The General 'Toronto Wolfpack' Discussion Thread

[Big Picture]

56 minutes ago, TheReaper said:

To some, sure.

But out of say 10000 regular  Wolfpack fans (the specific numbers aren't terribly critical to making my point):

If we suppose, as many do, that roughly half of them are "here for the beer" i.e. a social outdoor event with friends at a convenient location, or just your casual sports fan who will watch anything - will a slight change of code on the field matter that much? If they can continue their habit of spending sunny afternoons at Lamport, would they stop? How many would care that much, 500 out of a supposed 5000?

Say a quarter of our 10k were existing union fans, players/former players/their friends + families in the Ontario amateur scene, expats, etc. This is probably the "overlap" crowd, i.e. the 2500 strong "base" supporting potentially both the Arrows and the Wolfpack. How many of those do you think would prefer league so strongly that they would not go / no longer go to the Arrows one TWP is no longer an optio.? Obviously a few as commented above, but I'd say less than 10%, call it 5%. Then again, not really an area of growth for the Arrows since they already have most of these people.

And our last quarter is the true opportunity lost for rugby league, is the sports fan who, previously unexposed to any form of rugby, saw the Wolfpack as their first introduction to rugby and fell in love with rugby league. These are the people who will have RL as their benchmark when watching RU, and may find that they don't like the different pace of play or the often unclear breakdown. This is the largest chunk of people who may not bother with switching then, but I'd suggest that if they were open minded enough to adopt a new "foreign" sport when a new team came around, and they really enjoyed their experience, then they may be open minded to following a similar (if not quite as appealing to them) version of the sport, at the same location with a similar game day experience. I'd say that at least 1/3 to 1/2 would be open to that switch. The team is only 4 years old, most people won't be THAT diehard.

So I'd put it at 500 + 125 + 1675 = 2300 who would find RU so unappealing as to turn them off of the rest of the Lamport experience. And I assumed that 2500 were already union/Arrows fans. That still leaves 5,200 possible fans that will be looking for something else that the Arrows can provide. It is a big opportunity for them. They key will be finding a classy way to reach out once TWP is dead (and it isn't yet, let's not forget that!) and say "Hey, if you still want to watch rugby at Lamport, we're here". Maybe a discount to former TWP STHs? 

The crux of everything I've said is that there is far, far, more to a successful sports team than the specific version of chase-a-ball-around-a-field. Marketing, game day experience, fan culture, community outreach, visibility, all play very large parts. In fact, in Toronto, the biggest hurdle by far is not the code, or even the location. It's being perceived as "major league", i.e. big enough to be taken seriously. In sports especially, Toronto loves to be among the best, to the point of excluding the rest of Canada.

Soccer tried and failed many times, and was seen as the game for girls/sissies/European immigrants. But when big-time, big money MLSE (Maple Leafs, Raptors, Toronto Rock Lacrosse, minor league hockey) bought into the "major league", big American MLS, it became one of the most successful franchises in that league. Proving the sport didn't matter so much as the big league credibility and right kind of marketing.

Toronto continually looks down on and fails to support the Argos while the NFL increases in popularity - The Argos play at the same field as TFC, so it's not location, it Toronto's desire for the big-time, and turning it's nose up at anything "second rate". Instead of enjoying our game for it's different rules and field and history (much of Canadian football's history came about from various Toronto clubs and U of T), because the American's do it different that must be the better way. They're to big and too important to play against Saskatchewan and Hamilton, they want to compete with New York and Boston. 

In fact, despite it's reputation as a hockey town, Toronto is actually notoriously bad at supporting junior hockey. That's something that small towns do, not Toronto. Their AHL farm team (senior men) the Marlies get ~6k attendance (13th out of 31 teams in the league), largely because the NHL is so expensive that many families can not attend, so instead go the affordable option with a few rising or rehabbing stars. That attendance number is beaten by 2 or 3 OHL junior teams every year, in cities a fraction the size of TO. Several OHL or previous junior leagues had Toronto teams drop out or move.

So a big part of TWP's attraction was the double whammy of playing in England (instant credibility - we play with the best on the American leagues in American sports, now we play with the best in England in an English sport) AND the big-money,big-time professional appearance of having a very rich owner like David Argyle. Spare no expense, millions upon millions of dollars operations is the expectation for a sports team, not nickel-and-diming over sandwiches and coach bus costs. And while they didn't go straight into Super League, the path was clear, and by having or at least attempting to have a Super League calibre team from the get-go provided that perception that they would be in the the big league very shortly. "Build slowly" as the mantra on here would not work with that. They could overcome the perception being in a "minor league" with teams getting attendance in the 100's, with the combination of playing in England and being  a multi-million dollar operation, but only for a short time. Fake it till you make it.

The "big league" perception is a WAY bigger challenge for the Arrows than any quibbles over what oval-ball rules they play by. Right now MLR exists somewhere in the Major League Lacrosse, Arena Football, WNBA, USL soccer, minor league baseball realm. All of these teams can have decent fan bases, make a bit of money, have some games on a secondary sport channel etc. But they never have their scores on the TSN or ESPN ticker, they don't get included in the results-roundup on sports radio, and might get a once a year highlight on TV with a miracle play or a championship win. The MLR is following the MLS's approach so closely because MLS is the only league that has managed to make that step to "major" league status.

So petty English code rivalries are the least of anyone's worries here.

Very well said there.  What RL needs to overcome it's problems and the other obstacles to its growth in the UK and elsewhere is precisely what you described there re Toronto, in 10 or 12 cities in a spread of 5 or 6 countries all at once via a brand new league set up on that basis.

[Oxford]

2 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

To some 

NO RUGBY IS BETTER THAN UNION 

[Oldbear]

2 hours ago, TheLegendOfTexEvans said:

Not a surprise people who become incredibly rich don't follow the same rules the rest of society follows.

You get what you get with people like that, and that was always the danger.

Money has its own set of ethics and morals. 

If you bound up by your own empathy for individuals i suspect your not going to be billionaire.

Saying that I have friends who have done well and not changed, but maybe that's difference between millions and billions.

The man who owns the company I work for is a multi millionaire. To him people are commodities, he cares little for his employees, in fact his mantra is very much “what can I get away with?”. That I’m afraid is reality when dealing with very rich individuals, they don’t play the same moral game as you or I so in fact we shouldn’t be surprised when this kind of thing happens. As I said in an earlier post, the problem is that when the RFL is approached by a very wealthy individual, they roll over like a puppy dog, all sense of logic goes out of the window. Mr Argyle has invested a huge amount of money in RL, playing the rich fan, now times are tougher, thanks to the pandemic, so he is doing what rich people do, protecting himself. I really feel for the players and in future perhaps the RFL should insist that some sort of bond is lodged with them, purely for the purpose of flying overseas players home and paying suppliers, no bond then you can’t join the club.

[Oldbear]

Just quickly addressing the Reapers very comprehensive post, he has hit the nail on the head when it comes to Toronto sports fans, it is the same here in Vancouver. They want to play in the big leagues, hence the success of the Raptors and Blue Jays, even though these franchises have mostly underachieved throughout their lives, they play in the big time NBA and MLB. It’s also why you see way more NFL jerseys than CFL, it’s major league and CFL is for towns like Regina and Winnipeg. The attraction of TWP was that they were playing in an English league, and England is the birthplace of rugby so that’s credible in a way that a North American League could never be. How many Wolfpack fans become Arrows fans is open to debate, however many may just go back to doing what they did before the Wolfpack came along. I do suspect however that despite the obvious cost and logistical challenges if a way can’t be found for a Canadian RL team to operate in the British structure (and that will definitely need to involve TV from day1) then I suspect that RL in Canada is pretty much dead.

[TheReaper]

17 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

Very well said there.  What RL needs to overcome it's problems and the other obstacles to its growth in the UK and elsewhere is precisely what you described there re Toronto, in 10 or 12 cities in a spread of 5 or 6 countries all at once via a brand new league set up on that basis.

I'm not so certain that would be best. Most successful leagues are based on a local/regional core that added to that core - NHL from Eastern Canada/Northeast US, NRL from the NSWRL, AFL from the VFL, NFL from Ohio/PA leagues.

Rugby does give us two example of "equal" members in multiple countries without a defined core, the Pro 14 and Super Rugby. One was very successful but now appears to be collapsing, and one is fairly successful overall but appears to be in danger of taking on the same problems as SR by adding the SA teams.

To me there is a pretty obvious way to accomplish what you're suggesting while keeping most (not all) people happy. Expand Super league with defined slots per country, and let each country allot them as they see fit. So England can have their 12 spots, and keep P/R, with the bottom English team being replaced by the top Championship team. Canada and France can have two spots each and give them to Toronto, Ottawa, Catalans, and Toulouse. 

If they do this now, England actually gains two spots (Catalans and Toronto). It will be on the historical record that the "foreign"  slots are in addition - no bitching about an English team going down from 12th place out of 16, it's clear and obvious that the four extra spots are "bonus" spots that wouldn't exist if not for the foreign clubs. It will greatly increase the likelihood of broadcasting deal in Canada in France, since they have a guaranteed 2 spots and a local derby.

All TV money present and future divided equally.

Travel for all teams comes out of that pool before splitting. Nobody is disadvantaged by location (why this blindingly obvious solution isn't already in place I don't know). Get airline agreements done at the league level.

Given the locations of the teams and possible future teams in USA, the rest of UK/Ireland, and Spain seeming mostly likely, call it the Atlantic Super League or Atlantic Rugby League if a rebrand is necessary. 

[TIWIT]

2 hours ago, fighting irish said:

Can you summarise it for us CR?

 

It's a Neil Davidson/Canadian Press article so a simple Google ought to find it on other more accessible sites.

[TIWIT]

Funny how not so very long ago people here were all laughing at TWP for overpaying these same players who now seem to exhausted all that money. Not saying it's right to stiff employees on their contracted wages - it's not - but from their play on the field a lot of these guys weren't exactly earning their inflated wages and I don't recall hearing any complaints about that from ownership and management.

[Robin Evans]

3 minutes ago, TIWIT said:

Funny how not so very long ago people here were all laughing at TWP for overpaying these same players who now seem to exhausted all that money. Not saying it's right to stiff employees on their contracted wages - it's not - but from their play on the field a lot of these guys weren't exactly earning their inflated wages and I don't recall hearing any complaints about that from ownership and management.

So in essence,  they lost their opening games on high wages so they shouldn't whinge about not getting paid for three months????

Jesus H Arkwright,  that takes the garibaldi

[RobertAM]

if an established well organized group like MLSE came in and took over, made undertakings to the RFL that they would re-enter either L1 or Ch, employ Canadian/American players representing initially 10% of their roster increasing to 15% by year 5, work to secure a NA TV deal by year 3, would that galvanize the league and fans into an acceptance of their plan as an expansion strategy and agree to central funding?? I think fans here would buy into that, I know I would. Sure it was nice to see a winning team from the off but I'd swop that for longevity. The big question is would SL also accept it and agree to split the SKY pot if the team makes promotion or are they solely focused on lining their own pockets??

[TheReaper]

15 minutes ago, Oldbear said:

 I really feel for the players and in future perhaps the RFL should insist that some sort of bond is lodged with them, purely for the purpose of flying overseas players home and paying suppliers, no bond then you can’t join the club.

I'm pretty sure that's how MLR was able to pay it's players out for the season, I think they have to put the years' money in up front and everyone is paid centrally. So they already had and had accounted for it as money spent already. Just requires the cash flow buffer to be one year ahead. 

5 minutes ago, Oldbear said:

Just quickly addressing the Reapers very comprehensive post, he has hit the nail on the head when it comes to Toronto sports fans, it is the same here in Vancouver. They want to play in the big leagues, hence the success of the Raptors and Blue Jays, even though these franchises have mostly underachieved throughout their lives, they play in the big time NBA and MLB. It’s also why you see way more NFL jerseys than CFL, it’s major league and CFL is for towns like Regina and Winnipeg.

Exactly. I didn't want to get to far into this in my other post for clarity, but there is a directly observable effect of having the teams in "major" America leagues and a greater negative perception of the CFL - NHL excluded because it is Canadian originated and has many Canadian teams, and has a mostly opposite season. So Montreal has the Impact and had the Expos, Vancouver has the Whitecaps and had the Grizzlies - even though two of those teams have left, these cities are now in the "big league" club - too good for the Canadian-only CFL. Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, and Ottawa, even though they have NHL teams, have never been and likely will never be in that club - so they support their CFL teams much, much better. Still clearly second-fiddle to the NHL, but that gap isn't as wide and permanent as some would believe. The Melnyk disaster in Ottawa at the same time as the rebirth and relative success of the RedBlacks has them on very strong footing in comparison to the Senators.

5 minutes ago, Oldbear said:

The attraction of TWP was that they were playing in an English league, and England is the birthplace of rugby so that’s credible in a way that a North American League could never be. How many Wolfpack fans become Arrows fans is open to debate, however many may just go back to doing what they did before the Wolfpack came along.

That really is the most likely outcome for many. How many would have gone to their first game based on a random event - a friend invited them, they caught a news clip, they saw an ad, someone handed them a free ticket  . It will most likely be equally random if a similar random event happens to get them out to an Arrows game. I think access to the TWP mailing list would be a very valuable thing for the Arrows - I'm not sure if privacy laws allow that to be sold/shared though.

5 minutes ago, Oldbear said:

I do suspect however that despite the obvious cost and logistical challenges if a way can’t be found for a Canadian RL team to operate in the British structure (and that will definitely need to involve TV from day1) then I suspect that RL in Canada is pretty much dead.

One thing that hasn't made sense to me is how the TWP presence has had seemingly zero effect on the amateur Ontario scene. I know several guys who play in it, and if anything it's been a slow decline over almost the exact same time frame. They went from 4 teams (barely) down to two. I think the biggest reason was that they no longer avoid RU season, and most players are/were doing both, but it's very strange that there's been basically no natural swelling of playing interest.

[TheReaper]

12 minutes ago, RobertAM said:

if an established well organized group like MLSE came in and took over, made undertakings to the RFL that they would re-enter either L1 or Ch, employ Canadian/American players representing initially 10% of their roster increasing to 15% by year 5, work to secure a NA TV deal by year 3, would that galvanize the league and fans into an acceptance of their plan as an expansion strategy and agree to central funding?? I think fans here would buy into that, I know I would. Sure it was nice to see a winning team from the off but I'd swop that for longevity. The big question is would SL also accept it and agree to split the SKY pot if the team makes promotion or are they solely focused on lining their own pockets??

MLSE ARE the broadacasters, so that's sorted if they bought in. They are owned 37.5% Rogers (Sportsnet) 37.5% Bell (TSN) and the last bit a rich guy named Larry.

However, go take a look at TFC's history of playing Canadians. They meet the minimum, barely, at all times. They know Toronto better than anyone, and are in it to make money. Playing Canadians that are only there based on nationality won't sell any more tickets. We love our local stars when they make it big, but they do it on their playing merits. 

If the RFL truly wanted Canadian players in their league system, they would mandate that ALL teams have one or two. That way it's fair and not team is hamstrung by a different player pool, and all teams would contribute resources and give guys a chance. But the RFL has a really big problem with treating teams equally.

[John WP Fan]

 

6 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Do you as I think that will be the attitude of many Torontonians? Sorry if that is the wrong collective description.

i think Reaper answered this very well.

[Hela Wigmen]

42 minutes ago, TIWIT said:

Funny how not so very long ago people here were all laughing at TWP for overpaying these same players who now seem to exhausted all that money. Not saying it's right to stiff employees on their contracted wages - it's not - but from their play on the field a lot of these guys weren't exactly earning their inflated wages and I don't recall hearing any complaints about that from ownership and management.

What on earth does their performance have to do with anything? It’s absolutely abhorrent to link their performances to monies owed. 

[Harry Stottle]

3 hours ago, TheReaper said:

will a slight change of code on the field matter that much

3 similarities,

shape of the ball, shape of the pitch, shape of the goalposts.

[Harry Stottle]

2 hours ago, Oxford said:

Think I last watched a union game when the British Lions toured South Africa when they had quite a few ex League lads playing.

Each to there own Oxy.

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, Hela Wigmen said:

What on earth does their performance have to do with anything? It’s absolutely abhorrent to link their performances to monies owed. 

We are seeing true colours on show now. 

In fact this is like a carbon copy of issues a heartland team had over the last couple of years, the names are interchangeable but the comments from fans are nigh on identical. 

[Robin Evans]

1 minute ago, Harry Stottle said:

Think I last watched a union game when the British Lions toured South Africa when they had quite a few ex League of lads playing.

Each to there own Oxy.

I played it for thirty odd years. Loved it.

League always my favourite watch.

[TheLegendOfTexEvans]

3 hours ago, Oldbear said:

The man who owns the company I work for is a multi millionaire. To him people are commodities, he cares little for his employees, in fact his mantra is very much “what can I get away with?”. That I’m afraid is reality when dealing with very rich individuals, they don’t play the same moral game as you or I so in fact we shouldn’t be surprised when this kind of thing happens. As I said in an earlier post, the problem is that when the RFL is approached by a very wealthy individual, they roll over like a puppy dog, all sense of logic goes out of the window. Mr Argyle has invested a huge amount of money in RL, playing the rich fan, now times are tougher, thanks to the pandemic, so he is doing what rich people do, protecting himself. I really feel for the players and in future perhaps the RFL should insist that some sort of bond is lodged with them, purely for the purpose of flying overseas players home and paying suppliers, no bond then you can’t join the club.

I am sure people had a lot of nice foreign trips and meals along the way to make the decision.

Personally i think the whole thing was spin by Perez he persuaded Argyle it would work it was never going to wash its face.

Bringing in Noble and Vickers pretty much confirmed that theory in my head.

 

 

[TIWIT]

1 hour ago, Hela Wigmen said:

What on earth does their performance have to do with anything? It’s absolutely abhorrent to link their performances to monies owed. 

Why do you guys not read entire posts instead of snatching one line out of context and trying to use that to prove your point - and you're just the latest HW, not the only one, so I'm not singling you out.

Posters were laughing at TWP at at the start of the season for having probably the highest payroll for which they were getting the worst results. TWP were clearly overpaying their players - which was the general consensus - or said players were not delivering.

Now TWP is broke and not paying their players and everyone who was a critic of those players is all sympathetic of their situation.

Of course they should be paid what's owed to them. They signed a contract in good faith and deserve their money. Even if their on-field performance doesn't merit such a high wage, which is what so many here were saying. That's just another mistake made by TWP management, but the 180° swing in attitude from overpaid has-beans to underpaid victims of a rich man smacks of hypocrisy.

And yes, there is a direct correlation between on-field performance and a player's paycheque. For a team in any sport to succeed your highest-paid players have to be your best performing players.

[TheReaper]

49 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

3 similarities,

shape of the ball, shape of the pitch, shape of the goalposts.

That this was you takeaway from what I posted, shows me you're just more interested in taking petty potshots at a sport you don't like, rather than any actual discussion about why a rugby (or any other) team may or may not work in the context of the city of Toronto and playing in international sports leagues. Maybe you can take your clever remarks to the cross code forum, I'm interested in the factors that influence success as a sports business and how the Toronto Wolfpack fit into that overall landscape.

 

Also,

methods of moving the ball - backwards passing, kicks, running

type of contact allowed

offside concepts 

scoring concepts

basic player positions structure  

 

You know.... just most of the core elements of both sports. 

[Robin Evans]

but the 180° swing in attitude from overpaid has-beans to underpaid victims of a rich man smacks of hypocrisy.

"overpaid has beens" is an opinion.

BUT.. thats irrelevant. They should still have been paid their dues regardless of my or anyone else's opinions. There's no hypocrisy there no matter how you try and dress it.

[LeytherRob]

29 minutes ago, TIWIT said:

Why do you guys not read entire posts instead of snatching one line out of context and trying to use that to prove your point - and you're just the latest HW, not the only one, so I'm not singling you out.

Posters were laughing at TWP at at the start of the season for having probably the highest payroll for which they were getting the worst results. TWP were clearly overpaying their players - which was the general consensus - or said players were not delivering.

Now TWP is broke and not paying their players and everyone who was a critic of those players is all sympathetic of their situation.

Of course they should be paid what's owed to them. They signed a contract in good faith and deserve their money. Even if their on-field performance doesn't merit such a high wage, which is what so many here were saying. That's just another mistake made by TWP management, but the 180° swing in attitude from overpaid has-beans to underpaid victims of a rich man smacks of hypocrisy.

And yes, there is a direct correlation between on-field performance and a player's paycheque. For a team in any sport to succeed your highest-paid players have to be your best performing players.

I think its perfectly reasonable to believe both that TWP over paid on players, but £0 a month  is under paying them.  

[Dave T]

30 minutes ago, Robin Evans said:

but the 180° swing in attitude from overpaid has-beans to underpaid victims of a rich man smacks of hypocrisy.

"overpaid has beens" is an opinion.

BUT.. thats irrelevant. They should still have been paid their dues regardless of my or anyone else's opinions. There's no hypocrisy there no matter how you try and dress it.

Crazy isn't it? It is one of the most bizarre points I have seen on this thread, and there have been many!

[TIWIT]

57 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Crazy isn't it? It is one of the most bizarre points I have seen on this thread, and there have been many!

Thanks. If I can't educate and/or enlighten I'll settle for amuse.

[ATLANTISMAN]

3 hours ago, TheLegendOfTexEvans said:

I am sure people had a lot of nice foreign trips and meals along the way to make the decision.

Personally i think the whole thing was spin by Perez he persuaded Argyle it would work it was never going to wash its face.

Bringing in Noble and Vickers pretty much confirmed that theory in my head.

 

 

EVERYONE CALM DOWN 

We can have as many different opinions on here as we like however IMHO its all very simple.

* Perez fell in love with RL (Nothing wrong with that I did we all did)

* DA was invited to be an investor and spun whatever 

* DA discovered that all was not a bed of roses

* Perez left (Maybe signed agreement to say nothing)

* DA keeps it going hoping for uplift sponsorship crowds etc 

* Covid 19 kicks in whole thing falls apart 

HAPPENS 

Lets move on

 

P