Jump to content

RFL and SL reunite


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, M j M said:

If more people ran their Rugby League clubs like Gary Hetherington and less people ran their Rugby League clubs like McManus and Lenagan the sport would be in a much better financial place.

Seriously! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 184
  • Created
  • Last Reply
20 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

I guess this thread will simply split bewteen those disappointed that some of the 'soft skills' the game has lacked for so long were starting to be addressed and those whose schadenfreude and tall poppy syndrome see them glad to see the top tier go backwards. 

Though no doubt when the next SL TV deal is so low there is no money for the lower leagues we will soon see that change

Could it be that if the next deal is lower, if is because the on screen product has not been worth it's cost over the 7 years if has been payed for?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Gooleboy said:

Marquee imports, come on, surely as a SL is everything man you can agree that a big percentage of Aussies who come here come for an end of career last hurrah, or are not good enough to earn a regular starting spot in an NRL side. This is one of the main reasons we never beat the Australians when the chips are down.

Has been in the past. The marquee signings have changed that 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Harry Stottle said:

Could it be that if the next deal is lower, if is because the on screen product has not been worth it's cost over the 7 years if has been payed for?

One logical conclusion to that would be to spend all the money on SL and invest non into the lower tiers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Expand please.

I think there has been a lot of progress in the last year and this year felt a lot more vibrant and exciting than many a year, pre the suspension obviously. A few things that spring to mind:

  • A record sponsorship deal, over double the previous one.
  • New fresh TV content with a new magazine show and the Inside Super League documentary series.
  • A record Super League crowd.
  • The addition of Toronto to the league.
  • High profile players like SBW joining the competition, generating more column inches than I have seen for a long time.
  • The standard of the competition seemed a lot higher to me this season.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Mr Hetherington has got the biggest shiniest stadium to maintain, BUT he saw the game as a bigger package than the self motivated respects of some SL chairmen, and yes McManus was at the forefront along with Leneghan to ditch some quarters of the game for his/their own wellbeing.

Think about it Bostick, there was never any criticism from these two re Wheldon Rd or Belle Vue - for what it's worth Leneghan can't moan, being in a rented home - and I suppose the only way will ever know what they would have done is if Licencing comes back and standards to acheive inclusion into SL re Stadia are required.

Yes but there was a lot of criticism of Knowsley Road, which was a better stadium than Bell Vue  or  Wheldon Road. 

seriously do you think that the game would be better off without people like McManus involved?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, scotchy1 said:

Brilliant, we can swap our marquee imports for players who cant make the NRL. 

Then we can wonder why no-one is watching. 

What marquee players ?

Given the disparity in salary caps that has existed for  several years now,imports are generally those who are surplus to requirements at their NRL clubs or have dropped a bol##ck and been sacked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

So there is no place for those not good enough to play for money is there?

I’m not the one fetishising amateurs like some RFU Victorian.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Yep, especially considering that though Sky own the rights to the championship and dont bother screening them, we can pretty conclusively know where the value lay

It very quickly becomes a case of people in glass houses

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Bostik Bailey said:

  

2 hours ago, M j M said:

If more people ran their Rugby League clubs like Gary Hetherington and less people ran their Rugby League clubs like McManus and Lenagan the sport would be in a much better financial place.

Seriously! 

**consults the figures**

In the past decade St Helens have made cumulative losses of £13.5m

In the past decade Wigan have made cumulative losses of £3.4m

In the past decade Leeds have made cumulative profits of £6.1m

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Damien said:

I think there has been a lot of progress in the last year and this year felt a lot more vibrant and exciting than many a year, pre the suspension obviously. A few things that spring to mind:

  • A record sponsorship deal, over double the previous one.
  • New fresh TV content with a new magazine show and the Inside Super League documentary series.
  • A record Super League crowd.
  • The addition of Toronto to the league.
  • High profile players like SBW joining the competition, generating more column inches than I have seen for a long time.
  • The standard of the competition seemed a lot higher to me this season.

 

• Not surprising that we had to learn from giving one away in return for some advertising space on the side of an haulage companies trucks.

• Considering the NRL has returned I will agree.

• Yes, for an extraordinary fixture, not one of the norm.

• That is certainly open to debate, that a team void of winning a single game is "vibrant and exciting"

• Yes SBW did attract a lot more column inches, but it was short lived outside of the trade paper's, and at lot of those comments from those who actually knew the sport questioned the value to the Toronto team in playing worth for someone the wrong side of 30 (35 in August) and out of the game for 5 years.

• Honestly and not for the sake of argument, I didn't see any marked improvement from the previous season, but in the short time we did see it (on TV for me) there would have been plenty of time to get better or regress as the season unfolded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Damien said:

A once in a lifetime occurrence does not mean the split was wrong or a mistake. I have seen more progress in the last year with regards Super League than I have seen for a long time.

If that is the case, why are these top notch business men wanting the realign with the RFL instead of carrying on with their existing path forward?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, M j M said:

**consults the figures**

In the past decade St Helens have made cumulative losses of £13.5m

In the past decade Wigan have made cumulative losses of £3.4m

In the past decade Leeds have made cumulative profits of £6.1m

As they have moved to a new entirely self funded stadium in the last decade I'd have thought that was pretty good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Bostik Bailey said:

Yes but there was a lot of criticism of Knowsley Road, which was a better stadium than Bell Vue  or  Wheldon Road. 

seriously do you think that the game would be better off without people like McManus involved?

I don't see the relevance of your first comment in respect of the conversation.

Secondly, No we need as many people with money as we can possibly attract to the game, but as I have said previously, those who have made good in life and buy into the sport are useually natives of the town and or lifeling supporter's of sport, therecare not many like Dr Koukash who just turn up, and he was rejected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, M j M said:

**consults the figures**

In the past decade St Helens have made cumulative losses of £13.5m

In the past decade Wigan have made cumulative losses of £3.4m

In the past decade Leeds have made cumulative profits of £6.1m

And won 5 Super League titles and 2 Challenge Cups

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

If its more entertaining to watch it would bring in more wouldn't it? 

That wasn't the original point of discussion though Tommy, It was that some amatuer games have been as entertaining as those of the top level that we have seen, I for one have certainly been witness to that expierence on a lot of occaaions 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

It's always interesting to see the fans of the select championship clubs tell us how terrible SL is, how bad the players are, how poorly it is run etc etc etc.

The obvious question would be why their clubs are so poor in comparison but I'm sure its someone elses fault

Who has said that?  Genuine question as I don’t remember seeing those comments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Damien said:

As they have moved to a new entirely self funded stadium in the last decade I'd have thought that was pretty good.

Not really, moving to the stadium hasn't seen them become profitable, they are still not a viable business without the longstanding and extravagant support of Coleman and McManus - they've pumped more money propping up St Helens than Davey has at Huddersfield and, amazingly, Hughes has at London.

There's nothing wrong with that, as such, Rugby League is clearly their passion and plaything and they evidently have the money.

But, like Lenagan, they are not examples of how to make money in the business of Rugby League - there's only one man around the table of Super League bosses who has shown the ability to make money at the clubs he has been at, big and small, heartland and expansion. Yet he is the one who for some reason tends to be most derided by fans of the clubs who in their best years break even.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

I'm just not really interested in your opinion on individual players. 

But if you think there arent plenty of players who could comfortably get NRL contracts your kidding yourself. 

Plenty of imports (and some British) would get contracts Scotchy , no doubt.

However would any SLE "marquee" players be the highest paid players in the NRL?

In any event there are now other considerations for anyone coming from the NRL. I am certain there will be plenty not renewing their contracts in the UK/Europe and heading back to Australia at the earliest opportunity. 

We may actually have to pay even more for lesser quality going forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, M j M said:

Not really, moving to the stadium hasn't seen them become profitable, they are still not a viable business without the longstanding and extravagant support of Coleman and McManus - they've pumped more money propping up St Helens than Davey has at Huddersfield and, amazingly, Hughes has at London.

There's nothing wrong with that, as such, Rugby League is clearly their passion and plaything and they evidently have the money.

But, like Lenagan, they are not examples of how to make money in the business of Rugby League - there's only one man around the table of Super League bosses who has shown the ability to make money at the clubs he has been at, big and small, heartland and expansion. Yet he is the one who for some reason tends to be most derided by fans of the clubs who in their best years break even.

That's not what I was saying. Unless you are making out the stadium was free and they aren't havent paid or been paying for the cost of the build over the last decade, which I don't see could possibly be the case, then to compare losses and talk about profitably is painting a false picture. A new stadium is a huge investment that needs to be looked at over a much larger timeframe than what covers its construction and costs. Anyhow I'm not sure what this is to do with the thread so I'll leave it there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Damien said:

That's not what I was saying. Unless you are making out the stadium was free and they aren't havent paid or been paying for the cost of the build over the last decade, which I don't see could possibly be the case, then to compare losses and talk about profitably is painting a false picture. A new stadium is a huge investment that needs to be looked at over a much larger timeframe than what covers its construction and costs. Anyhow I'm not sure what this is to do with the thread so I'll leave it there.

Ah right. No the losses are separate to the costs of the building the stadium which is a piece of long-term piece of capital expenditure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.