Brian McDermott calls for extra salary cap and quota spots for non-heartland clubs

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

Just now, scotchy1 said:

The rules dont affect everyone equally. Applying them with no thought to local and individual factors is unfair. 

Excellent point. When some people say that everyone should play by the same rules, it's easy to forget that many heartlands clubs have a 80+ year head start in terms of player production pathway and local infrastructure. So viewing a level playing field purely in terms of money and salary cap dispensations completely ignores the gigantic advantage that heartlands clubs have in terms of recruiting players. It could be argued that London's salary cap should be 2 or 3 times that of the heartlands clubs, given the cost of living. Players will be able to make their money go alot further in the north than they can in London.

[paulwalker71]

Love the way the posters are queuing up to say that Toronto should 'play by the same rules'

Well, giving them NO central funding AND making them pay everyones expenses is hardly playing by the same rules is it?

Wake up people - it's NOT a level playing field. The other SL clubs are scared witless about Toronto - because they aren't going to be scratching around at the bottom like London (or Featherstone if that happens) - in 12 months time one of the self-entitled SL clubs is losing their seat at the top table!

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, Krzzystuff said:

we're in year three going on four...weren't we supposed to die in year one, and then two and then three? You going to look back at your 100% record of failing to predict our failure anytime? Come over and see what's its all about.

 

Now now Krizzy you are totally out of order, ask K'man that is if he has not got selective memory - as in giving you a "like" for your misinformation - the only time I have got Toronto's rise up the League's wrong was last year, WHEN THEY FAILED against London, so not a 100% fail, a 66% 2 out of 3 success rate, you my friend have me mixed up with someone else, have dreamt it, or fabricated it to suit your argument, a much nicer way of accusing you to be lying. 

Now what you have to worry about is I don't quite often get Rugby League match predictions wrong twice in a row, I said a few weeks ago even from 5th place and Toronto having the 'easy ride' given a full team and a *good neutral refereeing performance, that Fev have the personnel and game to beat the Favourites.

*I am not suggesting that any referee would purposefully lean one way or the other, but I have seen it many times were a very big majority crowd can influence some decisions even if only by subliminal influence.

[Roy Haggerty]

3 hours ago, Saint Toppy said:

Should be the same set of rules for everyone !

McDermott should quit whining and concentrate on his own job

Should be the same rules for everyone. Except Toronto shouldn’t get the same slice of the TV money as other clubs. And Catalans should have to pay a bond to enter the Cup, unlike the other clubs.

 

Same rules for everyone. As long as expansion clubs get clobbered by a poorer deal. 

[GUBRATS]

2 hours ago, Marauder said:

London failed for so long because they shipped players in, they've started to benefit from the amateurs starting junior teams that has players feeding into an academy - If you read my post it says invest in a 8 to 12 team league etc, by pass the long cold nights and use the extra money to build a future for rugby league and Toronto in Canada.

I recall back in 1985 watching Fulham , coached by Roy Lester at the time training at Lowton High School ( less than a mile from the LSV ) , all except Hussain Mbarki who trained mid week at his local Union club in London 

Very similar to Toronto's situation in fact 

[Harry Stottle]

18 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

Excellent point. When some people say that everyone should play by the same rules, it's easy to forget that many heartlands clubs have a 80+ year head start in terms of player production pathway and local infrastructure. So viewing a level playing field purely in terms of money and salary cap dispensations completely ignores the gigantic advantage that heartlands clubs have in terms of recruiting players. It could be argued that London's salary cap should be 2 or 3 times that of the heartlands clubs, given the cost of living. Players will be able to make their money go alot further in the north than they can in London.

What a load of complete tosh,

A 80+ year club could be said should have a dispensation and be rewarded for having kept the game alive and producing player's for those club's incapable of doing so, also being the focal point of the local communities which enables the infrastructure to continue. 

As for player's who choose to make a living in London that is simply their choice, if they could not afford to do it they wouldn't, please explain why players stay there for numerous seasons if they can't afford to, the truth of the matter is those player's do not easily and readily attract other clubs and the standing of the game in the capital is such that they don't generate enough cash to raise the profile of the club with attendances around the 1000 mark they have been wonderful to watch this season and if the populace of the area has been impressed and want more and better get along there and raise the budget, but we all know that ain't going to happen.

I'm a firm believer in you get out of life what you put into it, if you do it right you get rewarded, that right has to be earned. 

[Krzzystuff]

1 hour ago, Marauder said:

Spend the coin on development instead of trying to win everything with a massive financial advantage.

Do you understand sports at all? a wining team gets people looking at you. we all agree that RL is a great sport and once people see it they will likely get hooked. if no one knows it exists who are you going to develop?

[MustardBoy]

3 hours ago, Krzzystuff said:

The M60-boohoo is going mainstream folks...deal with it! You're not a hick village road anymore once were in so maybe go on a major trip outside your comfort zone...like across the road. come out of the dark ages.

Just think, you're ultimately aiming to buy trophies, in a league that's been held together for over 120 years by diddy clubs in hick villages in a foreign country whom you seem to have bitterness towards. How come the mighty Canada hasn't managed to form its own Rugby (either code) league of its own, with it being such a sporting Mecca riddled with huge mega cities? Shouldn't you show a tad more respect to the fans of clubs whom you're trying to leap-frog? Toronto aren't the saviours of anything, they're a marketing machine.

[Harry Stottle]

18 minutes ago, Krzzystuff said:

Do you understand sports at all? a wining team gets people looking at you. we all agree that RL is a great sport and once people see it they will likely get hooked. if no one knows it exists who are you going to develop?

Fair point, but you guy's keep telling us how popular RL is in Toronto, much more so than in many established towns in the north of England,  I am aware you can measure its popularity in Toronto by the crowd numbers but how many of that crowd populace is capable of playing the game in the future at a professional level, let us take away the ladies, those to old  and the infirmed what kind of numbers are you left with, do the same excersize with the 'home' TV audience in Toronto, what are the capable numbers remaining?

Just a thought. 

[Harry Stottle]

Writing the above got me thinking of the games I have seen televised from Lamport Stadium, it is the lack of young faces I have noticed in the crowd, definitely none in the beer village, and not many on the terraces.

 Not being one to assume these things, I am up to being told I am wrong  I will take make a concerted effort to evaluate the question on Saturday evening.

[hrtbps]

4 hours ago, Kayakman said:

McDermott is talking sense....for those that say the rules should be the same for everyone then why are the other clubs not paying for Toronto to travel to their home fixtures?....the word 'hypocrite' comes to mind.

 

Just to play devil's advocate here, isn't the reason Toronto pay travel expenses is because they chose to be based in another continent to everyone else, and nobody else pays Toronto's travel expenses because they didn't choose for Toronto to be based in another continent? 

[TboneFromTO]

McDermott is right if we are of the opinion that the league needs to expand.  I know some on here are not of that opinion.

Dispensation in the way he means would surely need a timelimit on how long it would be allowed (5 years imo) 

I personally feel that dispensation should be allowed especially if the club is denied central funding.

16 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Writing the above got me thinking of the games I have seen televised from Lamport Stadium, it is the lack of young faces I have noticed in the crowd, definitely none in the beer village, and not many on the terraces.

 Not being one to assume these things, I am up to being told I am wrong  I will take make a concerted effort to evaluate the question on Saturday evening.

As for this comment Harry - I have found the twp crowd to be younger then what I have experienced over here, just my personal experience (granted ive only seen them at lamport once)

[Oliver Clothesoff]

How do you define “non-heartlands” and how does one go from being deemed non-heartlands to being a heartlands club? Is there a time period on it? A barometer of on and/or off-field success? 

It’s too ambiguous and vague a term and just as difficult to police. 

[PREPOSTEROUS]

7 hours ago, Total Rugby League said:

Toronto head coach Brain McDermott believes non-heartland clubs should be given dispensations, including a larger salary cap and more overseas quota spots. The Wolfpack head coach says he has been “fascinated” by the ongoing saga regarding the club’s potential entry into Super League, and questioned whether decision-makers are keen to see Toronto be successful. McDermott, who spent five years at…

View the full article

Don't have any issues with this. The heartland clubs have the benefit of the junior and amateur clubs to pick over, non-heartlands don't have that. I'd say there is a 10 year dispensation which, if they lasted that long, should hopefully see junior players coming through

The caveat for me, any dispensation should be dependent upon investing in the local scene in preparation to produce a playing resource for the future. 

[Kayakman]

37 minutes ago, hrtbps said:

Just to play devil's advocate here, isn't the reason Toronto pay travel expenses is because they chose to be based in another continent to everyone else, and nobody else pays Toronto's travel expenses because they didn't choose for Toronto to be based in another continent? 

Not at all...the reason Toronto payed travel expenses was because they were nice and wanted to help out others; very altruistic.  Plus the League 1 Clubs and Championship Clubs were being inconvenienced by coming over and we wanted to minimize any problems for them.

The reason no one pays in SL will pay Torontos travel expenses are because they are cheap and used to being on the dole and having everyone else pay their way.  Sort of like being a permanent bum who constantly takes welfare checks but does nothing to pay back the society or change their condition/situation.

Its more like that.

[Oliver Clothesoff]

23 minutes ago, PREPOSTEROUS said:

Don't have any issues with this. The heartland clubs have the benefit of the junior and amateur clubs to pick over, non-heartlands don't have that. I'd say there is a 10 year dispensation which, if they lasted that long, should hopefully see junior players coming through

The caveat for me, any dispensation should be dependent upon investing in the local scene in preparation to produce a playing resource for the future. 

So a club must then, after ten years, rip their squad apart to suit the salary cap and quota that the rest of the teams have? How is that productive?

[Manxmanc]

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Writing the above got me thinking of the games I have seen televised from Lamport Stadium, it is the lack of young faces I have noticed in the crowd, definitely none in the beer village, and not many on the terraces.

 Not being one to assume these things, I am up to being told I am wrong  I will take make a concerted effort to evaluate the question on Saturday evening.

There is a previous post referring to TWP actively targeting the 18-35 age group, and figures showed this group to be a very significant percentage of their current following. If I can pinpoint the interview, I'll add a further post.

Edit: It was from a Bob Hunter interview on Sportsnet Today (about 25th August), where he actually confirmed that they were targeting the 20-35 age group which represented a significant section of their support.

 

[TboneFromTO]

3 minutes ago, Oliver Clothesoff said:

So a club must then, after ten years, rip their squad apart to suit the salary cap and quota that the rest of the teams have? How is that productive?

So established clubs are forever at a spending disadvantage?

The idea would be to help them get established,  maybe take away the dispensation over time not just a cold pull

[Oliver Clothesoff]

Just now, TboneFromTO said:

So established clubs are forever at a spending disadvantage?

The idea would be to help them get established,  maybe take away the dispensation over time not just a cold pull

Why would an established club be at an advantage? 

 

[ELBOWSEYE]

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Writing the above got me thinking of the games I have seen televised from Lamport Stadium, it is the lack of young faces I have noticed in the crowd, definitely none in the beer village, and not many on the terraces.

 Not being one to assume these things, I am up to being told I am wrong  I will take make a concerted effort to evaluate the question on Saturday evening.

If you look at the age profile of fans over here you fill find an ageing fan base in general, although some clubs are trying to encourage young fans to attend with various activities. 

[TboneFromTO]

5 minutes ago, Oliver Clothesoff said:

Why would an established club be at an advantage? 

 

Once a club is established they should be treated as equal by the league, a thriving fan base, and established presence in their city/town means they shouldn't need to be treated differently from the established heartlands clubs.  Or what's the point in having the rules in the first place

If all the expansion (non heartlands) teams can spend extra,  all of a sudden the established clubs become uncompetitive due to not being able to wage match that puts them into trouble.

[redjonn]

If SL was a closed shop and threat of relegation a non issue I could see strong rational for differing financial and non financial regulations being flexible. That is in order to provide maximum support to grow the sport in the chosen  selected expansion area's. As distinct from an ad-hoc entity suddenly appearing in what may not of been a priority expansion area.  It may be that the selected area was France to increase clubs in SL their or in London or where-ever, if we had a strategic plan for growing the sport in other area's within the sports administration locality.

As it is not the above I don't see why rules should be different, with the possible exception of taking account of local wage issues like a London weighting. Then again one could imagine that say a place like Leeds which has relative good local economy than against say Wakefield (not wishing to denigrate but just comparing for example to make a point)  - should we then adjust for that.

[PREPOSTEROUS]

43 minutes ago, Oliver Clothesoff said:

So a club must then, after ten years, rip their squad apart to suit the salary cap and quota that the rest of the teams have? How is that productive?

I motioned 10 years, you pick you're own time frame. There needs to be a time limit to give the incentive to develop local players otherwise there is no gain to be made from the expansion. 

 

It could also be a sliding scale which would allow clubs to prepare for the alignment of the existing clubs. 

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

2 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

What a load of complete tosh,

A 80+ year club could be said should have a dispensation and be rewarded for having kept the game alive and producing player's for those club's incapable of doing so, also being the focal point of the local communities which enables the infrastructure to continue. 

As for player's who choose to make a living in London that is simply their choice, if they could not afford to do it they wouldn't, please explain why players stay there for numerous seasons if they can't afford to, the truth of the matter is those player's do not easily and readily attract other clubs and the standing of the game in the capital is such that they don't generate enough cash to raise the profile of the club with attendances around the 1000 mark they have been wonderful to watch this season and if the populace of the area has been impressed and want more and better get along there and raise the budget, but we all know that ain't going to happen.

I'm a firm believer in you get out of life what you put into it, if you do it right you get rewarded, that right has to be earned. 

I respectfully disagree and think your post is a load of complete tosh.

[Denton Rovers RLFC]

5 hours ago, Eddie said:

Agree it should be the same rules for everyone. I’d love to see the salary cap increased though, not by loads, £500k maybe, it’s too small time at the moment and too many players leave for the NRL or Union. If it means the gap widens between top and bottom so what, the weaker clubs will have to work harder. 

Until supporters of the game are prepared to put a pound or more per game into the sport then clubs can't afford to increase the cap by that amount, the only alternate is a significant increase in sponsorship and TV deals, the former isn't going to happen because the interest in rugby league as a whole has retrograded compared to other competing sports, TV deal, well I have absolutely no idea how that's going to pan out but we are looking at around £30M net increase over 5 years just to cover £500k (for 12 clubs) never mind all the additional increases in costs to run a pro club since the last TV deal.