Jump to content

5 year plan


Recommended Posts


  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 minute ago, Mr Plow said:

New TV deal is in the horizon, new challenges post Covid, Ottawa and NY, the uncertain future of Toronto. What would your 5 year plan for the sport be? Scrap promotion and relegation? Focus on expansion to North America? 

Other way around, guarantee and enshrine p&r, scrap expansion to NA. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mr Plow said:

New TV deal is in the horizon, new challenges post Covid, Ottawa and NY, the uncertain future of Toronto. What would your 5 year plan for the sport be? Scrap promotion and relegation? Focus on expansion to North America? 

Keep P&R (I don’t think I’d be interested in a closed shop SL), double the salary cap and focus on strengthening the game from all sides including North America, focus on getting more people playing especially kids and women. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Eddie said:

Keep P&R (I don’t think I’d be interested in a closed shop SL), double the salary cap and focus on strengthening the game from all sides including North America, focus on getting more people playing especially kids and women. 

I’d only keep P&R I’d promoted teams are exempt from relegation for 3 years. Since 2015 only Hull KR have managed to stay up.

Expansion, in England I’d focus on London and Newcastle then abroad France and North America.

Sell SL as different packages. For example; Package 1- Thursday and Friday games, Package 2- Saturday and Sunday games, Package 3 Magic Weekend

Then like you say, invest more in the community game and grow the women’s game

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Planning for five years is two years too many for Rugby League. We don’t see beyond the end of our nose and get bored with what we’ve decided after a year anyway and then either revert to a previous “plan” or mash two or more previous “plans” together and hope something happens that sees the game flush with cash, big attendances, good TV audiences and sponsors lining up to align with us. 

The TV money will go down. The less informed will blame Robert Elstone and/or Super League as a whole for this. It’s inevitable that the deal will go down. Money is being poured into Sky’s big sports, your Football’s and F1’s. That’s Sky’s big ticket attractions, not Rugby League. Super League will, rightfully, keep a high percentage of the deal and the lower leagues will probably get a like-for-like percentage, though a lesser amount of money due to the overall package drop in value, as they’re getting already. 

Super League will have a maximum of twelve teams and they’ll play the same amount of games now. Club chairmen in the predicted economy aren’t going to vote in another club or two and therefore receive less money from the central funding. Club chairmen aren’t going to vote for fewer games, either. 

As for promotion and relegation. I can see some chairmen being dead against it. Likewise, there will be a handful of chairmen outside of Super League adamant that we must have the promotion aspect. Both groups will be as guilty as the other of self interest and I predict, much like 2017 (IIRC), quite a bitter, aggressive and vitriolic war of words from both sides of the divide. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's too early for a 5 year plan and the game has too short an attention span to maintain one anyway.

There is currently a 1 year plan, which is survival and maximise the next TV deal - because of this, whomever joins SL next year is a much bigger decision than it would be in any other year.

The plan beyond that will depend on the length of the TV deal and how big it is.

The plan should many things in it, but I would have growth of girls/womens game very high up - gets the whole family involved and is a long term investment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Hela Wigmen said:

Planning for five years is two years too many for Rugby League. We don’t see beyond the end of our nose and get bored with what we’ve decided after a year anyway and then either revert to a previous “plan” or mash two or more previous “plans” together and hope something happens that sees the game flush with cash, big attendances, good TV audiences and sponsors lining up to align with us. 

The TV money will go down. The less informed will blame Robert Elstone and/or Super League as a whole for this. It’s inevitable that the deal will go down. Money is being poured into Sky’s big sports, your Football’s and F1’s. That’s Sky’s big ticket attractions, not Rugby League. Super League will, rightfully, keep a high percentage of the deal and the lower leagues will probably get a like-for-like percentage, though a lesser amount of money due to the overall package drop in value, as they’re getting already. 

Super League will have a maximum of twelve teams and they’ll play the same amount of games now. Club chairmen in the predicted economy aren’t going to vote in another club or two and therefore receive less money from the central funding. Club chairmen aren’t going to vote for fewer games, either. 

As for promotion and relegation. I can see some chairmen being dead against it. Likewise, there will be a handful of chairmen outside of Super League adamant that we must have the promotion aspect. Both groups will be as guilty as the other of self interest and I predict, much like 2017 (IIRC), quite a bitter, aggressive and vitriolic war of words from both sides of the divide. 

Nailed it .... sadly 😟

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Mr Plow said:

I’d only keep P&R I’d promoted teams are exempt from relegation for 3 years. Since 2015 only Hull KR have managed to stay up.

Expansion, in England I’d focus on London and Newcastle then abroad France and North America.

Sell SL as different packages. For example; Package 1- Thursday and Friday games, Package 2- Saturday and Sunday games, Package 3 Magic Weekend

Then like you say, invest more in the community game and grow the women’s game

I like the idea of a period of grace from relegation for a promoted club but I think 3 years is too long. Club A gets promoted in year 1 and still has exemption in their third year when club B and club C who were promoted in the following years also have it. This would then continue with every season after year 3 having 3 clubs (25% of the division) unable to go down. So it would then be possible for the team finishing 9th to get relegated a lot of the time. I would say 1 year of grace would be enough and this would remove the handicap of not being able to recruit players until the very end of the season for newly promoted clubs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Adelaide Tiger said:

Bring in Peter V’landys let him run the game instead of self interest Chairmen of clubs.

I don't think that is a good idea as it would probably upset the Leigh massive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Adelaide Tiger said:

Bring in Peter V’landys let him run the game instead of self interest Chairmen of clubs.

That would shake up the establishment.

 The Chairmen would finally be put in their place. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at the International game would that be part of the 5 year plan? The RLIF recommended that US and Canada host the 2025 World Cup should that happen or should it be a Europe wide held tournament (France, Spain and Italy?) and should the Ashes series or 4 nations happen again before then? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HarrogateKnights said:

Looking at the International game would that be part of the 5 year plan? The RLIF recommended that US and Canada host the 2025 World Cup should that happen or should it be a Europe wide held tournament (France, Spain and Italy?) and should the Ashes series or 4 nations happen again before then? 

agree but I would go further than that and invite  3 teams to tour  and play triple headers 

First I would get teams out of the top tier of international rankings to play England 

Second get teams out of the middle tier of international rankings  to play England Knights 

Finally get teams out of the bottom tier of international rankings to play an England team made up of championship players

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Forever Trinity said:

I wouldn't have automatic promotion and relegation however I would be in favour of the champions in the Championship playing the bottom of SL in a winner takes all.

Either a playoff or exemption from relegation for a year or so is the best way to do it. Then you don’t have teams going straight down

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, POR said:

agree but I would go further than that and invite  3 teams to tour  and play triple headers 

First I would get teams out of the top tier of international rankings to play England 

Second get teams out of the middle tier of international rankings  to play England Knights 

Finally get teams out of the bottom tier of international rankings to play an England team made up of championship players

 

That would be decent, I would play them in reverse order so you have England "A" vs Say Greece, England Knights vs Say PNG and England vs Australia all at one stadium one afternoon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 01/08/2020 at 18:21, Hela Wigmen said:

 

As for promotion and relegation. I can see some chairmen being dead against it. Likewise, there will be a handful of chairmen outside of Super League adamant that we must have the promotion aspect. Both groups will be as guilty as the other of self interest and I predict, much like 2017 (IIRC), quite a bitter, aggressive and vitriolic war of words from both sides of the divide. 

Yes how utterly selfish of Championship chairmen to want promotion retained, you’d think they’d be thinking about the wellbeing of SL over their own clubs wouldn’t you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Eddie said:

Yes how utterly selfish of Championship chairmen to want promotion retained, you’d think they’d be thinking about the wellbeing of SL over their own clubs wouldn’t you.

What are you even on about? Nowhere have I taken “a side” on that argument. 

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...