Jump to content

Who do you want in Super League


Who do you want to gain promotion?  

144 members have voted

  1. 1. Who do you want to gain promotion?

    • Toronto Wolfpack
      95
    • Featherstone Rovers
      49


Recommended Posts


  • Replies 104
  • Created
  • Last Reply
4 hours ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

No offence, but I can't imagine a village in West Yorkshire with a population of circa 15k is going to be a massively attractive draw for potential sponsors compared to a city in Canada with a population of 2.7m.

Based on their marketing and season ticket base, the Wolfpack are drawing from a population of 6-8 million, not 2.7 million. 2.7 million is just the municipality itself, not its massive metropolitan area and surrounding satellite cities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Until recently, I've always been of the belief that finals are the best way to decide who the champions are. My rationale had been the NRL has so many different winners, compared to the EPL which had so few. My thought had been finals give more chance of an upset winner.

Now i've changed my tune, I think you have more chance of different teams winning in a first-past-the-post system. SL would have had seven sifferent champions if that was the case, rather than 4. It doesn't reward success from being the best over a (very long) home and away season.

Which brings us to this Toronto game. Toronto have clearly been the best team in the championship for the last two years. It would be a crime if they weren't promoted. They shouldn't even have to go through a final to get promoted. With all due respect to Fev, they don't deserve to be promoted on the basis they strung 4 wins together in September.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fev for me - think they've been amazing in this play off series and for that alone I'd rather them get promoted

Now then, it's a race between Sandie....and Fairburn....and the little man is in........yeees he's in.

I, just like those Castleford supporters felt that the ball should have gone to David Plange but he put the bit betwen his teeth...and it was a try

Kevin Ward - best player I have ever seen

DSC04156_edited-1_thumb.jpg

The real Mick Gledhill is what you see on here, a Bradford fan ........, but deep down knows that Bradford are just not good enough to challenge the likes of Leeds & St Helens.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Toronto, primarily because they walked the league but also because it might put SL in the National spotlight for a while and improve the next tv deal. 

That said I’d much prefer a 14 team SL with two up two down (champions go up, next 4 in the play offs) so Fev would have a chance too, I think they’d be great as a part of SL. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, muckymunksy said:

Fev hopefully 

Toronto be a nightmare to expensive to get there won’t bring any away fans.

They want there own rules play there home games when they demand.

probaly break the salary cap more then Wigan and will get away with it.

 

 

Catalans don’t take away fans either, do you want them out of SL too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the unlikely event that Featherstone do win promotion, I hope some of you lot trumpeting Toronto as the saviours of rugby league won't mind forfeiting your own club's Super League status and giving it to the Wolfpack for the good of the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

I think the game as a whole needs to decide what it wants to be. If we want promotion and relegation to give the likes of Featherstone a crack at playing in the highest tier, then we can't moan if high profile sponsors and/or broadcasters aren't queuing up to offer us lucrative deals. No offence, but I can't imagine a village in West Yorkshire with a population of circa 15k is going to be a massively attractive draw for potential sponsors compared to a city in Canada with a population of 2.7m.

But you believe the high-flying metropolises of Wigan, St Helens, Warrington & Hull (for example) are a draw because they’re towns in the north with a higher immediate population?

 

the whole ‘pit village’ argument is nothing more than distraction. There are very few big city teams in UK rugby league and the more successful ones are often the traditional community clubs. When Wigan were dominating the sport in the ‘80s an ‘90s, I don’t remember anyone whining about their geographical location, or marketability as a weekend destination. 
 

if you want to travel to exotic places., feel free, just don’t expect the sport we all love to restructure to give you an excuse to go. Otherwise there’s no hop for any of the current SL clubs apart from Leeds and Catalan. 
 

Will all you SL fans still be championing favouring expansion teams when its at the expense of your clubs?  I know your natural altruism will mean you’re happy to see your clubs playing second tier for eternity with no hope of promotion as long as SL has New York & Johannesburg. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Tubby said:

But you believe the high-flying metropolises of Wigan, St Helens, Warrington & Hull (for example) are a draw because they’re towns in the north with a higher immediate population?

All of those towns that you mention have a population of >100k. I suspect that those towns with higher populations (and consequently a higher number of more affluent consumers) are more attractive to potential sponsors and broadcasters compared to towns/villages with lower populations. Do you think otherwise? If so, I'd love to know why.

 

17 minutes ago, Tubby said:

the whole ‘pit village’ argument is nothing more than distraction. There are very few big city teams in UK rugby league and the more successful ones are often the traditional community clubs. When Wigan were dominating the sport in the ‘80s an ‘90s, I don’t remember anyone whining about their geographical location, or marketability as a weekend destination. 

When Wigan were dominating the sport in the 80s and 90s I remember there being significantly less money in the sport to the extent where most of the top division was comprised of part-time players. Although Wigan may not be a glamorous weekend destination in some people's eyes, is it more or less glamorous than Featherstone?

 

19 minutes ago, Tubby said:

if you want to travel to exotic places., feel free, just don’t expect the sport we all love to restructure to give you an excuse to go. Otherwise there’s no hop for any of the current SL clubs apart from Leeds and Catalan. 

Personally, I'm not overly bothered about travelling to exotic places. I love going to places like Post Office Road. It's a cracking ground and a great place to watch rugby league.

 

21 minutes ago, Tubby said:

Will all you SL fans still be championing favouring expansion teams when its at the expense of your clubs?  I know your natural altruism will mean you’re happy to see your clubs playing second tier for eternity with no hope of promotion as long as SL has New York & Johannesburg. 

I don't support any SL teams in particular, but instead just want the sport to thrive.

If the elite division was comprised of multiple small 15k towns/villages spread across only 2 English counties, that would undoubtedly have less appeal to sponsors and broadcasters compared to bigger population centres spread across the country (and potentially also Europe and North America), and consequently there would likely be less money in the sport.

If people are happy for the elite level of the game to go back to the 80s and early 90s where the majority of players were part-time, then we have to accept the knock-on effect that will have in terms of retaining the game's best players and what would happen to the profile of the sport.

Personally, I'll still be watching rugby league either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

All of those towns that you mention have a population of >100k. I suspect that those towns with higher populations (and consequently a higher number of more affluent consumers) are more attractive to potential sponsors and broadcasters compared to towns/villages with lower populations. Do you think otherwise? If so, I'd love to know why.

First of all, I apologise that my post appeared to be a reply only to yours, it was intended as a reply to the general negativity about a 'small-town club'.  The catchment area of Featherstone doesn't comprise only the immediate town of Featherstone, it obviously covers a much larger area.  I live in Wakefield but have roots in Featherstone and Pontefract; many of my friends and fellow supporters are from Pontefract, or many other parts of the five towns.  As such, I don't believe the population of the town whose name is in the team is particularly relevant with respect to the likes of the towns mentioned.

When Wigan were dominating the sport in the 80s and 90s I remember there being significantly less money in the sport to the extent where most of the top division was comprised of part-time players. Although Wigan may not be a glamorous weekend destination in some people's eyes, is it more or less glamorous than Featherstone?

That's exactly my point, the aforementioned towns are neither more nor less attractive than Featherstone; in the wider world, they are perceived in exactly the same way, small insignificant northern towns.

Personally, I'm not overly bothered about travelling to exotic places. I love going to places like Post Office Road. It's a cracking ground and a great place to watch rugby league.

I agree entirely, this point was aimed at those stating they'd prefer to visit Toulose or Toronto than Featherstone for a weekend.  These people don't seem to realise that the two things aren't mutually exclusive; go to Featherstone to watch the rugby (much as you would to Wigan, Warrington or Castleford, then have a lovely trip to Toronto another time.

I don't support any SL teams in particular, but instead just want the sport to thrive.

If the elite division was comprised of multiple small 15k towns/villages spread across only 2 English counties, that would undoubtedly have less appeal to sponsors and broadcasters compared to bigger population centres spread across the country (and potentially also Europe and North America), and consequently there would likely be less money in the sport.

Was the Sky money significantly better with London/Paris in SL than without?  this is a genuine question, I have no idea.

If people are happy for the elite level of the game to go back to the 80s and early 90s where the majority of players were part-time, then we have to accept the knock-on effect that will have in terms of retaining the game's best players and what would happen to the profile of the sport.

Personally, I'll still be watching rugby league either way.

You and I both, I think we largely have the same opinions about RL.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Tubby said:

First of all, I apologise that my post appeared to be a reply only to yours, it was intended as a reply to the general negativity about a 'small-town club'.  The catchment area of Featherstone doesn't comprise only the immediate town of Featherstone, it obviously covers a much larger area.  I live in Wakefield but have roots in Featherstone and Pontefract; many of my friends and fellow supporters are from Pontefract, or many other parts of the five towns.  As such, I don't believe the population of the town whose name is in the team is particularly relevant with respect to the likes of the towns mentioned.

No worries, and those are fair points. But would that argument not also apply to bigger towns? E.g. St Helens' and Wigan's catchment areas may expand beyond their immediate vicinity?

12 minutes ago, Tubby said:

That's exactly my point, the aforementioned towns are neither more nor less attractive than Featherstone; in the wider world, they are perceived in exactly the same way, small insignificant northern towns.

And I think this was the argument behind the 'Framing the Future' plan or whatever it was called, which involved mergers and rebranding as big city names.

14 minutes ago, Tubby said:

Was the Sky money significantly better with London/Paris in SL than without?  this is a genuine question, I have no idea.

I don't think it was better, but my suspicion is that the game is now suffering from its instability, lack of vision and inability to expand. If a proper plan had been put in place to develop London (as with Melbourne Storm in Australia) and also foster other expansion areas such as Newcastle, then my guess is that this would have helped to increase the profile, and consequently make it a more appealing game for sponsors and broadcasters. And perhaps we wouldn't be staring down the barrel of a much-reduced broadcasting deal for 2021 onwards. But this is all complete guesswork on my part and I could be completely wrong.

If the game was starting to design a structure from scratch on a blank sheet of paper, based around the current clubs, my guess is that the likes of York, Newcastle and Bradford would be much more strategically attractive propositions than the likes of Featherstone. But the instability provided by P&R means that it is impossible to guarantee any structure that safeguards these clubs from falling out of the top flight.

I can completely see why people like P&R and why they want it to stay, but from my perspective - in the long term interests of the game - we have to devise a top division that works to the game's strengths in terms of strong clubs with a good support base and big potential catchment areas, in order to maximise our potential audience and bring more money into the sport. Alternatively, if people want P&R to stay then we have to accept a huge amount of instability in the game, which may result in missing out on some of that potential audience, and consequently we can't moan if fewer sponsors and broadcasters want to invest in the sport.

 

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.