New York team- $52 million funding over first 3 years

[Bob8]

32 minutes ago, Kayakman said:

 

Both of you use the word Mr.which is interesting and both have roughly the same form and development in paragraph structure...length of paragraphs is also eerily similar...

If you are not Parksider are you his twin brother?...are there two of you (or possibly a third?)?  Could this possibly develop into a Cain/Abel scenario (or Romulus/Remus for that matter)?

Scary days.

And Hey...oh ya...I love maple syrup! 

We have innocent until proven guilty.  

Even then, there are two options:
- Stottle is the id of a different person, in which case he should not be chased off.
- Stottle is the rational id of the same person, which has not yet resorted to being disingenuous.  In which case, he should not be chased off.

Either way, innocent until proven guilty.  

[DoubleD]

2 hours ago, Adelaide Tiger said:

I will reply to your highlighted text.

Where you and I disagree is what you refer to as 'progess'.  

I have no issue with a  new venture acquiring players from existing clubs i.e. If A new venture sign a couple of Cas players - what a change of scenery that would be - then it opens up opportunities for Cas academy players to get a professional contract.  Which will still balance the number of RL players playing the game.  Also IMHO this approach is better as the game cannot afford to lose academy players that have grown up playing the game but leave it through lack of opportunity.

Your view, if I making the correct assumption, is that a new venture must have a ready source if local talent.  Now we know that to develop 25-30 players even of Championship standard can take many years.  So what type of investor is going to hang around many years till a new venture is competitive.  

Your point on a new venture signing Cas academy players is a poignant one, as the English Academy standoff Callum McLelland has just been poached by Scotland yawnion. No doubt for a significant wad of money. If we stand still, this will only continue. However, if he had a counter offer on the table from a flagship Trans-Atlantic team and have the chance to see a different part of the world and live in a wonderful city, it could certainly correct the balance

[Harry Stottle]

56 minutes ago, Kayakman said:

 

Both of you use the word Mr.which is interesting and both have roughly the same form and development in paragraph structure...length of paragraphs is also eerily similar...

If you are not Parksider are you his twin brother?...are there two of you (or possibly a third?)?  Could this possibly develop into a Cain/Abel scenario (or Romulus/Remus for that matter)?

Scary days.

And Hey...oh ya...I love maple syrup! 

Pity we do not post in scribe, you could then use your forensic handwriting analytical skills to help you with your conundrum.

22 minutes ago, Bob8 said:

We have innocent until proven guilty.  

Even then, there are two options:
- Stottle is the id of a different person, in which case he should not be chased off.
- Stottle is the rational id of the same person, which has not yet resorted to being disingenuous.  In which case, he should not be chased off.

Either way, innocent until proven guilty.  

I could be Dr Henry Jekyll, then again Mr Edward Hyde, do they exist as two entities or are they both one of the same?

Alas nothing so romantic, I pronounce my innocence, it is up to others to decide are we both were a figment of their imagination like the characters  of Mr Robert Louis Stevenson, keep reading, we will need to travel to the end of this story to reveal the epilogue that is presented from the perspective within?

By the way Bob,  if needed can I secure your services as my attorney, please.

[Kayakman]

7 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Pity we do not post in scribe, you could then use your forensic handwriting analytical skills to help you with your conundrum.

 

So you both admit to using cursive writing also!....Alas the pattern becomes too pronounced!

[John Drake]

1 hour ago, Bob8 said:

We have innocent until proven guilty.  

Even then, there are two options:
- Stottle is the id of a different person, in which case he should not be chased off.
- Stottle is the rational id of the same person, which has not yet resorted to being disingenuous.  In which case, he should not be chased off.

Either way, innocent until proven guilty.  

We do check this stuff out, to prevent multiple user IDs on here ruining the forum.

Having done so, we have no reason to believe that The Parksider and Harry Stottle are the same person.

Hope that clears things up.

Back on topic...

[Bob8]

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Pity we do not post in scribe, you could then use your forensic handwriting analytical skills to help you with your conundrum.

I could be Dr Henry Jekyll, then again Mr Edward Hyde, do they exist as two entities or are they both one of the same?

Alas nothing so romantic, I pronounce my innocence, it is up to others to decide are we both were a figment of their imagination like the characters  of Mr Robert Louis Stevenson, keep reading, we will need to travel to the end of this story to reveal the epilogue that is presented from the perspective within?

By the way Bob,  if needed can I secure your services as my attorney, please.

It would be an honour!

I go by the name of Bob7 in real life, so no-one knows it is me.

[Harry Stottle]

38 minutes ago, John Drake said:

We do check this stuff out, to prevent multiple user IDs on here ruining the forum.

Having done so, we have no reason to believe that The Parksider and Harry Stottle are the same person.

Hope that clears things up.

Back on topic...

Aw John, that was getting interesting.

[TheReaper]

On the topic of the source(s) of players and makeup of the league.

As an example, (and these are ballpark numbers) the NHL:

50% Canadian players, 25% American, 25% Other, mostly European.

7/31 or 22.5% Canadian teams, 24/31 or 77.5% American teams.

 

Would there be anything wrong with a league that is say:

65% English players, 25% Aus/NZ, 10% North American, with that last number growing over time?

And 50% English 50% N.Am. teams?

 

Overall I think the concerns about both player numbers, and their origins, are pretty minor. More professional teams can only mean more opportunities for players. Some argue something along the lines of "there aren't enough quality players for a larger top flight". To that I would say that no, some of the players being brought up won't be at the same level as those who are already there, but they never will be until they are able to train to get to that level. And as the level of these top teams increases they will have more resources to put into developing players to a higher standard.

Also, you're still watching the best. Only now watching the top 350 players instead of the top 300 (NRL players aside).

[ojx]

47 minutes ago, TheReaper said:

65% English players, 25% Aus/NZ, 10% North American, with that last number growing over time?

I like that idea. A very gradual implementation of a North American players requirement. Start with requiring one more each year. Then in ten years time, the Wolfpack would need at least ten North Americans. It gives them a clear and manageable development goal for a new RL market.

[Krzzystuff]

1 hour ago, TheReaper said:

On the topic of the source(s) of players and makeup of the league.

As an example, (and these are ballpark numbers) the NHL:

50% Canadian players, 25% American, 25% Other, mostly European.

7/31 or 22.5% Canadian teams, 24/31 or 77.5% American teams.

 

Would there be anything wrong with a league that is say:

65% English players, 25% Aus/NZ, 10% North American, with that last number growing over time?

And 50% English 50% N.Am. teams?

 

Overall I think the concerns about both player numbers, and their origins, are pretty minor. More professional teams can only mean more opportunities for players. Some argue something along the lines of "there aren't enough quality players for a larger top flight". To that I would say that no, some of the players being brought up won't be at the same level as those who are already there, but they never will be until they are able to train to get to that level. And as the level of these top teams increases they will have more resources to put into developing players to a higher standard.

Also, you're still watching the best. Only now watching the top 350 players instead of the top 300 (NRL players aside).

This makes sense to us because that's what were used to but the English boys are used to local players in local teams and don't understand how we can have a team with no local Torontoninas on it or isn't 95% Canadian. Cultural differences stemming from us being a large nation size wise and small population vs. a small nation with a large population. Also a lot of these teams were playing before Canada was a nation so i feel for them that what they always grew up with is being threatened.

Modern sport calls for the best athletes on a team without concern for where they come from. I get quotas for English players but they should able to come from all over England and get supported. Realistically you can’t expect the game to stay competitive with small town venues and absolutely no money when you compete with the NRL unless you want to be development league or a retirement league. It’s like some Hockey leagues in Europe vs. the NHL....anyone know anything about hockey outside of the NHL? The best come to the NHL because that’s where the money, prestige and fame are at….NHL/NRL…exactly the same isn’t it? English game needs to evolve with the times. There will still be the local competition in the lower tiers so fans can still watch the local boys play like the OHL in Canada.

Before people say why “why should we change to benefit NA” and all that stuff but it’s the players that will push for this. They want to be paid more for what they put their bodies though. They want to play the best so they can be the best in the world and I’m sure they would like to do that in an English league. Imagine playing top tier RL and getting paid 50K a year when some kid in an EPL side makes that in a week doing 1/10 of the damage to his body in the process and is famous while most people have no idea who you are. Gota motivate the next generation to take the sport up so there is someone there to watch play.

In comes NA….

[jpmc]

people shouldn't forget,in 10yrs time or so we could be targeting union players again

[DoubleD]

2 hours ago, Bob8 said:

It would be an honour!

I go by the name of Bob7 in real life, so no-one knows it is me.

Cunning disguise Sir, no wonder I could never track you down

[Kayakman]

3 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Aw John, that was getting interesting.

We're on to .you...You don't get away that easy!

[TheMancunianCandidate]

On 27/11/2017 at 9:49 AM, Copa said:

This does not make me excited... I just get nervous and suspicious.

Surely I’m not the only one who feels that way?

http://m.nrl.com/well-funded-new-york-bid-targets-hayne/tabid/10874/newsid/116615/default.aspx

“A$52 million in funding over the initial three years of its existence.

Bid founder Ricky Wilby is a Yorkshire-based entrepreneur who has been involved in rugby league all his life. He has spent the past 12 years with the Catalans Dragons in media, sponsorship and logistics.

.....

The start-up costs will be significant costs but Wilby said the bid team's investors would "put in 10 million pounds per year over the first three years", which equates to A$52. 5 million.

"One London-based investor is a property magnate with 20 properties in and around Mayfair and Kensington. There is another investor based in New York, also in property development," Wilby said.”

 

I have no doubt that Ricky Wilby is a very capable and professional operator but I just hope he hasn’t fallen under the spell of the convicted fraudster who used to frequent the Perpignan and Canet Plage areas of South West France. 

He is well known for tricking and convincing even the smartest operators - including the owners of this forum and people who are and were in the highest positions in the British game -  into allowing them to provide advertising space that he sold on several times to several unwitting customers, often charities, in a number of sports over the years and was even featured in a BBC Radio 4 programme: see link below.

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/radio4/transcripts/20110511_ftf_advertisingspace.rtf

IF he is involved - and I have no evidence that he is - it will end in tears. Let’s see these property magnates that Wilby mentions,, if they are associates of the chap mentioned above they will be fraudsters also. And good ones. 

I sincerely hope that New York are a raging success but knowing this bloke well, he won’t be able to stop himself from trying to get involved. 

[Bondi Cannon]

From personal experience and that of several friends, 100% what the previous poster, a man who knows his onions, has said.

[Kayakman]

1 hour ago, TheMancunianCandidate said:

I have no doubt that Ricky Wilby is a very capable and professional operator but I just hope he hasn’t fallen under the spell of the convicted fraudster who used to frequent the Perpignan and Canet Plage areas of South West France. 

He is well known for tricking and convincing even the smartest operators - including the owners of this forum and people who are and were in the highest positions in the British game -  into allowing them to provide advertising space that he sold on several times to several unwitting customers, often charities, in a number of sports over the years and was even featured in a BBC Radio 4 programme: see link below.

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/radio4/transcripts/20110511_ftf_advertisingspace.rtf

IF he is involved - and I have no evidence that he is - it will end in tears. Let’s see these property magnates that Wilby mentions,, if they are associates of the chap mentioned above they will be fraudsters also. And good ones. 

I sincerely hope that New York are a raging success but knowing this bloke well, he won’t be able to stop himself from trying to get involved. 

Methinks Evil Homer has not read this thread yet...his arrival is well anticipated.

[Adelaide Tiger]

13 hours ago, Bob8 said:

I have Parksider on ignore, so I will reply to his and your post in this.  

I actually looked at my post above and despite his fibbing, I specifically mention playing structues as a weakness.  I do not accept that it is feasible of necessary to start producing a full domestic squad in a couple of seasons.  No doubt he still claims Leneghan will insist, despite this being debunked.  He is lying when he says this has not been addressed by me, he will make the same BS claims time and time again.  

As I refer to in the previous post, circumstances favour this method, as the NRL is much stronger than Super League.  Trying a get a team viable in the NRL would be a non-starter.  Fortunately, at the moment, the game and the British economy being relatively weak mean that many of the best British players will go to the NRL and new teams can employ second rate Australians to compete in SL.  This situation may not last forever and is the weakness of the model.

There are people on this board who have accurate information on the thoughts of Super League Chairmen.  It is fair to say they are varied and I certainly do not have a complete survey.

Hi Bob8.  I don't have anybody on ignore as I enjoy the cut and thrust of debate with anyone especially those who have an alternate view.  I suppose it comes from when I was younger and I would read Tory biased newspapers - I have always voted Labour, or did, when I lived in the UK - as I was more curious in wanting to understand the opposing argument/views than reinforcing beliefs from Labour biased newspapers.

Anyway, I believe that the weakness in playing structure in SL, to which you refer, is actually an advantage for the SL with new ventures.  As you rightly point out it would be extremely difficult for a new venture to be successful in the NRL. But the attraction for businessmen in financially backing a new venture in the SL is that they can attract current SL players, NRL players and even Championship level players to create a strong playing group that can be supplemented by local talent and be competitive.

Another advantage at the moment is the exchange rate of the dollar to the pound.  The average American wage according to the 2015 US Census is $56,516 which equates to just short of £42,000.  Therefore if the squad is to have up to 5 US players with the potential to play in the SL you will not be paying exhorbitant salaries to them.

[Bob8]

5 hours ago, Adelaide Tiger said:

Hi Bob8.  I don't have anybody on ignore as I enjoy the cut and thrust of debate with anyone especially those who have an alternate view.  I suppose it comes from when I was younger and I would read Tory biased newspapers - I have always voted Labour, or did, when I lived in the UK - as I was more curious in wanting to understand the opposing argument/views than reinforcing beliefs from Labour biased newspapers.

Anyway, I believe that the weakness in playing structure in SL, to which you refer, is actually an advantage for the SL with new ventures.  As you rightly point out it would be extremely difficult for a new venture to be successful in the NRL. But the attraction for businessmen in financially backing a new venture in the SL is that they can attract current SL players, NRL players and even Championship level players to create a strong playing group that can be supplemented by local talent and be competitive.

Another advantage at the moment is the exchange rate of the dollar to the pound.  The average American wage according to the 2015 US Census is $56,516 which equates to just short of £42,000.  Therefore if the squad is to have up to 5 US players with the potential to play in the SL you will not be paying exhorbitant salaries to them.

I am Labour and I read the Telegraph.  I enjoy honest debate, I do not enjoy dishonest debate, teh part I discussed was dishonest.

I absolutely agree that the relative weakness of Super League, both in playing and financial terms, is an advantage.  That was my argument, albeit I was not clear.

[The Parksider]

17 hours ago, TheReaper said:

Overall I think the concerns about both player numbers, and their origins, are pretty minor. More professional teams can only mean more opportunities for players. Some argue something along the lines of "there aren't enough quality players for a larger top flight". To that I would say that no, some of the players being brought up won't be at the same level as those who are already there, but they never will be until they are able to train to get to that level.

The growing crisis over the last several years as regards junior RL  articulated by chairmen, coaches and local league administrators appears to have passed you by then?

Not only that you assert that players can "train to get to that (Superleague) level". Does this mean you and I have a chance if we just get our heads down and train hard?

Significant views include Cas CEO Steve Gill lamenting on the big reduction in budding RL players in the Cas area, the Hull clubs joining Academies as the local junior talent reduces in another hot bed. Jamie Peacock pushing for 10 SL clubs at the last re-organisation to keep the playing standard up. SL chairmen rejecting a 13 or 14 club SL (when they wanted to ensure HKR returned this coming season) on the basis of there being no decent professionals to staff more clubs.

Don't you remember the last 14 club Superleague season when London, Bradford and Wakefield were a shambles, with Wakey even worse the year after, crowds peeling away accordingly, or read Schofield's dismissal of Widnes as a serious Superleague quality side? How poor were Leigh, how about Lenegan's rejection of Toulouse due to there being no production of SL level players, or Catalans need to ship in as many Aussies as they can even after 10 years, something several other clubs do. Finally Wilkin as the players rep spoke of a smaller SL being needed to create intensity, commerciality, & sustainability.

What about the drop in interest once NRL salary levels rose and our top stars started to go there? We need entertainers not just anyone in a rugby shirt.

The lack of players of adequate quality to entertain the fans and satisfy the TV companies and their audiences is a major problem you, or the two posters Bob8 and Adelaide Tiger above, just can't brush aside whether you ignore it as a reality, or dismiss it as irrelevant.......

Or even worse as above suddenly start to argue (after a whole season has gone) that the "weakness in playing structure is an advantage". It is not an advantage in any way. That weakness could easily lead to a drop in the number of teams in SL to 10 which they were very close to doing when they dropped from 14 to 12. SL clubs can give themselves a massive boost financially and quality wise by a drop to 10 via a return to licensing, and a withdrawal of funding to the Championship who by the way can't generate their own money  as the standard isn't high enough.

Will SL chairmen water down Superleague to allow Toronto and New York to compete? Will they stand idly by whilst their players are progressively shipped off to North America?, of course they won't. Bottom line is investors are OK as long as they invest in growth, not invest in stealing our players because they don't produce any themselves and won't do for a long time.

[RayCee]

The good thing about North American teams coming on board (while in the short term, they will need players from existing nations), they will soon be producing players. The number of athletes that cannot make the cut over there will ensure that will happen. Patience, patience.

SL wages going up with increased revenues will retain UK RL players from going elsewhere and encourage more to see RL as a career. Additionally, UK RU players who currently would have to take a pay cut to jump ship would be well compensated by trying out RL.

If RL in the UK isn't developing enough talent, that comes down to either a short sighted attitude or the requirement for more money. Where will that come from? Expanding the game.

[Bob8]

42 minutes ago, RayCee said:

The good thing about North American teams coming on board (while in the short term, they will need players from existing nations), they will soon be producing players. The number of athletes that cannot make the cut over there will ensure that will happen. Patience, patience.

SL wages going up with increased revenues will retain UK RL players from going elsewhere and encourage more to see RL as a career. Additionally, UK RU players who currently would have to take a pay cut to jump ship would be well compensated by trying out RL.

If RL in the UK isn't developing enough talent, that comes down to either a short sighted attitude or the requirement for more money. Where will that come from? Expanding the game.

Indeed.

I am on the pessimistic end personally.  Twenty-one is late to take up the game and learn the required skills, even eighteen is rather pushing it and would require the infastructure being there to take up a large number of people.

That said, it being hard does not mean it should not be done. 

[Adelaide Tiger]

2 hours ago, The Parksider said:

The growing crisis over the last several years as regards junior RL  articulated by chairmen, coaches and local league administrators appears to have passed you by then?

Not only that you assert that players can "train to get to that (Superleague) level". Does this mean you and I have a chance if we just get our heads down and train hard?

Significant views include Cas CEO Steve Gill lamenting on the big reduction in budding RL players in the Cas area, the Hull clubs joining Academies as the local junior talent reduces in another hot bed. Jamie Peacock pushing for 10 SL clubs at the last re-organisation to keep the playing standard up. SL chairmen rejecting a 13 or 14 club SL (when they wanted to ensure HKR returned this coming season) on the basis of there being no decent professionals to staff more clubs.

Don't you remember the last 14 club Superleague season when London, Bradford and Wakefield were a shambles, with Wakey even worse the year after, crowds peeling away accordingly, or read Schofield's dismissal of Widnes as a serious Superleague quality side? How poor were Leigh, how about Lenegan's rejection of Toulouse due to there being no production of SL level players, or Catalans need to ship in as many Aussies as they can even after 10 years, something several other clubs do. Finally Wilkin as the players rep spoke of a smaller SL being needed to create intensity, commerciality, & sustainability.

What about the drop in interest once NRL salary levels rose and our top stars started to go there? We need entertainers not just anyone in a rugby shirt.

The lack of players of adequate quality to entertain the fans and satisfy the TV companies and their audiences is a major problem you, or the two posters Bob8 and Adelaide Tiger above, just can't brush aside whether you ignore it as a reality, or dismiss it as irrelevant.......

Or even worse as above suddenly start to argue (after a whole season has gone) that the "weakness in playing structure is an advantage". It is not an advantage in any way. That weakness could easily lead to a drop in the number of teams in SL to 10 which they were very close to doing when they dropped from 14 to 12. SL clubs can give themselves a massive boost financially and quality wise by a drop to 10 via a return to licensing, and a withdrawal of funding to the Championship who by the way can't generate their own money  as the standard isn't high enough.

Will SL chairmen water down Superleague to allow Toronto and New York to compete? Will they stand idly by whilst their players are progressively shipped off to North America?, of course they won't. Bottom line is investors are OK as long as they invest in growth, not invest in stealing our players because they don't produce any themselves and won't do for a long time.

Well thank you for referring to me in your post.

The basis of your argument is that there are not enough quality players to go around and new ventures will further dilute the 'quality' player pool.  This is not the fault of a new venture but a fault of the game in general up to this point. 

I have yet to read anything from you that seeks to address this except to preserve the status quo. 

To stay as we are means the game will go backwards relative to other sports.  MAYBE - see I am retaining my cautious tone - a team named New York MAY begin to change the perception of the media and generate a greater level of media interest that TWP has.  In turn this MAY lead to a stronger more sustainable game. It MAY fail but I would rather the game had a go if it as deemed feasible rather than be afraid as it might upset the staus quo.  Self preservation MAY kill the game.

What I find confusing in your posts is that you will be ok with investors i.e. New ventures if they invest in growth.  And I agree that all new investors/ventures should invest in the game in their community.  But how the hell can a new venture start without players that can play at the standard required?  

Finally, I mentioned that the inherent weaknesses in the game can actually encourage investment as it is a lower entry cost for a consortium than in most other sports.  Whilst you seem to believe the inherent weakness is an excuse to pull up the drawbridge.

 

[Big Picture]

23 hours ago, TheReaper said:

And 50% European 50% American teams?

I made a slight edit there.  Toulouse and Catalans would almost certainly be involved, and there's no particular reason to exclude the Latin part of America either, especially if Catalans based their franchise in Barcelona.

[JoneslessBishop]

9 hours ago, The Parksider said:

The growing crisis over the last several years as regards junior RL  articulated by chairmen, coaches and local league administrators appears to have passed you by then?

Not only that you assert that players can "train to get to that (Superleague) level". Does this mean you and I have a chance if we just get our heads down and train hard?

Significant views include Cas CEO Steve Gill lamenting on the big reduction in budding RL players in the Cas area, the Hull clubs joining Academies as the local junior talent reduces in another hot bed. Jamie Peacock pushing for 10 SL clubs at the last re-organisation to keep the playing standard up. SL chairmen rejecting a 13 or 14 club SL (when they wanted to ensure HKR returned this coming season) on the basis of there being no decent professionals to staff more clubs.

Don't you remember the last 14 club Superleague season when London, Bradford and Wakefield were a shambles, with Wakey even worse the year after, crowds peeling away accordingly, or read Schofield's dismissal of Widnes as a serious Superleague quality side? How poor were Leigh, how about Lenegan's rejection of Toulouse due to there being no production of SL level players, or Catalans need to ship in as many Aussies as they can even after 10 years, something several other clubs do. Finally Wilkin as the players rep spoke of a smaller SL being needed to create intensity, commerciality, & sustainability.

What about the drop in interest once NRL salary levels rose and our top stars started to go there? We need entertainers not just anyone in a rugby shirt.

The lack of players of adequate quality to entertain the fans and satisfy the TV companies and their audiences is a major problem you, or the two posters Bob8 and Adelaide Tiger above, just can't brush aside whether you ignore it as a reality, or dismiss it as irrelevant.......

Or even worse as above suddenly start to argue (after a whole season has gone) that the "weakness in playing structure is an advantage". It is not an advantage in any way. That weakness could easily lead to a drop in the number of teams in SL to 10 which they were very close to doing when they dropped from 14 to 12. SL clubs can give themselves a massive boost financially and quality wise by a drop to 10 via a return to licensing, and a withdrawal of funding to the Championship who by the way can't generate their own money  as the standard isn't high enough.

Will SL chairmen water down Superleague to allow Toronto and New York to compete? Will they stand idly by whilst their players are progressively shipped off to North America?, of course they won't. Bottom line is investors are OK as long as they invest in growth, not invest in stealing our players because they don't produce any themselves and won't do for a long time.

Parky aren’t you the same person who suggested that development in countries can only be enabled by having SL clubs there. It’s one thing I agree with you on. Let’s look at the example of the Celtic Crusaders. When they were in SL they brought through the likes of Flower, Dudson and White. There are still Welsh clubs (the reformed Crusaders and the rebranded West Wales Raiders). They are not producting the same quality of players, as not exposed as they are not exposed to the same frequency or quality of coaching, or level of opponent. Are the raw materials different. I can’t tell you if players in and around those 2 league 1 clubs are worse than those 3 were 10 years ago. But they are not getting the same quality players through.

So more SL clubs, with the coaching and environments they have, can raise the quality of the players they work with. They might not initially be North Americans, but in the medium term, it shouldn’t result in a a reduction in quality. In the short term, the exposure and revenues these teams will bring will outweigh any perceived reduction in quality. And if NYC are bringing in the quality of NRL player that no English club will attract, will there even be a drop?

5-6 North American team is 8 years away apparently. Plenty of time to fill the gaps, and may well inspire the next generations of lads in Hull and Cas to pick up a rugby ball.

[TheReaper]

8 hours ago, The Parksider said:

The growing crisis over the last several years as regards junior RL  articulated by chairmen, coaches and local league administrators appears to have passed you by then?

Not only that you assert that players can "train to get to that (Superleague) level". Does this mean you and I have a chance if we just get our heads down and train hard?

Well, I'm not a the cusp of anything close to elite. More of a beer league player myself. But there are those who just need to opportunity to raise their game.

8 hours ago, The Parksider said:

Jamie Peacock pushing for 10 SL clubs at the last re-organisation to keep the playing standard up. SL chairmen rejecting a 13 or 14 club SL (when they wanted to ensure HKR returned this coming season) on the basis of there being no decent professionals to staff more clubs.

How do you define "playing standard" anyway? It's not a measurable thing. Like I said, if you have the best vs the best, then that's the standard. You can watch the best 100 players or you can watch the best 300 players. Obviously to add more you need to use players who weren't in that top 100. But if you truly want the highest standard, why don't we just have two teams play over and over? That would have a higher standard.

And without knowing any details about rejecting a bigger league, I have a suspicion that had more to do with pie-splitting.

8 hours ago, The Parksider said:

Don't you remember ....

Well, since I only follow RL since the Wolfpack came around, I don't know a thing about any of that.

Look, if there truly aren't enough players and it declining like you say, then it's only a matter of time before no-one plays the game at all because it'll be dead in the UK. OR, if there are enough fans who want to pay to watch even though no locals are playing, I guess those fans will get over caring where those players come from. Nobody in Toronto cares where the Blue Jays players come from. There aren't that many MLB level Canadians, and the ones that exist are under no expectation to play for the Canadian team. I understand there is a cultural difference. But cultural differences are growing smaller all the time as the world globalizes, and professional sport is a business first and foremost. Change with the times or fall behind. Because like it or not, if RL takes off in the USA, they are going to be signing English players all they want. As it stands they're looking to do that as part of the RFL structures as a way to join an existing model instead of starting from scratch. So at least there's some level of integration and cooperation. If you kick them out or don't let them in then maybe the game doesn't  grow here, and best of luck with your declining numbers.

BUT, if there are new exciting teams in cool big cities to bring attention to the game, new sponsors and investors bringing money into the game, don't you think that more players might be interested in playing? That they might stick with the game longer if there's a better shot at making it, since there are more paying teams? And the greater resources mean they get treated better in pay and facilities? I think player retention will make a big difference- you can't "train up" those who quit cus it looked like a dead end.

 

26 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

I made a slight edit there.  Toulouse and Catalans would almost certainly be involved, and there's no particular reason to exclude the Latin part of America either, especially if Catalans based their franchise in Barcelona.

Fair enough, no reason not to exclude if they want to join. Although if all of that were to happen we'd be approaching Super Rugby territory and it hasn't worked well for them

In the long run, if the game succeeds in the Americas, I think it'll break off into it's own league and we'll have a post-season Champions tournament between us and Europe.