Jump to content

5 year plan


Recommended Posts


  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Four big things for me:

  1. Reform the voting structure of the SLE board to reduce the power of the clubs. Give more power to the SLE executive and ensure that the players union has a place on the board. 
  2. Make elements of central funding performance-related based on certain metrics around commercial performance and player development. 
  3. Replace the salary cap with a version of FFP that is linked to club turnover, with mechanisms to limit the impact of "directors loans" that will never be repaid. 
  4. Remove loop fixtures and in their place, promote short-form versions of the game to appeal to new audiences. 

Talk of league structures, to be honest, is akin to discussion where to reposition the deckchairs on the Titanic. No one particular structure will fix big systemic issues - some will be better for fixing them than others - but those issues still need addressing for any structure to be effective. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there anyone on here who has a clue about planning in a position that if you fail you lose everything, so far it reads like red book 1 basic business for council employees.

first thing you do is understand where you want to be in 5 years, in today’s climate that must be how many SL clubs, and what expectations are below it - at present it seems we haven’t got a clue, no vision

then you break down the components of how you are going to get there, this will include expansion, tv deals, tv audiences, sponsorship, p&r, gates, financial stability of clubs, stadiums etc

you deliver a broad mission statement, set your annual goals ie route, allocate ownership of goals and manage accordingly - communicating openly to your stakeholders as you go and dealing with failure via process, re routing when necessary- RL must understand that ownership and meeting goals are not dirty words

RL must become commercial results orientated, 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without the new TV deal you can’t determine the league structure, the whole future of the game as a pro sport hinges on the TV deal and how the sport can sell itself, otherwise there will just not be enough money in the game to stop a mass talent flow to the NRL and RU. Once the deal is secured, it must be spent wisely, we really need strong leadership, question is where will it come from?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You take your plan to the table and get buy in from those who want to be a part of the journey - here we seem to want the sport to sit at the table with look we aint got a clue what we are doing, where we want to be and what we can do for you - but can we have some money please, go on pretty please.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 04/08/2020 at 01:24, Oldbear said:

Without the new TV deal you can’t determine the league structure, the whole future of the game as a pro sport hinges on the TV deal and how the sport can sell itself, otherwise there will just not be enough money in the game to stop a mass talent flow to the NRL and RU. Once the deal is secured, it must be spent wisely, we really need strong leadership, question is where will it come from?

It amazes me how the posters state-side and those from OZ seem to be so much more focused on the importance of the TV deal. I think  the Brits don`t have a lot of faith in the Broadcasters. Could be a result of playing second fiddle to soccer for so long. There doesn`t seem to be a lot of faith in their leaders as well. Maybe an independent Commission  to run the game that is answerable to no one but the best interests of the game even if noses are put massively out of joint. How would it be elected/appointed though?

If the broadcasters could be sold a vision for the potential of the game they may then be interested in throwing them a bit more cash.

It seems to me though some toes need to be stood on big time if it is going to break out of its current gridlock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, The Rocket said:

It amazes me how the posters state-side and those from OZ seem to be so much more focused on the importance of the TV deal. I think  the Brits don`t have a lot of faith in the Broadcasters. 

Here in North America the sheer size of the broadcasting contracts is what helps make the NFL, NBA, NHL and MLB so huge. Millions of fans only ever see their team via TV, doesn’t stop them buying the jersey and other assorted stuff. Of course the TV companies can then have a level of control that most British RL fans would find very uncomfortable, such as flexing game times at short notice, even changing game days with little notice, along with a myriad of different ways to advertise products and let’s face it, the number of Covid cases in the US is out of control, but MLB and NBA are playing in the US, because TV dictates. TV also influences the make up of the league, not just the schedule and number of teams but often the participants. Rules are also changed to make things more TV friendly, I’m assuming such things have also happened in the NRL with the likes of captains challenge.

I think you are right in that RL in the UK needs to be able to sell itself to UK and worldwide broadcasters if it wants a bigger deal. The problem is does the RFL/SL have the right people to make the pitch and if not, who should do it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Smudger06 said:

Get a 6.15pm Sunday game on free to air. 

Give Sky what they want, Thursday and Friday Night rugby league 1st and 2nd Pick of the round + flexible short notice scheduling after mid season. But they must give up exclusivity. 

I have to agree with this. 1 game a week FTA should be an essential part of the next TV deal. Even if all the rest are on sky, this may well be the last TV deal where FTA means something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 03/08/2020 at 07:46, Mr Plow said:

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

So if a team comes up finishes bottom you relegate the team above them?

No incentive for a promoted team to try and avoid relegation but punishing a team above them? is that how you would play it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Five year plan!

1. Form a committee to discuss the idea of a possible plan.

2. Work out the plan and send to clubs for feedback.

3. Agree with clubs that we don't need to rush into these things.

4. Form a committee to further discuss the merits of a new idea that somebody's milkman had last Thursday.

5. Send it to the clubs for feedback.

And repeat

Repeat

Repeat

Repeat

Not cynical me though.

😉😕

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Forever Trinity said:

So if a team comes up finishes bottom you relegate the team above them?

No incentive for a promoted team to try and avoid relegation but punishing a team above them? is that how you would play it?

The one year exemption from relegation is more to mitigate the handicap that all promoted clubs face in terms of recruitment due to their promotion not being confirmed until the last week of the season. Not many SL standard players will commit to a club in the Championship in the hope that said club will be promoted before they play for them. The promoted team ends up with the best of its Championship squad plus a few players from the relegated club and players the rest of SL didn't want. This means that the first season is almost always a struggle and many teams go straight back down. An exemption from relegation in year one means that while they will still struggle and may finish bottom they can seek to sign players for the following year safe in the knowledge that they will be in SL. This increases the chances of a team promoted into SL being able to establish themselves and having an extended run in the top tier rather than a succession of yo-yo P&R that damages the clubs involved. A squad of players may not prove strong enough to avoid finishing bottom but no team is not going to try.

In such a system every team would begin the season knowing that to be certain of staying up that they needed to finish above 1 of the other 10 teams eligible for relegation. If they finish 10th or better that will be enough no matter what, they would have a full season to avoid going down knowing what was required to do so. They would also know that if they were relegated that after any subsequent promotion they would be guaranteed two years in SL to become strong enough to avoid being relegated again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, sweaty craiq said:

The beauty of the mid 8’s was that promoted team simply had to be better than those wishing to take its place on that day

Wish they’d have kept something like the qualifiers maybe a relegation playoff or something like that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

Doddle.....

Used to have it, didn't we?

And everyone hated it.

EDIT

Not FTA though, on Sky. I can't see any decent FTA channel having a regular Sunday evening slot for any sport, let alone rugby league.

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 hours ago, gingerjon said:

Used to have it, didn't we?

And everyone hated it.

EDIT

Not FTA though, on Sky. I can't see any decent FTA channel having a regular Sunday evening slot for any sport, let alone rugby league.

FTA would snap it up. They are desperate for live sport, they have been totally and utterly outmatched for everything by Sky & BT. 

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.