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

[sweaty craiq]

I agree with that.

So if the debt in Superleague was £68,000,000 amongst the bottom say 8 SL clubs then none of them should be operating a full time professional squad, but slashing wage bills.

Equally if the top two championship clubs cannot afford to run a full time professional squad then they should stay part time.

I'm happy the idea that only clubs who can afford to "run a full time professional squad" do so.

Where we differ is you count 20 of them and I can't get past about 8.....

 

If the average debt for the bottom 8 clubs was £68m or £8.5m per club then I expect the receivers to close the comp down, if the debt is to benefactors then it should be capitalised to shares unless they want it back in which case they will seize any assetts

The danger to the sport is that those benefactors want to claw money back, the best way to do that would be to ring fence the comp and then slash budgets - some SL that would be and imo that is what we are currently seeing

You can run a FT club on £6-700k central funding in a second tier and a £1m+ playing budget, which provides the core infrastructure to move up should you win promotion without major surgery on an already dead patient ie what we almost have now.

For sums - Cats and Toulouse own TV deal in France no Sky funding. 9 clubs in SL1 at £1.2m = £10.8m, 9 clubs in SL2 at £700k = £6.3m total funding £17.1m pa which is within what we currently have and allows 2x10's with p&r, £19m if the French clubs are funded by Sky

[Dave T]

Noticed in Koukash's latest ramblings he said that 12 of 14 clubs are in financial difficulty.

Personally I think he should shut up. Who is he to discuss other's business?

A lot of what he says hardly makes the game attractive to investors.

[bamfordsbeans]

There is a lot of talk on how many full-time professional clubs we can afford.I would like to see more full-time clubs -not less.The key is how much do we pay the players?There is a lot of talk of many young players leaving the game or going part-time when it may be better for the game if they were playing at say SL2 level.Their aim would then be for their team to get to SL1 level or to be signed by a higher profile club.

[Dave T]

There is a lot of talk on how many full-time professional clubs we can afford.I would like to see more full-time clubs -not less.The key is how much do we pay the players?There is a lot of talk of many young players leaving the game or going part-time when it may be better for the game if they were playing at say SL2 level.Their aim would then be for their team to get to SL1 level or to be signed by a higher profile club.

Yep. On one hand we are being told that we are losing players to the game due to scrapping the academy and not enough opportunities for them and then on the other we are being told that we don't have enough players to make up full time squads.

 

The lower clubs may, as you say, use younger lads on more basic salaries while they develop.

[Griff]

As the link said as a climax......

 

 

There are other sources too if you look for them..............

 

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

 

That link is talking about a split after 11 games.  It's well past sell-by date.

[The Parksider]

There is a lot of talk on how many full-time professional clubs we can afford.I would like to see more full-time clubs -not less.The key is how much do we pay the players?There is a lot of talk of many young players leaving the game or going part-time when it may be better for the game if they were playing at say SL2 level.Their aim would then be for their team to get to SL1 level or to be signed by a higher profile club.

 

You may like to consider that top young players only go to the top. Hunslet's Carl Abelett, Jordan Baldwinson, Liam Sutcliffe, Paul McShane, straight to Leeds academy. Baldwinson then played one SL game and was off to Australia. Mike Ford's son George bypassed most of this and straight to top class RU and then on to the the international set up.

 

There is then the question of the quality of players available. We are where we are and we know what we have got in terms of professional quality talent. Not enough to stock 14 clubs, maybe 12, 10 certainly? SL2 isn't a shop window for talent IMO, the SL scouts did the rounds on those lads years ago apart from the usual exceptions to the rule, I'd suggest?.

 

The cutting of academies seems to me to be working on the quality of player, those in the know are clear that lads who will never make it have been signed on in numbers just to have an academy to tick the boxes. Many of the academy ratings are poor ones, many of the academies hardly turn out any professional quality players.

Edited January 14, 2014 by The Parksider

[Dave T]

You may like to consider that top young players only go to the top. Hunslet's Carl Abelett, Jordan Baldwinson, Liam Sutcliffe, Paul McShane, straight to Leeds academy. Baldwinson then played one SL game and was off to Australia. Mike Ford's son George bypassed most of this and straight to top class RU and then on to the the international set up.

 

There is then the question of the quality of players available. We are where we are and we know what we have got in terms of professional quality talent. Not enough to stock 14 clubs, maybe 12, 10 certainly? SL2 isn't a shop window for talent IMO, the SL scouts did the rounds on those lads years ago I'd suggest?.

But isn't that exactly the point? When Leeds are releasing some of the talent that they are forced to because they voted to scrap the youth team some of these lads who are good enough can potentially continue their RL career at a slightly lower level but still on a wage that means they can be a full time RL player.

 

At the moment, there are very few opportunities in our game, it's not like Union where you can look for a club in Wales, or France, or Ireland, or Scotland, etc. If you can't get a SL club, you pretty much have nowhere to go for fulltime RL. More fulltime clubs, albeit at a lower level both on the field and financially is a positive step imho.

[The Parksider]

1. If the average debt for the bottom 8 clubs was £68m or £8.5m per club then I expect the receivers to close the comp down, if the debt is to benefactors then it should be capitalised to shares unless they want it back in which case they will seize any assetts. The danger to the sport is that those benefactors want to claw money back, the best way to do that would be to ring fence the comp and then slash budgets - some SL that would be and imo that is what we are currently seeing

 

2. You can run a FT club on £6-700k central funding in a second tier and a £1m+ playing budget, which provides the core infrastructure to move up should you win promotion without major surgery on an already dead patient ie what we almost have now. For sums - Cats and Toulouse own TV deal in France no Sky funding. 9 clubs in SL1 at £1.2m = £10.8m, 9 clubs in SL2 at £700k = £6.3m total funding £17.1m pa which is within what we currently have and allows 2x10's with p&r, £19m if the French clubs are funded by Sky

 

1. Yes I agree with you good sir, mainly on the need to run a proper business and look for real growth, not a multi-million debt to a rich man "just passing". Ring fencing a smaller SL should be enough to keep 10 clubs on an even keel. Why you would want to "slash budgets" and downgrade the whole comp is beyond me I'm afraid......

 

2. Ah I get it, you want to slash SL clubs money and give it to CC clubs. I'm all for two leagues of ten in my dreams too but I do fear that there may be no French TV deal.

 

I would also fear that the top SL clubs will just say "no" and that they will still hog the talent, that SKY will say "no" we want to see the top clubs on TV, whilst more talented kids choose another sport, RU or Australia.

 

Your idea is a great thought and well costed out in the initial phase. After that I fear that helping Leigh to compete for the same resources as Wigan, Halifax to compete with Fartown and Bradford, Fev with Wakey and Cas, Hull with HKR will just bring standards down spreading resources too thinly.

 

Where do you see any growth in this plan?  What would Sheffield, Doncaster and Batley do with £700K other than use it for survival??

 

I'll stick with funding two French clubs and eight English clubs to £1,700,000 to eradicate rich mens debts, to offer high enough salaries to keep top players, to deliver an Elite comp for SKY and to grow two big sustainable clubs in "Calder" and "Bradhuddersfax". Big clubs attract fans and stimulate Junior RL to cut them all down in size is also IMVHO damaging.

[The Parksider]

But isn't that exactly the point? When Leeds are releasing some of the talent that they are forced to because they voted to scrap the youth team some of these lads who are good enough can potentially continue their RL career at a slightly lower level but still on a wage that means they can be a full time RL player.

 

At the moment, there are very few opportunities in our game, it's not like Union where you can look for a club in Wales, or France, or Ireland, or Scotland, etc. If you can't get a SL club, you pretty much have nowhere to go for fulltime RL. More fulltime clubs, albeit at a lower level both on the field and financially is a positive step imho.

 

The best players who don't make it at SL do already filter down to the Championship. But if you then pay  such players who are not up to professional standard a professional wage, how is that any benefit to the game?? To pay a championship level player say £30,000 a year is a waste of precious resource. It's better for him if he can find a job and pick up £10K for part time.

 

There is a finite resource in quality players and salaries available. The game needs to try to stop top kids choosing Australia or Union. Therefore we need SL clubs to offer top wages and star billing.

 

To put money into championship clubs to enable them to have full time players, means that money is taken off the top clubs. It's the top clubs who attract fans to watch the game, it's the top clubs who stimulate the kids to play and the best to consider one day playing for leeds and Warrington on the TV or even England at Wembley.

 

If I count back Leeds talent production line I see one or two or three quality players produced a year and that's from one of the best academies. Leeds don't release top players and won't stop finding them by the overpopulated junior system being cut to sensible levels to create quality over quantity and stop ruining Youth Rugby IMVHO.

[Martyn Sadler]

The point of my proposal is to make the battle to avoid the wooden spoon on a year-by-year basis one that really means something.

 

So it is perfectly possible that a team could finish at the bottom of the league in the first year of a three-year cycle and improve in the subsequent two years, as Widnes did in 2013 and hopefully again in 2014. In fact you would hope that it would do that. The object is to have teams fighting to avoid that fate.

 

You also make the point that under an annual P&R system, relegated clubs are given parachute payments to give them a soft landing in the Championship.

 

But all that does is virtually guarantee yo-yo status, as a team drops into a lower league, retains full-time players, and effectively corrupts the competition, as we saw when teams like Huddersfield, Salford and Castleford were relegated from Super League but and bounced back immediately. It's a dispiriting scenario for the other clubs in the second-tier competition.

[JohnM]

quick question: does anyone yet know the what, how and when of the restructure?

[gingerjon]

quick question: does anyone yet know the what, how and when of the restructure?

 

Google.

 

And.

Edited January 14, 2014 by gingerjon

[JohnM]

quite so. 

 

but does anyone  yet know the what, how and when of the restructure?

[gingerjon]

quite so. 

 

but does anyone  yet know the what, how and when of the restructure?

 

Everything that is being discussed is in there.

[Griff]

quite so. 

 

but does anyone  yet know the what, how and when of the restructure?

 

How can they when the meeting's not till Friday ?

Edited January 14, 2014 by Griff

[keighley]

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.

Well, if you read my post you will see that I didn't say Nil professional clubs. I said those that can afford to be fully professional should continue and those that can't should go semi pro. They can go fully pro any time they can afford it.

The stars will gravitate to the fully pro clubs who can afford them. This is no different to now. The stars are at the top teams who can afford them. All the recent England team were from top level clubs either here or in Australia except Rangi Chase and he soon moved to a wannabee top level club at Salford.

So that being the case Sky are likely to be unmoved as, from their point of view, very little will have changed.

We can agree to disagree. That's fine with me. I would still like to know where the revenue to maintain a fully pro league is coming from. Most of the teams cannot afford it.

[keighley]

1. Yes I agree with you good sir, mainly on the need to run a proper business and look for real growth, not a multi-million debt to a rich man "just passing". Ring fencing a smaller SL should be enough to keep 10 clubs on an even keel. Why you would want to "slash budgets" and downgrade the whole comp is beyond me I'm afraid......

 

2. Ah I get it, you want to slash SL clubs money and give it to CC clubs. I'm all for two leagues of ten in my dreams too but I do fear that there may be no French TV deal.

 

I would also fear that the top SL clubs will just say "no" and that they will still hog the talent, that SKY will say "no" we want to see the top clubs on TV, whilst more talented kids choose another sport, RU or Australia.

 

Your idea is a great thought and well costed out in the initial phase. After that I fear that helping Leigh to compete for the same resources as Wigan, Halifax to compete with Fartown and Bradford, Fev with Wakey and Cas, Hull with HKR will just bring standards down spreading resources too thinly.

 

Where do you see any growth in this plan?  What would Sheffield, Doncaster and Batley do with £700K other than use it for survival??

 

I'll stick with funding two French clubs and eight English clubs to £1,700,000 to eradicate rich mens debts, to offer high enough salaries to keep top players, to deliver an Elite comp for SKY and to grow two big sustainable clubs in "Calder" and "Bradhuddersfax". Big clubs attract fans and stimulate Junior RL to cut them all down in size is also IMVHO damaging.

If there is to be no French TV deal, then there is no point in having Toulouse in SL. Currently they are no bigger deal than say Halifax. French teams do little to improve SL unless they bring major financing with them and major financing comes from TV.

[JohnM]

How can they when the meeting's not till Friday ?

 

 Thank you! Over 3000 posts so far but only a few days to go and all will be revealed.

[Dave T]

The best players who don't make it at SL do already filter down to the Championship. But if you then pay  such players who are not up to professional standard a professional wage, how is that any benefit to the game?? To pay a championship level player say £30,000 a year is a waste of precious resource. It's better for him if he can find a job and pick up £10K for part time.

 

There is a finite resource in quality players and salaries available. The game needs to try to stop top kids choosing Australia or Union. Therefore we need SL clubs to offer top wages and star billing.

 

To put money into championship clubs to enable them to have full time players, means that money is taken off the top clubs. It's the top clubs who attract fans to watch the game, it's the top clubs who stimulate the kids to play and the best to consider one day playing for leeds and Warrington on the TV or even England at Wembley.

 

If I count back Leeds talent production line I see one or two or three quality players produced a year and that's from one of the best academies. Leeds don't release top players and won't stop finding them by the overpopulated junior system being cut to sensible levels to create quality over quantity and stop ruining Youth Rugby IMVHO.

But clubs are moaning (Tony Smith certainly is) that younger players are being released and then either going to Union, being lost to the game, or being part-time in the Championship. None of these are great options. 

 

Surely you can see the benefits of these players being able to stay in  fulltime environment?

 

There are players that are even now making the step up from Championship to Super League (Chris Hill and Alex Walmsley are great examples).

 

Why do you think a player staying full time at Leigh on £30k is worse than them being part-time on £10k but having to work on a building site? I disagree strongly with this. Full time professionalism benefits players.

[gingerjon]

 Thank you! Over 3000 posts so far but only a few days to go and all will be revealed.

 

How sweet.

 

You think they'll reach a decision.

[Griff]

How sweet.

 

You think they'll reach a decision.

 

They must do eventually, or there'll be no competition.

[gingerjon]

They must do eventually, or there'll be no competition.

 

Eventually.

 

There are no guarantees the brinkmanship will end this week.

[Terry Mullaney]

The point of my proposal is to make the battle to avoid the wooden spoon on a year-by-year basis one that really means something.

 

So it is perfectly possible that a team could finish at the bottom of the league in the first year of a three-year cycle and improve in the subsequent two years, as Widnes did in 2013 and hopefully again in 2014. In fact you would hope that it would do that. The object is to have teams fighting to avoid that fate.

 

You also make the point that under an annual P&R system, relegated clubs are given parachute payments to give them a soft landing in the Championship.

 

But all that does is virtually guarantee yo-yo status, as a team drops into a lower league, retains full-time players, and effectively corrupts the competition, as we saw when teams like Huddersfield, Salford and Castleford were relegated from Super League but and bounced back immediately. It's a dispiriting scenario for the other clubs in the second-tier competition.

You've not answered the questions I asked though Martyn, one of which is how would you determine the Champions of the Championship in year three without the normal top eight play off. Would there then be your round robin tournament after that to decide who goes up. Can part timers be asked to do that? when would the season end? Would the previous two champions give full commitment in the third season, knowing they've got their place in the promotion play offs already secured?

It's unworkable Martyn, sorry to say.

[Martyn Sadler]

You've not answered the questions I asked though Martyn, one of which is how would you determine the Champions of the Championship in year three without the normal top eight play off. Would there then be your round robin tournament after that to decide who goes up. Can part timers be asked to do that? when would the season end? Would the previous two champions give full commitment in the third season, knowing they've got their place in the promotion play offs already secured?

It's unworkable Martyn, sorry to say.

Quite the reverse, Terry.

 

Actually there is a debate to be had about the length of the season. I do agree that it's too long, and yet your club has been playing matches it doesn't need to play since New Year's Day.

 

Of course there would be a top-8 play-off (if that's what we stick with) in year 3.

 

Given what would be at stake, I don't doubt that the players, clubs and fans would be well up for it.

 

And your other question: "Would the previous two champions give full commitment in the third season, knowing they've got their place in the promotion play offs already secured?"

 

Of course they would, because it would be strongly to their advantage to reduce the number of teams that would qualify for promtion, and to secure a home play-off.

 

I'm glad to say that it's eminently workable and much more so than the alternatives.

 

Don't be such a pessimist!

 

You could have some thrilling games to look forward to.

[sweaty craiq]

1. Yes I agree with you good sir, mainly on the need to run a proper business and look for real growth, not a multi-million debt to a rich man "just passing". Ring fencing a smaller SL should be enough to keep 10 clubs on an even keel. Why you would want to "slash budgets" and downgrade the whole comp is beyond me I'm afraid......

2. Ah I get it, you want to slash SL clubs money and give it to CC clubs. I'm all for two leagues of ten in my dreams too but I do fear that there may be no French TV deal.

I would also fear that the top SL clubs will just say "no" and that they will still hog the talent, that SKY will say "no" we want to see the top clubs on TV, whilst more talented kids choose another sport, RU or Australia.

Your idea is a great thought and well costed out in the initial phase. After that I fear that helping Leigh to compete for the same resources as Wigan, Halifax to compete with Fartown and Bradford, Fev with Wakey and Cas, Hull with HKR will just bring standards down spreading resources too thinly.

Where do you see any growth in this plan? What would Sheffield, Doncaster and Batley do with £700K other than use it for survival??

I'll stick with funding two French clubs and eight English clubs to £1,700,000 to eradicate rich mens debts, to offer high enough salaries to keep top players, to deliver an Elite comp for SKY and to grow two big sustainable clubs in "Calder" and "Bradhuddersfax". Big clubs attract fans and stimulate Junior RL to cut them all down in size is also IMVHO damaging.

I stated that ring fencing SL allows them to take the pieces of silver, slash playing and development budgets to pay off debt, I stated that is what is happening now imo and is not good for the game

We need to improve our pool of FT players eligible for eng/wales/France in the short term 20 clubs does that for what we currently have, longer term I expect those 20 to grow their own wood via the junior games promotion and would also advocate centrally run academies as the majority of clubs have shown they can't produce players, possibly wire Wigan saints Leeds and hull to stand alone with a Calder Kirklees and Lancashire run by the RFL

Increased intensity at the top will put bums on seats and viewers on subs, a relegation/promotion scrap does the same

Anyone thinking this robs revenue from the elite when you consider the opportunities it opens is very blinkered