Championship clubs consider structure changes

[Hela Wigmen]

A five team “development league” is a terrible idea, might as well just liquidate the expansion clubs and keep it a local game for local people. 

[Robthegasman]

3 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

They have only 4 hours Rob not enough time to get drunk and fall asleep

Depends how many pints they sink,and if they have had a few scoops before

[HarrogateKnights]

2 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

And you believe that 9's is the product that cross will that divide HK? Not for me sorry.

No don't believe 9s is the way forward. I would be open to a 9s tournament instead of summer bash though

[HarrogateKnights]

2 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

It's a money issue HK , as I put a much bigger % of the expansion ( and Cumbrian currently ) clubs income is travel costs , without that expense covered , they will struggle , IMO

Totally agree its a money issue. Ideally the overseas teams should be playing in their own leagues. The French teams together. Regional leagues below super league might be potentially the way to go

[THE RED ROOSTER]

Actually this is a debate going on across UK Sport not just in Rugby League

In Soccer

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50674331

in Rugby Union

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/51473029

The real question is what is a sustainable second tier professional structure ?.

My money would be on a franchised Super League 1 and 2 of 10 clubs in each with P&R between the two with the second tier having a lower salary cap. From a TV point of view you would have the "jeopardy" of relegation from the top flight with the excitement of the race to Super League 1. A bit like the 8/8/8 only more sensibly across the two divisions over a season with a soft landing for the relegated club and not too steep a financial climb for the promoted club.

There would be franchise criteria though for membership of both leagues around finances, player development and geographical locatio,n as with the first time round, to determine who "adds value" to the game, its sponsors, growing the playing base and TV

And if you asked a select eight Championship clubs "do you want in ?" then the answer is going to be "ta very much" and the rest will be abandoned. That is the way of things when it comes to self-preservation.

I am not saying that I approve of all of this, but with the next TV deal offering less money do not be surprised if "the powers that be" within the game have been thinking about something similar to that which I have outlined here.

[Hela Wigmen]

3 minutes ago, THE RED ROOSTER said:

Actually this is a debate going on across UK Sport not just in Rugby League

In Soccer

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50674331

in Rugby Union

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/51473029

The real question is what is a sustainable second tier professional structure ?.

My money would be on a franchised Super League 1 and 2 of 10 clubs in each with P&R between the two with the second tier having a lower salary cap. From a TV point of view you would have the "jeopardy" of relegation from the top flight with the excitement of the race to Super League 1. A bit like the 8/8/8 only more sensibly across the two divisions over a season with a soft landing for the relegated club and not too steep a financial climb for the promoted club.

There would be franchise criteria though for membership of both leagues around finances, player development and geographical locatio,n as with the first time round, to determine who "adds value" to the game, its sponsors, growing the playing base and TV

And if you asked a select eight Championship clubs "do you want in ?" then the answer is going to be "ta very much" and the rest will be abandoned. That is the way of things when it comes to self-preservation.

I am not saying that I approve of all of this, but with the next TV deal offering less money do not be surprised if "the powers that be" within the game have been thinking about something similar to that which I have outlined here.

There’s twelve Super League clubs, where are the other eight coming from when only London and Toulouse are the only professional sides outside of the Super League?

[Moscow01]

League 1 and Championship clubs who currently don’t own their own ground and rely on RFL funding should be extremely worried. I can’t see a future for them. 

I think progressive, well-run clubs like Newcastle will be OK. Teams like Whitehaven and Oldham - with no money and no hope of ever returning to what they once were - will be in trouble. 
 

In a few years’ time I see a 14 team Super League, a Championship division containing the best run part-time teams who own their own grounds and can access income. Then all the rest - much of the teams currently in League 1 - forced to go amateur or cease to exist. 

[Robthegasman]

22 minutes ago, Moscow01 said:

League 1 and Championship clubs who currently don’t own their own ground and rely on RFL funding should be extremely worried. I can’t see a future for them. 

I think progressive, well-run clubs like Newcastle will be OK. Teams like Whitehaven and Oldham - with no money and no hope of ever returning to what they once were - will be in trouble. 
 

In a few years’ time I see a 14 team Super League, a Championship division containing the best run part-time teams who own their own grounds and can access income. Then all the rest - much of the teams currently in League 1 - forced to go amateur or cease to exist. 

I think you will be sadly proven right.I think we will see a number of clubs outside of Super League be forced to go amateur or die.

You mention Newcastle quite conveniently and it is my understanding that Newcastle Falcons RUFC own Newcastle Thunder.And you are right they are a progressive club.Perhaps they offer a a taste of what could be done.

[Hela Wigmen]

1 hour ago, scotchy1 said:

I didn't suggest a 5 team development league. I suggested that if the 5 teams were in a real development league other clubs would find it easier to step up and compete meaning more clubs would be added. 

There is Ottawa and NYC pretty much confirmed, valencia and red star rumoured, plus dublin often rumoured

A lower level could see the return of the likes of Gloucester, hemel or oxford especially if it went to a regional competition 

You may as well kill them all off with that travel. 

[THE RED ROOSTER]

2 hours ago, Hela Wigmen said:

There’s twelve Super League clubs, where are the other eight coming from when only London and Toulouse are the only professional sides outside of the Super League?

That 's why I wrote "select eight". it will boil down to who has the finances to support Professional Rugby League in a climate of reduced TV funding even on a lower cap in the second group. - Remember not every full time outfit spends to the cap limit to begin with. As with the original Super League this may well be by invitation from " the powers that be"

Anyone who watched "We play League" will have noticed Robert Elstone's planning sessions about "Planet League". His brief is a simple one: - How do you interest a TV Network in the game.

Now if you accept that the 8/8/8 system was an attempt by Rugby League to create a made for SKY TV spectacle, then you would conclude that any package for TV has to have an element of drama / jeopardy built in. Franchising has not worked as it lacked any sense of drama at the bottom of the table and allowed clubs to atrophy. Conversely even supporters of P&R like myself would have to concede that League's cycle of boom and bust is essentially bankrupting clubs because of the disparity between leagues. So as with the other sports on which there are links in my original post is decide what are the twenty clubs on which can build a competition that is adequately financed allowing for movement without creating bankruptcy and future proofing the game.

Of course the problem here is all clubs outside Super League (not including fantasy Rugby League sides in North America) All of whose Chairman and fans think they should be part of this competition. Deciding who is in and who is out is always problematic in league as the start of Super League and of franchising proved.

The structure here is me thinking out loud but if you do read closely the comments from Robert Elstone and others you will note that something along similar lines may be being pushed as an option both to SKY and to any Private Investment firm they want involved to maximise revenue from TV rights and sponsors.

And If a Private Investment firm does get involved then they will want a say in order to maximise their profits - This is not philanthropy and nostaligia does not increase the profit margin.

[Robthegasman]

No doubt this would be very controversial but could the unthinkable happen and we see some clubs come together and amalgamate?

Or could some clubs do an on field rebrand like Eastern Suburbs did in Australia when they rebranded as Sydney City Roosters,later just Sydney Roosters?and in rugby union where I believe that Penzance and Newlyn RUFC rebranded as Cornish Pirates?

 

[Yakstorm]

1 hour ago, Robthegasman said:

No doubt this would be very controversial but could the unthinkable happen and we see some clubs come together and amalgamate?

Or could some clubs do an on field rebrand like Eastern Suburbs did in Australia when they rebranded as Sydney City Roosters,later just Sydney Roosters?and in rugby union where I believe that Penzance and Newlyn RUFC rebranded as Cornish Pirates?

Unfortunately it feels like many of the supporters of these clubs would rather let their club die that stomach a name change or a merger....  Especially if you can take the recent examples with Swinton and Salford both entertaining adding 'Manchester' to their name...

The sad reality is, most of the clubs neither have the money or expertise to 'grow their brand' tied to the old naming or even if they did eventually change, know how to take advantage of the larger region they now represent. 

[Yakstorm]

2 minutes ago, SL17 said:

I take that as being disrespectful. You have hardly impressed so far other than a general ###### up in beer garden.

If you manage to stay in existence as long as these clubs have. You might get my blessing. 

I honestly don't understand this attack? How am I being disrespectful? There are multiple people on here and who are quoted in papers around the proposed name changes for Swinton and Salford who said they'd stop supporting their clubs if they changed their names to Manchester and it clearly upset people enough that there were death threats made to the former Swinton management.

Are you arguing that people did in-fact say that? Or that people have put up strong resistance to entertaining mergers?  There was a reason why all the mergers proposed back in the mid-90's didn't happen and why outside of the 'takeovers' by Hull and Huddersfield, there hasn't been any mergers since.  

As for my comments around most clubs not having the money and expertise to grow their brands or take advantage of any name change, how is that incorrect?  Your club of Leigh is a lot better off than a number of other teams in the Championship and L1, it actually has money and decent crowds, so has a lot more to work with than a number of clubs.

Again, not sure how I am being disrespectful, etc, all I was doing is adding my opinion to the questions asked in Robthegasman's post. 

[ojx]

1 hour ago, SL17 said:

I take that as being disrespectful. You have hardly impressed so far other than a general ###### up in beer garden.

If you manage to stay in existence as long as these clubs have. You might get my blessing. 

Nothing should ever change. Change is bad. The sport is doing great.  Netball won't over take it in popularity soon.

[Yakstorm]

26 minutes ago, SL17 said:

Clubs in the lower tiers cannot continue without funding. Leigh are no different to that fact.

So either they support themselves or die. That for me isn’t an answer given the product is taking all again.

If Toronto feel hard done by what SL have done to them. Welcome to a world were the lower tiers have had it done on them since the conception of Superleague.

Drain the source and retain them as feeder clubs.

Not for me.. New structure, new investment and we go again.

I'm confused... I never mentioned Toronto, never said the league's below SL should be feeder clubs, and as for funding, well Leigh will survive longer than many without it, but yes all Leagues should have funding, I've never said anything to the contrary to that, in fact, I'm amazed, especially for the L1 clubs, that they survive on the pittance they get now.  

[Hela Wigmen]

8 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

Honestly mate, it's easier for everyone if you just read it properly.

'Regional Competion'

So two very, very small conferences. May as well kill them off. Insular thinking there. 

[Gooleboy]

6 hours ago, Yakstorm said:

Unfortunately it feels like many of the supporters of these clubs would rather let their club die that stomach a name change or a merger....  Especially if you can take the recent examples with Swinton and Salford both entertaining adding 'Manchester' to their name...

The sad reality is, most of the clubs neither have the money or expertise to 'grow their brand' tied to the old naming or even if they did eventually change, know how to take advantage of the larger region they now represent. 

So if that is the case, what examples are there of the SL or it's Clubs showing expertise in growing their brand?

[bamfordsbeans]

If as many expect the new deal to be reduced,it is slightly ironic that the Championship and League 1 clubs suffer due to an under performing SL.

After 23 years we still have only 4 to 6 clubs living up to the requirements of the game in this countries premier competition.

A lower standard of play and high profile players has led to reduced crowds,TV audiences and general media interest.

[Ivarr the Boneless]

11 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

 

A lower level could see the return of the likes of Gloucester, hemel or oxford especially if it went to a regional competition 

Oxford won't come back. Some of the key people who ran the club just wouldn't be interested. They wouldn't trust the RFL not to move the goalposts in a year or two TBH.

The way forwards down here is probably a stronger Conference South now. That has the potential to be rebranded onto a revised structure. 

Perhaps more important for southern RL in the short run would be the fate of Broncos and Skolars if funding is pulled/slashed. If their benefactors / owners gave up the ghost, the loss of their development work would be disastrous for southern RL. (Stress that is hypothetical, I'm not a close personal friend of either man and have no inside knowledge.)

We really would be heading for the scenario in John Inverdales infamous "it's just 13 blokes running around a pitch" quote if the development goes bang.

 

 

[Hela Wigmen]

45 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt. 

No, you tweak your argument again and again when it’s pulled up. Ring fencing the three Southern expansion clubs in League One would be the death knell for the three of them. 

[Harry Stottle]

13 hours ago, Robthegasman said:

Depends how many pints they sink,and if they have had a few scoops before

Lightweights?

[Hela Wigmen]

37 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Good job nobody has suggested it then.

 

But that’s exactly what you did do. 

[Hela Wigmen]

11 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

As I said, I gave you the benefit of the doubt.

Cool story. 

[Smudger06]

I think the days of sustaining 25 Clubs in 2 separate League competitions are numbered. 

To that end a 16 Club Championship would be the way forward.

Coventry Bears, Newcastle Thunder, London Skolars, Doncaster & Hunslet able to rebrand as Leeds Hawks (Est. Hunslet 1883) would be included in the Championship along with Manchester Lions (Est. Swinton 1866) rebrand going through, Bradford Bulls, Leigh Centurions, Halifax, Featherstone Rovers, Sheffield Eagles, Widnes Vikings, York City Knights, Cumbria RL (3 Club Barrow, Workington, Whitehaven amalgamation) Club XIII Wales (2 Club NW Crusaders / WW Raiders Amalgamation) Eastern Suburbs RL (2 Club Oldham / Rochdale Amalgamation)

Job done......

[GUBRATS]

14 minutes ago, Smudger06 said:

I think the days of sustaining 25 Clubs in 2 separate League competitions are numbered. 

To that end a 16 Club Championship would be the way forward.

Coventry Bears, Newcastle Thunder, London Skolars, Doncaster & Hunslet able to rebrand as Leeds Hawks (Est. Hunslet 1883) would be included in the Championship along with Manchester Lions (Est. Swinton 1866) rebrand going through, Bradford Bulls, Leigh Centurions, Halifax, Featherstone Rovers, Sheffield Eagles, Widnes Vikings, York City Knights, Cumbria RL (3 Club Barrow, Workington, Whitehaven amalgamation) Club XIII Wales (2 Club NW Crusaders / WW Raiders Amalgamation) Eastern Suburbs RL (2 Club Oldham / Rochdale Amalgamation)

Job done......

Not a fan of Dewsbury ,Batley and Keighley then ?