Super League clubs to compete with Rugby Union

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

12 minutes ago, Dave T said:

They did it before didnt they? 

Not saying that is a reason not to do it, as long as we learn from history.

And didn't SL too? Maybe someone can remember how that went, particularly when they negotiated a new TV deal?

[Padge]

55 minutes ago, yanto said:

"someone will eventually catch on that inflated wages going into tighthead props that can play 30 minutes in the other code can be spent just as well in rugby league. Someone will wise up to it.”

Maybe he is hinting that some money men can be convinced to put money into league rather than union and then this .this and this 

" We feel we can manage the sport in a more professional manner that appeals to more people and more sponsors.... We’re no longer prepared to be accepted as a poor relation; we’re fed up of being downtrodden as a code just because we’re on the M62 compared to the M5......feeling in the sport that over the next six months with the way we’re going, we can become a real threat to rugby union in this country.”

So maybe its not the players that are the target but some of the obscene money that is thrown at union through rich sugar daddies and huge commercial partners.My thoughts are as he says the next three months will see "significant change" is there  the possibility of a top name blue chip sponsor coming on board with some big investment  ???

 

I get your point, but, to put up a fight for players you need the money, so its sort of part and parcel of the same thing.

There has been a thread recently about the game being portrayed as part of Red Halls strategy as flat caps and whippets. Meanwhile you have people like Lenagan  putting together a business club, opening a Wigan RL London office and battling against that image.

I suspect that a strategy has already been developed to first change the image, bring in better value sponsors and a player retention strategy.

 

[Celtic Rooster]

Super League clubs to compete with Union financially? Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha. Rugby Union has genuine wealth even though, in my opinion, it's an inferior game. Rugby League, although I believe it to be the best sport on the planet (Ruined by Super League), is a minority sport and always will be on this side of the Atlantic (I do believe it could make great strides across the pond). Nothing matters below Super Greed and the people running the game are so hell bent on convincing people who know nothing about the game that we are a growing sport fail to see that they are killing everything else off below their beloved competition.

[Padge]

3 minutes ago, Celtic Rooster said:

Super League clubs to compete with Union financially? Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha. Rugby Union has genuine wealth even though, in my opinion, it's an inferior game. Rugby League, although I believe it to be the best sport on the planet (Ruined by Super League), is a minority sport and always will be on this side of the Atlantic (I do believe it could make great strides across the pond). Nothing matters below Super Greed and the people running the game are so hell bent on convincing people who know nothing about the game that we are a growing sport fail to see that they are killing everything else off below their beloved competition.

 

In the immortal words of Charlie Brown, Good Grief, 

[GUBRATS]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

They did it before didnt they? 

Not saying that is a reason not to do it, as long as we learn from history.

No Dave , youre getting mixed up with the APC , Association of Premiership Clubs , which was the collective name for all the semi pro clubs outside SL 

As far as I know they still meet with the RFL as do SL clubs and then all together at RFL council meetings 

If the SL club owners decide on a closed shop licence or franchise then the lower leagues ( or possibly just the heartland clubs ) might well form thier own ' board ' to make decisions on their future , again something that should have been looked at during the 6 years of licencing , probably missed the boat now 

Again if the bridge is lifted we could end up with quite a split 

SL

Championship comprising heartland clubs only 

League 1/2 or whatever with the rest 

Be interesting to see how the RFL would deal with that 

[Blind side johnny]

16 hours ago, The Future is League said:

I always respect your views on the game so in simple terms if that's possible how would you like to see the game progress?

Through visionary leadership from all those at the helm of the game and the clubs.

First and foremost I would like to see the sport of RL promoted to the point that it is regarded as an attractive option by the sports-watching public. If demand can be generated amongst consumers then broadcasters and other media will quickly follow, just as long as we concentrate upon the actual product and less upon the trimmings.

[Tongs ya bas]

4 hours ago, roughyedspud said:

Why shouldn't it?

If Super league clubs can form a board too better decide the direction of super league then why can't there be championship board?

Resources, personnel, product, that kind of thing.

You were speaking of commercial, media, sponsorship.

Rugby league in general is already disadvantaged in terms of demography, image, geography, and finance. If he recent carry on with Leigh and Torontos an example of championship clubs handling the media, then good luck.

Mindst you I enjoy a decent pie and pea supper, no tinned mushies mind.

[Mattrhino]

1 hour ago, sweaty craiq said:

RU has a far greater player base, a number of those outside backs are made for RL. If we find 2 we will win the next WC. Woods was unable to keep the value compared with other sports, I expect some fun at the next TV deal

Except they can't find decent wingers, so they have to poach average RL ones.

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, GUBRATS said:

No Dave , youre getting mixed up with the APC , Association of Premiership Clubs , which was the collective name for all the semi pro clubs outside SL 

As far as I know they still meet with the RFL as do SL clubs and then all together at RFL council meetings 

If the SL club owners decide on a closed shop licence or franchise then the lower leagues ( or possibly just the heartland clubs ) might well form thier own ' board ' to make decisions on their future , again something that should have been looked at during the 6 years of licencing , probably missed the boat now 

Again if the bridge is lifted we could end up with quite a split 

SL

Championship comprising heartland clubs only 

League 1/2 or whatever with the rest 

Be interesting to see how the RFL would deal with that 

I didnt realise APC were still around, I can find no trace. I do recall when they were setup that they would take control of their own tv and commercial deals and talked about movibg back to winter.

Chris Hamilton was Chairman - who is chairman of this organisation now?

[Padge]

20 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I didnt realise APC were still around, I can find no trace. I do recall when they were setup that they would take control of their own tv and commercial deals and talked about movibg back to winter.

Chris Hamilton was Chairman - who is chairman of this organisation now?

Wasn't APC an informal body as opposed to SLE which is a corporate entity in its own right.

[Marauder]

Lots of talk about expansion but what about growth at grassroots to produce quality young players in quantity to accommodate the expansion.

[westside]

24 minutes ago, Marauder said:

Lots of talk about expansion but what about growth at grassroots to produce quality young players in quantity to accommodate the expansion.

Look at Melbourne Storm or the Wolfpack. Often the local grassroots people are simply too amateur to work with. In the case of North America, many of them are loyal to RU first and play RL because the competition is lesser.

[Marauder]

3 minutes ago, westside said:

Look at Melbourne Rebels or the Wolfpack. Often the local grassroots people are simply too amateur to work with. In the case of North America, many of them are loyal to RU first and play RL because the competition is lesser.

Exactly what I mean, expansion clubs will snap up the best available players causing a downwards ripple which in turn will see average amateurs being taken from clubs who can not survive having 4 or 5 players away from them, this will then create a smaller pond to catch and produce future players.

[westside]

I'm a big believer in signing professional crossovers supplemented by a proper club academy. But I see what you mean. Maybe the short-term solution is more RU juniors joining established SL academies in England, until the local talent pool builds out.

[Marauder]

6 minutes ago, westside said:

I'm a big believer in signing professional crossovers supplemented by a proper club academy. But I see what you mean. Maybe the short-term solution is more RU juniors joining established SL academies in England, until the local talent pool builds out.

IMO the academies take juniors far to early, this in turn also see's age group teams folding because the lack of numbers and I can't see why a RU Junior would go to a league club - Lower the criteria to start and coach an Amateur team and gradually increase the need to have graded coaches as the clubs move upwards in the amateur ranks, also streamline all the bull#hit paperwork required on the day to day running of an amateur team, we need to be getting administrators who have fallen out with the game back involved.

[Marauder]

6 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Im not sure Pearson means anything to do with players when he mentions competing for players to be honest. I think he means for money, sponsors, visibility, corporates, prestige etc.

I do as well, but none of the extra finance will go towards the development of the local amateur leagues.

[Marauder]

3 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Im not sure thats true, many SL clubs spend way more than demanded on their foundations and outreach.  Its not really the development of their local amateur leagues that are losing out, much more its the rest of the country.

How many SL Clubs would you actually say take their whole catchment area under their wing ?

 I'll stick my neck out and say none, now if you said how many SL clubs direct the better kids towards the better amateur club in their catchment area before taking them away to their academy,  I'll say everyone who runs an academy, this system however has seen a decline in junior clubs and especially administrators who have given up the ghost, the knock on of this is a lot of kids will miss the chance to even try the game of rugby league.

[Marauder]

7 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

A lot of clubs do a massive amount. I know for example leeds put in loads of effort to getting as many kids as possible playing, they work on talent identification to get players who may not have played but have the natural skills to play, and also spend a lot of time working on improving coaching at youth and amateur levels. Im sure many clubs do the same. 

There is a bit of a vicious circle going on but that lays with the RFL. The RFL under lewis secured a massive bump in funding from Sport England which a few years later under Wood, we got nowhere near our targets and saw the funding slashed, which saw the RFL lose loads of development officers, which saw participation collapse. 

I've been around long enough to know, what I'm trying to put across is the lack of OVERHALL development has seen our game falling behind, How many junior clubs can't fulfil fixtures once their local union and football clubs start up again (by the way both play in the cold wet wintery months) this is because we can very rarely offer a continuous season of fixtures because we are having to dodge fixtures around exams, holiday etc, and if you think Leeds aren't cherry picking your wrong, they wouldn't be to bothered if they took 3 kids from a team and the rest of the kids didn't get a game because of the lack of numbers.

Biggest mistake the RFL did was getting ride of development officers, we've probably lost well over 100,000 potential players since

[ELBOWSEYE]

41 minutes ago, Marauder said:

How many SL Clubs would you actually say take their whole catchment area under their wing ?

 I'll stick my neck out and say none, now if you said how many SL clubs direct the better kids towards the better amateur club in their catchment area before taking them away to their academy,  I'll say everyone who runs an academy, this system however has seen a decline in junior clubs and especially administrators who have given up the ghost, the knock on of this is a lot of kids will miss the chance to even try the game of rugby league.

Couldn't be more wrong, I worked in junior and schools rugby in the eighties and nineties in Warrington and the work done now by the pro club is massive compared to then. They go into all the schools and are working with all the junior sides. The only thing that happened when I coached was each school had a chance to visit the stadium and see a game, no coaching, no visits to junior sides unless you knew a player. Each club has designated matches to raise money and two players attached to the club to do coaching and other requirements. I always thought the problem was the transfer of players to open age from junior sides. 

[Dave T]

31 minutes ago, Marauder said:

I've been around long enough to know, what I'm trying to put across is the lack of OVERHALL development has seen our game falling behind, How many junior clubs can't fulfil fixtures once their local union and football clubs start up again (by the way both play in the cold wet wintery months) this is because we can very rarely offer a continuous season of fixtures because we are having to dodge fixtures around exams, holiday etc, and if you think Leeds aren't cherry picking your wrong, they wouldn't be to bothered if they took 3 kids from a team and the rest of the kids didn't get a game because of the lack of numbers.

Biggest mistake the RFL did was getting ride of development officers, we've probably lost well over 100,000 potential players since

I really cant help but think the development officer point is overstated. If they could return a 100k players surely it would be a no brainer for the RFL and Clubs to invest in this?

[Padge]

2 minutes ago, ELBOWSEYE said:

Couldn't be more wrong, I worked in junior and schools rugby in the eighties and nineties in Warrington and the work done now by the pro club is massive compared to then. They go into all the schools and are working with all the junior sides. The only thing that happened when I coached was each school had a chance to visit the stadium and see a game, no coaching, no visits to junior sides unless you knew a player. Each club has designated matches to raise money and two players attached to the club to do coaching and other requirements. I always thought the problem was the transfer of players to open age from junior sides. 

I was keeping out of this as, like you, this is not what I see on the ground. It appears some people are going to grind and grind the axe whilst ignoring the reality. 

 

[Cowardly Fan]

53 minutes ago, Marauder said:

Biggest mistake the RFL did was getting ride of development officers, we've probably lost well over 100,000 potential players since

They had a massive drop in funding from Sport England.  Where would you have cut funding from instead?

[Marauder]

11 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

No doubt Leeds are cherry picking youngsters, its kind of their job at the moment, thats how our elite development works. The point I am making is that the loss of development officers isnt really linked to SL clubs  It was never a responsibility of theirs and participation has been Sport England funded for a long time. 

If you are suggesting some closer integration between the amateur clubs and youth development pathways then thats something that could definitely be investigated.                                                                                

"Never a responsibility" I suppose it will look good on the tombstone but IMO it's everyone's responsibility not just the amateurs or SL clubs.

[Marauder]

11 hours ago, ELBOWSEYE said:

Couldn't be more wrong, I worked in junior and schools rugby in the eighties and nineties in Warrington and the work done now by the pro club is massive compared to then. They go into all the schools and are working with all the junior sides. The only thing that happened when I coached was each school had a chance to visit the stadium and see a game, no coaching, no visits to junior sides unless you knew a player. Each club has designated matches to raise money and two players attached to the club to do coaching and other requirements. I always thought the problem was the transfer of players to open age from junior sides. 

80's & 90's wasn't even a drop in the ocean when you consider the development that was being done before the plug was  pulled, in my area (Doncaster population around 300,000) alone where they had every school but two playing the game, that's a lot of kids tasting rugby league for the first time. yes the age when juniors move to open-age is a problem age but that would be more down to natural wastage (Wine , women and song) many do find themselves back into the game at a later age, we also know many don't.

[Jim from Oz]

“Pearson, speaking exclusively to the Guardian, believes extra power for the clubs will enable the sport to move forward."

In my 40-plus years of watching RL, I have come to realise one thing: extra power for the clubs ALWAYS leads to the sport of RL moving backwards!

Oh well, another year, another restructure. Yawn.

Wake me up when John Quayle has been appointed head of the UK RFL. He – or somebody like him – is UK RL's only hope (apologies to Obi-Wan Kenobi).

And, to add, were these 12 clubs/club chairmen the same 12 clubs/club chairmen who agreed to the ludicrous 3x8 structure

 

And were these 12 clubs/club chairmen the same 12 clubs/club chairmen who agreed to SL clubs playing a ridiculous 30 regular season games a year?