Hull FC and Hull KR to merge...

[Father Ted]

Why would anyone think the draft will work?

Some young player who's loyalty is say with FC decides "I'm signing for FC forget the draft"

Reply "oh no your not your signing for HKR."

Player comes back the following day saying "See ya later I've signed for Leeds"

[The Parksider]

This sets the table for Hudgell selling up in a year or 2 to a new organisation who co-operate with a merger allowing Hudgell to paint himself as the last surviving rugby league hero in East Hull

 

It's been reported that fans of both clubs have started a campaign against the merger of the academies in which 1,500 Hull & HKR fans have already signed up.

 

Who is this "mystery" new organisation who will  facilitate merger despite the whole of Hull on their backs and how do you deal with the new club starting in CC1 like Toulouse have to do?

[jpmc]

"It is a case of a decline in the talent pool in Hull with less school kids playing the game. We've not got the number of talented players. The cost of running a Super League team and an academy is high, sponsors are drifting away and we have a decline in talent.

 

"That decline in talent and the costs basis means this is a logical step and it's one we believe will help both clubs to produce Super League players.

 

I can understand the reaction within the city to this news. Its worrying. As a neutral I disagree with Pearson's logic completely. His quote above and his solution proves to me he hasn't tried to solve it - more stick plaster on it.

 

This may sound stupid - but wouldn't it be better for both clubs to combine efforts and funds to grow the sport back into schools and get kids back into playing from age 4/5/6 upwards?

 

I have always considered Hull to be a hot bed of RL and I was shocked to see Pearson's statement.

 

Is he right and me wrong?

 

Or is he wrong and I am right?

 

Yeeaayyyyyyy.

[CodeAgnostic]

1. There is no scientific survey, your question does not appear to cover the option of "both". After 50 years following the game and how fans react, I'd expect Hull's success on the pitch grew crowds and that thousands of floating and new fans in both sides of the city were choosing Hull over HKR to go watch, I'd also reckon that all the best young players both sides of the city were choosing to join Hull academy, I'll take that as a given, as they were.

Out of interest did the Hull FC success happen before the rise of Hull City? Are there more kids playing soccer since the rise of Hull City?

2. They meet my definition of a big club alongside Leeds and Wigan. 

Think that any club outside of the big 3 that is unknown beyond Rugby League makes it debatable whether or not they meet the definition of a big club.

3. I don't imagine they would leave Wigan just because the senior side get pipped in finals. I don't imagine you have to win trophies to get the best locals playing for you. I imagine you have to be one of the few sides competing for those trophies. That's what Hull need to be - not a bottom four SL club which makes them as attractive to fans and quality young professionals as Widnes, Salford and Wakefield.

I would agree that clubs do not have to win trophies to get the locals playing for them but I would suspect that the local clubs would need to offer them an opportunity that they would not get at a bigger club. That opportunity, whether it's in the form of monetary gain, quicker route to the first team or something else needs to be identified by the local club and then addressed. Is there any evidence to suggest that those local kids not signing would if there was only one SL club?

Opportunities do not come with their values stamped upon them. ~Maltbie Babcock

[The Parksider]

Out of interest did the Hull FC success happen before the rise of Hull City? Are there more kids playing soccer since the rise of Hull City?

Think that any club outside of the big 3 that is unknown beyond Rugby League makes it debatable whether or not they meet the definition of a big club.

I would agree that clubs do not have to win trophies to get the locals playing for them but I would suspect that the local clubs would need to offer them an opportunity that they would not get at a bigger club. That opportunity, whether it's in the form of monetary gain, quicker route to the first team or something else needs to be identified by the local club and then addressed. Is there any evidence to suggest that those local kids not signing would if there was only one SL club?

 

I've no data on Junior soccer in Hull. Wigan did OK despite the rise of Athletic.

 

Can't agree it's debatable wether Hull.F.C. are a big Rugby League club.

 

It's not a matter of local kids not signing it's about the quality of the young players, and what little quality there is, two salary capped clubs having to share them.

 

Last data I did showed 15 Hull lads in SL first teams, 17 Leeds lads 14 saints lads and 25 Wigan lads.

 

It's also about the quality of the imports as all clubs now have to look abroad for a decent squad, scrubbing around the lower reaches of SL isn't that attractive to the imports either.

 

The question is whether if you put all the playing personnel that have signed at Hull and HKR together was there the players for one stronger side/club that would have competed at a higher level to inspire the local kids and attract the better overseas players?

 

What do you think?

[Wellsy4HullFC]

That's because you take the "here and now" view.

It makes the assertion "the fans" are the same people every year.

I've seen them come and go over many years in Leeds and as the Hunslet diehards eventually drift away or die off the younger kids take the option of following the big side north of the river.

That's where the "merger" thing falls down when it asks fans to change allegiances. A merged club is asking 21,000 diehards to follow a new club.

A Hull.F.C. that is the only ticket in town can try to use that to attract the best local players, and get more on field success and grow to the 13,000 they used to get a few years back.

After that new fans coming into the game can choose who they want to watch and if there's only one SL side it's a no-brainer. In a generation or two Hull could be the best supported club in the game on say 16,000 crowds.

Not overnight. Sorry I could not say that in a sentence.

Hull have never had 13,000 average as the "only ticket in town". They only averaged 10,500 after winning the Challenge Cup.

I can't believe we've gone back to this again.

[DoubleD]

i must admit whilst initially seeing this as a negative cost saving exercise, I do now see some benefits. You only need to look at one of the more successful academies in Leeds and watching them hardly any of them are going to make the grade to Super League. So hopefully it will raise standards in the academy system and other regions will follow. As long as we don't end up in a position where players slip through the net because they're late developers.

Not sure how the draft system will work, I'd imagine the player could still say yes/no if they didn't want to go to a certain club. The draft system does seem to work well in American Football

[bowes]

I think we need to go down to 8 academies. The only thing that would concern me is I'm not sure if London would be up to scratch for that size of academy but there's noone they could link up with

[CodeAgnostic]

I've no data on Junior soccer in Hull. Wigan did OK despite the rise of Athletic.

Yes but there is only one professional Rugby League club in Wigan and that is arguably one of the most successful.

It's not a matter of local kids not signing it's about the quality of the young players, and what little quality there is, two salary capped clubs having to share them.

"Quality kids" usually have more than one sporting career option. Matty Smith was a former soccer apprentice and there have been others in rugby league. The Hull clubs might be better to look at the Hull City youth side and sign former apprentices.

It's also about the quality of the imports as all clubs now have to look abroad for a decent squad, scrubbing around the lower reaches of SL isn't that attractive to the imports either.

While imports are a known quantity, that works both ways. They can be a lower quality.

However Tom Linenam is a good example of what's possible from junior rugby union. Given that converts are unproven in rugby league then maybe it's time that clubs worked collaboratively to recruit more converts from junior rugby union. I believe that the clubs need a cooperative process that recruits a volume of junior rugby union converts to discover the Rugby League players.

The question is whether if you put all the playing personnel that have signed at Hull and HKR together was there the players for one stronger side/club that would have competed at a higher level to inspire the local kids and attract the better overseas players?

I think the question is more complicated. What impact if any has the rise and success of Hull City had on rugby league in Hull? Have the better athletes turned away from rugby league to soccer or something else? Where has the talent pool gone and why? If the clubs playing personnell and resources were combined I would agree that there is potential for a stronger side but that negates the impact of the coaching team and the management. Resources are only important when the management have the capability to use them effectively.

[sigesige00]

Merger of 2 Super League clubs?  Seriously?  Hull is the ONLY city of Super League derby!

[The Parksider]

Hull have never had 13,000 average as the "only ticket in town".

 

Nobody said they did. You've invented that twisting the words I used.

 

Hull averaged 13,000 fans the season after getting to Old Trafford which followed the cup success.

 

That was without the two HKR games included.

 

If they did not then you do the figures.

 

A successful Hull can clearly get 13,000 crowds without HKR's input  and without HKR they'd have the ability to grow crowds further in the future because as we see with Leeds/Hunslet, Hunslets many years of failure progressively saw people coming into the game as fans south of the river less inclined to go see Hunslet and more inclined to go see Leeds north of the river..

 

Hetherington has finished Hunslet off now by setting them up as the "A" team. 

 

Had Rovers not been promoted via Hudhgell and had stayed in decline it was most likely this would have benefitted Hull. The evidence of the last eight years shows that together in SL they struggle and chase the same players and chase the same new fans coming into the game, who are less likely to come to struggling clubs

 

You may want to pour scorn on this to conceal the fact that you felt HKR & Hull had a "symbiotic" relationship and were good for each other, but clearly you were wrong. The famous sell out derby stopped selling out and I have no reason to believe that the people of Hull and Leeds  are any different. I believe that it's logical to conclude Hull could have become a Leeds if they had become that only ticket in town. 

 

I don't intend to go in circles with you on this. I invite others to comment whether they feel Hull would do better without HKR in SL, or wether the two clubs are "symbiotic" and good for each other. We won't agree I know so anyone else??

[The Parksider]

Matty Smith was a former soccer apprentice and there have been others in rugby league. The Hull clubs might be better to look at the Hull City youth side and sign former apprentices.

While imports are a known quantity, that works both ways. They can be a lower quality.

 

However Tom Linenam is a good example of what's possible from junior rugby union. Given that converts are unproven in rugby league then maybe it's time that clubs worked collaboratively to recruit more converts from junior rugby union. 

 

It seems to me you believe that there are potentially better quality RL players playing soccer and RU over here than the imports we get from NRL sides.

 

That you can point to them - Smith and Lineham - maybe shows that those who may not make it at soccer and RU do consider the RL option.

 

Not a lot, but you don't consider the logistics of scouts gong all over the country to try to get lads to go to the M62 for trials?? Is this how you would find and test them?? Put some meat on the bones here with a practical system for offering soccer and RU players a career in RL?

 

I'm not setting you up here, IIRC Hudgell would like an U23 competition, one of the reasons he wants to save on his academy, maybe that can be open to trialists??

[scotchy]

i must admit whilst initially seeing this as a negative cost saving exercise, I do now see some benefits. You only need to look at one of the more successful academies in Leeds and watching them hardly any of them are going to make the grade to Super League. So hopefully it will raise standards in the academy system and other regions will follow. As long as we don't end up in a position where players slip through the net because they're late developers.

Not sure how the draft system will work, I'd imagine the player could still say yes/no if they didn't want to go to a certain club. The draft system does seem to work well in American Football

the problem with that is that it looks from an idea that the youth development/academy system is only there to produce players for that club. The SL academy system doesn't only provide players for Leeds but many go to other SL clubs and even more go to the lower leagues. Pretty much the entire game is built on SL academies. That's the insidious negative to same drop to 8. It may not be hugely obvious and it might even produce a few better youngsters but it will produce a huge amount fewer players as a total and they aren't being replaced from elsewhere.

We need more players not fewer. Cutting the amount of academies might produce better but it will certainly produce fewer.

It seems crazy to me that the game seems to be suggesting we have 8 academies produce 12 SL sides plus 12 more u23/reserve sides. It's certainly indicative of the penny pinching managed decline that thinks 8 academy sides can support 600 squad places.

[Krytensmate]

I find it depressing people are actively suggesting that it would be good for the sport to see current clubs decline

Just who do you think will replace a declining club ?

[CodeAgnostic]

It seems to me you believe that there are potentially better quality RL players playing soccer and RU over here than the imports we get from NRL sides.

I think that a lot of former NRL coaches in Superleague like to bring in players they know.

Not a lot, but you don't consider the logistics of scouts gong all over the country to try to get lads to go to the M62 for trials?? Is this how you would find and test them?? Put some meat on the bones here with a practical system for offering soccer and RU players a career in RL?

I'm not setting you up here, IIRC Hudgell would like an U23 competition, one of the reasons he wants to save on his academy, maybe that can be open to trialists??

I did make a suggestion on the Number of Academy players thread but personally I would go a lot further.

[The Parksider]

It seems crazy to me that the game seems to be suggesting we have 8 academies produce 12 SL sides plus 12 more u23/reserve sides. It's certainly indicative of the penny pinching managed decline that thinks 8 academy sides can support 600 squad places.

 

It looks to me like in a couple of weeks we will also have eight Superleague clubs not 12.

 

Wether the likes of wakey or Widnes can afford an U23 side is an assumption.

 

Change doesn't necessarily all come at once.

 

It may be a conspiracy theory at the moment but I do smell an 8 club SL with financially/resource challenged clubs just making up the numbers.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

Nobody said they did. You've invented that twisting the words I used.

A Hull.F.C. that is the only ticket in town can try to use that to attract the best local players, and get more on field success and grow to the 13,000 they used to get a few years back.

If you're not suggesting they achieved 13,000 as a stand alone club, then why can't they achieve 13,000 with both clubs in the same league like they did at the time you're actually going back to? It seems a counterproductive point.

Hull averaged 13,000 fans the season after getting to Old Trafford which followed the cup success.

That was without the two HKR games included.

If they did not then you do the figures.

They only averaged 10,500 when they actually won something. If you think a runners up place at Old Trafford would increase crowds more than a Challenge Cup win then you're having a laugh.

A successful Hull can clearly get 13,000 crowds without HKR's input and without HKR they'd have the ability to grow crowds further in the future because as we see with Leeds/Hunslet, Hunslets many years of failure progressively saw people coming into the game as fans south of the river less inclined to go see Hunslet and more inclined to go see Leeds north of the river..

You're comparing apples with oranges

And just because you've taken the Hull KR crowds of of the average doesn't mean they have had no influence.

Hetherington has finished Hunslet off now by setting them up as the "A" team.

Had Rovers not been promoted via Hudhgell and had stayed in decline it was most likely this would have benefitted Hull. The evidence of the last eight years shows that together in SL they struggle and chase the same players and chase the same new fans coming into the game, who are less likely to come to struggling clubs

Surely if they were chasing the same new fans, there'd still be around the same amount combined as there were before?

We are chasing the same junior players, that's a given. But to blame Hull's rapid decline between 2006's GF runners up to 2008's wooden spoon runners up on that is pretty impossible. It's clear to see that there's more to it.

The evidence we actually do have of a new club achieving CC wins and GF runners up is Warrington. There's far more to it than simply winning (or in this case losing) a final.

You may want to pour scorn on this to conceal the fact that you felt HKR & Hull had a "symbiotic" relationship and were good for each other, but clearly you were wrong.

How? You've not actually provided any evidence to back up your point that Hull's crowd increase was because of on field success. How large did Warrington's crowds grow after winning the CC three times, GF runners up twice and league leaders shield once? A few hundred? Not a few thousand.

The famous sell out derby stopped selling out and I have no reason to believe that the people of Hull and Leeds are any different. I believe that it's logical to conclude Hull could have become a Leeds if they had become that only ticket in town.

Maybe the rivalry between Leeds and Hunslet wasn't quite as important to the clubs as the Hull clubs? Without Hunslet, Leeds still have a local derby (they do even without Bradford). Hull are isolated. That's why it's comparing apples with oranges.

The derby has stopped selling out because Hull's form has been abysmal for 7 years now. The apathy towards the club is at an all time high. You can't blame one season of Hull KR on taking the playing resources away to that point (they'd only take away youngsters and they're hardly coming through at either club in numbers and it wouldn't take effect on the pitch for a number of years). Poor coaching appointments (when was the last time we appointed a head coach who's last job was actually as a head coach?).

I don't intend to go in circles with you on this. I invite others to comment whether they feel Hull would do better without HKR in SL, or wether the two clubs are "symbiotic" and good for each other. We won't agree I know so anyone else??

We don't agree, you're right. But I wish you'd at least acknowledge the points I've made for a number of years rather than just ignore them.

I'm happy for you to not believe that the relationship between the two Hull clubs is not good for either, but not for the reasons you've given as they are deeply flawed on do many levels (unless you wish to counter argue the points I've made, like I have you, and actually enter into the debate rather than repeat the same rhetoric year after year).

[scotchy]

It looks to me like in a couple of weeks we will also have eight Superleague clubs not 12.

 

Wether the likes of wakey or Widnes can afford an U23 side is an assumption.

 

Change doesn't necessarily all come at once.

 

It may be a conspiracy theory at the moment but I do smell an 8 club SL with financially/resource challenged clubs just making up the numbers.

regardless, they still need players

[Old Frightful]

I await DSK's reaction to the latest development in this saga with interest:-

 

Third professional RL team in Hull?

 

I reckon his head will explode. 

[Old Frightful]

And we clearly need Jamie Peacock's opinion....

[The Parksider]

regardless, they still need players

 

It's not "regardless" at all. The problem seems to be the vast swathe of young players annually taken to the academies comprising of a handful of professional prospects and large numbers of players to make up the numbers in what was a 13 team league.

 

That decimates amateur youth Rugby league leaving nowhere to play for those who may be late starters, and once discarded at 19 most of them don't play again.

 

Cutting to eight can keep the quality, help keep the Youth Junior game going, and then the U23 allows further development. so the quality is better and the learning process longer.

 

Eight clubs of 25 players a year going through from 15-23 still delivers the number to stock the game, the game is then not carrying excess baggage at a cost.

 

You yourself speak of a "managed decline" so why burden clubs who run academies but still end up taking the left overs from the big clubs, either their better kids who didn't make it with the big club or their over the hill seniors. This is Wakefield to a "T" for Trinity. This is Leigh with a "L" for leftovers.  

 

What we saw was a superleague that was never going to be competitive top to bottom. Cut to 12 and it still isnt, cut to eight and maybe it is. Eight isn't enough so now four make the numbers up mainly comprising of rejects from the top clubs and overseas players.

 

You yourself talked of "managed decline" yet you give no regard to the bigger picture and indicate a player shortage which I can't see the logic of nor the arithmetic. Eight academy clubs with 25 players will create 200 players a year coming through plus there are the overseas quotas to add to that.

 

There is no numbers problem nor any loss of quality??

[scotchy]

What u23's? How are 8 academies going to support 8u23's 12 SL clubs and the rest of the league?

How are these 'late developers' going to get to bloom late in the u23's when they won't be in the academy system at all because there are only 8 of them.

Also where are the championships going to get their players from considering you have just taken 200 19-23year olds who would otherwise drop to down from SL and put them in an u23's comp no one watches? Also what is the benefit of this to the game? Wasn't it better for the game that hill played for Leigh then wire and amor played for Whitehaven then leeds and Walmsley played for Batley then Saints than they had spent that time playing for an u23's side? Where is the gain here?

It may have passed you by but 'managed decline ' was mentioned as a bad thing.

[DoubleD]

U23s is a daft idea, really hope they don't bring that back. The standard would be poor and teams would struggle to field teams week in week out. Plus it is costly.

Would rather loans/DR or changing academy back to U20s or even U21s.

[The Parksider]

 

1. It may have passed you by but 'managed decline ' was mentioned as a bad thing.

 

2. What u23's?

 

3. How are 8 academies going to support 8u23's 12 SL clubs and the rest of the league?

 

4. How are these 'late developers' going to get to bloom late in the u23's when they won't be in the academy system at all because there are only 8 of them. Also where are the championships going to get their players from considering you have just taken 200 19-23year olds who would otherwise drop to down from SL and put them in an u23's comp no one watches? Also what is the benefit of this to the game? Wasn't it better for the game that hill played for Leigh then wire and amor played for Whitehaven then leeds and Walmsley played for Batley then Saints than they had spent that time playing for an u23's side? Where is the gain here?

 

 

1. It may have been a bad thing as far as your concerned. If clubs or any businesses ignore decline and do not adapt to it then the decline would accelerate. What do you want to do instead? Stand still on a system that isn't working and is costly, or impose an academy system on the Championship because that's the clear alternatives to downsizing the SL academy system?

 

2. The U23's Hudgell spoke of, he wants a reserve grade as do others, and a stop to loaning players out on dual reg. 

 

3. For someone who understands the value of Superleague being the be all and end all of the game you now seem to be getting a soft spot for the small clubs. Do you think those that are making these significant changes, firstly an 8 club SL, then an aim to take academies down to that then a return to reserve grade give a damn?

 

4. I haven't taken any young players from anywhere. It's not my plan. All I'm pointing out to you is you still have this mentality that Superleague has simply been dropped to 12 clubs and that's that. There are major policy changes going on outside the glare of Solly's Public Relations spotlight and I invited you to consider this, and comment as I enjoy your posts, not accuse me of making those changes! 

[The Parksider]

What u23's? How are 8 academies going to support 8u23's 12 SL clubs and the rest of the league?

 

You have just taken 200 19-23year olds who would otherwise drop to down from SL and put them in an u23's comp no one watches? Also what is the benefit of this to the game? Where is the gain here?

It may have passed you by...........

 

 

It may have passed you by as Saint Toppy says "In fact Saints were in favour of expanding the 'reserve' grade structure along the lines of having an 'A Team' and an U23's competition. If this was in place they wouldn't have had to look overseas for McDonell or Quinlan"