League One's Future

[Rach]

37 minutes ago, TMF said:

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.

Though having experience of following both traditional and expansion teams ,try that experiment with both types of club and I'd put money on which would get there first ......

[bbfaz]

10 minutes ago, Rach said:

something the luxury that the non-m62 clubs don't have hence their attempts to grow the game in their own locality.

That needs to be committed to and fully backed.  Hemel threw everything in the bin at one point to concentrate on the professional side.  Southampton tried to develop their own junior league across Hampshire to develop players and open age clubs but outside forces with RL destroyed it for their own gain.

The issue is that it's always viking harvest time in RL.  For instance, you're an open age club in London, you find a lad, you teach him about the game.  He's suited to it, it's really about knowledge and seasoning.  A semi-pro club poaches him and it's tough luck but if you ask for one of their fringe players on dual reg, it's like you've asked them for change and they're pretending they lost their wallet.  It has to be a broader partnership.  I've said the same thing time and again.  We could all get together and bake a really nice cake but people would rather scrap over the crumbs.

[Rach]

29 minutes ago, bbfaz said:

That needs to be committed to and fully backed.  Hemel threw everything in the bin at one point to concentrate on the professional side.  Southampton tried to develop their own junior league across Hampshire to develop players and open age clubs but outside forces with RL destroyed it for their own gain.

The issue is that it's always viking harvest time in RL.  For instance, you're an open age club in London, you find a lad, you teach him about the game.  He's suited to it, it's really about knowledge and seasoning.  A semi-pro club poaches him and it's tough luck but if you ask for one of their fringe players on dual reg, it's like you've asked them for change and they're pretending they lost their wallet.  It has to be a broader partnership.  I've said the same thing time and again.  We could all get together and bake a really nice cake but people would rather scrap over the crumbs.

Good post :-) 

Players are always if they are exceptional going to be recruited for clubs at a higher level and that is no bad thing so long as there is  some reference /acknowledgement of where they were nurtured ,,

Its like you say if everyone played the game fairly we'd be ok but for some reason RL likes to shoot itself in the foot and act the little kid on the playground who is set on upsetting everyone by pinching the ball just to get a reaction 

[Wolford6]

 

The Bulls have  loads of players and the Academy is doing well against Superleague Academies. However:

 - The Academy players aren't getting selected against weaker teams or when a first-choice is injured. Loan players with no commitment to the club are getting picked instead.

 - The website has stopped printing match reports for Academy games.

 

It's just not good enough for a team that is intending to re-engage with its supporter base and to develop future Superleague players.

[Rach]

30 minutes ago, Wolford6 said:

 

The Bulls have  loads of players and the Academy is doing well against Superleague Academies. However:

 - The Academy players aren't getting selected against weaker teams or when a first-choice is injured. Loan players with no commitment to the club are getting picked instead.

 - The website has stopped printing match reports for Academy games.

 

It's just not good enough for a team that is intending to re-engage with its supporter base and to develop future Superleague players.

Was talking to a mate the other night ,a rugby league supporter of many years standing who's Grandson made a couple of 1st team appearances for the Bulls last term after coming through the Academy set up  but hasn't had a look in this year, she was feeling disheartened  with the game after seeing Hitchcock and Laithwaite brought in and going straight into the team . 

[Adeybull]

25 minutes ago, Wolford6 said:

 

The Bulls have  loads of players and the Academy is doing well against Superleague Academies. However:

 - The Academy players aren't getting selected against weaker teams or when a first-choice is injured. Loan players with no commitment to the club are getting picked instead.

 - The website has stopped printing match reports for Academy games.

 

It's just not good enough for a team that is intending to re-engage with its supporter base and to develop future Superleague players.

Or maybe: the coaching staff recognise the damage that can be done if you throw the youngsters in too early?  These "weaker teams" frequently have some big tough seasoned guys, who could easily wreck the confidence of some developing youngsters and would likely have few qualms about doing so.

And the ONLY essential priority for the club on the field this year is to get out of League 1. No easy challenge, given the remarkable quality and ability and strength of a good number of the other L1 clubs, who will doubtless have precisely the same objective. If that does not happen, I suggest you can forget the idea of an academy and much else going forward? So maybe the coaching staff are picking teams with that overriding imperative in mind?

I don't know anything specific, but just suggesting there may be sound reasons?

As for the website not reporting on academy games, I would not know since I virtually never visit it.  What I DO visit, several times every day, is Facebook - where I regularly see summary match reports as well as Bulls TV (like watching the U19s last night far from disgrace themselves against the mighty Wigan). Maybe the club is directing its limited media resources to where it thinks it will get the most traffic? Or the most likely payback? Or maybe there simply isn't anyone to write expansive match reports? Given the club is in a league lower this season, and income and resources must surely reflect that?

Again, I know nothing specific so again just speculating on possible reasons?

Speaking as someone who was a very very disillusioned and demoralised former uber-keen supporter, my own impression is that the club has made significant progress this year in trying to re-engage with the likes of me.  But maybe that's just me?

 

[TrueBull]

55 minutes ago, Wolford6 said:

 

The Bulls have  loads of players and the Academy is doing well against Superleague Academies. However:

 - The Academy players aren't getting selected against weaker teams or when a first-choice is injured. Loan players with no commitment to the club are getting picked instead.

 - The website has stopped printing match reports for Academy games.

 

It's just not good enough for a team that is intending to re-engage with its supporter base and to develop future Superleague players.

The academy players are getting picked in the reserves though. Which is why we’re running reserves. 

[Bearman]

Coventry Bears continue their community work.

The latest venture saw 25 new U8's turn up tonight for a taste of rugby league. My youngest grandson was amongst them. He was buzzing after the session.

That of course is where non heartland clubs differ from the heartlands clubs. The pro heartland clubs have established amatuer clubs doing that work for them. The non heartland clubs have to set up the infrastructure to give the kids a pathway.

Those kids that turned up tonight will have to be nurtured for 10-15 years to come on stream. There is no quick fix, it needs patience. If the RFL throw out the ( League 1) bathwater the baby will definitely go down the plughole with the water.

So, in the short term there may well be some distorted scorelines, is that a reason to pull the plug on the initiatives?

We need 10-15 year plans if we are ever to catch up with the Aussies.

 

[bbfaz]

3 hours ago, Rach said:

Good post :-) 

Players are always if they are exceptional going to be recruited for clubs at a higher level and that is no bad thing so long as there is  some reference /acknowledgement of where they were nurtured ,,

Its like you say if everyone played the game fairly we'd be ok but for some reason RL likes to shoot itself in the foot and act the little kid on the playground who is set on upsetting everyone by pinching the ball just to get a reaction 

 

I'm cynical enough to have recruited players based on successes we've had in the past.  At one point, we put players in Oxford and Skolars and another in the Blackheath 1sts in Union.  "We will make you a better rugby footballer" has been a selling point in the past.  We brought a former semi-pro player back into the game from Union but he was poached after one friendly in our own clubhouse by a semi-pro club who'd turned up surreptitiously.

Had they approached us and him, we'd have come up with a plan.  Play for us through the summer, train with them and then join them at the end of our season.  However, they took him solely to train, never played him and now he's back in Union.  All the vision of Mr Magoo.  We don't get to play with our toys because the big kid stole them and broke them.

And they did this to other clubs too.

[Wolford6]

2 hours ago, Adeybull said:

As for the website not reporting on academy games, I would not know since I virtually never visit it.  What I DO visit, several times every day, is Facebook - where I regularly see summary match reports as well as Bulls TV (like watching the U19s last night far from disgrace themselves against the mighty Wigan). Maybe the club is directing its limited media resources to where it thinks it will get the most traffic?

Fair enough, Adey.

However, I suspect that many men over 50, including me, don't do Facebook. Recent national news stories indicate that we were probably right not to join.

One thing that bothers me is that the young kids will be on a very low contract, then see journeymen pros coming into the team and presumably picking up appearance money plus win-bonus. Let's face it, these journeymen can't get in the team at their parent clubs.

By the scenario you suggest, even if we get promoted, we'll have the same policy next year because getting back to Superleague will be our priority. And then the young lads will quit.

It sucks.

[bbfaz]

To post on the original subject, I liked the idea of opening up professionalism as put forward by Kris on page 1.  One of the most disappointing things about the Championship 1 expansion from South Wales through to Coventry was that it didn't expand within the footprint or on the fringes of the footprint.  No NCL sides, no Woolston Rovers in Chester.

However, if there's no promotion or relegation we fall into a situation where you're too small to succeed.  You can't chase the dream, there's no dream to chase or, more appropriately, no dream to sell.  Once you start playing professionally, a lot of the focus shifts from keeping all the players happy and invested towards a customer-based model.  You need to keep fans happy to keep the money coming in.  Otherwise, you just dwindle to an ever-decreasing bunch of anoraks.  Not that we don't love anoraks but any successful professional club has broader appeal.

Essentially, without the idea that somehow someway they'll get their act together, there's no point in Hemel Stags running a professional team, unless you're tied to and subsidised by a professional club as a farm team.  We've seen this time and again in lower division "franchise" systems in the US.  The US "third division" in football has something like a 96% failure rate.  Independent baseball fell apart so many times that only a handful of teams go back to the early 90's.  Every American Football league, including Indoor/Arena, has failed, leading to a handful of hermit clubs who join up to whatever league is going.  People say it's because of college and high school teams but it's also because no promotion and relegation creates a system where clubs always stay too small to succeed.

[The Parksider]

On 4/19/2018 at 8:25 PM, RayCee said:

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. 

A whole swathe of Clubs may dream of Superleague but it's never going to happen. You look at names on maps, you look at league tables, you don't look at the actual businesses themselves or the history of the game.

Hunslet will not be allowed in SL because Leeds are in there simple as. The game needs to avoid as much as possible having the  clubs chasing the same fans and players. Hunslets aspirations end in the championship where their crowds would be 60% better and that is it.  The clubs outside the M62 have largely failed to attract any investment, they've failed to develop players locally, they've failed to attract fans. South Wales, Gloucester and Oxford have all given up as their businesses were not viable and the question remains will the other expansion clubs be viable without their SKY money. The answer is no.

In 1996 in an attempt to cut the number of clubs all chasing the same money, fans and players fifteen clubs were asked to merge to create six clubs. They refused to do so and so the only way forward to create a strong Superleague was to pick 12 clubs and give them all the money and access to the best players. Some of those who would not merge are today incapable of Superleague, have no ambition of Superleague (except in their dreams at night) and are happy to plod on as semi pro outfits to keep their names and their history alive.

The proposed restructure is SL1 and SL2. This comes under the juridstiction of Superleague not the RFL. In short the SL would look for clubs to apply to join and these clubs would need to have some sort of real ambition (not dreams) so that P & R could work between the two leagues. All the SKY money would go into these clubs. League one would obviously be pro. league two semi pro.

The rest would stay with the RFL. It would be up to the RFL to sort them out and the first question asked of them will be do you want to carry on under your own finances, and if so do you want to run semi pro or amateur. This will be a major sort out.

The 20 in the Superleague structure are not hard to pick out. SL1 would of course be something like Leeds, Wigan, Hull, Saints, Wire, Cas, Wakey, Huddersfield, HKR, Catalans.  SL2 would probably be Toulouse (I assume the French will not be abandoned) Widnes, Salford, Featherstone, London, Leigh, Halifax, Newcastle, Bradford. Who knows wether club 20 will indeed be the merged Cumbria Dr. Koukash keeps talking about?

So back to the question about League one and it's future. It has no such future unless the RFL recreate it as a third league under their own juridstiction. What it would look like I do not know, it will depend entirely on what the clubs want to do?

[deluded pom?]

You are an advocate of one Hull club and of not having multiple teams on each other’s doorstep but still put both Hull clubs in SL1!

[jpmc]

1 hour ago, The Parksider said:

A whole swathe of Clubs may dream of Superleague but it's never going to happen. You look at names on maps, you look at league tables, you don't look at the actual businesses themselves or the history of the game.

Hunslet will not be allowed in SL because Leeds are in there simple as. The game needs to avoid as much as possible having the  clubs chasing the same fans and players. Hunslets aspirations end in the championship where their crowds would be 60% better and that is it.  The clubs outside the M62 have largely failed to attract any investment, they've failed to develop players locally, they've failed to attract fans. South Wales, Gloucester and Oxford have all given up as their businesses were not viable and the question remains will the other expansion clubs be viable without their SKY money. The answer is no.

In 1996 in an attempt to cut the number of clubs all chasing the same money, fans and players fifteen clubs were asked to merge to create six clubs. They refused to do so and so the only way forward to create a strong Superleague was to pick 12 clubs and give them all the money and access to the best players. Some of those who would not merge are today incapable of Superleague, have no ambition of Superleague (except in their dreams at night) and are happy to plod on as semi pro outfits to keep their names and their history alive.

The proposed restructure is SL1 and SL2. This comes under the juridstiction of Superleague not the RFL. In short the SL would look for clubs to apply to join and these clubs would need to have some sort of real ambition (not dreams) so that P & R could work between the two leagues. All the SKY money would go into these clubs. League one would obviously be pro. league two semi pro.

The rest would stay with the RFL. It would be up to the RFL to sort them out and the first question asked of them will be do you want to carry on under your own finances, and if so do you want to run semi pro or amateur. This will be a major sort out.

The 20 in the Superleague structure are not hard to pick out. SL1 would of course be something like Leeds, Wigan, Hull, Saints, Wire, Cas, Wakey, Huddersfield, HKR, Catalans.  SL2 would probably be Toulouse (I assume the French will not be abandoned) Widnes, Salford, Featherstone, London, Leigh, Halifax, Newcastle, Bradford. Who knows wether club 20 will indeed be the merged Cumbria Dr. Koukash keeps talking about?

So back to the question about League one and it's future. It has no such future unless the RFL recreate it as a third league under their own juridstiction. What it would look like I do not know, it will depend entirely on what the clubs want to do?

You've missed out Toronto

[John WP Fan]

1 hour ago, jpmc said:

You've missed out Toronto

I think he knows that!

[Adeybull]

11 hours ago, Wolford6 said:

Fair enough, Adey.

However, I suspect that many men over 50, including me, don't do Facebook. Recent national news stories indicate that we were probably right not to join.

One thing that bothers me is that the young kids will be on a very low contract, then see journeymen pros coming into the team and presumably picking up appearance money plus win-bonus. Let's face it, these journeymen can't get in the team at their parent clubs.

By the scenario you suggest, even if we get promoted, we'll have the same policy next year because getting back to Superleague will be our priority. And then the young lads will quit.

It sucks.

I suspect, sadly, that its not older b*ggers like us that the club, indeed the game, sees priority in (re)engaging with, though.  We were the future...once.  No longer.  The game needs to attract - in the case of the Bulls, re-attract - the youngsters, the families, the women. Otherwise, you can see the future on too many terraces these days.  And that future sucks for the game, I suggest?  And speaking as someone who has just slipped quietly out of his fifties last month, much as it pains me personally to say it!

I can se both sides to the academy lads point.  The trrouble is, the position the club finds itself in right now sucks.  Does it ever? And the only way the club will have any chance of getting out of that position - absent whatever Wood's schemes might have been, now out of the window no doubt with him, or some major money man waiting in the wings for a return to licensing - is by getting promoted.  Which means putting out the team with the best chance of achieving it.  Because, if the Bulls do not go up this year, I cannot conceive how they can continue with an academy - or anything much else.  And there are a number of excellent other clubs in the divison who will be determined to try and make sure it is THEY that get promoted - and rightly so. 

So yes, it sucks. But, I suggest, maybe a little less than the alternative which REALLY sucks?

 

[RayCee]

13 minutes ago, Adeybull said:

We were the future...once.  No longer.  The game needs to attract - in the case of the Bulls, re-attract - the youngsters, the families, the women. Otherwise, you can see the future on too many terraces these days.

I noticed the crowd at a women's game between Leeds and Bradford wasn't shabby. It's a highlights video on the BBC. The enthusiasm these young ladies had for being able to play RL at a higher level was inspiring. I wonder if growing the women’s game will open the game to a new audience and the families will follow.

[bbfaz]

6 hours ago, The Parksider said:

So back to the question about League one and it's future. It has no such future unless the RFL recreate it as a third league under their own juridstiction. What it would look like I do not know, it will depend entirely on what the clubs want to do?

So you're saying that rather than open things up, they should be closed down?

[gogledd]

Interesting read. Lots of comments I agree with, some I dont but I'm just going to post about why I'm backing the North Wales Crusaders -OK last couple of seasons we've not done so well - mainly because we are playing of a debt created by an ex-CEO who has been found guilty of fraud. The debt he mounted up will take us another season to pay off -but in 2013 we won the league (or the then Championship 1). Since our crooked CEO;s demise we have floundered at mid-table, finishing last season in 9th losing out on the top eight by points difference.

However as some have pointed out a club shouldn't be judge purely on results.

We have initiated an player pathway, with U 16's U18s and now Crusaders A all plying their trade in North West Counties - the best players can go on to play for North Wales Origin - a concept to promote rugby league for local talented player and a patheway into the WRL teams. We have the only wheelchair Rugby League team in Wales, we have a number of mini- teams, touch rugby is starting back next week.

After the CEO was found fraudulently using the club accounts the Supporters have set up a Supporters Trust so there is an independent funding source controlled by its membership.

Our move to Queensway has led to volunteers running matchday and the icome from the bar and food outlets all coming back into the club.

It may take a while until we are back at the top of League 1 but dont write us off.

And please, please support League 1. Dont let the SL or the RFL cut us adrift - it would be disasterous for community rugby league.

[RayCee]

26 minutes ago, gogledd said:

Interesting read. Lots of comments I agree with, some I dont but I'm just going to post about why I'm backing the North Wales Crusaders -OK last couple of seasons we've not done so well - mainly because we are playing of a debt created by an ex-CEO who has been found guilty of fraud. The debt he mounted up will take us another season to pay off -but in 2013 we won the league (or the then Championship 1). Since our crooked CEO;s demise we have floundered at mid-table, finishing last season in 9th losing out on the top eight by points difference.

However as some have pointed out a club shouldn't be judge purely on results.

We have initiated an player pathway, with U 16's U18s and now Crusaders A all plying their trade in North West Counties - the best players can go on to play for North Wales Origin - a concept to promote rugby league for local talented player and a patheway into the WRL teams. We have the only wheelchair Rugby League team in Wales, we have a number of mini- teams, touch rugby is starting back next week.

After the CEO was found fraudulently using the club accounts the Supporters have set up a Supporters Trust so there is an independent funding source controlled by its membership.

Our move to Queensway has led to volunteers running matchday and the icome from the bar and food outlets all coming back into the club.

It may take a while until we are back at the top of League 1 but dont write us off.

And please, please support League 1. Dont let the SL or the RFL cut us adrift - it would be disasterous for community rugby league.

Thank you for that insight. That is the sort of impassioned plea this post is all about. I hope SL is aware and cares about the effect disowning L1 could have on the aspirations and - even in some cases - the existence of such clubs as the NWC. I also believe a successful L1 has benefits for RL in the UK and abroad that are not fully realised by some.

[Toby Chopra]

43 minutes ago, gogledd said:

Interesting read. Lots of comments I agree with, some I dont but I'm just going to post about why I'm backing the North Wales Crusaders -OK last couple of seasons we've not done so well - mainly because we are playing of a debt created by an ex-CEO who has been found guilty of fraud. The debt he mounted up will take us another season to pay off -but in 2013 we won the league (or the then Championship 1). Since our crooked CEO;s demise we have floundered at mid-table, finishing last season in 9th losing out on the top eight by points difference.

However as some have pointed out a club shouldn't be judge purely on results.

We have initiated an player pathway, with U 16's U18s and now Crusaders A all plying their trade in North West Counties - the best players can go on to play for North Wales Origin - a concept to promote rugby league for local talented player and a patheway into the WRL teams. We have the only wheelchair Rugby League team in Wales, we have a number of mini- teams, touch rugby is starting back next week.

After the CEO was found fraudulently using the club accounts the Supporters have set up a Supporters Trust so there is an independent funding source controlled by its membership.

Our move to Queensway has led to volunteers running matchday and the icome from the bar and food outlets all coming back into the club.

It may take a while until we are back at the top of League 1 but dont write us off.

And please, please support League 1. Dont let the SL or the RFL cut us adrift - it would be disasterous for community rugby league.

That's great to hear, and also similar comments about Coventry earlier. 

I suppose the question that I'm left with - and this is a genuine question, not a dig - is: why do the Crusaders, Hemel and the Coventrys of this world need to be a so-called 'professional' club to achieve the brilliant community work they do? 

Given the thinner player pool in these areas, and the lack of an established rugby league audience, it just strikes me that it's a huge drain of effort trying to grind out results and attract paying punters, when all the effort could be focused on being an elite community club, either in the NCL or some sort of expansion area equivalent - a super CLS with development funding. 

Don't get me wrong, I'm a southerner and I'd love rugby league to have a wider professional footprint, but in the end the resources needed to succeed as a spectator funded pro club in a new area are likely beyond what's available.

Much better to focus on the community work, and by all means keep the 75k a year and put it to good use building the pathway and yes, funneling talented youth players north. Just not paying players a small amount at tier 3. 

Or am I missing something? Is being part of the professional pyramid, even with limited on field success, somehow crucial to the pathway work? 

Because it seems to me that all the positive things these clubs achieve, and there are many, aren't to do with being a pro club - but being brilliant regional community hubs. Is that what League 1 is supposed to be for? 

[Toby Chopra]

24 minutes ago, Saint 1 said:

I am inclined to agree with you, but I suppose the thing is that we know the RFL place so little emphasis on community work that these clubs would not get any money if not for their League 1 place. In which case it is a choice between being a League 1 club with all the trades offs that that brings, or being an entirely self-funded amateur club.

Sounds about right. 

Which leaves League 1 with 3 wildly different purposes trying to coexist: as an entrypoint for heavily funded fully pro N American teams, a holding division for heartland clubs who probably could sustain a semi pro existence if their luck turns, and as an excuse to pay regional community clubs development money.

Such a hotch potch can't last. The sport just needs to come up with a model that allows all 3 of those things to happen, without pretending all the clubs are the same. 

[newbe]

RFL should not dismiss the community work done by Coventry, Hemel, Crusaders an all the other clubs do because I should imagine Sport  England look at things like this

[RayCee]

1 hour ago, Toby Chopra said:

Such a hotch potch can't last. The sport just needs to come up with a model that allows all 3 of those things to happen, without pretending all the clubs are the same. 

You say because teams in a division don't have the same aspirations, it can't last but don't explain why it can't. I also don't think anyone is pretending that they are the same. In the EPL, some teams are aiming at winning the premiership, others have no such hope. They just strive to stay there and avoid relegation. Does that make the EPL a hotch potch that cannot last?

[dixiedean]

1 hour ago, Toby Chopra said:

Sounds about right. 

Which leaves League 1 with 3 wildly different purposes trying to coexist: as an entrypoint for heavily funded fully pro N American teams, a holding division for heartland clubs who probably could sustain a semi pro existence if their luck turns, and as an excuse to pay regional community clubs development money.

Such a hotch potch can't last. The sport just needs to come up with a model that allows all 3 of those things to happen, without pretending all the clubs are the same. 

But is that not the essence of promotion/relegation?

Well -funded teams move through swiftly.

Heartland clubs whose "luck turns" (code for finally get run professoinally) a la Wigan in early 80's, Keighley in 90's, Salford in late 60s. hopefully York nowadays will rise. Twas ever thus.

Development clubs need 20 years minimum. that is what it took London before they started prducing SL quality players. Newcastle now, after years of fearful beatings, are starting to look decent.

Patience is needed. Throwing it away would be a false economy.