Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

I wonder if Martyn could do an interview with Mark Cambel where could pose all the questions that are troubling him about the rovers finances.  Then we can all have the low down,   Seems churlish speculating on here when he has better access to the people with the facts than we do.Look forward to seeing interview in print.

 

 

I can’t wait! Last week it didn’t get delivered, but will be straight out for one of that happens again. I would like to know what “financial pressures” Martyn says will be put on clubs by the new structure. Last year he said clubs would bust a gut “overspending to avoid relegation”. The autumn clamour for players is just about over and all I can see is sensible spending and in some place s like Wakey and Bradford sensible cuts in the player budget.

 

I suggested to Ponte and Terry that Rovers did not seem to be busting their guts to get in the Superleague ASAP and seemed happy to do it through the 3x8 system. I think from the figures Martyn gives it’s clear they are financially well stretched but as has been said who isn’t outside the big boys and big bankrollers.

 

Martyn’s expose of the finances of Fev was part of Ponte’s debate with him hence he chose Fev to illustrate a point. I’m sure that post wasn’t tomorrows article in full or I may as well cancel my copy. I think the accounts at many of the clubs from HKR down to Leigh will all be pretty much the same with clubs spending to the limit. Let's see if he has the full low down?

 

All these ten clubs have struggled in Superleague apart from Featherstone who have never had the chance to either make or break. So for a couple of years now I for one have always thought they should have their chance regardless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 4.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

also im heearing season tickets are gonna be sold in 2 blocks...1 for the regular season then one for the 3x8 season...

 

Selling a three game season ticket will be a hard sell, won't it ?  If the price is more than double the entrance fee, punters are bound to start thinking they'll be out of pocket if they miss just one game.

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Key would be to have better incentives for developing and retaining self grown academy talent. I think there seems to be a start with something that limits the salary allocated against the salary cap, no matter how much the salary is.  They should go further so that you gain significant advantage against salary cap for self developed academy players, say for a period of 5 years for an individual player, etc, anyway with more thought could come up with an approach that is a major incentives.  Could even extend to players from your academy playing in first team elsewhere and the academy producing clubs get some salary cap relief,

 

I dunno too much about academies Red, It may be once the top clubs scouts have been round every year there's not a lot of top talent left for the rest of the clubs to sign to their academies and develop.

 

Hardaker was missed and Leeds paid £100K to take him away anyway. In an ideal smaller Superleague the talent would be spread evenly but how to do this is another thread....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is so galling is its perpetuated by our own media.......... we hark on about national media not giving us a fair ride.  But our own RL press are continually decisive  and undermining.  They say they care and its their duty blah blah blah.  They could do much more to SELL the sport to different groups!  More stuff on players lifestyles, stuff that appeals to the younger fan.

I would like our Media to become the next big expansion area and bee more independent.   Instead of a couple of blokes in brighouse running lifestyle business off the back of our sport. 

 

There are some very good modern RL Jurnos out their, they are been held back bye their dinosaur editors.  And that is from the horses mouth so as to speak and why many are turning to creating web based media themselves.  We are on the cusp of a media revolution in League and the old guard no it !!!

 

Some very good points about the media there.

 

We have two weekly papers, neither of which do much to further the cause of Rugby League.  I would suggest that both of them need to develop a more positive attitude towards our game.  It's very easy and very lazy to snipe and tell us all what's wrong.

 

I stopped buying League Express some time ago becuase I don't like the style and feel of the reporting and editorials.  League Weekly, while a little more positive isn't much better.

 

RLW is a better read, a magazine is perhaps more suited to the behind the scenes stuff that we RL anoraks like to lap up.  That said, there could be a big difference made to the two papers if the tone was lifted a bit.

 

Until the in house press start to big up the game, we can't really expect the nationals to give us a fair crack, IMVHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How would your finances look without the GF windfalls?  you earned them but they were never guaranteed and I have no idea of the effect, I just wonder if there would have been any?

 

Pretty similar.  Most of it goes on extra costs like players' wages.

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can’t wait! Last week it didn’t get delivered, but will be straight out for one of that happens again. I would like to know what “financial pressures” Martyn says will be put on clubs by the new structure. Last year he said clubs would bust a gut “overspending to avoid relegation”. The autumn clamour for players is just about over and all I can see is sensible spending and in some place s like Wakey and Bradford sensible cuts in the player budget.

 

I suggested to Ponte and Terry that Rovers did not seem to be busting their guts to get in the Superleague ASAP and seemed happy to do it through the 3x8 system. I think from the figures Martyn gives it’s clear they are financially well stretched but as has been said who isn’t outside the big boys and big bankrollers.

 

Martyn’s expose of the finances of Fev was part of Ponte’s debate with him hence he chose Fev to illustrate a point. I’m sure that post wasn’t tomorrows article in full or I may as well cancel my copy. I think the accounts at many of the clubs from HKR down to Leigh will all be pretty much the same with clubs spending to the limit. Let's see if he has the full low down?

 

All these ten clubs have struggled in Superleague apart from Featherstone who have never had the chance to either make or break. So for a couple of years now I for one have always thought they should have their chance regardless.

Agreed.  If you see my post on the last page, I state how fev have spent thier money and the revenues it may create in the medium to long term.   We have spent on increasing capacity, increasing matchday revenue ( new refreshment kiosks). Non match day revenue ( club house upgrade, business units in new stand)  Playing refenue (centre of excellence).  So to me our liabilities represent an example of good investment that will see medium and longterm gains in many areas.   Where as some liabilities at clubs like Wakefield represent very poor value investment in the medium and long term.

VIVA THE FEVOLUTION

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can’t wait! Last week it didn’t get delivered, but will be straight out for one of that happens again. I would like to know what “financial pressures” Martyn says will be put on clubs by the new structure. Last year he said clubs would bust a gut “overspending to avoid relegation”. The autumn clamour for players is just about over and all I can see is sensible spending and in some place s like Wakey and Bradford sensible cuts in the player budget.

 

I suggested to Ponte and Terry that Rovers did not seem to be busting their guts to get in the Superleague ASAP and seemed happy to do it through the 3x8 system. I think from the figures Martyn gives it’s clear they are financially well stretched but as has been said who isn’t outside the big boys and big bankrollers.

 

Martyn’s expose of the finances of Fev was part of Ponte’s debate with him hence he chose Fev to illustrate a point. I’m sure that post wasn’t tomorrows article in full or I may as well cancel my copy. I think the accounts at many of the clubs from HKR down to Leigh will all be pretty much the same with clubs spending to the limit. Let's see if he has the full low down?

 

All these ten clubs have struggled in Superleague apart from Featherstone who have never had the chance to either make or break. So for a couple of years now I for one have always thought they should have their chance regardless.

 

Parky, you're correct that Martyn's prediction of doom regarding overspending to stay in the 12 isn't going to happen.

 

I don't think the expose of Featherstone's finances tell us anything one way or the other.  They are nothing but a limited snapshot on an abitrary date in the company's year.  Without the context behind the numbers, they are utterly meaningless.

 

For example, I'm lucky enough to have a reasonable holding in two small companies, one has liabilities of around £300,000, the other has liabilities of around £15,000.  One of them is likely to close down this year, the other is in rude health.  Which one do you think is which?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My tuppence worth is that Franchising has failed because too many clubs were allowed to get away with underperforming. This comes down to a lack of leadership and strength at the top of the game.

Franchising was supposed to allow teams to up their game over the course of a 3 year licence period without the risks of relegation. What in fact has happened is far too many clubs have seen it as an opportunity to do the bare minimum.

The fact 2nd tier/Championship clubs have not had the same access to the sort of money Superleague clubs have means they've not been able to close the gap as much as they might. Although the gap is not as wide as it should have been because of the failures of Superleague clubs.

Looking forward I'd have preferred to have 2 leagues of 12 with 1 up 1 down but with minimum standards a la RU Premiership. That avoids the convoluted system we've now got where presumably if you can fund 13 players on the pitch pretty much anything else goes.

1 up 1 down with standards means you have to win on the pitch and look after the other bits. I'm not convinced that the 3rd group of 8 is going to add much. Are they really going to have playoffs to determine mid-table mediocrity?

I like the idea with a couple of midlands clubs we can have regionalised National Leagues with hopefully cross "conference" games as well.

It'll certainly be interesting to watch the scramble to avoid the bottom 2 this year and we might see a closing of the playing gap between SL and Championship gap over 3 years so we can hopefully see a 1 up 1 down next time round.

so you are saying licensing has failed but your last comment leans towards that the next system will faim and P&R will fail without closing the gap.....so enlighten us to what system isnt a failure and should be implemented! !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mmm maybe the accountant doing his best to limit the tax bill... whats the cash flow or more specific the FCF.

 

Tax bill ? :lol:

 

No, no.  Plenty of losses to bring forward to cover the occasional profit.

 

As has virtually every club in the league.

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well again that's an argument that looks fine on the face of it.

However why were there such bad academies? Why did clubs have to do the bare minimum, why did many SL clubs not have the same staffing and facilities the big boys had??

It was a lack of money simple as that. Licensing was a medium for clubs to succeed in, but many of the clubs did not have the money to meet the licensing requirements fully.

Much of the £Millions put in by the Fulton's, Hudgell's, O'Connors, Hughes, Richardson, Wilkinson etc merely went to try to put a competitive team on the pitch. The clubs incomes could not pay for everything licensing demanded.

I think your maybe off beam to think the clubs were just lazy?

I think money does play a role to a certain extent but at the end of the day comes down to priorities on expenditure. They could've choosen to invest in academy structures and go over and above the bare minimum to maintain a franchise. Many didn't. Those that over achieved are now filling their teams will talent and supplying the rest of the game.

Some teams saw the ability to do as little as possible in order to have as much income as possible to fund the team without even really translating that into success on the pitch.

I don't agree with Lobby BTW that you have more than 1 promoted because RL has more "big teams". We may have had teams that have achieved historically but often more than a couple of generations ago and any goodwill that could be called on much diminished to make the club great again.

I agree opportunities have to be there so that a winner of a Championship Grandfinal can go up if it wants but the game cannot afford the annual disruption a 2 up 2 down or theoretical 4 up 4 down that now seems to be the case.

030910105148.jpg

http://www.wiganstpats.org

Producing Players Since 1910

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tax bill ? :lol:

 

No, no.  Plenty of losses to bring forward to cover the occasional profit.

 

As has virtually every club in the league.

 

chuckle....  my point was really that without proper analysis it is hard to say how financially healthy a company is.  

 

I would be surprised if any sports clubs is focused on making a profit, break even over a number of years - yes, but surely not profit.   Even if we ever got to a stage that their was "buckets of money" swilling around the sport, some clubs would still be financially unhealthy. That is as any sport that has lots of money it goes out into the players, coaching staff and their agents - football being a good example and nowadays the NRL as players wages go up.

 

Nice that we will perceive the sport as healthy if we ever replicate NRL monies in the sport here but that won't mean we have good financial strength at all clubs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion, a nice way of putting what I say goes.  I reported a post to you back in July where some members were off topic slating Featherstone people.  Compared to my recent posts I have done nothing wrong but guess what mine were removed.

 

I suppose if you want a one way opinion on the state of the game then people like me can use other forums, after all that's exactly what you want us to do.

 

There is evidence all over this forum to prove what you are accusing me of to be absolute twaddle. Not least the fact that you are still an active member of it, despite having a go at me here.

 

In your head, I should be banning you for being critical of me, or at the very least deleting your critical posts, shouldn't I? But on the contrary, you've never been banned, warned or suspended at all on here, yet here you are still, claiming victimisation of some kind or other.

 

You witter on about censorship, then appear to demand it for anyone who has a view contrary to your own.

 

Honestly, if I censored stuff on here because I personally didn't agree with it, this thread would be about two pages long, not 200.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so you are saying licensing has failed but your last comment leans towards that the next system will faim and P&R will fail without closing the gap.....so enlighten us to what system isnt a failure and should be implemented! !

If we look towards the NRL with jealousy presumably it's because we can see a system properly implemented with a strong leadership and the benefits it bring. The NRL is clearly a ring fenced comp and accepted as such.

Clearly we have a different tradition in this country which means ring fencing means cutting off clubs not fortunate enough to finding themselves in the top tier.

We either do franchising properly or not at all. Properly means making sure all clubs are able to achieve the standards required and maintain them. But standards should be aspirational rather than a safety net. We've all seen what happens to the welfare system if people aspire to rely on the safety net.

I think RU actually do it quite well. Clearly a lot of clubs would like to close the door but there is sufficient merit in the system to allow clubs to rise to the top.

Bristol, Leeds, Cornish Pirates amongst others want to get to the top and no doubt there are others lower down the leagues who are bubbling up.

With minimum standards you are able to ensure any organisations is a well run club rather than just a expensively assembled team which will fall apart as quickly as assembled when arrangements off the pitch are found out or over stretched by any promotion.

Leigh now have a very nice stadium courtesy of Wigan Borough Tax payers and if they get everything else right could go well if promoted.

The test of those organisational structures would be the fact they are maintained regardless of any promotion or relegation. Minimum standards achieve this even if some clubs find it so etching to work down to as opposed doing the best they can.

Unfortunately we now seem to have got rid of this as a sport which means relying upon the action on the field to attract the fickle public rather than investing in the whole of the business.

030910105148.jpg

http://www.wiganstpats.org

Producing Players Since 1910

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Parky, you're correct that Martyn's prediction of doom regarding overspending to stay in the 12 isn't going to happen.

 

I don't think the expose of Featherstone's finances tell us anything one way or the other.  They are nothing but a limited snapshot on an abitrary date in the company's year.  Without the context behind the numbers, they are utterly meaningless.

 

For example, I'm lucky enough to have a reasonable holding in two small companies, one has liabilities of around £300,000, the other has liabilities of around £15,000.  One of them is likely to close down this year, the other is in rude health.  Which one do you think is which?

 

If you have a say in the management of these companies....neither.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is evidence all over this forum to prove what you are accusing me of to be absolute twaddle. Not least the fact that you are still an active member of it, despite having a go at me here.

 

In your head, I should be banning you for being critical of me, or at the very least deleting your critical posts, shouldn't I? But on the contrary, you've never been banned, warned or suspended at all on here, yet here you are still, claiming victimisation of some kind or other.

 

You witter on about censorship, then appear to demand it for anyone who has a view contrary to your own.

 

Honestly, if I censored stuff on here because I personally didn't agree with it, this thread would be about two pages long, not 200.

**applause**

 

I really wonder why people hang around here if they hate the oppressive moderation so much...  If I had all my posts deleted on a forum and received repeated warnings for being all nice and polite then I'd not be here for long.

 

There are some seriously bitter people out there...

"When in deadly danger, when beset by doubt; run in little circles, wave your arms and shout"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've not described the SL playoffs there. You've described the SLPO and the Qualifying playoffs.

You've also not described the actual current playoffs. To say "there is a play off system to determine the champions" is not a description (and if it is, it can equally be said to apply to the new system, because THERE IS a playoff system to determine the champions, just a different one).

Try describing the playoff system currently and in as much detail as you have for the new system. Then tell me it's less complicated.

 

No.  You said was the new system more complex than the old one.  Given that in the old one there were only two parts and that for six of the teams nothing happened once they didn't make the play offs obviously it's more complicated now.

 

But, just for you.  This is how the entire Super League season can be summed up:

 

At present, in Super League, fourteen teams play a twenty-seven round regular season.  At the end of this season eight teams qualify for the play-offs from which a champion is crowned.  The other six teams play no further matches.  The play-offs last for four weeks.  In each of the weeks two teams are eliminated (with those who finished highest in the table having a second chance, those who finished lower going home on a single defeat) until the fourth week when the surviving teams contest the grand final.

 

In the future, in Super League, twelve teams will play a twenty-three round regular season.  At the end of this season eight teams qualify for the play-offs from which a champion is crowned.  The other four teams join with the top four teams from the Championship.  The eight SL play-off teams play seven further league fixtures adding to their points they have already accumulated.  The top four sides receive the advantage of having four home games.  After these fixtures the top four contest for the title in a straightforward knock-out lasting two weeks.  The other Super League sides also play an additional seven fixtures with four of their matches being away from home.  Their points start over at this point.  At the end of this mini-league the top three teams automatically join SL for the following season whilst teams 4 and 5 in the table play a one-off game, the winner of which joins SL.

 

Like I've said, it's one of the geniuses of the new system that its response to the oft-stated belief that 8 from 14 devalues the play-offs is to move it to 8 from 12.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think money does play a role to a certain extent but at the end of the day comes down to priorities on expenditure. They could've chosen to invest in academy structures and go over and above the bare minimum to maintain a franchise. Many didn't. Those that over achieved are now filling their teams will talent and supplying the rest of the game.

 

 

For me it's a bit complicated. ideally you want to spend long term, but if you don't put a good team on the pitch it heavily affects the income - just look at the spread of SL attendances last season from 15,000 down to 2,000. Spending on "infrastructure" AND the "team" is possible only if you get the gates.

 

If you don't it's the team otherwise your on a spiral of decline and even then some could could not spend enough on the team, several clubs were below the cap or went into debt to get to it.

 

The thing is it's easy to say what the clubs should be doing but when you need £6,000,000 a year to do it you know that half a dozen of them simply cannot do it. Licensing needed clubs to get growth and they didn't, that's why I believe we need a Superleague set up that can grow.

 

For me the six poor SL clubs and the two top championship clubs will just play at a lower financial level to survive, a massive gap will open with the eight and in three years it'll be "all change"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we look towards the NRL with jealousy presumably it's because we can see a system properly implemented with a strong leadership and the benefits it bring. The NRL is clearly a ring fenced comp and accepted as such.

Clearly we have a different tradition in this country which means ring fencing means cutting off clubs not fortunate enough to finding themselves in the top tier.

We either do franchising properly or not at all. Properly means making sure all clubs are able to achieve the standards required and maintain them. But standards should be aspirational rather than a safety net. We've all seen what happens to the welfare system if people aspire to rely on the safety net.

I think RU actually do it quite well. Clearly a lot of clubs would like to close the door but there is sufficient merit in the system to allow clubs to rise to the top.

Bristol, Leeds, Cornish Pirates amongst others want to get to the top and no doubt there are others lower down the leagues who are bubbling up.

With minimum standards you are able to ensure any organisations is a well run club rather than just a expensively assembled team which will fall apart as quickly as assembled when arrangements off the pitch are found out or over stretched by any promotion.

Leigh now have a very nice stadium courtesy of Wigan Borough Tax payers and if they get everything else right could go well if promoted.

The test of those organisational structures would be the fact they are maintained regardless of any promotion or relegation. Minimum standards achieve this even if some clubs find it so etching to work down to as opposed doing the best they can.

Unfortunately we now seem to have got rid of this as a sport which means relying upon the action on the field to attract the fickle public rather than investing in the whole of the business.

 

It's worth pointing out that the RFL's own doc says that they will be lowering the standards required and being less onerous in enforcing them.

 

This is all going to end so well.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has there been any word anywhere on whether there are any plans at all for what was the Northern Rail Cup?  I know it's dead for 2014.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...