superten Posted May 26, 2020 Share Posted May 26, 2020 Are heartland clubs holding back expansion ? Is the reason why our sport doesn't seem to get national due to the fact there's just to many teams entrenched in the heartlands . Are investors put off by this ? Should we reduce the number of heartland clubs at the top table ? Currently there's ten clubs in super league with another 12 (if you include Sheffield) in the second tier . Ideally Super league could do with reducing to 8 heartland teams with Catalan and Toulouse along with Toronto and Ottawa making up the 12 . The big question is which 8 Heartland clubs would be in the 8 . Chief Crazy Eagle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hela Wigmen Posted May 26, 2020 Share Posted May 26, 2020 In answer to the questions you’ve asked; No. No. No. Why is the big question what 8 heartlands teams gets into your Super League? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted May 26, 2020 Share Posted May 26, 2020 Are you seriously proposing to remove two long established clubs and replace them with one team who’ve never played a game and don’t have any players, and another who have been unsuccessfully trying to get promoted for a few years and struggle to attract 2,000 fans to games, or is this a wind up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommygilf Posted May 26, 2020 Share Posted May 26, 2020 Its not that they are holding the game back, but they certainly are setting the (particularly financial) rules up in their favour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superten Posted May 26, 2020 Author Share Posted May 26, 2020 42 minutes ago, Eddie said: Are you seriously proposing to remove two long established clubs and replace them with one team who’ve never played a game and don’t have any players, and another who have been unsuccessfully trying to get promoted for a few years and struggle to attract 2,000 fans to games, or is this a wind up? Huddersfield, wakefield and Salford didn't get much bigger gates in Championship and often struggle to get gates over 3,000 for certain games in super league Chief Crazy Eagle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hela Wigmen Posted May 26, 2020 Share Posted May 26, 2020 14 minutes ago, superten said: Huddersfield, wakefield and Salford didn't get much bigger gates in Championship and often struggle to get gates over 3,000 for certain games in super league Yeah, and...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Picture Posted May 26, 2020 Share Posted May 26, 2020 5 hours ago, superten said: Are heartland clubs holding back expansion ? Is the reason why our sport doesn't seem to get national due to the fact there's just to many teams entrenched in the heartlands . Are investors put off by this ? Should we reduce the number of heartland clubs at the top table ? Currently there's ten clubs in super league with another 12 (if you include Sheffield) in the second tier . Ideally Super league could do with reducing to 8 heartland teams with Catalan and Toulouse along with Toronto and Ottawa making up the 12 . The big question is which 8 Heartland clubs would be in the 8 . The answer to your questions is yes, but what you suggest there is not an answer. Tony Collins' Rugby Reloaded podcasts include two very interesting and enlightening interviews with former St Helens Chief Executive Sean McGuire. McGuire says there that the reason why there's no little money in the game is that with the possible exception of Leeds its traditional pro clubs are all in smallish economically disadvantaged towns where there's no real money to speak of, and what you suggest above wouldn't change that materially. It would be like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. The only thing which could change that materially would be the creation of a whole new franchised league which wouldn't include any of the heartland clubs but would instead have its franchises — and I mean all of them — located in big globally recognized cities strategically chosen to maximize its appeal to broadcasters and sponsors so as to bring in as much money from those sources as possible and put it on a solid financial footing from the start. It would of course need rich franchise owners too and a strong promotional push to attract a whole new audience to this wonderful sport to buy the league's tickets, merchandise, etc. and watch on TV too. In short it would have to be full of Torontos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superten Posted May 26, 2020 Author Share Posted May 26, 2020 5 minutes ago, Big Picture said: The answer to your questions is yes, but what you suggest there is not an answer. Tony Collins' Rugby Reloaded podcasts include two very interesting and enlightening interviews with former St Helens Chief Executive Sean McGuire. McGuire says there that the reason why there's no little money in the game is that with the possible exception of Leeds its traditional pro clubs are all in smallish economically disadvantaged towns where there's no real money to speak of, and what you suggest above wouldn't change that materially. It would be like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. The only thing which could change that materially would be the creation of a whole new franchised league which wouldn't include any of the heartland clubs but would instead have its franchises — and I mean all of them — located in big globally recognized cities strategically chosen to maximize its appeal to broadcasters and sponsors so as to bring in as much money from those sources as possible and put it on a solid financial footing from the start. It would of course need rich franchise owners too and a strong promotional push to attract a whole new audience to this wonderful sport to but the league's tickets, merchandise, etc. and watch on TV too. In short it would have to be full of Torontos. if we went with two teams from each of the main areas so East Yorks Hull FC & Hull KR , WEST Yorks Leeds & Bradford . Merseyside St Helens & Widnes while Greater Mancs Wigan & Warrington I know Warrington isn't in greater Mancs but BBC Manchester does cover there games . Chief Crazy Eagle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted May 26, 2020 Share Posted May 26, 2020 46 minutes ago, superten said: Huddersfield, wakefield and Salford didn't get much bigger gates in Championship and often struggle to get gates over 3,000 for certain games in super league What of it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted May 26, 2020 Share Posted May 26, 2020 2 minutes ago, superten said: if we went with two teams from each of the main areas so East Yorks Hull FC & Hull KR , WEST Yorks Leeds & Bradford . Merseyside St Helens & Widnes while Greater Mancs Wigan & Warrington I know Warrington isn't in greater Mancs but BBC Manchester does cover there games . Now I know this is a wind up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted May 26, 2020 Share Posted May 26, 2020 13 minutes ago, Big Picture said: The answer to your questions is yes, but what you suggest there is not an answer. Tony Collins' Rugby Reloaded podcasts include two very interesting and enlightening interviews with former St Helens Chief Executive Sean McGuire. McGuire says there that the reason why there's no little money in the game is that with the possible exception of Leeds its traditional pro clubs are all in smallish economically disadvantaged towns where there's no real money to speak of, and what you suggest above wouldn't change that materially. It would be like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. The only thing which could change that materially would be the creation of a whole new franchised league which wouldn't include any of the heartland clubs but would instead have its franchises — and I mean all of them — located in big globally recognized cities strategically chosen to maximize its appeal to broadcasters and sponsors so as to bring in as much money from those sources as possible and put it on a solid financial footing from the start. It would of course need rich franchise owners too and a strong promotional push to attract a whole new audience to this wonderful sport to but the league's tickets, merchandise, etc. and watch on TV too. In short it would have to be full of Torontos. A lot of top football teams are (and have been) in economically disadvantaged towns and cities too - it never harmed Liverpool in the 70s and 80s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweaty craiq Posted May 26, 2020 Share Posted May 26, 2020 RL holds back RL. We never look ahead and examine what ifs. What if Ottawa then New Jersey win a place in SL, Toulouse also - thats 7 UK clubs to provide careers for juniors to aspire to. If we don’t want them in SL then don’t admit them, if we do then when do we start expanding it. We have great opportunities and threats, unless we are brave we will grow the cheap sport perception and shrink further Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Picture Posted May 26, 2020 Share Posted May 26, 2020 33 minutes ago, superten said: if we went with two teams from each of the main areas so East Yorks Hull FC & Hull KR , WEST Yorks Leeds & Bradford . Merseyside St Helens & Widnes while Greater Mancs Wigan & Warrington I know Warrington isn't in greater Mancs but BBC Manchester does cover there games . Then you'd still have mostly teams from smallish economically disadvantaged towns unable to attract the sort of money needed, and you'd blow up the existing leagues too so you'd accomplish nothing other than to make things worse. How exactly is what you describe there going to be worth more to Sky (for example) than what the game can offer them now? 31 minutes ago, Eddie said: A lot of top football teams are (and have been) in economically disadvantaged towns and cities too - it never harmed Liverpool in the 70s and 80s. I presume that soccer is the brand of football you mean there? If so, the presence of top teams in economically disadvantaged towns has been offset by the presence of other teams in big cities which enables their league to attract serious money from broadcasters and sponsors and those top teams also get to play in multinational continental competitions like the Champions League and EUFA League which boosts their stature further. You're comparing apples to oranges there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted May 26, 2020 Share Posted May 26, 2020 7 minutes ago, Big Picture said: Then you'd still have mostly teams from smallish economically disadvantaged towns unable to attract the sort of money needed, and you'd blow up the existing leagues too so you'd accomplish nothing other than to make things worse. How exactly is what you describe there going to be worth more to Sky (for example) than what the game can offer them now? I presume that soccer is the brand of football you mean there? If so, the presence of top teams in economically disadvantaged towns has been offset by the presence of other teams in big cities which enables their league to attract serious money from broadcasters and sponsors and those top teams also get to play in multinational continental competitions like the Champions League and EUFA League which boosts their stature further. You're comparing apples to oranges there. I’m talking about in previous times, when football was nowhere near as awash with money as it is now. It’s a reasonable comparison given the circumstances - economically wealthy areas do not necessarily produce the best sports teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATLANTISMAN Posted May 26, 2020 Share Posted May 26, 2020 Personally speaking I value EVERY club we have in this wonderful sport however the reality is Sean McGuire is spot on in what he says. Which comes back to what my old friend in the NFL said expand or die. P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEANO Posted May 26, 2020 Share Posted May 26, 2020 It is quite obvious to me that the game is in the heartlands for a reason. The reason being nobody else wants it otherwise after a 100 years plus it would be nation wide sometimes you have to take a step backwards to move forward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Picture Posted May 26, 2020 Share Posted May 26, 2020 53 minutes ago, ATLANTISMAN said: Personally speaking I value EVERY club we have in this wonderful sport however the reality is Sean McGuire is spot on in what he says. Which comes back to what my old friend in the NFL said expand to die. P And that expansion can only come about through a separate and distinct organization which disrupts the traditional clubs as little as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M j M Posted May 26, 2020 Share Posted May 26, 2020 The reality is that the "big city clubs" would need millions and millions of ££ to get established, and would probably continue to lose money for up to a decade. I imagine a budget of £20m+ to cover losses over the first decade might be needed to get a top flight club up and running from scratch - Toronto is well on track for that level of loss. That's not a reason to not do it - but people need to be realistic; if you invent a new top flight with say four current clubs and six expansion franchises there is every chance the expansion clubs run out of cash within a couple of years, the four heartlands clubs are left but the teams which have been excluded have been crippled and their fans disenfranchised and disillusioned. Expansion is difficult nowadays because the sports market is so saturated and loyalties to both sports and to clubs so entrenched. It's not impossible but we need to be realistic about what can realistically be achieved - and remember that just jetissoning Rugby League clubs and strong Rugby League areas because they don't fit a vision is a dangerous game to play when there aren't that many strong Rugby League areas to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Picture Posted May 26, 2020 Share Posted May 26, 2020 1 minute ago, M j M said: The reality is that the "big city clubs" would need millions and millions of ££ to get established, and would probably continue to lose money for up to a decade. I imagine a budget of £20m+ to cover losses over the first decade might be needed to get a top flight club up and running from scratch - Toronto is well on track for that level of loss. That's not a reason to not do it - but people need to be realistic; if you invent a new top flight with say four current clubs and six expansion franchises there is every chance the expansion clubs run out of cash within a couple of years, the four heartlands clubs are left but the teams which have been excluded have been crippled and their fans disenfranchised and disillusioned. Expansion is difficult nowadays because the sports market is so saturated and loyalties to both sports and to clubs so entrenched. It's not impossible but we need to be realistic about what can realistically be achieved - and remember that just jetissoning Rugby League clubs and strong Rugby League areas because they don't fit a vision is a dangerous game to play when there aren't that many strong Rugby League areas to begin with. Yes they could need millions to get established, that's why a plan able to attract those millions (and attract new audiences to the sport) would be needed before they could be established. To attract those millions, you leave all the current clubs out and place all the franchises in big cities in a spread of countries which are appealing to broadcasters and sponsors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted May 26, 2020 Share Posted May 26, 2020 17 minutes ago, Big Picture said: You could have both if the big city teams are in one league and the traditional clubs are in another. Then you could watch the former on TV and the latter live where you live just like always. Would you have Catalans and Toulouse in a big city league? They aren’t in the same category as New York, Toronto and Ottawa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M j M Posted May 26, 2020 Share Posted May 26, 2020 7 minutes ago, Big Picture said: Yes they could need millions to get established, that's why a plan able to attract those millions (and attract new audiences to the sport) would be needed before they could be established. To attract those millions, you leave all the current clubs out and place all the franchises in big cities in a spread of countries which are appealing to broadcasters and sponsors. Toronto have found that broadcaster and sponsor engagement (and money) follows, at some considerable lag, fan engagement. Toronto have done a great job with the fans, almost unprecedented. But the money from other sources has yet to emerge. The reality is that unless we find half a dozen David Argyles we will struggle to find institutional investors who would look at this as a proposal that has legs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Picture Posted May 26, 2020 Share Posted May 26, 2020 5 minutes ago, Eddie said: Would you have Catalans and Toulouse in a big city league? They aren’t in the same category as New York, Toronto and Ottawa. Perpignan is a small town so not Catalans, Toulouse would be a possibility in an investor(s) there had the funds to pay the franchise fee suited to a ground floor opportunity in the major league sports business with superior growth potential due to a transatlantic multinational reach. Ottawa might also not get in if backers could be found for better, higher profile markets, it's a bit on the small side to make the sort of impact which would be desirable. To be clear, by a new league I mean one starting with a completely clean slate and totally free of the baggage of failed past expansion efforts and with the financial means to mount a strong promotional campaign to create demand for its tickets, merchandise, etc. Just now, M j M said: Toronto have found that broadcasters and sponsors follow, at some considerable lag, fans. The reality is that unless we find half a dozen David Argyles we will struggle to find institutional investors who would look at this as a proposal that has legs. A league such as I envisage would need 10-12 investors like David Argyle, one such per franchise, and they would all have to do everything right as they set up their franchises. They'd have to be in the right locations to generate serious interest from broadcasters and sponsors, they'd all need a great nickname, logo and colours, they'd all need solid, competent, well respected management staff, etc. etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M j M Posted May 26, 2020 Share Posted May 26, 2020 3 minutes ago, Big Picture said: A league such as I envisage would need 10-12 investors like David Argyle, OK, well being brutally honest that's not a very realistic scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Picture Posted May 26, 2020 Share Posted May 26, 2020 3 minutes ago, M j M said: OK, well being brutally honest that's not a very realistic scenario. In the normal course of things I'd agree. However with a good, solid plan which could show the sort of investors who might otherwise look at buying an MLS or NHL franchise and their counterparts in other countries how good an investment a league of this nature could be for them by following the same path to profitability as those leagues have done, it could indeed be realistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEANO Posted May 26, 2020 Share Posted May 26, 2020 Yeah I agree. Kick out the likes of St. Helens and Wigan cos no one outside the m62 corridor has heard of them. Use their players though and base them in Dublin New York Barcelona etc. Great idea. Don’t forget to pull up the drawbridge as well sometimes you have to take a step backwards to move forward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.