Jump to content

The General 'Toronto Wolfpack' Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts


3 minutes ago, TIWIT said:

Perhaps not in the legal definition. It was more like Marlon Brando's negotiation tactics in the Godfather - make an offer that can't be refused.

Although TWP could have refused of course. Cancelled the game and stayed in the Championship.

Which in hindsight would probably have been for the best.

 

 

 

It could be refused though. If it was a terrible offer, it could have been refused.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, RP London said:

everytime i go to a stadium... so probably about 15...just in Rugby League in the UK is that ok with you? I've also been to baseball grounds in the US, NFL grounds in the US, Ice hockey stadiums around england and the US and canada, football grounds all around the world, RL grounds in AUS, RU grounds around the world.. how about you?

I have no idea on your point here.. unless you think the clubs are doing things perfectly..  which I dont think anybody would argue.

 

 

I haven't said the clubs are perfect , but they do what they can to sell to the customers they have , they could spend plenty more and be left with plenty on the shelves , in what way would that help the clubs ? 

I will pm you with something later that I suggested to the lower tier clubs about a decade ago on this very subject 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Dave T said:

It could be refused though. If it was a terrible offer, it could have been refused.

No ifs ands or buts, from TWP's side it was a terrible deal. From the SL side it was a fantastic deal -free trips/accommodation to Toronto and they get to divy up TWP's TV money. Christmas comes early!

If you were in Argyle's position would you have refused? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TIWIT said:

No ifs ands or buts, from TWP's side it was a terrible deal. From the SL side it was a fantastic deal -free trips/accommodation to Toronto and they get to divy up TWP's TV money. Christmas comes early!

If you were in Argyle's position would you have refused? 

As it was the deal that TWP themselves had sold their admission on in Year 1, then I don't see why it suddenly became a horrendously expensive and prohibitive deal for TWP.

TWP had never had TV money, had always paid additional SL costs, this wasn't a new deal that was horrendous. I understand the arguments about fairness etc. but that is a matter of opinion. 

Surely TWP had additional income streams in SL in year 4 versus the lower leagues?

I get the argument about fairness, but this hasn't been the thing that has killed off an alleged billionaire's involvement.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, ShropshireBull said:

And no, I don't buy for a second that because you make up 1/12 of broadcast content you get a 12th of a UK based deal. Especially when, as mentioned, you bring nothing into that pot. Plus, this isn't a NA franchise system and even in the elite association football competition at European level, clubs receive a tv pot that is based on how much their native market brings in.Many fans of other clubs would argue that it is fair that you bring in nothing, so you get nothing.

Overall, I do want to see a competitive and thriving Canadian couple in Super League, along with French sides but it has to be done for the long term. I think my way would offer Canada's long term potential to be reached in a way that is 'fair' to everyone. 

I trimmed most out just not copy a long post just for ease of browsing.

 

I actually do agree with you on protecting teams, my own ideal would be for a 16 team league, with 2 Canadian and 2 French teams. English clubs would be placated by receiving an "extra" spot back up to 12. I wouldn't necessarily define it as "protected teams", however, but as "defined slots" per country, with each country free to determine their own entries. So the English could define theirs as the top 12 from their pyramid system, and the bottom of 12 being replaced by the top of their next tier. Canada would be free to directly place in TWP and the Aces since there are no other options. France could do the same, or require the lower of Catalan or Toulouse to playoff against the Elite 1 winner. Up to all of them I would give the power of this decision to governing bodies, i.e. CRLA. That way if Canada were to ever develop it's own league they could have that winner enter if so desired. This has already been done somewhat in Super Rugby in the past with the South African entries.

Where I still don't agree is a forced quota of players. I'm alright with there being different types of organizations off the field - for example the Pro14 having provinces, clubs, regions etc all run differently - on the field it should be level. But, if a modest quota was the price of coming to an agreement then that could be alright. But modest, starting with 3 I think would be reasonable.

But there is another part to my objection to it. Whatever condition forced on a team, whether it be player quotas or anything else, if they don't want to do it for their own reasons, then all you'll get is the minimum lip service. Of course it's beneficial for TWP to find, develop, and play Canadians. But is it more beneficial to them than winning? Does it sell more tickets than winning? It may or may not, and their own internal math would guide that for them. My opinion is that they should be left as free as possible to run their business in the way they see fit. They need to realize for themselves that it increases buy-in from fans, increases potential future players, etc, and that is when you see the honest effort put in.

Regarding TV money. The potential income from further TV deals from broadcasters in France or Canada is what's on the table, and is why it is necessary to have guaranteed teams in the competition. But all members must be treated equally financially. Broadcast fee for broadcast rights is a direct transaction. None of this "who "brings" what", it's abstract at best and unprovable whatabboutism at worst. Equal contribution of content deserves equal remuneration. Whoever buys those rights in the UK, Sky or someone else, knows they are buying the rights to an international competition with international viewers. There is value in providing greater variety of teams for the UK teams to play against, there is value in reaching those viewers who are not in their country. It allows them to present a better offering to potential sponsors who may have customers in multiple countries. The same works in reverse for the broadcasters in the smaller members of the arrangement.

One thing that is abundantly clear from the success of the North American sports leagues is that the more they work together as a partnership to benefit everyone, the more they do succeed. Did you know that the NFL goes as far as sharing the revenue of all merchandise not sold at the stadium? The Packers only got 1/32 of the profit from that Packers hat you see walking down the street in the UK. 

So all the clubs, governing bodies, and league office need to work together as partners to present the most attractive product to all potential buyers (broadcasters, sponsors, etc)), not 12/16 members member saying "we've got ours go find yours".  Things like travel costs should be levelled for all clubs - pay for it all out of the central pot before distributing what's left. Use that league-wide organization to entice a better deal from a hotel chain that operates in all 3 countries. Tie that in with advertising good rates to travelling fans. Think together, act together.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Dave T said:

As it was the deal that TWP themselves had sold their admission on in Year 1, then I don't see why it suddenly became a horrendously expensive and prohibitive deal for TWP.

TWP had never had TV money, had always paid additional SL costs, this wasn't a new deal that was horrendous.

I think it makes sense that they allotted for these costs for a (short) number of years, and that it would get more equitable as they rose to a level with clubs in the same realm of financial capability. And for it not to be planned to be in perpetuity.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Man of Kent said:

Except the 11 Super League clubs (and the Super League board & RFL). 'Please take us back, please. It'll be different this time. PLEASE! We're begging you!'  😉 

No begging or grovelling on this end....never has been and never will be.

You gotta understand that this seems to be some sort of a type of English thing...this begging and grovelling.   Its rooted in history with serfdom and these Lords, estates and your old class society (obviously still practised by many over there today).   The ones that couldn't take it anymore left and emigrated to places like Canada and Australia...some higher ups tried to recreate the Old World society but it never really caught.  Over here we do not bow to the masters or pay rent to the Lords...we are free, but you guys can grovel all you want....its not in our DNA anymore...WE STAND!

Its a take it or leave it deal from Toronto...choose and get on with it...don't wallow in it!...in a way its...well...lets just say it does not reflect kindly upon you.

We call!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Kayakman said:

No begging or grovelling on this end....never has been and never will be.

You gotta understand that this seems to be some sort of a type of English thing...this begging and grovelling.   Its rooted in history with serfdom and these Lords, estates and your old class society (obviously still practised by many over there today).   The ones that couldn't take it anymore left and emigrated to places like Canada and Australia...some higher ups tried to recreate the Old World society but it never really caught.  Over here we do not bow to the masters or pay rent to the Lords...we are free, but you guys can grovel all you want....its not in our DNA anymore...WE STAND!

Its a take it or leave it deal from Toronto...choose and get on with it...don't wallow in it!...in a way its...well...lets just say it does not reflect kindly upon you.

We call!

You’re joking! The past two weeks has seen a procession of employees past (probably owed money) and present (definitely owed money) taking the knee as they beg forgiveness for Toronto. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

You’re joking! The past two weeks has seen a procession of employees past (probably owed money) and present (definitely owed money) taking the knee as they beg forgiveness for Toronto. 

Taking the knee is popular these days 😀 ( only joking before any abuse comes). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, TheReaper said:

I think it makes sense that they allotted for these costs for a (short) number of years, and that it would get more equitable as they rose to a level with clubs in the same realm of financial capability. And for it not to be planned to be in perpetuity.

Of course, but with no signed contract it is clearly just an aspiration, just like I'm sure they hoped they would be able to get a TV deal too. 

But, and this is the clincher, they agreed to this plan (remember they had the backing of a billionaire, huge sponsorship deals and merchandise sale far in excess of all other SL clubs if we are to believe what we are being told) and then doubled down by hiring an expensive squad, and then asking to be allowed to spend even more. 

So quite frankly, it is laughable for anybody to claim £1.8m broke TWP. 

As I say I understand the fairness point, and it is clearly something the new owner wants to address up front, but TWP broke because of poor ownership, terrible business decisions, and Covid. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Kayakman said:

No begging or grovelling on this end....never has been and never will be.

You gotta understand that this seems to be some sort of a type of English thing...this begging and grovelling.   Its rooted in history with serfdom and these Lords, estates and your old class society (obviously still practised by many over there today).   The ones that couldn't take it anymore left and emigrated to places like Canada and Australia...some higher ups tried to recreate the Old World society but it never really caught.  Over here we do not bow to the masters or pay rent to the Lords...we are free, but you guys can grovel all you want....its not in our DNA anymore...WE STAND!

Its a take it or leave it deal from Toronto...choose and get on with it...don't wallow in it!...in a way its...well...lets just say it does not reflect kindly upon you.

We call!

Funny, one of your fellow fans believes 'take it or leave it' deals are blackmail. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

You’re joking! The past two weeks has seen a procession of employees past (probably owed money) and present (definitely owed money) taking the knee as they beg forgiveness for Toronto. 

You are kidding right...think about it...the vast majority of the folks you are talking about (maybe 100%) are British...my point exactly...don't beg...it reflects poorly upon you.  There are better ways to deal with these problems....never beg or grovel...its UnCanadian thats for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Funny, one of your fellow fans believes 'take it or leave it' deals are blackmail. 

Unknown in your culture...its called a 'squeeze play' and it comes from baseball.  This is what the Wolfpack is doing...please watch the video (its short) and then you will understand.

 

 

Edited by Kayakman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Kayakman said:

Unknown in your culture...its called a 'squeeze play' and it comes from baseball.  This is what the Wolfpack is doing...please watch the video (its short) and then you will understand.

 

 

It must be embarrassing how you have all these tactics and things we just don't understand and you've been run ragged by Carter and Hudgell. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 07/09/2020 at 20:08, Kayakman said:

KNOCK...KNOCK....KNOCK...Please, Kind Sir!,  just open the door A LITTLE and let us in....its cold outside...I promise we won't stay long.

 

1 hour ago, Kayakman said:

No begging or grovelling on this end....never has been and never will be.

You gotta understand that this seems to be some sort of a type of English thing...this begging and grovelling.   Its rooted in history with serfdom and these Lords, estates and your old class society (obviously still practised by many over there today).   The ones that couldn't take it anymore left and emigrated to places like Canada and Australia...some higher ups tried to recreate the Old World society but it never really caught.  Over here we do not bow to the masters or pay rent to the Lords...we are free, but you guys can grovel all you want....its not in our DNA anymore...WE STAND!

Its a take it or leave it deal from Toronto...choose and get on with it...don't wallow in it!...in a way its...well...lets just say it does not reflect kindly upon you.

We call!

No begging on your end ? Hmmn.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, RobertAM said:

If the SL clubs vote to deny TWP re entry to SL it will go down as a major own goal. Kiss any future expansion plans anywhere goodbye.

What’s happens to them now? What if they enter the Championship and get promoted again? Will SL let them back in? What about Ottawa? 
 

The worst thing that could happen now though is if SL stays as 11 clubs next year. We’re going backwards, always 1 step forward 2 steps back with this sport

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Derwent said:

Based on that article’s guess of the clubs for and against TWP returning, they look like they can be put in to two categories. Those afraid of the competition that TWP could offer (possibly being relegated and loosing Sky money) and those who see a positive from the competition (a possible growth in publicity and revenues). 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Seems odd that they list Hudds as a 'no' and then provide a quote from them saying they are undecided. 

Perhaps Huddersfield are opposed in principle but not totally decided yet until they’ve seen the proposal.

I’m not prejudiced, I hate everybody equally

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...