The General 'Toronto Wolfpack' Discussion Thread

[Man of Kent]

3 minutes ago, TheReaper said:

My post was in objection to Harry's ridiculous statement that "we don't produce players and are proud of it", when we do and there are strong cultural reasons why they are not the focus of most sports leagues.

I understand that but this is British pro sport we’re talking about and we don’t draft players from colleges here. It’s not about having ‘local heroes’ for the sake of it.

If every club pursued the Toronto model we would quickly find there wouldn’t be enough players of good standard. I’m sure there would be players from somewhere, but they wouldn’t have been developed at professional clubs by professional coaches and training with professional players.

Can you not see Toronto is at a competitive disadvantage compared to clubs with a production pipeline of juniors? 

[Damien]

33 minutes ago, Oldbear said:

Running this team takes a hell of a lot of $. If Argyle loses patience, or gets sick (believe me, I know what it’s like to deal with an unexpected diagnosis of a life threatening illness), then it really won’t matter if there are thousands of passionate fans, unless the Wolfpack can find other rich guys willing to do what he has, then the future would be bleak. Although having a very rich owner can be a major asset, it can also be a potential threat, both for the reasons mentioned above and because the very rich owner will always get his way. Who knows what private discussions have taken place about development, but unless the owner is committed to it (it’s his $ they are spending after all), then nothing, or at best very little, gets done. Now that may be the real reason Perez departed at the end of season 1, it may not be, as has been said, we will watch Ottawa’s approach with interest.

And how is that any different than any other rich owner doing that? Toronto aren't in in their own little bubble when it comes to this but seem to be doing more than most to diversify and develop their commercial side so they aren't dependent on one owner. 

[TheReaper]

26 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

I understand that but this is British pro sport we’re talking about and we don’t draft players from colleges here. It’s not about having ‘local heroes’ for the sake of it.

If every club pursued the Toronto model we would quickly find there wouldn’t be enough players of good standard. I’m sure there would be players from somewhere, but they wouldn’t have been developed at professional clubs by professional coaches and training with professional players.

Can you not see Toronto is at a competitive disadvantage compared to clubs with a production pipeline of juniors? 

I can, but I think it's up to them to recognize the benefits to themselves. Forcing someone to do something makes it less likely that they will do it well. 

[Damien]

3 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

I understand that but this is British pro sport we’re talking about and we don’t draft players from colleges here. It’s not about having ‘local heroes’ for the sake of it.

If every club pursued the Toronto model we would quickly find there wouldn’t be enough players of good standard. I’m sure there would be players from somewhere, but they wouldn’t have been developed at professional clubs by professional coaches and training with professional players.

Can you not see Toronto is at a competitive disadvantage compared to clubs with a production pipeline of juniors? 

The British RL model is signing the best players from amateur clubs that your club can attract in the hope that they become good enough for the first team. Professional clubs aren't some charity signing these players for the good of the game, they are doing that because it makes good sense for them and provides a steady stream of cheap talent. It would not make sense for every club to follow the Toronto model because it does not make business sense for them to do so and some probably couldn't afford to do so even if they wished.

I don't know any other UK sport that blindly follows the model that RL purists want Toronto to follow. I don't even know why some RL fans want all clubs to be the same in some sanitised, strictly controlled model to suit their club. Even the much fabled salary cap and youth development in reality does no more than favour the big clubs and maintain the status quo. It hasn't been this way for the vast majority of the history of Rugby League and isn't seen as the only way in Football or RU. Quite why it is seen as the only way now in RL I don't know. In Football or RU if an owner wants to plough money into the sport then so be it. If a RL club wants to splash the cash and put funds into other clubs through transfer fees then great. If they want to attract superstars then fantastic. As you say if Toronto do not want to produce youth, an argument against them that is exaggerated somewhat after only 3 years, in theory yes they are at a disadvantage but that should be their choice and it certainly shouldn't be the only measure of success.

[TheReaper]

30 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

No it isn't I agree with that, but there is an old saying "When in Rome, do as the Romans do" Toronto (area) may be seperated by a few thousand mile's from the RL organisation they have joined, but they should still be trying to provide other than just leeching.

They provide competitive fixtures, increased media coverage, increased pay to the players of the game. They provide a way for new fans to discover and engage in rugby league fandom. They provide an opportunity for English players to see a part of the world they might not have otherwise gone too, maybe encouraging some of them to stay in the game for a shot to play against or in TO. They provide new ideas of how to do some things. They have provided inspiration for others to start junior clubs here (I know of 2). 

So one aspect of many is not at the same level as all other clubs. Every club has some aspects of many that they do not do as well as other clubs. 

 

[Man of Kent]

13 minutes ago, Damien said:

The British RL model is signing the best players from amateur clubs that your club can attract in the hope that they become good enough for the first team. Professional clubs aren't some charity signing these players for the good of the game, they are doing that because it makes good sense for them and provides a steady stream of cheap talent. It would not make sense for every club to follow the Toronto model because it does not make business sense for them to do so and some probably couldn't afford to do so even if they wished.

I don't know any other UK sport that blindly follows the model that RL purists want Toronto to follow. I don't even know why some RL fans want all clubs to be the same in some sanitised, strictly controlled model to suit their club. Even the much fabled salary cap and youth development in reality does no more than favour the big clubs and maintain the status quo. It hasn't been this way for the vast majority of the history of Rugby League and isn't seen as the only way in Football or RU. Quite why it is seen as the only way now in RL I don't know. In Football or RU if an owner wants to plough money into the sport then so be it. If a RL club wants to splash the cash and put funds into other clubs through transfer fees then great. If they want to attract superstars then fantastic. As you say if Toronto do not want to produce youth, an argument against them that is exaggerated somewhat after only 3 years, in theory yes they are at a disadvantage but that should be their choice and it certainly shouldn't be the only measure of success.

Hmmm. You’re going to need more straw

[Damien]

6 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

Hmmm. You’re going to need more straw

Nope and to be honest I feel that way when I read many of your posts and others. Plenty of people have differing views but yet some want the game run exactly the same way to an exact thinking, with no or little leeway, because that is what has been deemed best by some in Rugby League over the last 2 decades to suit their own agenda. This doesn't really allow for other viewpoints, models or other ways to build a club or achieve success.

[CanadianRugger]

5 hours ago, TheReaper said:

Is just Harry being an ignorant #####**. We produce NHL, NBA, NFL, MLB, CFL, AFL, Super Rugby , Premiership, Top 14, Pro 14, Bundesliga, PGA, ATP, and Olympic level players/athletes and are extremely proud of them.

The economics simply to not allow us to sustain many national leagues that can have that as their focus.

*I'm not forgetting CPL, CEBL and NBLC, but they are all young and still trying to achieve sustainability.

**Mods, I feel Harry's comment deserves my insult since he is displaying literal ignorance in a rude fashion. Remove the insult if you must but please leave the rest of the content of my post intact.

We know the answer to your first question, amen to the rest!

 

[TIWIT]

3 hours ago, SL17 said:

Tell it to Perez.

????

[TIWIT]

3 hours ago, Damien said:

Nope and to be honest I feel that way when I read many of your posts and others. Plenty of people have differing views but yet some want the game run exactly the same way to an exact thinking, with no or little leeway, because that is what has been deemed best by some in Rugby League over the last 2 decades to suit their own agenda. This doesn't really allow for other viewpoints, models or other ways to build a club or achieve success.

Plus it's been such a wonderful success.

[Oldbear]

5 hours ago, Damien said:

And how is that any different than any other rich owner doing that? Toronto aren't in in their own little bubble when it comes to this but seem to be doing more than most to diversify and develop their commercial side so they aren't dependent on one owner. 

The difference is that to do what Toronto do, that is play in a league in a different continent, with no TV money, requires your owner to be really rich, and have no interest in getting a return back, whereas the owner of a say Huddersfield does not need to be so rich, therefore if he were to die, get sick or lose interest, there would probably be other similar wealthy men or women ready to replace him. There’s not too many people of Argyles wealth, and I would guess even fewer that combine that wealth with a willingness to lose a ton of money on an RL team, meaning that if he were to go for whatever reason, he will not be so easy to replace.

[TIWIT]

16 minutes ago, SL17 said:

Why the question marks? 
 

Perez was an employee,  hence the non disclosure when he left. 
 

What world do you live in.

[Harry Stottle]

12 hours ago, TheReaper said:

They provide competitive fixtures, increased media coverage, increased pay to the players of the game. They provide a way for new fans to discover and engage in rugby league fandom. They provide an opportunity for English players to see a part of the world they might not have otherwise gone too, maybe encouraging some of them to stay in the game for a shot to play against or in TO. They provide new ideas of how to do some things. They have provided inspiration for others to start junior clubs here (I know of 2). 

So one aspect of many is not at the same level as all other clubs. Every club has some aspects of many that they do not do as well as other clubs. 

 

I answered your statement when you said "It's nobody's business to tell another business how to find their employees" 

You know very well we were discussing player development, of which my direct answer was "When in Rome........... and leeching" relating to the fact that TWP have joined an organisation and are happy to sit back and rely on others to do all the providing, and based on the progress they are making or even any intention to start it off the reliance on other 'provider's'will be for ever.

The fact that you have ignored that response and launched into some diatribe to sway away from the discussion point, suggests you believe that I am correct.

[RP London]

12 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Sorry RP I was determined to take on board what you said, but when I take a slap in the face it is not in my nature to turn the other cheek, I have to respond.

As I say I respect you and the position you take even though we dont agree all the time. My initial post was not just aimed at you it was aimed at everyone who turns every news story on Toronto into the same fight.

Totally understand your reply to Reaper and having to reply as the insult was not fair. 

 

 

[RP London]

13 hours ago, DoubleD said:

That lasted long

 I gave it a go.. 

[Harry Stottle]

12 hours ago, Damien said:

It hasn't been this way for the vast majority of the history of Rugby League

Go on then, give me a history lesson, tell me how it did work? 

As a kid I probably first picked up a rugby ball in an organised way (not just playing tick 'n pass on the street) aroundish 1962, and I don't think the process I went through had been altered before that if ever at all.

I'm always willing to learn.

[RP London]

to try and sum up... 

Some Toronto fans dont care about the make up of the team they support.. that is equally evident in the UK, if you win the grand final do you care who is in the team? (some of you will say yes you do, and some will say no you dont... its a difference of opinion lets leave it there).

Some Toronto fans arent worried, at the moment, about junior development.. it is also abundantly clear that some in the UK are not that worried about it either... This is not a purely Canadian/Torontonian issue.. frankly there is a little bit of glass houses and stones here. 

We all tend to agree that Junior development takes some time.. so we shouldnt be expecting results straight away but it should be being started, we are talking "putting balls in hand" here.. IMO this is also a way to get community buy in and build supporter bases and not just junior development in terms of getting players onto the roster.

There is a genuine concern about the player pool being thinned too far with no players being added to it from Toronto/canada. Even Toronto fans would surely see this, whether it is seen as that important is a different matter. But equally this would happen with a shrinking sport in the UK anyway. 

The general argument against this all is that a successful Toronto can solve issues rather than be the issue:

With success juniors will want to get involved in Canada and a growing Junior set up will come, equally a successful Toronto could make the sport more appealing for juniors in the UK and may lift numbers for UK game.. across the uk as other areas want to get involved. They can also increase the money pot and the sponsor pool etc etc

All the concerns are genuine, all the counter arguments are genuine too.. no one (except some very small exceptions who the mods normally pick up on) want the sport to die, we all want the best for it. The problem is there is no right or wrong answer in this, people are trying to do what they think is right and then they have to basically see how it goes (especially when the world throws up things you cannot control).

In the end the proof will be in what is happening in years down the line.. can we please just leave it there and treat the posts about Toronto for what they are rather than the continual dive into all of this? Pretty please?

[Damien]

19 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Go on then, give me a history lesson, tell me how it did work? 

As a kid I probably first picked up a rugby ball in an organised way (not just playing tick 'n pass on the street) aroundish 1962, and I don't think the process I went through had been altered before that if ever at all.

I'm always willing to learn.

There's nothing like taking one line from the a long post to try and twist it out of context. That's what I'd expect from some of the others in the Leigh echo chamber.

Of course what you say hasn't changed but its not what I said either. What you say also has nothing to do with what a professional club does to develop a player. Please tell me when a salary cap has existed for the majority of RL's history? When has youth development, which in itself is a loose term because the development actually largely happens at an amateur club, deemed to be the only way for a professional club? 

[Harry Stottle]

8 hours ago, CanadianRugger said:

We know the answer to your first question, amen to the rest!

 

In the words of one if your countries better exports "That don't impress me much"

I don't give a flying one for for the success of other sports or the individuals of other sports, my primary and number one concern is Rugby League Football, and my wish is that in Canada or Toronto in particular that those shakers and manipulators who can make things happen put some effort into 'EXPANDING' the game among the natives in respect of participation and eventually in time that will provide professional player's.

Now will *someone sensible please explain to me why is there seemingly no effort being expanded to get the game initialized and going-on in the playing fields of Toronto, as I have stated previously if that infrastructure is not there to fall back on when as they will surely do fall on hard times then it will all have been a waste of time, money and effort.

I have been witness to the many 'Expansion' projects in Rugby League which have all failed, even ones close to the heartlands but they could easily be 4,500 miles away in that the locals in sufficient numbers have not been introduced, cajoled and participated in the sport, there are loads of references to relate to have a look.

*Where are you Oldbear?

[kiwis 13 6]

having a grassroots development program in your area should be the rule wherever you are... it should bring through at least some future players for your club and it creates awareness and an association with the sport.

[17 stone giant]

2 minutes ago, kiwis 13 6 said:

having a grassroots development program in your area should be the rule wherever you are... it should bring through at least some future players for your club and it creates awareness and an association with the sport.

I can't really understand why any club (new or old) wouldn't be promoting the sport in their area by running junior teams and/or putting on coaching sessions for local kids etc. Are Toronto really not doing any of this? I would find that amazing if they aren't.

[DoubleD]

45 minutes ago, RP London said:

to try and sum up... 

Some Toronto fans dont care about the make up of the team they support.. that is equally evident in the UK, if you win the grand final do you care who is in the team? (some of you will say yes you do, and some will say no you dont... its a difference of opinion lets leave it there).

Some Toronto fans arent worried, at the moment, about junior development.. it is also abundantly clear that some in the UK are not that worried about it either... This is not a purely Canadian/Torontonian issue.. frankly there is a little bit of glass houses and stones here. 

We all tend to agree that Junior development takes some time.. so we shouldnt be expecting results straight away but it should be being started, we are talking "putting balls in hand" here.. IMO this is also a way to get community buy in and build supporter bases and not just junior development in terms of getting players onto the roster.

There is a genuine concern about the player pool being thinned too far with no players being added to it from Toronto/canada. Even Toronto fans would surely see this, whether it is seen as that important is a different matter. But equally this would happen with a shrinking sport in the UK anyway. 

The general argument against this all is that a successful Toronto can solve issues rather than be the issue:

With success juniors will want to get involved in Canada and a growing Junior set up will come, equally a successful Toronto could make the sport more appealing for juniors in the UK and may lift numbers for UK game.. across the uk as other areas want to get involved. They can also increase the money pot and the sponsor pool etc etc

All the concerns are genuine, all the counter arguments are genuine too.. no one (except some very small exceptions who the mods normally pick up on) want the sport to die, we all want the best for it. The problem is there is no right or wrong answer in this, people are trying to do what they think is right and then they have to basically see how it goes (especially when the world throws up things you cannot control).

In the end the proof will be in what is happening in years down the line.. can we please just leave it there and treat the posts about Toronto for what they are rather than the continual dive into all of this? Pretty please?

Well said RP, I hope a line can be drawn under it but I think sadly that won’t be the case so this will be the last time I look at this thread. 

The ironic thing is that if Leigh replaced Toronto in SL for arguments sake, it would do absolutely nothing for the player pool, as they’re fishing from the same pond that other NW clubs are. So the argument is pointless 

[Harry Stottle]

14 minutes ago, Damien said:

There's nothing like taking one line from the a long post to try and twist it out of context. That's what I'd expect from some of the others in the Leigh echo chamber.

Of course what you say hasn't changed but its not what I said either. What you say also has nothing to do with what a professional club does to develop a player. Please tell me when a salary cap has existed for the majority of RL's history? When has youth development, which in itself is a loose term because the development actually largely happens at an amateur club, deemed to be the only way for a professional club? 

OK point taken, but that one line resonated with me more than all the post together.

2 points from your reply,

The Salary Cap, do you see that as an obstacle to youth development?

And, Secondly there was a time when the amatuer game didn't have junior set-ups, it was play at school then join one of the many amatuer clubs at open age level dotted around the towns which useually had enough teams to form their own Leagues, in my own particular case as a 15 year old I had nowhere to go but a local works RU team thay game was far easier for a 15 year old than open age RL, but at 16 went to Leigh RLFC Colts U'17s which then transgressed into the 'B' U19's most professional clubs operated this system and then for those good enough the 'A' team and first team. 

Lots of lads went straight from the Amateur open age to Pro clubs, but the colts system also produced many pro players.

[RP London]

7 minutes ago, DoubleD said:

Well said RP, I hope a line can be drawn under it but I think sadly that won’t be the case so this will be the last time I look at this thread. 

The ironic thing is that if Leigh replaced Toronto in SL for arguments sake, it would do absolutely nothing for the player pool, as they’re fishing from the same pond that other NW clubs are. So the argument is pointless 

i think you're right there!

[Harry Stottle]

12 minutes ago, DoubleD said:

The ironic thing is that if Leigh replaced Toronto in SL for arguments sake, it would do absolutely nothing for the player pool, as they’re fishing from the same pond that other NW clubs are. So the argument is pointless 

I think you are missing the point DD, the Leigh junior set up already provides player's to the professional game, if Leigh had the higher profile status within the town that SL would bring attracting more spectator's which would include more juniors, if they so desire to take up the sport there are community clubs readily available they can go play the sport. 

So whilst I would agree that the same pond would still exist, it would have the opportunity to be stocked wirh more fish that could develop into pro players, that situation sadly is not available for any Toronto youngster who may think, I would like to give this sport a go.

So you see the argument is anything but pointless.