Jump to content

RFL Strategy - aims for 2019


Recommended Posts


  • Replies 76
  • Created
  • Last Reply
53 minutes ago, redjonn said:

well legacy for a touring side could be more "soft measures"... around the brand...

- around the ongoing interest in the team/uk touring side

- knowledge base sustained about the uk RL

- ongoing friendship/partner (schools, community clubs, etc ) or even sponsor connections. In order to raise profile for future tours from these islands... like twinned towns, schools, etc

any way with more thought better one;s could be identified 

All very fair.  As with many of these things they are pretty difficult to measure objectively and most of the time the reason for stating them as targets/measures is to ensure that somebody is at least considering them.

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

Yes, I suspect they have access to far more through partners, but it is a very modest contactable database.

Possibly. From my experience getting the details of ticket purchases for games at external venues was very difficult, even when the venue agreed to it in the contract we never got it all. 

I used to think The RFL could help e.g. Coventry to target an occasional game for. There must be 5-10k in the area who have attended a game, but never been to the Bears, and they could help with promotion and planning. However, based on that total figure they don't have the reach. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, The 4 of Us said:

Most large organisations have a 5-10 outlook. The fact that the “refresh” doesn’t look much beyond the next 2 years is telling and worrying. In essence they’ve bet the house on the World Cup and next TV deal. Last one out turn off the lights. 

Turn off the lights? This is the RFL, to be fair.

More like blow out the candle.

- Adepto Successu Per Tributum Fuga -

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They need to start holding their fellow clubs to certain quantifiable benchmarks. As effectively all Clubs are part owners of the RFL, regardless of current status I.e League 1, Championship or Super League. Benchmark 1; did club run a SL Under 19 Academy this season just gone? Yes = safe. No = Club moves to benchmark 2! Benchmark 2; did club achieve a minimum of 6k attendence for every home game if in SL, 2.5k minimum attendance for every home game if in Championship, 1k minimum attendance for every home game if in League 1? Yes = safe. No = Club moves to benchmark 3!  Benchmark 3; did club achieve excellence on the field of play this season, earning a top 3 Finnish in respective tier? Yes = safe. No = all Clubs falling into this bracket, irrespective of current tier receives official notice of failure, 2 of these notices of failure on 2 consecutive seasons and they are thrown out of the RFL no questions asked. End of.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Smudger06 said:

They need to start holding their fellow clubs to certain quantifiable benchmarks. As effectively all Clubs are part owners of the RFL, regardless of current status I.e League 1, Championship or Super League. Benchmark 1; did club run a SL Under 19 Academy this season just gone? Yes = safe. No = Club moves to benchmark 2! Benchmark 2; did club achieve a minimum of 6k attendence for every home game if in SL, 2.5k minimum attendance for every home game if in Championship, 1k minimum attendance for every home game if in League 1? Yes = safe. No = Club moves to benchmark 3!  Benchmark 3; did club achieve excellence on the field of play this season, earning a top 3 Finnish in respective tier? Yes = safe. No = all Clubs falling into this bracket, irrespective of current tier receives official notice of failure, 2 of these notices of failure on 2 consecutive seasons and they are thrown out of the RFL no questions asked. End of.....

Good idea in principle, but more than likely in most cases their only idea about how to hit crowd targets like that is "away fans".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Smudger06 said:

They need to start holding their fellow clubs to certain quantifiable benchmarks. As effectively all Clubs are part owners of the RFL, regardless of current status I.e League 1, Championship or Super League. Benchmark 1; did club run a SL Under 19 Academy this season just gone? Yes = safe. No = Club moves to benchmark 2! Benchmark 2; did club achieve a minimum of 6k attendence for every home game if in SL, 2.5k minimum attendance for every home game if in Championship, 1k minimum attendance for every home game if in League 1? Yes = safe. No = Club moves to benchmark 3!  Benchmark 3; did club achieve excellence on the field of play this season, earning a top 3 Finnish in respective tier? Yes = safe. No = all Clubs falling into this bracket, irrespective of current tier receives official notice of failure, 2 of these notices of failure on 2 consecutive seasons and they are thrown out of the RFL no questions asked. End of.....

We would lose half the clubs In the RFL within two years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Smudger06 said:

They need to start holding their fellow clubs to certain quantifiable benchmarks. As effectively all Clubs are part owners of the RFL, regardless of current status I.e League 1, Championship or Super League. Benchmark 1; did club run a SL Under 19 Academy this season just gone? Yes = safe. No = Club moves to benchmark 2! Benchmark 2; did club achieve a minimum of 6k attendence for every home game if in SL, 2.5k minimum attendance for every home game if in Championship, 1k minimum attendance for every home game if in League 1? Yes = safe. No = Club moves to benchmark 3!  Benchmark 3; did club achieve excellence on the field of play this season, earning a top 3 Finnish in respective tier? Yes = safe. No = all Clubs falling into this bracket, irrespective of current tier receives official notice of failure, 2 of these notices of failure on 2 consecutive seasons and they are thrown out of the RFL no questions asked. End of.....

So a club could, as now, just create a crowd figure that fits the criteria. No club would move past benchmark 2.

- Adepto Successu Per Tributum Fuga -

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, The 4 of Us said:

Most large organisations have a 5-10 outlook. The fact that the “refresh” doesn’t look much beyond the next 2 years is telling and worrying. In essence they’ve bet the house on the World Cup and next TV deal. Last one out turn off the lights. 

I don’t think it is. I’m not sure how much input Rimmer had for the last tranche of objectives/goals but if they aren’t or haven’t worked in the way they hoped, then changing them is exactly the right thing to do.  Also, failure would be to just sit back watching everything fade away.  

I think we already know the RFL aren’t as transparent as they say, so the 2 years could be a prelude to realignment after the WC and any other plans SL have that we don’t know.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

We would lose half the clubs In the RFL within two years. 

Naw, it would force them to actually take measures to improve themselves, could lose 8 or 10. Invite applications for replacements whom in turn would be subject to that benchmark system after an initial 3 year club launch phase.  All 3 benchmark standards could be raised steadily when the vast majority of clubs are consistently achieving them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Smudger06 said:

Naw, it would force them to actually take measures to improve themselves, could lose 8 or 10. Invite applications for replacements whom in turn would be subject to that benchmark system after an initial 3 year club launch phase.  All 3 benchmark standards could be raised steadily when the vast majority of clubs are consistently achieving them. 

' take measures ' ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Smudger06 said:

No room for blagging it, figures would have to be verified independently.

Figures can be verified easily. But how do you verify actual attendance against the declared figure?

- Adepto Successu Per Tributum Fuga -

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Smudger06 said:

The best measure, invest in an Academy that meets SL criteria as per Newcastle in League 1, Widnes & Bradford in the Championship. 

That's fine if you have access to the right quality of player ? , And what would be accepted as it being a success ? , Widnes have ' blooded ' a lot of players this year , how many of them will make SL is a different thing , Bradford have produced plenty of SL quality players in recent years , but it will be interesting to see if they can maintain that after a full academy generation outside the top flight 

SL requires around 25 new players per year , how many academies is realistic to produce those players ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

That's fine if you have access to the right quality of player ? , And what would be accepted as it being a success ? , Widnes have ' blooded ' a lot of players this year , how many of them will make SL is a different thing , Bradford have produced plenty of SL quality players in recent years , but it will be interesting to see if they can maintain that after a full academy generation outside the top flight 

SL requires around 25 new players per year , how many academies is realistic to produce those players ?

Surely it's not all about developing players for Super League level though. More players and better development at all levels can only be good for the game and improve standards overall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

It's up to the clubs to employ the  people who can do that, like any other business that wants to grow its customer numbers. 

Spot on. Clubs with smaller crowds generally have lower incomes and they are the ones who often struggle, whether that is competing on the field, or struggling off the field.

Tbh it's one of the reasons I always preferred a cap of 50% of turnover rather than a flat cap. That encourages income growth as a key differentiator.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.