Jump to content

The General 'Toronto Wolfpack' Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Dave T said:

I believe c£100k or so is granted if you have an Academy. And Sky Try money is granted for foundations to deliver grassroots stuff. 

And clubs have to have a number of UK players and there are incentives on the cap for homegrown players. 

So there are a number of incentives which drive player development, they maybe need a rethink in how they are positioned to make them fit for purpose in a more international league. 

Ive had a good hunt around and cant find anything about this. Do you have a link to it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


3 minutes ago, TIWIT said:

Indeed. Cable sports networks are desperate for programming, the cheaper the better.

Indeed, with Toronto its a shame they couldn't play their loop fixtures in Canada as it would have been an ideal way to host exhibition matches in other Canadian cities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, dkw said:

Ive had a good hunt around and cant find anything about this. Do you have a link to it?

 

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

I assume you mean the Academy funding? I'll have a scan, God knows where I've read it! 

https://www.rugby-league.com/article/39145/rfl-statement-professional-rugby-league-club-in-bradford

This is from 3 years ago but highlights the £100k for a Tier 1 Academy. I have no idea if this has changed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

 

https://www.rugby-league.com/article/39145/rfl-statement-professional-rugby-league-club-in-bradford

This is from 3 years ago but highlights the £100k for a Tier 1 Academy. I have no idea if this has changed. 

Cheers, but that looks like its an additional funding to run an academy rather than withheld from the central funding if you dont.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, dkw said:

Cheers, but that looks like its an additional funding to run an academy rather than withheld from the central funding if you dont.

Yes, that maybe the case, similar to Sky Try funding. 

It's one of the reasons why it needs a rethink of how we fund and incentivise development. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Omott91 said:

Can I ask why?

Personally I agree but really really hope I'm wrong. 

Me too, but I just don't think they'll get the vote. I think the charm offensive has come too late, and has now been replaced with some emotional blackmail from players and unions which I don't think will have gone down too well. 

But I'm not sure what the score is on voting or governance around this, so maybe this'll be taken out of the clubs hands. If the RFL get their way, I suspect it will be a yes, so it's interesting to watch. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

Yes, that maybe the case, similar to Sky Try funding. 

It's one of the reasons why it needs a rethink of how we fund and incentivise development. 

I fully agree with that, having clubs spending more and more money on players (and agents) wages is not the right way to go, especially the clubs who get promoted and have to then just get whatever left or over the hill aussies on big wages. This is why I still think the best way forward is 3 year exemption from relegation for clubs to allow them to feed youth in. Though obviously that also has flaws I do think it can be worked to allow a clear path for youth into 1`st teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

I get that to an extent Harry, though I feel the position of the sport here and the historical baggage it carries (including that of our own making) means that growth here in areas like Newcastle, Wales, the South West, London and and the Midlands are much more difficult. The way I see it is that increased domestic interest, both heartland and not, may have to paradoxically come from outside.

I would largely agree with this, although the game can only rely on 'outside' investment to a very limited point. 

I've said further up this thread that we're actually wrong to see "expansion" as a geographic issue, when it really isn't. The issue of "expansion" is really about expanding the audience for RL and increasing the demand for RL content, be that in-person or over distance (TV and digital) - the latter perhaps being more important longer-term as the population becomes even more transient. Don't get me wrong, geography can be part of the answer but it is not itself the answer. 

I genuinely don't think there are more than a small handful of clubs that have thought about where the next generation of RL supporters and viewers are coming from. I think even fewer have thought about how they're actually going to go out and get them. 

You don't need to put pins in maps and you don't need to wait for the next Argyle or Hughes to come along with a bundle of cash and a choice of city. You just need to make RL something that more people want to buy in order to make it more valuable.

We can play games in places like Newcastle, Cardiff and Coventry but the real issue is that when we're doing that, we're selling the same thing to the same people - the people who are already buying what the sport has to offer. Nobody new is buying and nobody new is watching (at least, not in big enough volumes). 

Expansion starts not with plucking cities out of thin air, but with understanding who we actually want to sell this sport to and catering to what those people want. Geographic expansion might be part of the solution, but don't be fooled into believing that geographic expansion is in any way a solution alone. 

Edited by whatmichaelsays
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A couple of points from me that I'm not clear on if anyone can help.

1, If its SL or bust what happens if they are relegated next year, will he pull out?

2, What is this huge fantastic "wolf grooming" business worth to the SL and is it realistic?

3, When are we likely to see this huge NA TV deal that everybody bangs on about, have I missed it? is it in the pipeline?

4, If again, like Argyle this man is so rich, why is the 1.8M per year of central funding so pivotal to the deal itself when he already owes nearly 1.2M in back pay for just 4 months? 1.8M doesn't cover anything like his payroll for a season so always has a huge shortfall? can he afford to keep covering it?

5, Is he clearing all the debts, to service providers, backroom staff, sub contractors and other clubs etc or just playing staff?

6, Would it not be cost effective to spend all this money on starting an NA league rather than play in an English one but let the RFL administer it? and help gain their own TV deal and have a long term plan to merge them in the future?

7, By my reckoning they have already lost some of their best players with more to be announced, will they even have a team to compete in the SL? if re-instated can they even field a team?

8, Who is paying for all the flights & accommodation for a Canadian team to play in an English league?

 

These are just a few things that I have thought of there will be loads to iron out, there are so many variables to consider when deciding to accept them back into SL for 2021 or not.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dave T said:

Me too, but I just don't think they'll get the vote. I think the charm offensive has come too late, and has now been replaced with some emotional blackmail from players and unions which I don't think will have gone down too well. 

But I'm not sure what the score is on voting or governance around this, so maybe this'll be taken out of the clubs hands. If the RFL get their way, I suspect it will be a yes, so it's interesting to watch. 

Oh come on! Weren't you one of the ones screaming that the TWP players have to get paid no matter what, and now along comes a man with a plan, and some reasonable conditions, that will get them paid. The players agree to it and even try to help things out to get things moving and you don't approve of their actions?! 

You can't have it both ways!!

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TIWIT said:

Oh come on! Weren't you one of the ones screaming that the TWP players have to get paid no matter what, and now along comes a man with a plan, and some reasonable conditions, that will get them paid. The players agree to it and even try to help things out to get things moving and you don't approve of their actions?! 

You can't have it both ways!!

Quote me saying that or we'll just accept that you are lying. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, binosh said:

A couple of points from me that I'm not clear on if anyone can help.

1, If its SL or bust what happens if they are relegated next year, will he pull out?

2, What is this huge fantastic "wolf grooming" business worth to the SL and is it realistic?

3, When are we likely to see this huge NA TV deal that everybody bangs on about, have I missed it? is it in the pipeline?

4, If again, like Argyle this man is so rich, why is the 1.8M per year of central funding so pivotal to the deal itself when he already owes nearly 1.2M in back pay for just 4 months? 1.8M doesn't cover anything like his payroll for a season so always has a huge shortfall? can he afford to keep covering it?

5, Is he clearing all the debts, to service providers, backroom staff, sub contractors and other clubs etc or just playing staff?

6, Would it not be cost effective to spend all this money on starting an NA league rather than play in an English one but let the RFL administer it? and help gain their own TV deal and have a long term plan to merge them in the future?

7, By my reckoning they have already lost some of their best players with more to be announced, will they even have a team to compete in the SL? if re-instated can they even field a team?

8, Who is paying for all the flights & accommodation for a Canadian team to play in an English league?

 

These are just a few things that I have thought of there will be loads to iron out, there are so many variables to consider when deciding to accept them back into SL for 2021 or not.

They have a cool logo and a massive market in North America

All of your points are irrelevant.......don't be so negative 🤣

  • Haha 1

england_identity2.jpg1921_button.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 19/09/2020 at 09:13, Dave T said:

I do have some sympathy for the potential owner's position here. But this position of indirectly publicising the player wage position is misguided. Trying to make this a key part of the decision for the league is distasteful, particularly when one of the demands is to give the owner £1.8m. We shouldn't be using player wages as a pawn in this, and that shouldn't be a factor in the decision on TWP. 

However he isn't the owner and isn't liable, Argyle is the scumbag here. 

 

16 minutes ago, TIWIT said:

Oh come on! Weren't you one of the ones screaming that the TWP players have to get paid no matter what, and now along comes a man with a plan, and some reasonable conditions, that will get them paid. The players agree to it and even try to help things out to get things moving and you don't approve of their actions?! 

You can't have it both ways!!

For the avoidance of doubt, this is my position on the wages. There in writing. 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Quote me saying that or we'll just accept that you are lying. 

Excuse me sir, I was clearly in error. Forgive my mistake.

And I am also sorry that you find it 'distasteful' that the players go public in their support of a plan that would get them paid. How dare they advocate for themselves! Better they follow my example and keep quiet in the presence of those who know all and are so generous as to share their wisdom with us in hopes that that might get them their money.

Fat effing chance of any of that ever happening.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, TIWIT said:

Excuse me sir, I was clearly in error. Forgive my mistake.

And I am also sorry that you find it 'distasteful' that the players go public in their support of a plan that would get them paid. How dare they advocate for themselves! Better they follow my example and keep quiet in the presence of those who know all and are so generous as to share their wisdom with us in hopes that that might get them their money.

Fat effing chance of any of that ever happening.

The players and union should absolutely do what is right for them. They have mortgages and bills to pay and we're totally shafted by Argyle. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

To me it appears Superleague and/or the RFL want LiVolsi to write, in a couple of weeks,  a long term business plan for the future of the game that they should have written themselves prior to encouraging the participation of any expansion teams. Surely this is what Ralph Rimmer and Robert Elstone are getting vast sums of money to produce?

Its simple, either the game (the team owners, fans, sponsors and broadcast partners) want to expand the global footprint of RL in which case share the revenue and expenses equally or alternatively advise any potential investors that the game  is staying put in its M62 silo. Tell Catalans and Toulouse to join a domestic or pan European  league, advise Ottawa and NYRL to set up a NA league, and perhaps we will meet once every couple of years for an International tournament. That would be the kindest thing to do rather than saying to well heeled individuals "yes you can join but when you get too ambitious (making SL in 3 years) or successful (winning the Challenge Cup) you must post a bond or fund the entire shebang yourself. 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Man of Kent said:

I think this comment from Gary Carter rather than a reported comment from a club, but this is a red herring:

Quote

No trans-atlantic sports competition has yet succeded. The NFL has wanted a London franchise for years but so far has not made the maths work.

The NFL has succeeded as a transatlantic venture. It has grown an audience on this side of the Atlantic and sells-out four games a year. That's success. 

The measure of success is not whether there is a London franchise. In many respects, it is better for the NFL to not have a London franchise for the same reason that, before the Rams moved there, Los Angeles was the most important city in the NFL. Without the threat of a London franchise, it's harder for franchises in America to bully the local government into funding new stadiums. 

The NFL aren't doing the London thing in order to establish a franchise. They're doing it to build and monetise an audience. 

Edited by whatmichaelsays
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The players and union should absolutely do what is right for them. They have mortgages and bills to pay and we're totally shafted by Argyle. 

Argyle is GONE! He has thrown the keys on the table and left the building with his tail between his legs. He is KAPUT! DEAD! He is of the past and completely irrelevant to the current situation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, RobertAM said:

To me it appears Superleague and/or the RFL want LiVolsi to write, in a couple of weeks,  a long term business plan for the future of the game that they should have written themselves prior to encouraging the participation of any expansion teams. Surely this is what Ralph Rimmer and Robert Elstone are getting vast sums of money to produce?

It certainly seems Super League wants the RFL to convince them of (a) the financial viability of Toronto and (b) the financial benefits to Super League of including Toronto. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TIWIT said:

Argyle is GONE! He has thrown the keys on the table and left the building with his tail between his legs. He is KAPUT! DEAD! He is of the past and completely irrelevant to the current situation.

So is this a different club then? With a different application??

If so.... start in League 1.

If its the same club.... divvy up

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TIWIT said:

Argyle is GONE! He has thrown the keys on the table and left the building with his tail between his legs. He is KAPUT! DEAD! He is of the past and completely irrelevant to the current situation.

When we are talking about what has happened so far, he is relevant to the discussion. 

I could have just said the pl ayers were shafted by Toronto Wolfpack, their employer, but for some reason I expect you would have taken offence to that to. 

Edited by Dave T
  • Like 1
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...