League One's Future

[hunsletgreenandgold]

7 minutes ago, RP London said:

We are in broad agreement here as you say in your last sentence but what is often mentioned for league one is to tell the expansion teams that they arent good enough and need to be put somewhere else, that is never muted about heartland clubs. 

Yes everyone has the dreaded running out of money issue but Hunslet are not going to be told by the RFL sorry but your not welcome in League 1 as Hemel, Cov, the Welsh clubs etc are being told by some on here, thats why they are not being talked about in this way.

I assure you I'm all for expansion clubs being in the pro game and my opinion of what to do with struggling clubs is certainly not push them out of the league and back to a regional level where they'll no doubt never recover (which has also happened to heartland cubs I might add) but I don't understand what you think is different in the way say a struggling Hunslet side would be treated if it was in the same position as Gloucester or Oxford. Or are you suggesting the RFL would step in to 'save' them? 

[RP London]

3 minutes ago, hunsletgreenandgold said:

I assure you I'm all for expansion clubs being in the pro game and my opinion of what to do with struggling clubs is certainly not push them out of the league and back to a regional level where they'll no doubt never recover (which has also happened to heartland cubs I might add) but I don't understand what you think is different in the way say a struggling Hunslet side would be treated if it was in the same position as Gloucester or Oxford. Or are you suggesting the RFL would step in to 'save' them? 

I wasnt saying you were, was just pointing out the reason Hunslet were treated differently in THIS discussion. The Discussion is to do with what is happening now not what would happen in an alternative reality (or in years time if hunslet were in that situation). 

In all honesty if Hunslet or anyone else was at the bottom even with those expansion teams were just one place higher I think the same discussion would be being had in he wider RL community that they should be binned off, completely ignoring the heartland team (which would be allowed to stay in league 1) that was sitting rock bottom. If the expansion clubs were dotted around the league this discussion wouldnt even be occurring. 

the discussion is always there because some expansion teams are getting poor results, that is it, its not about their community work or if they are moving forward it is the fact that league is basically split i 2 on results. 

[hunsletgreenandgold]

2 hours ago, RP London said:

I wasnt saying you were, was just pointing out the reason Hunslet were treated differently in THIS discussion. The Discussion is to do with what is happening now not what would happen in an alternative reality (or in years time if hunslet were in that situation). 

In all honesty if Hunslet or anyone else was at the bottom even with those expansion teams were just one place higher I think the same discussion would be being had in he wider RL community that they should be binned off, completely ignoring the heartland team (which would be allowed to stay in league 1) that was sitting rock bottom. If the expansion clubs were dotted around the league this discussion wouldnt even be occurring. 

the discussion is always there because some expansion teams are getting poor results, that is it, its not about their community work or if they are moving forward it is the fact that league is basically split i 2 on results. 

Okay - I mean my first reply was to Raycee who was attempting to bring the thread back on the topic of future of League 1 and the consequences if there was no possible upward movement from League 1,  then want on to suggest the likes of Hunslet were happy at that level. My point was making clear that whether you're heartland or expansion it really doesn't matter - everybody wants to go up. I understand you was more referring to the consensus, on forums like this, about what should happen to struggling expansions side. I have no argument about that - whilst ever they're able to operate as one, any side should be allowed to continue as a pro team because it's most likely the work they're doing off the field is setting them up for future successes on the field. The North American model is completely different and shouldn't be compared with a UK expansion team IMO.  

[RP London]

34 minutes ago, hunsletgreenandgold said:

Okay - I mean my first reply was to Raycee who was attempting to bring the thread back on the topic of future of League 1 and the consequences if there was no possible upward movement from League 1,  then want on to suggest the likes of Hunslet were happy at that level. My point was making clear that whether you're heartland or expansion it really doesn't matter - everybody wants to go up. I understand you was more referring to the consensus, on forums like this, about what should happen to struggling expansions side. I have no argument about that - whilst ever they're able to operate as one, any side should be allowed to continue as a pro team because it's most likely the work they're doing off the field is setting them up for future successes on the field. The North American model is completely different and shouldn't be compared with a UK expansion team IMO.  

totally agree with that.

[paulwalker71]

10 hours ago, RP London said:

and this is the issue that i was pointing out in my post.. while i empathise with your reasoning why should London and Newcastle be punished here.. they are doing ok, they are building, Newcastle sit nicely above a few heartland sides and are developing really well off the field too why should they now have to "step down"? 

The thing with League one is there is a fair bit of baby and bathwater.. when one or two teams arent doing so well on the pitch there must be a wholesale change... either that or we could look at why those teams arent doing so well and see if help can be given.. dont punish teams doing well on and off the field by ripping apart the league just because one or two arent getting the results on the field. 

To be fair I did point out that Newcastle were a slightly different case, and you could certainly argue that they should be in the mix with other Northern clubs right now.

Any change of structure has to happen at a certain point, and there can be anomalies, of course. I actually don't think it would be end of the world if (taking my scribbled down scheme as a starting point) if Newcastle had to 'step down' to the new League for a season. They'd almost certainly win that league quite handsomely, and would then be able to  take their time and plan ahead for a higher level. It would only be for a season after all! Might be better for them to be the big fish in the small pond for a season, rather than be chucked into a big pond and possibly struggle?

But, yeah, good on Newcastle, I'm a big supporter of what they are doing

[RayCee]

8 hours ago, hunsletgreenandgold said:

What makes you think that? I'd argue that Hunslet is the most concentrated area (for it's size) for RL anywhere in the Northern Hemisphere. Hunslet isn't happy where it is, but has it's only challenges in progressing forward. I'm not wanting to turn this into a 'heartland v expansion' debate but it does seem to be only mentioned about how expansion clubs want to move upwards. I assure you all traditional clubs have that aspiration too - we've just had longer to become disillusioned about it.

The use of Hunslet as an example wasn't based on an assumption that all heartland teams had no aspirations, but there are comments on this forum where it is stated that some teams are happy where are. The lack of success by Hunslet on the field gave that impression to me from the outside. 

I'm surprised that you feel that I was suggesting no heartland team wants to progress. I've never seen anyone make that claim, but it's an interesting point which has helped me to see why a few heartland supporters are so against new teams coming along. 

A heartland team that wants to progress but then new teams like the TWP arrive and step over them on their way up - followed by others - could be irksome. I'm not saying this of you, but clearly one Hunslet fan here has turned this personal frustration into a personal crusade. 

All present and future L1 teams are at risk of being shut out of any hope of progress to a higher level. What do clubs like Hunslet think of that, now that it's been clarified that they do indeed have hopes of moving up, but it may soon be no longer possible? This is based on the notion that SL clubs want to turn UK RL into an exclusive group. I hope it proves to be incorrect. 

Please be assured Hunslet g&g that while I want to see new teams enter L1 from non heartland areas, I also want to see heartland teams strive for promotion, if that is what they want. 

[RayCee]

7 hours ago, Bearman said:

They own their own club and ground. Arsenal juniors were playing out of  it out at one point.

They let the club out for functions and have a thriving lottery that many clubs would be envious of.

Now that's something I'm glad to hear and learn about. The crowd attendances could give the impression they are in trouble but off the field anything but. 

[Newcastle Thunder]

3 hours ago, paulwalker71 said:

To be fair I did point out that Newcastle were a slightly different case, and you could certainly argue that they should be in the mix with other Northern clubs right now.

Any change of structure has to happen at a certain point, and there can be anomalies, of course. I actually don't think it would be end of the world if (taking my scribbled down scheme as a starting point) if Newcastle had to 'step down' to the new League for a season. They'd almost certainly win that league quite handsomely, and would then be able to  take their time and plan ahead for a higher level. It would only be for a season after all! Might be better for them to be the big fish in the small pond for a season, rather than be chucked into a big pond and possibly struggle?

But, yeah, good on Newcastle, I'm a big supporter of what they are doing

This should be based on more then just results and league standings

we currently average around 900 at games and is growing, we have a fully staffed academy set up that plays in the Super League academy structure

just look at the recent results from our under 16 academy with wins over London, Widnes Vikings, Wakefield Trinity and Leeds Rhinos and our u19’s with wins over Wakefield and London so far.

The club administrates and runs the the community game in the whole region and employs staff to grow the club and school game

 

[Rach]

You could argue the case for all expansion clubs and there are compelling arguments in their favour for all of them .

The main barrier to all their on-field success is the size of the local player pool and until clubs are given time to take root and given chance to embed themselves in local junior sport to produce those players results are always going to be patchy.

Newcastle are a case in point , they are now beginning to look like an established club with a decent chance of moving up the league structure , its no coincidence that alongside this upturn in fortunes you've got their establishment of ambitious academy squads and the growth of community clubs like Cramlington Rockets and Northumbria Uni lifting the BUCS Student Title - these things don't happen overnight.

Coventry has gone down the local based player's route this year, backing this up with University and local feeder club links, and a strong SKYTRY schools programme allied to a Bears run junior rugby after school development sessions.

From small Acorns and all that stuff - the Bears ,Skolars and Hemel began as community clubs themselves 

Again I'd ask are  the M62 Clubs in L1  building their off-field activities to produce their own players like Thunder or Bears or or they just going to be reliant on SL Cast offs or dual reg for their existence ??

 

 

[DoubleD]

4 minutes ago, Rach said:

You could argue the case for all expansion clubs and there are compelling arguments in their favour for all of them .

The main barrier to all their on-field success is the size of the local player pool and until clubs are given time to take root and given chance to embed themselves in local junior sport to produce those players results are always going to be patchy.

Newcastle are a case in point , they are now beginning to look like an established club with a decent chance of moving up the league structure , its no coincidence that alongside this upturn in fortunes you've got their establishment of ambitious academy squads and the growth of community clubs like Cramlington Rockets and Northumbria Uni lifting the BUCS Student Title - these things don't happen overnight.

Coventry has gone down the local based player's route this year, backing this up with University and local feeder club links, and a strong SKYTRY schools programme allied to a Bears run junior rugby after school development sessions.

From small Acorns and all that stuff - the Bears ,Skolars and Hemel began as community clubs themselves 

Again I'd ask are  the M62 Clubs in L1  building their off-field activities to produce their own players like Thunder or Bears or or they just going to be reliant on SL Cast offs or dual reg for their existence ??

 

 

Some very good points Rach. With regards to your last paragraph, York are certainly expanding their grassroots development. I would like to see more from others, as I’m not aware what Doncaster, Keighley, Workington, Whitehaven, Oldham do (I know you can only class a couple of these as M62 clubs ?)

[terrywebbisgod]

9 hours ago, Newcastle Thunder said:

This should be based on more then just results and league standings

we currently average around 900 at games and is growing, we have a fully staffed academy set up that plays in the Super League academy structure

just look at the recent results from our under 16 academy with wins over London, Widnes Vikings, Wakefield Trinity and Leeds Rhinos and our u19’s with wins over Wakefield and London so far.

The club administrates and runs the the community game in the whole region and employs staff to grow the club and school game

 

Just to point out Leeds sent an u15's side up to Newcastle. 

[hunsletgreenandgold]

50 minutes ago, Rach said:

Again I'd ask are  the M62 Clubs in L1  building their off-field activities to produce their own players like Thunder or Bears or or they just going to be reliant on SL Cast offs or dual reg for their existence ??

I don't think it's that straight forward for a lot of M62/heartland clubs. When the likes of Thunder and Bears do activities to engage with either their local community cubs or within their own academies to produce players, they're the only fish in that particular pool - so they'll directly reap the benefits of the efforts they put in - which is great. 

Then I think about how that works with L1, and arguably even Championship, clubs in the heartland areas. There a tons of activity camps and lots done to engage with young players and some will go on to be affiliated to said club, but aside from the Cumbrian clubs pretty much all heartland L1 and Championship clubs are also in the same pool for players as SL clubs and they're not the biggest fish. So what you end up with is players who either come through L1/Championship club academies, or at least have benefitted from their community work, who then get cherry picked out into the SL team's academy - they cast the net far and wide and sadly when a lot of these players don't make it (which is the majority) they feel quite disillusioned and don't feel their natural path is to go back to the L1 club and more often than not drop out of the game. 

My comments relate to what I think is a wider problem in the game relating to academies but it definitely feels relevant as to why some M62 teams then end up with weak/non existent academies and then turn to Duel reg/poor SL players. 

[Scarey71]

47 minutes ago, Rach said:

Again I'd ask are  the M62 Clubs in L1  building their off-field activities to produce their own players like Thunder or Bears or or they just going to be reliant on SL Cast offs or dual reg for their existence ??

 

 

Very simplistic view of the world.  You think if St Helen's moved to Cov lock, stock and barrel the bears would have a chance of competing for local talent?

What about Hudds who have two academies?  Their own and Bradford's  With Leeds at the other side what can any other West Yorks side do to attract youngsters?  Hey kids Hunslet or Rhinos?

When the decent talent is inexorably sucked into the SL clubs there's not much left for the minnows and if they do unearth a gem you know what happens.

Portraying them as benefits scroungers waiting for the SL clubs to toss them their benefits is a bit harsh!

[Rach]

Simplistic maybe but I'm seeing comments on this forum saying that L1 expansion teams should basically buggers off n leave the m62 clubs to it because they are losing games without any recourse to looking at  club structures financial position or future prospects ,now that's a simplistic viewpoint !

 

On 13/04/2018 at 9:22 PM, getdownmonkeyman said:

 

 

[Scarey71]

It certainly is. Very simplistic.  Sadly it's the very same dour northerner attitude that keeps Rugby League's chip on it's shoulder. 

[DoubleD]

2 hours ago, hunsletgreenandgold said:

I don't think it's that straight forward for a lot of M62/heartland clubs. When the likes of Thunder and Bears do activities to engage with either their local community cubs or within their own academies to produce players, they're the only fish in that particular pool - so they'll directly reap the benefits of the efforts they put in - which is great. 

Then I think about how that works with L1, and arguably even Championship, clubs in the heartland areas. There a tons of activity camps and lots done to engage with young players and some will go on to be affiliated to said club, but aside from the Cumbrian clubs pretty much all heartland L1 and Championship clubs are also in the same pool for players as SL clubs and they're not the biggest fish. So what you end up with is players who either come through L1/Championship club academies, or at least have benefitted from their community work, who then get cherry picked out into the SL team's academy - they cast the net far and wide and sadly when a lot of these players don't make it (which is the majority) they feel quite disillusioned and don't feel their natural path is to go back to the L1 club and more often than not drop out of the game. 

My comments relate to what I think is a wider problem in the game relating to academies but it definitely feels relevant as to why some M62 teams then end up with weak/non existent academies and then turn to Duel reg/poor SL players. 

Part of that is true but the criticism of some lower league heartland clubs is entirely valid. How much grassroots footy is there in places like Keighley, Oldham, Rochdale? York has recently recognised the decline and are looking to address it. Halifax are belatedly looking to do similarly. People talk about the decline in the game in Cumbria - what are the semi pro clubs doing about it? If clubs like Newcastle, Coventry, York can engage with community clubs, schools, do camps etc, why can't the others?

[hunsletgreenandgold]

28 minutes ago, DoubleD said:

Part of that is true but the criticism of some lower league heartland clubs is entirely valid. How much grassroots footy is there in places like Keighley, Oldham, Rochdale? York has recently recognised the decline and are looking to address it. Halifax are belatedly looking to do similarly. People talk about the decline in the game in Cumbria - what are the semi pro clubs doing about it? If clubs like Newcastle, Coventry, York can engage with community clubs, schools, do camps etc, why can't the others?

So you think the onus should be on the clubs and not the governing body to resolve the decline in youth participation? What's the incentive for them to do so based on the situation that occurs which I set out in my last post. As I said there is plenty going on at a lot of the L1/championship clubs i'm close to (can't speak for 3 you've mentioned above) so I'm not sure what more you expect for the little reward they get from it. 

[newbe]

On 19/04/2018 at 11:56 AM, slowdive said:

How can a club like Hemel survive with attendances like that? 

They are business  first, open 7 days a week, a function room capable of holding 200 people, booked well into next year, got a lottery of over 1800 people been running over 25yrs, and have a bar open 7 days a week which has a pub licence so any one  can walk in, also they have a long lease on there ground. How many league 1 clubs can say this. A lot of clubs rent off football or union grounds  to play so do not get the revenue on match days. 

[DoubleD]

49 minutes ago, hunsletgreenandgold said:

So you think the onus should be on the clubs and not the governing body to resolve the decline in youth participation? What's the incentive for them to do so based on the situation that occurs which I set out in my last post. As I said there is plenty going on at a lot of the L1/championship clubs i'm close to (can't speak for 3 you've mentioned above) so I'm not sure what more you expect for the little reward they get from it. 

I think the onus should be on both parties - a collaborated approach. The Championship/League 1 clubs receive central funding for a start. It should be in their interests to engage with local communities and clubs as this is their audience/fan base/sponsors etc. I am not talking about every Championship/League 1 club having an academy.

Otherwise, how do they benefit the sport as a whole - why should these clubs receive central funding if they don't give anything back?

[Newcastle Thunder]

6 hours ago, terrywebbisgod said:

Just to point out Leeds sent an u15's side up to Newcastle. 

You can only play what’s in front of you, we also had 8 u15’s playing that night

[deluded pom?]

2 hours ago, DoubleD said:

I think the onus should be on both parties - a collaborated approach. The Championship/League 1 clubs receive central funding for a start. It should be in their interests to engage with local communities and clubs as this is their audience/fan base/sponsors etc. I am not talking about every Championship/League 1 club having an academy.

Otherwise, how do they benefit the sport as a whole - why should these clubs receive central funding if they don't give anything back?

Do all SL clubs currently meet this criteria?

[newbe]

If they got rid of D/R in league 1  that would surely increase player pathways. Clubs will not do this its a shame because if they did it might make S/L run a reserve competition 

[DoubleD]

1 hour ago, deluded pom? said:

Do all SL clubs currently meet this criteria?

I think we know the answer to that mate, but that's opening up another can of worms...........

[TMF]

As a well respected English coach said recently (reported in the press), give Doncaster £1,000,000 and they would be a Super league club. It's just an example but I find it hard to argue against.

[Rach]

9 hours ago, Scarey71 said:

Very simplistic view of the world.  You think if St Helen's moved to Cov lock, stock and barrel the bears would have a chance of competing for local talent?

What about Hudds who have two academies?  Their own and Bradford's  With Leeds at the other side what can any other West Yorks side do to attract youngsters?  Hey kids Hunslet or Rhinos?

When the decent talent is inexorably sucked into the SL clubs there's not much left for the minnows and if they do unearth a gem you know what happens.

Portraying them as benefits scroungers waiting for the SL clubs to toss them their benefits is a bit harsh!

1

Ok my final comment may have been a tad harsh but you can't argue with the fact that the 'traditional' clubs have an easier job of recruiting players that those in expansion areas - Match /contract payments are never going to be huge in L1 which means players are not going to commit to regular long travel when say for example they can travel within the 20 or 30 miles at most between West Yorkshire Clubs or the Cheshire /Lancs clubs - the old adage about shouting down the pit for a new prop forward could be rewritten replacing the pit for an SL Clubs Academy Set Up.or NCL Club . something the luxury that the non-m62 clubs don't have hence their attempts to grow the game in their own locality.

Compare say the Cougars and the Bears most recent major signings -Cougars are able sign a former England Prop Daryl Griffin who has primarily played all his pro career in within a 40-mile radius of 5 clubs (though ironically he comes from a development area -Oxford ), Coventry pick up a London Bronco Junior (Kam Peace Paul who is still a great prospect ) on loan who has  some links to Northampton still a 50 mile round trip to training .