Sky Sports halving offer-What are the ramifications for Championship and Championship 1 clubs?

[sweaty craiq]

Well just moved to Virgin - why? I was asked ''because you are significantly reducing what you pay to my sport whilst asking for another above inflation increase - 8% - and in all my time of having sky I have never watched a game of football on it'' 

[ATLANTISMAN]

Back on topic:)

My forecast would be some Championship matches on SKY backed up by sponsors + On-line nothing wrong in creating a decent You Tube channel for the Championship and League 1.

 

P 

[LeeF]

On 01/01/2021 at 09:39, Wakefield Ram said:

Riveting for the purists. And for the non-purists? Would that game create new fans? That's the question.

Judging by some of the comments at the time the match attracted non fans to the game who by definition must be non purists

[The Rocket]

On 22/12/2020 at 21:17, Tommygilf said:

Over the past 6 years, plus next year in the final deal, the Super League money will have funded around £70 million into the RFL and lower divisions according to the reputable Mr Davidson (£10 million a year). League 1 to the tune of circa £7million, and the Championship vastly more.

 

Nobody, including me, is saying these clubs have no value. Just that £10 million a season is very generous and in the current climate is under no obligation to be matched. It seems plenty of people are "taking stock", and giving a very generous amount to the championship seemingly hasn't delivered the return.

Agree with most of the rest of what you were arguing but having read `The Adults Sports Participation Figures ` I would like to give the RFL a little more credit on their strategy of funding the lower Leagues.

Given the precipitous decline in other team sports participation rates over the last 5 years: Basketball and soccer down 19 % ; union and hockey down 25 % and League only down 14 %. Figures over the last year showed a 7 % increase for League while Union and soccer still registered large declines. These figures show the League was indeed having some success, at least relatively, if that had indeed been their strategy.

It does also tie in with the top down versus bottom up strategy debate that has raged on these pages before.

I`m a great one for giving people the benefit of the doubt and not always think the worst of people or immediately assuming they are incompetent. It would appear that on receiving what now appears to have been a very generous last broadcast deal from Sky that your administrators made a conscious decision to go for the `bottom up` growth strategy for the game and that included no money for TWP. Given the dramatic decline in sports participation rates among all sports one would have to say they were starting to see some return on their investment.

Now if they had of been better off on spending a much larger percentage of that money on other projects, maybe investing in a Newcastle, London trying to create another big club to add to your big 5, who knows. But I would just like to say that they, unless I am sadly mistaken, did have a plan and were having some success. Credit where credit is due.

[Tommygilf]

12 minutes ago, The Rocket said:

Agree with most of the rest of what you were arguing but having read `The Adults Sports Participation Figures ` I would like to give the RFL a little more credit on their strategy of funding the lower Leagues.

Given the precipitous decline in other team sports participation rates over the last 5 years: Basketball and soccer down 19 % ; union and hockey down 25 % and League only down 14 %. Figures over the last year showed a 7 % increase for League while Union and soccer still registered large declines. These figures show the League was indeed having some success, at least relatively, if that had indeed been their strategy.

It does also tie in with the top down versus bottom up strategy debate that has raged on these pages before.

I`m a great one for giving people the benefit of the doubt and not always think the worst of people or immediately assuming they are incompetent. It would appear that on receiving what now appears to have been a very generous last broadcast deal from Sky that your administrators made a conscious decision to go for the `bottom up` growth strategy for the game and that included no money for TWP. Given the dramatic decline in sports participation rates among all sports one would have to say they were starting to see some return on their investment.

Now if they had of been better off on spending a much larger percentage of that money on other projects, maybe investing in a Newcastle, London trying to create another big club to add to your big 5, who knows. But I would just like to say that they, unless I am sadly mistaken, did have a plan and were having some success. Credit where credit is due.

I think that is misreading my point mate. 

The RFL funding (from the Super League contract) to the lower league clubs is different from the community development stuff and in any case should be judged on ROI. Does £10 million a year represent good ROI where it has been invested? 

Perhaps more pertinently, does giving some clubs circa £750k and some £75k a season represent a 10 fold increase in value or ROI? I think on that point particularly the answer is clearly no. I have no problem at all with championship clubs being able to spend as much as Super League clubs, but don't think the Sky money is best served funding that to the extent it has. Would we really see a significantly worse performance if each championship club was given £200k? In the vast majority of cases I think not - and in any case I think we're going to find out very soon.

I think the crux of the issue is that unless a club is fully professional, then the level of central funding beyond a basic level is basically inconsequential. All it means is part time players getting better wages. 

I also think that you have to be aware that the participation figures also take into account the relatively massive growth in Women's RL participation for example, which has been something that has offset the decline in male participation. If we want to be really straight about investment then there could be an argument that the Women's Super League could have been funded to the same level as League 1 and seen even greater returns in that area.

[matt newsholme]

something doesnt add up with idea lower leagues have been getting 10 million a year. If league one was getting 1 million then championship should have been getting 9 million. Assume Top team got around 750k mark then a 50k drop for each position ( although from memory i seem to think after the top four the drop off was a lot steeper). gives you

1	750
2	700
3	650
4	600
5	550
6	500
7	450
8	400
9	350
10	300
11	250
12	200
13	150
14	100
	5950

so total funding of just under 6 million to championship per year. Where's the other 3 million gone each year? Over the 7 years of deal that 21 million unnacounted for.

 

 

[ATLANTISMAN]

7 minutes ago, matt newsholme said:

something doesnt add up with idea lower leagues have been getting 10 million a year. If league one was getting 1 million then championship should have been getting 9 million. Assume Top team got around 750k mark then a 50k drop for each position ( although from memory i seem to think after the top four the drop off was a lot steeper). gives you

1	750
2	700
3	650
4	600
5	550
6	500
7	450
8	400
9	350
10	300
11	250
12	200
13	150
14	100
	5950

so total funding of just under 6 million to championship per year. Where's the other 3 million gone each year? Over the 7 years of deal that 21 million unnacounted for.

 

 

RFL:)

[Tommygilf]

9 minutes ago, matt newsholme said:

something doesnt add up with idea lower leagues have been getting 10 million a year. If league one was getting 1 million then championship should have been getting 9 million. Assume Top team got around 750k mark then a 50k drop for each position ( although from memory i seem to think after the top four the drop off was a lot steeper). gives you

1	750
2	700
3	650
4	600
5	550
6	500
7	450
8	400
9	350
10	300
11	250
12	200
13	150
14	100
	5950

so total funding of just under 6 million to championship per year. Where's the other 3 million gone each year? Over the 7 years of deal that 21 million unnacounted for.

 

 

The RFL

[matt newsholme]

15 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

The RFL

so funding to lower leagues is really 7 million a year not 10. The 3m RFL funding is for administering the entire game not just lower leagues.

[Tommygilf]

13 minutes ago, matt newsholme said:

so funding to lower leagues is really 7 million a year not 10. The 3m RFL funding is for administering the entire game not just lower leagues.

Tomato tomato really, there almost certainly won't be 7 million coming in after 2021

[Devon Ram]

If the Championship is going for another broadcaster for the league plenty of places to start with Quest ITV4 plus Prime are just 3 but don't use the persons that did the negotiate for Super League must have used Mays team straight from the EU negotiate.

[Rugbyleaguesupporter]

11 hours ago, Devon Ram said:

If the Championship is going for another broadcaster for the league plenty of places to start with Quest ITV4 plus Prime are just 3 but don't use the persons that did the negotiate for Super League must have used Mays team straight from the EU negotiate.

Out of interest how much on top of production costs they will incur do you think quest, itv 4 or prime will pay for championship rights? 

[Damien]

11 hours ago, Devon Ram said:

If the Championship is going for another broadcaster for the league plenty of places to start with Quest ITV4 plus Prime are just 3 but don't use the persons that did the negotiate for Super League must have used Mays team straight from the EU negotiate.

Seriously why would Prime be interested in Championship Rugby League? It doesn't seem like a good fit, or any fit at all, for them.

[Devon Ram]

That's the problem negative remarks already to my suggestions Rugby League needs to break away from both SKY & BBC Both don't care anymore the game needs something new & a fresh outlook with the correct people & new partners who knows but sticking with same old partners we will never get out of the boring rut everybody keeps talking about.

I understand C4 suppose to be moving to Leeds why not try to negotiate with them if the Championship don't at least talk to these people will never move on, show SKY & BBC plenty more fish in the sea!!!!

[gittinsfan]

17 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

Tomato tomato really, there almost certainly won't be 7 million coming in after 2021

Your quote of £10m was proved to be wrong.Why not just admit it.

[Damien]

36 minutes ago, Devon Ram said:

That's the problem negative remarks already to my suggestions Rugby League needs to break away from both SKY & BBC Both don't care anymore the game needs something new & a fresh outlook with the correct people & new partners who knows but sticking with same old partners we will never get out of the boring rut everybody keeps talking about.

I understand C4 suppose to be moving to Leeds why not try to negotiate with them if the Championship don't at least talk to these people will never move on, show SKY & BBC plenty more fish in the sea!!!!

If you think 2 questions are negative remarks then you need to be little less sensitive. The fact you chose to ignore them and instead moan speaks volumes.

[Rupert Prince]

On 21/12/2020 at 19:17, Harry Stottle said:

Will this head to a real parting of SL and the RFL if there is no funding below SL. 

Pity is as far as the RFL is concerned is that it won't happen this season, just imagine a WC with no SL players involved, like what happened in Aus in the Mid 90's.

Strange to report there is no full time players in the NZ game.  Strange that Australia does not have our equivalent of the Championship where they had a pathway to promotion and relegation.  

[whatmichaelsays]

44 minutes ago, Devon Ram said:

That's the problem negative remarks already to my suggestions Rugby League needs to break away from both SKY & BBC Both don't care anymore the game needs something new & a fresh outlook with the correct people & new partners who knows but sticking with same old partners we will never get out of the boring rut everybody keeps talking about.

I understand C4 suppose to be moving to Leeds why not try to negotiate with them if the Championship don't at least talk to these people will never move on, show SKY & BBC plenty more fish in the sea!!!!

That doesn't really answer the question. 

What do the RL Championships offer to broadcasters like C4, Amazon or Quest that can offer them a commercial return? Why is the RL Championship something that their audiences want? How much would the RL Championship be worth to those broadcasters.

You criticise the negotiating of the Super League team, but you can't really "negotiate" anything with C4, Quest, Amazon or anyone else until you can answer that question. 

[Rupert Prince]

On 31/12/2020 at 14:34, The Blues Ox said:

True.

I don't blame the players though, I just think all flair and off the cuff stuff is coached out of them in favor of possesion and teritory stats. Nobody dare make a mistake now trying to open a game up. As Gubrats says, take away the last minute or so and it was pretty drab. The 3 drives then the ball out the back gets a bit boring and a bit easy to read for any competent defense after the first 40 times its used.

You are wrong headed.  In the case of football all the excitement there is in the last 5 minutes of injury time.  You are talking about the wrong game.

[Tommygilf]

56 minutes ago, gittinsfan said:

Your quote of £10m was proved to be wrong.Why not just admit it.

Hahaha ooooooo so the £10 million that comes from Super League to the rest of the game and £7 million directly into the lower divisions is a major discrepancy 

tbf the £3 million is more important than I thought, might be the best they can get!

[The Rocket]

1 hour ago, whatmichaelsays said:

That doesn't really answer the question. 

What do the RL Championships offer to broadcasters like C4, Amazon or Quest that can offer them a commercial return? Why is the RL Championship something that their audiences want? How much would the RL Championship be worth to those broadcasters.

You criticise the negotiating of the Super League team, but you can't really "negotiate" anything with C4, Quest, Amazon or anyone else until you can answer that question. 

Serious question Michael. If the Super League was disbanded and the existing 12 teams incorporated into a 20 team Championship, that included Newcastle, York, Sheffield, London , you will have to excuse me I don`t know the geography of England too well but am picking teams that I think will broaden its geographical footprint and perhaps appeal to a wider audience. Do you think that will have the potential to attract a similar broadcast deal ? I know the obvious problem will be that the salary cap would have to be drastically reduced but would this be a way of putting a bit extra money into those type clubs I mentioned because if this next deal is reduced as is expected then they may well get nothing anyway and it could then take forever for them to grow to a size where they could challenge the likes of Leeds etc.

Maybe this would be a way of bringing those clubs on a bit faster even if it meant your big 5 or whatever it is had to be held back a little. I know this wouldn`t happen in this TV deal but maybe the next one. And people could still see their Rugby League on TV, in fact a broader range of people would get to see their team on TV.

[whatmichaelsays]

1 hour ago, The Rocket said:

Serious question Michael. If the Super League was disbanded and the existing 12 teams incorporated into a 20 team Championship, that included Newcastle, York, Sheffield, London , you will have to excuse me I don`t know the geography of England too well but am picking teams that I think will broaden its geographical footprint and perhaps appeal to a wider audience. Do you think that will have the potential to attract a similar broadcast deal ? I know the obvious problem will be that the salary cap would have to be drastically reduced but would this be a way of putting a bit extra money into those type clubs I mentioned because if this next deal is reduced as is expected then they may well get nothing anyway and it could then take forever for them to grow to a size where they could challenge the likes of Leeds etc.

Maybe this would be a way of bringing those clubs on a bit faster even if it meant your big 5 or whatever it is had to be held back a little. I know this wouldn`t happen in this TV deal but maybe the next one. And people could still see their Rugby League on TV, in fact a broader range of people would get to see their team on TV.

I've said on here before that I don't think the game's lack of relevance or appeal are an issue of geography, so the geography of the UK and arguments of where our clubs are based is, in my view, an unhelpful side argument. 

For me, the question that should be asked when it comes to any decision about structures, how many teams to add and subtract and which teams to add and subtract from the league should be "does this decision make Rugby League more appealing to people who don't currently watch Rugby League?". If the answer isn't a resounding "yes", then it's a waste of time debating it. 

Does a 20-team second tier competition with Newcastle, York, Sheffield, London in it appeal to people who don't watch the current 12-team second tier competition with Newcastle, York, Sheffield, London? No, I don't think so. Does putting more money into these clubs make them more appealing to people who don't currently watch them? I don't think so.

At the end of the day, there aren't enough people out there like us who love RL for what it is. That means that if the sport wants to appeal to new audiences, it has to do (at least) one of two things: either keep looking for people like us, or adapt the sport to appeal to more people. Given that the sport has been doing the former for a long, long time now with relatively little success, perhaps it is time to do the latter? I don't think weakening our top clubs, in order to throw money at the clubs further down the latter, helps us to do that. 

Let me use Eddie Hearn as an example, given that people currently see him as some sort of saviour for RL. Why do you think he is currently filling his boxing rings with YouTube celebrities? He's doing it because he is a man who earns a living from pay-per-view content but realises that the next generation of customers are a generation of people who are used to getting their content for free and on their own terms. If he is going to preserve his business stream of PPV TV, he needs to get the boxing fans of five-ten years from now accustomed to paying £25 for a boxing match - and using the YouTubers that they watch day after day is one way he's trying to do that. It might not be proper boxing, your dad will almost certainly hate it, but it is also a prime example of how sports have to adapt to attract new audiences. RL isn't immune from that reality. 

[Devon Ram]

53 minutes ago, The Rocket said:

Serious question Michael. If the Super League was disbanded and the existing 12 teams incorporated into a 20 team Championship, that included Newcastle, York, Sheffield, London , you will have to excuse me I don`t know the geography of England too well but am picking teams that I think will broaden its geographical footprint and perhaps appeal to a wider audience. Do you think that will have the potential to attract a similar broadcast deal ? I know the obvious problem will be that the salary cap would have to be drastically reduced but would this be a way of putting a bit extra money into those type clubs I mentioned because if this next deal is reduced as is expected then they may well get nothing anyway and it could then take forever for them to grow to a size where they could challenge the likes of Leeds etc.

Maybe this would be a way of bringing those clubs on a bit faster even if it meant your big 5 or whatever it is had to be held back a little. I know this wouldn`t happen in this TV deal but maybe the next one. And people could still see their Rugby League on TV, in fact a broader range of people would get to see their team on TV.

Over twenty years ago there was a big change in this country people like me moved for work so their is lots of people that come from the Rugby League heartlands living in different parts of the UK in the Southwest (Cornwall/ Devon) while watching the Devon Sharks i have come across  fans from many clubs so the idea people wont watch games is rubbish take the Challenge Cup up North they might get lots heads up about the game being on TV but away from the north nothing SKY leading up to the grand final this year a week before was saying it was at Old Trafford sorry but the 2 main channels that show Rugby League don't care & like some of the fans to scared to try new blood plenty of providers out in the market just needs somebody to be brave & talk to them if they say NO at least somebody tried.

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, Devon Ram said:

Over twenty years ago there was a big change in this country people like me moved for work so their is lots of people that come from the Rugby League heartlands living in different parts of the UK in the Southwest (Cornwall/ Devon) while watching the Devon Sharks i have come across  fans from many clubs so the idea people wont watch games is rubbish take the Challenge Cup up North they might get lots heads up about the game being on TV but away from the north nothing SKY leading up to the grand final this year a week before was saying it was at Old Trafford sorry but the 2 main channels that show Rugby League don't care & like some of the fans to scared to try new blood plenty of providers out in the market just needs somebody to be brave & talk to them if they say NO at least somebody tried.

I think they almost certainly have tried, and like Scottish Football or Australian RU have found that those other broadcasters offers are much lower.

Its not good at all, its basically managed decline

[Devon Ram]

1 minute ago, Tommygilf said:

I think they almost certainly have tried, and like Scottish Football or Australian RU have found that those other broadcasters offers are much lower.

Its not good at all, its basically managed decline

Do we know that for sure or is the powers to be in Rugby League happy with the status Quo, lets look at it a different way plenty of providers out in the market place Rugby League offers a summer sport so why don't we offer a short deal to one of them plus put some decent advertising in to it or is the clubs happy with Sky's money but no chance of showing their product?? Lets face it where a second class sport has far has the BBC are concerned.