I want Bradford to get sorted and i believe they will,  To blame their troubles on Huddersfield  for any reason at all is Daft, and would be like me blaiming them for the Giants finishing bottom for year after year.

 

At some point in the future there will have to be less clubs and expansion, I'm for that, But i know that the clubs with money will survive better than the ones without, whether we like it or not. When the money stops they will go the way of Hunslet and others, Nothing new about that in League.

[keighley]

The deal protects the two relegated clubs from financial collapse giving them around £800K to play in the championship with. They may be able to keep a number of players on full time.

 

This happened when clubs like Salford, Castleford and Fartown went down under P & R. Wilkinson, Fulton and Davey backed them with money. IIRC Huddersfield went undefeated, Cas lost one and Salford lost two games so the parachute payment loads the dice for these relegated clubs if they maintain their chairman's backing as well.

 

Four SL clubs in the play off will be all the stronger and debt free thanks to this deal.

 

That leaves two current CC clubs to probably be the underdogs in the first round of "8" Fev, Leigh or Fax.

 

They will have had a £500K boost pre-season allowing them to try to strengthen their squads, but only at the last minute before the new structure starts, and that could be a problem for them as it always was for top CC clubs when we had P & R before.

 

That's my quick analysis but it looks like the middle "8" is loaded. What I will be looking for is the top CC clubs crying "foul". Bet they don't.....

 

yes it's loaded. It's a load of rubbish. Another scenario is that Sheffield again win a playoff place, actually do win a promotion spot but are then turned down on standards.

 

When this format has been in place for several seasons and no CC club has come within a smell of promotion and the public therefore completely tires of it and votes with their feet, what then.

 

If they are to have p and r, have p and r, not some loaded half assed system which will not result in any promotion and with loaded deck finances to even further discriminate against likely threats from below.

 

I cannot believe that a ten team league with one fifth from a foreign country, unchanging and unchangeable for the foreseeable future is the way forward for a sport that wants to expand and grow.

 

It's not beyond the realms of possibility, with BT still lurking out there, that this one sided mess will provoke a breakaway and split the game asunder.

[keighley]

Mark Aston weighs in on this topic.

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/all-clubs/promotion-or-bust-is-real-fear-for-rivals-aston-1-6413882

 

This is from a RL genius from his playing days to his coaching and administration days. As we several of us at least, have deduced, Aston backs up our thoughts that this 3 x 8 is a fraud and so stacked against Championship sides, that a team actually getting promotion will be as rare as a dodo egg.

 

What is the thought process from those making the decisions to introduce such a doomed format. ? Go knows I support p and r but this is going to be worse than licencing.

 

Not only does it keep the top CC clubs from promotion but it further weakens the CC by creating a permanent top four at that level and marginalsing the rest but not funding them equally. More money to the top four, what the hell is that about ? It will make reaching the 3 x 8 academic and leave the other 8 or ten playing for nothing.

 

His point on the academies is also illuminating. There is going to be a severe shortage of players soon and just reducing the number of SL clubs to divvy up the pie in bigger pieces will not solve that.

 

Just as the game should be on the crest of a wave of success after the World Cup and the Sky deal, it shoots itself in the foot.

[GIANTSTRIDES]

yes it's loaded. It's a load of rubbish. Another scenario is that Sheffield again win a playoff place, actually do win a promotion spot but are then turned down on standards.

 

When this format has been in place for several seasons and no CC club has come within a smell of promotion and the public therefore completely tires of it and votes with their feet, what then.

 

If they are to have p and r, have p and r, not some loaded half assed system which will not result in any promotion and with loaded deck finances to even further discriminate against likely threats from below.

 

I cannot believe that a ten team league with one fifth from a foreign country, unchanging and unchangeable for the foreseeable future is the way forward for a sport that wants to expand and grow.

 

It's not beyond the realms of possibility, with BT still lurking out there, that this one sided mess will provoke a breakaway and split the game asunder.

 

Trouble with that is that the public have been voting with their feet for some time now, I believe numbers are up at SL games and down at CC games.

 

Don't think we have had the whole story yet, but i expect the greedy SL chairmen to start up again soon, Doesn't seem as though much is going to change to me.

[gingerjon]

This is from a RL genius from his playing days to his coaching and administration days. As we several of us at least, have deduced, Aston backs up our thoughts that this 3 x 8 is a fraud and so stacked against Championship sides, that a team actually getting promotion will be as rare as a dodo egg.

 

What is the thought process from those making the decisions to introduce such a doomed format. ? Go knows I support p and r but this is going to be worse than licencing.

 

Not only does it keep the top CC clubs from promotion but it further weakens the CC by creating a permanent top four at that level and marginalsing the rest but not funding them equally. More money to the top four, what the hell is that about ? It will make reaching the 3 x 8 academic and leave the other 8 or ten playing for nothing.

 

His point on the academies is also illuminating. There is going to be a severe shortage of players soon and just reducing the number of SL clubs to divvy up the pie in bigger pieces will not solve that.

 

Just as the game should be on the crest of a wave of success after the World Cup and the Sky deal, it shoots itself in the foot.

 

I don't necessarily agree with everything in this but would stress - if London survive then at best for the current members of the Championship it's only 2 of them who are going to get any worthwhile funding.

[GaryO]

I don't think anyone has put the distribution figures on here.  As they relate to how the restructure will work rather than the TV deal itself (which is Sky handing over money and SL/RFL dealing with it) I think it's relevant they're spelt out here:

 

In 2015, then:

 

12 SL Clubs: £1.825m

Clubs 13/14: £788k, £787k

Cubs 15/16: £550k, £500k

Clubs 17-24: Between £250k and £150k (Club 24, I presume is the 2014 C1 Champions).

Championship 1 clubs: 75k

 

So it's pretty much as per the initial RFL proposal.

 

And there was I as a supporter of one of the CC "big four" buoyed and elated at the initial proposal of CC clubs having what seemed to be a pathway to the big league once again, and I was overjoyed at the thought of seeing my club welcome Wigan, Leeds, Saints ...... et al to our ground.

 

On reflection I was totally dim in my euphoria and I let elation cloud my usual calculated approach to "why".

 

These figures (thanks, Ginge) represent a very well calculated and orchestrated way of "keeping the Buggars where they belong" No wonder McManus, Leneghan and the other rebels have come out - post vote - to acknowledge their support of this sham.

 

I must concede and offer my congratulations to Wood and Rimmer in how they have seemingly been everyone's friend whilst in reality they have stabbed the CC clubs in the back, with false hopes.

 

On the funding alone and without a Ken Davy or a Good Doctor Koukash they will never ever be in a position to compete, ah well back to reality the dream was good while it lasted.  

[Dave T]

And there was I as a supporter of one of the CC "big four" buoyed and elated at the initial proposal of CC clubs having what seemed to be a pathway to the big league once again, and I was overjoyed at the thought of seeing my club welcome Wigan, Leeds, Saints ...... et al to our ground.

 

On reflection I was totally dim in my euphoria and I let elation cloud my usual calculated approach to "why".

 

These figures (thanks, Ginge) represent a very well calculated and orchestrated way of "keeping the Buggars where they belong" No wonder McManus, Leneghan and the other rebels have come out - post vote - to acknowledge their support of this sham.

 

I must concede and offer my congratulations to Wood and Rimmer in how they have seemingly been everyone's friend whilst in reality they have stabbed the CC clubs in the back, with false hopes.

 

On the funding alone and without a Ken Davy or a Good Doctor Koukash they will never ever be in a position to compete, ah well back to reality the dream was good while it lasted.  

If the CC clubs can't read, then it must have been very very easy for Wood and Rimmer to hoodwink them.

[gingerjon]

If the CC clubs can't read, then it must have been very very easy for Wood and Rimmer to hoodwink them.

 

Look over here, structure, don't look around the structure, look at the structure. don't look over there, look at the structure, the structure ...

[The Parksider]

I do know what your views are , And i agree about the desirabillity of big crowds and good acadamies, But what are we supposed to do suspend the game till we have 12 clubs that are in that catagory , That's not an option is it?

Of course it is an option and it is an option that has been taken today.

More TV money will mean loss making SL clubs on lower crowds can have those losses reduced or wiped out enabling them to become solvent SL clubs. Toulouse present another option.

I wouldn't worry about KD he's aligned with Lenigan and isn't going anywhere.

I'll just keep to my opinion the games needs one club per region, and needs bums on seats and kids in effective academies

[GIANTSTRIDES]

Of course it is an option and it is an option that has been taken today.

More TV money will mean loss making SL clubs on lower crowds can have those losses reduced or wiped out enabling them to become solvent SL clubs. Toulouse present another option.

I wouldn't worry about KD he's aligned with Lenigan and isn't going anywhere.

I'll just keep to my opinion the games needs one club per region, and needs bums on seats and kids in effective academies

 

I see we are at cross purposes about the bit you have picked out.

 

I'll assume you have no answer to the Bradford bit.

 

And if there is one thing I'm not worried about It's KD, If he walked tommorrow i wouldn't knock him.

[GaryO]

If the CC clubs can't read, then it must have been very very easy for Wood and Rimmer to hoodwink them.

 

Facts from day one would have been good to peruse, keeping back - if that was the case - the proposed funding was the master stroke.

 

Still, there is an increase in payments which help out with day to day running costs.

[Dave T]

Facts from day one would have been good to peruse, keeping back - if that was the case - the proposed funding was the master stroke.

Still, there is an increase in payments which help out with day to day running costs.

as per GJ's posts - this proposal has been public for a while.

[Ponterover]

Facts from day one would have been good to peruse, keeping back - if that was the case - the proposed funding was the master stroke.

 

Still, there is an increase in payments which help out with day to day running costs.

 

It's been on the RFL website since October

[GIANTSTRIDES]

There was always going to be some kind of sweentner for the SL clubs in this.

[Keith T]

London and one other will leave SL this season on a parachute payment of £780K

 

Two of probably Leigh, Fax and Fev will win £500K for coming top of the championship.

 

So in 2015 expect six well funded SL clubs and two CC clubs with funds to battle for four SL places..

 

It will be fascinating to see how it pans out, which SL club will collapse under the strain which CC club may just get a foothold.

 

IMVHO expect little change the RFL are merely making sure two CC clubs get a chance to fight for promotion. Everyone else in the CCC's stay as they are fighting for survival.

 

Unless there has been a change to the documents that was proposed I believe Martin Sadler has got the wrong figures for the two relegated teams.

 

It says in that document that the 13th SL team will receive the top Championship prize, i.e. £650k plus a one-off payment of £250k and the 14th SL team will collect the 2nd place Championship prize plus the one-off £250k, making totals of £900k and £850k respectively.

 

If that is correct then the two relegated teams will have a £350k financial advantage over the top Championship club on £550k. 

[Oxford]

Keith T

I can't help but wonder if you're looking at things from the wrong angle,

"Unless there has been a change to the documents that was proposed I believe Martin Sadler has got the wrong figures for the two relegated teams

If that is correct then the two relegated teams will have a £350k financial advantage over the top Championship club on £550k."

I don't see this necessarily as an SL bias so much as recognition of just how bad a deal being relegated is, it's a complete disaster!

Even if you're a huge champion of P and R or of Championship  Clubs and their ambitions this has to be thought about carefully if we are not to lose clubs altogether when they go down.

[Keith T]

Oxford, my first point is to show what I consider to be an error in Mr Sadler's figures as he shows £778k as the amount the 13th SL club will receive whereas the proposal document states they receive the top payment for the Championship clubs plus £250k which as I stated gives them £900k not £778k.

 

As the top Championship club's prize as gone to them they pick up the prize that should have gone to the 3rd placed team and the knock-on effect is that each of the other teams drops two places in the prize-money list.

 

Yes, protect them to some extent but why give them an advantage over the top Championship clubs?

[Martyn Sadler]

Unless there has been a change to the documents that was proposed I believe Martin Sadler has got the wrong figures for the two relegated teams.

 

It says in that document that the 13th SL team will receive the top Championship prize, i.e. £650k plus a one-off payment of £250k and the 14th SL team will collect the 2nd place Championship prize plus the one-off £250k, making totals of £900k and £850k respectively.

 

If that is correct then the two relegated teams will have a £350k financial advantage over the top Championship club on £550k. 

The figures I quoted were the ones presented to the meeting of Super League clubs last Wednesday, so they presumably superseded any figures from a previous document.

 

The Championship clubs meet on 14 February, and the figures may conceivably have changed again by then.

[Keith T]

The figures I quoted were the ones presented to the meeting of Super League clubs last Wednesday, so they presumably superseded any figures from a previous document.

 

The Championship clubs meet on 14 February, and the figures may conceivably have changed again by then.

Thanks for that Martin.   I was quoting from the sections 6.5 and 6.6 of the Policy Document dated September that was presented to the clubs in October, so as you say they must have altered that at their meeting this week.

[Oxford]

I can neither argue with your figures or Martin's nor do I want to. I simply felt that the reason for the supposed favouritism was neither sinister nor bias but could in fact be a very sensible solution to a real danger when it comes to relegation. The nub of the problem for the RFL will always be how to find an answer to everyone's demands and complaints. This latest restructure does look like a real attempt to do just that, but the problem is in trying to please everyone hardly anyone ends up either happy or satisfied!

[yipyee]

Sheffield need a lot more people through the gate before they start dreaming about $uperleague.

Parsimony can only get you so far.

I thought it had been changed to what goes on, on the pitch. .. (what youve been moaning about for sooooo long!!)

[yipyee]

Reading some comments on here I wonder how many clubs need to go to the wall before this system is classified as a failure! !

[DAZROVER1985]

Reading some comments on here I wonder how many clubs need to go to the wall before this system is classified as a failure! !

maybe go back to the old system and have Bradford going to the wall on a regular basis