Another Restructure?

[Oldbear]

1 hour ago, steve oates said:

Does the salary cap stopping clubs overspending on players, mean that they are maybe spending steadily on improving their operations generally? The scenario you set out seems to indicate Superleague is fairly well balanced with some growth being achieved at some clubs.

I'd agree with you and Gubrats who takes the view there is no magic plan that can make Superleague a whole lot better. I suppose every plan has an upside but also a downside some people do not seem to consider.    

I’m never quite sure what the salary cap has done for RL, it hasn’t stopped clubs from getting into financial trouble and it hasn’t led to more parity in the league, primarily because not all the SL clubs can actually afford to spend full cap. In fact if you look at salary caps in other sports it appears that it’s main effect has been to make the role of GM more important, as these guys are charged with ways of circumventing the cap. Take the NFL for example, there are a multitude of ways that clubs avoid breaking the cap, all of which are creative and legal (restructuring contracts, converting salary to bonus, front or back end loading of contracts), which I guess is less of an issue when everyone can afford to do it, but a sport like RL, where perhaps only 7-8 clubs can afford to spend full cap any creative ways to get round the cap just gives those clubs even more of an advantage if they choose to use it.

[DOGFATHER]

On 17/02/2021 at 19:12, GUBRATS said:

Just admit it , you don't know 

Just like the rest of us , none of us have the answer , not you , certainly not me , not Ralph , not Robert , not Mr Vlandys , not some marketing consultancy that will charge a fortune to come to the same conclusion as you and me 

We are discussing one of life's huge conundrums , how to grow RL 

One way that never seems to be considered is making a top flight, big budget rugby league video game, that plays well. Something far better than the big ant bargain basement badly flawed stuff that has previously been released. Get a big international prize for the top player as seen in fortnite etc.

Nearly every household in the country and beyond, certainly those with kids in it, is highly likely to have at least one games console in it too.

If you take a "sport" like skateboarding for example. It went from obscurity from the streets of America, to a worldwide phenomena producing the X games, and was introduced as an Olympic sport for the Tokyo Olympics. Its participants became global superstars, it achieved this growth in popularity on the back of the Tony Hawks game series.

I find it hard to understand how skateboarding is really a sport, but there it is, accepted in to the Olympics as sport because of the popularity amongst the younger generation.

We have a great back story to tell about inclusiveness, persecution from the rich, rebellion, highly tuned, skilled and powerful warriors with immense bravery, what more could a kid want?

Surely, there is a software house somewhere looking for the next big thing. Why not Rugby League?

[DOGFATHER]

Just now, DOGFATHER said:

One way that never seems to be considered is making a top flight, big budget rugby league video game, that plays well. Something far better than the big ant bargain basement badly flawed stuff that has previously been released. Offer a big international prize for the top player as seen in fortnite etc.

Nearly every household in the country and beyond, certainly those with kids in it, is highly likely to have at least one games console in it too.

If you take a "sport" like skateboarding for example. It went from obscurity from the streets of America, to a worldwide phenomena producing the X games, and was introduced as an Olympic sport for the Tokyo Olympics. Its participants became global superstars, it achieved this growth in popularity on the back of the Tony Hawks game series.

I find it hard to understand how skateboarding is really a sport, but there it is, accepted in to the Olympics as sport because of the popularity amongst the younger generation.

We have a great back story to tell about inclusiveness, persecution from the rich, rebellion, highly tuned, skilled and powerful warriors with immense bravery, what more could a kid want?

Surely, there is a software house somewhere looking for the next big thing. Why not Rugby League?

 

[Liverpool Rover]

20 minutes ago, DOGFATHER said:

One way that never seems to be considered is making a top flight, big budget rugby league video game, that plays well. Something far better than the big ant bargain basement badly flawed stuff that has previously been released. Get a big international prize for the top player as seen in fortnite etc.

Nearly every household in the country and beyond, certainly those with kids in it, is highly likely to have at least one games console in it too.

If you take a "sport" like skateboarding for example. It went from obscurity from the streets of America, to a worldwide phenomena producing the X games, and was introduced as an Olympic sport for the Tokyo Olympics. Its participants became global superstars, it achieved this growth in popularity on the back of the Tony Hawks game series.

I find it hard to understand how skateboarding is really a sport, but there it is, accepted in to the Olympics as sport because of the popularity amongst the younger generation.

We have a great back story to tell about inclusiveness, persecution from the rich, rebellion, highly tuned, skilled and powerful warriors with immense bravery, what more could a kid want?

Surely, there is a software house somewhere looking for the next big thing. Why not Rugby League?

I would love a big budget EA Sports Rugby League game but I doubt that the game is high profile enough to sell enough copies to make it worthwhile. Australia maybe but not here.

[Hela Wigmen]

Go for 2x10’s. 

Fans don’t like loop games but clubs do. You either go for playing everyone three times (27 games) and Magic or you play everyone home and away (18 games) and then have the Challenge Cup made up of those twenty clubs split into four groups of five (8 group games and 18 league games plus Magic), with the format as clubs are split into five pots based upon their final league finishes the year before. Top two from each group progress. Games can be as part of a season ticket and clubs can use a third shirt for cup games/Magic. 

Top four play-offs in both leagues.

Bottom of Super League relegated. Championship Grand Final winner takes their place. 

All twenty clubs get the same amount of funding. That’s whether you finish as Super League champions or bottom of Division 2. Controversial, I know. 

Some clubs don’t have the ambition to reach Super League. That’s fine. But why are we pulled back by these clubs. Send them off to play at their own level and allow those who have ambition to compete at a level that befits them as clubs. 

[Big Picture]

54 minutes ago, Hela Wigmen said:

Go for 2x10’s. 

Fans don’t like loop games but clubs do. You either go for playing everyone three times (27 games) and Magic or you play everyone home and away (18 games) and then have the Challenge Cup made up of those twenty clubs split into four groups of five (8 group games and 18 league games plus Magic), with the format as clubs are split into five pots based upon their final league finishes the year before. Top two from each group progress. Games can be as part of a season ticket and clubs can use a third shirt for cup games/Magic. 

Top four play-offs in both leagues.

Bottom of Super League relegated. Championship Grand Final winner takes their place. 

All twenty clubs get the same amount of funding. That’s whether you finish as Super League champions or bottom of Division 2. Controversial, I know. 

Some clubs don’t have the ambition to reach Super League. That’s fine. But why are we pulled back by these clubs. Send them off to play at their own level and allow those who have ambition to compete at a level that befits them as clubs. 

Fund twenty clubs?  Seriously??  They're struggling to hold onto enough money in TV rights payments to fund 12 clubs at the same level as before, where would they get the money to fund 20????

[fighting irish]

11 hours ago, Hela Wigmen said:

Go for 2x10’s. 

Fans don’t like loop games but clubs do. You either go for playing everyone three times (27 games) and Magic or you play everyone home and away (18 games) and then have the Challenge Cup made up of those twenty clubs split into four groups of five (8 group games and 18 league games plus Magic), with the format as clubs are split into five pots based upon their final league finishes the year before. Top two from each group progress. Games can be as part of a season ticket and clubs can use a third shirt for cup games/Magic. 

Top four play-offs in both leagues.

Bottom of Super League relegated. Championship Grand Final winner takes their place. 

All twenty clubs get the same amount of funding. That’s whether you finish as Super League champions or bottom of Division 2. Controversial, I know. 

Some clubs don’t have the ambition to reach Super League. That’s fine. But why are we pulled back by these clubs. Send them off to play at their own level and allow those who have ambition to compete at a level that befits them as clubs. 

I like this idea Hela.

If all funding was split 20 ways and then remove the salary cap.

I even started to think about biasing the share-out of funding in favour of the lowest placed clubs in the previous season to give the poorer performers a better chance of competing the following season. (A bit like the bottom NFL clubs having first pick at the draft).

There is a danger of clubs wanting to finish last though, so that would need some iteration to gauge the relative merits of it (and how much you skew the payments).

I'd like to see some way of accommodating the lower league clubs into the cup though. 

[Hela Wigmen]

11 hours ago, Big Picture said:

Fund twenty clubs?  Seriously??  They're struggling to hold onto enough money in TV rights payments to fund 12 clubs at the same level as before, where would they get the money to fund 20????

We fund 36 as a sport now. 

[Damien]

12 hours ago, Big Picture said:

Fund twenty clubs?  Seriously??  They're struggling to hold onto enough money in TV rights payments to fund 12 clubs at the same level as before, where would they get the money to fund 20????

Indeed. It would see the elite competition facing huge drops in funding and a worse competition all round. Once again we would be devaluing the very competition Sky pay for to subsidise things they don't. Then people will be shocked when Sky then think why should they pay as much the next time.

[sweaty craiq]

2 hours ago, Damien said:

Indeed. It would see the elite competition facing huge drops in funding and a worse competition all round. Once again we would be devaluing the very competition Sky pay for to subsidise things they don't. Then people will be shocked when Sky then think why should they pay as much the next time.

No it wouldnt

 

[Damien]

1 minute ago, sweaty craiq said:

No it wouldnt

 

Great argument. So please explain how giving 20 teams equal funding does not mean a reduction on what 12 or indeed 14 teams would receive? 

[fighting irish]

2 hours ago, Damien said:

Indeed. It would see the elite competition facing huge drops in funding and a worse competition all round. Once again we would be devaluing the very competition Sky pay for to subsidise things they don't. Then people will be shocked when Sky then think why should they pay as much the next time.

You are right BP, no doubt.

I do think it would bring into sharper focus, the need for finding additional funding across the board.

Perhaps with a cash prize for winning the comp and the cup to ensure the ambitious clubs vie to win.

It certainly doesn't solve all our problems but it might make it easier to insist on and pressurise clubs to meet whatever ''minimum standards'' the franchised organisation aspires to, starting with SL1 and then SL2.

If the SL1 clubs fail to upgrade they can be replaced by an aspiring SL2 club. 

 

[steve oates]

5 hours ago, Damien said:

Indeed. It would see the elite competition facing huge drops in funding and a worse competition all round. Once again we would be devaluing the very competition Sky pay for to subsidise things they don't. 

2022 is when the new deal starts and I read that it would be maybe £28-30M a year all going to Superleague to decide what to do with it 

Hela's right we fund 36 clubs now, but not in 2022. If the Championship and league one clubs end up in dire straits then I could see 12 clubs being picked for the Championship and the third tier closing?

[Damien]

2 minutes ago, steve oates said:

2022 is when the new deal starts and I read that it would be maybe £28-30M a year all going to Superleague to decide what to do with it 

Hela's right we fund 36 clubs now, but not in 2022. If the Championship and league one clubs end up in dire straits then I could see 12 clubs being picked for the Championship and the third tier closing?

I have no issue funding all clubs but we certainly don't need to fund Championship clubs to be full time.

[sweaty craiq]

3 hours ago, Damien said:

Great argument. So please explain how giving 20 teams equal funding does not mean a reduction on what 12 or indeed 14 teams would receive? 

That argument says let’s have 4 teams as they would get more than 12/14 and £7-10m per club would allow us to take RU best players.

hang on though who would watch 24 games playing each other 4 times at home and 4 away, indeed who would pay to broadcast it.

ohh hang on, it’s the value the broadcasters put on the product on offer that dictates the size of deal, it seems it went up when we had the 8’s btw

[steve oates]

5 minutes ago, Damien said:

I have no issue funding all clubs but we certainly don't need to fund Championship clubs to be full time.

Yeh I appreciate that mate. But as it works now we are funding championship clubs to be mostly part time. The SKY money offered appears to be enough to give the SL clubs what they get now and the Championship clubs some money -but nothing like they got from this SKY deal (if any at all).

[Damien]

2 minutes ago, sweaty craiq said:

That argument says let’s have 4 teams as they would get more than 12/14 and £7-10m per club would allow us to take RU best players.

hang on though who would watch 24 games playing each other 4 times at home and 4 away, indeed who would pay to broadcast it.

ohh hang on, it’s the value the broadcasters put on the product on offer that dictates the size of deal, it seems it went up when we had the 8’s btw

Sorry that makes absolutely no sense and doesn't answer the question.

Again please explain how giving 20 teams equal funding does not mean a reduction on what 12 or indeed 14 teams would receive?

You said it doesn't and I'm intrigued to see how. If you cant answer the question then that's fine.

[Smudger06]

Need to restructure HQ, not Clubs or system.....start by opening an RFL Studio somewhere in red Hall. All photographers, graphic designers, social media administrators, video editors can all use the studios to get decent and constant content delivered to the consumers and potential consumers. 

[GUBRATS]

21 hours ago, DOGFATHER said:

One way that never seems to be considered is making a top flight, big budget rugby league video game, that plays well. Something far better than the big ant bargain basement badly flawed stuff that has previously been released. Get a big international prize for the top player as seen in fortnite etc.

Nearly every household in the country and beyond, certainly those with kids in it, is highly likely to have at least one games console in it too.

If you take a "sport" like skateboarding for example. It went from obscurity from the streets of America, to a worldwide phenomena producing the X games, and was introduced as an Olympic sport for the Tokyo Olympics. Its participants became global superstars, it achieved this growth in popularity on the back of the Tony Hawks game series.

I find it hard to understand how skateboarding is really a sport, but there it is, accepted in to the Olympics as sport because of the popularity amongst the younger generation.

We have a great back story to tell about inclusiveness, persecution from the rich, rebellion, highly tuned, skilled and powerful warriors with immense bravery, what more could a kid want?

Surely, there is a software house somewhere looking for the next big thing. Why not Rugby League?

Skateboarding isn't a sport , it's a pastime 

[GUBRATS]

18 hours ago, Big Picture said:

Fund twenty clubs?  Seriously??  They're struggling to hold onto enough money in TV rights payments to fund 12 clubs at the same level as before, where would they get the money to fund 20????

Same place as we'd find the money for a big city Euro/World Super Duper League 

[Tommygilf]

8 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Skateboarding isn't a sport , it's a pastime 

In your head yes, but back in the real world no

[Big Picture]

5 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Same place as we'd find the money for a big city Euro/World Super Duper League 

ROFLMAO, only a fraction of the money to fund a new transatlantic league would come from the UK, the rest would be sourced from other countries.

[GUBRATS]

6 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

ROFLMAO, only a fraction of the money to fund a new transatlantic league would come from the UK, the rest would be sourced from other countries.

Course it would

[Big Picture]

3 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Course it would

Absolutely.  There are plenty of rich guys in North America who would likely see great potential in such a league and they could get in on the ground floor for a lot less money than buying into any of the established major pro leagues.  That in turn would create interest from TV broadcasters over here.

[Damien]

21 hours ago, DOGFATHER said:

One way that never seems to be considered is making a top flight, big budget rugby league video game, that plays well. Something far better than the big ant bargain basement badly flawed stuff that has previously been released. Get a big international prize for the top player as seen in fortnite etc.

Nearly every household in the country and beyond, certainly those with kids in it, is highly likely to have at least one games console in it too.

If you take a "sport" like skateboarding for example. It went from obscurity from the streets of America, to a worldwide phenomena producing the X games, and was introduced as an Olympic sport for the Tokyo Olympics. Its participants became global superstars, it achieved this growth in popularity on the back of the Tony Hawks game series.

I find it hard to understand how skateboarding is really a sport, but there it is, accepted in to the Olympics as sport because of the popularity amongst the younger generation.

We have a great back story to tell about inclusiveness, persecution from the rich, rebellion, highly tuned, skilled and powerful warriors with immense bravery, what more could a kid want?

Surely, there is a software house somewhere looking for the next big thing. Why not Rugby League?

Quite simply cost. Of course everything you say is quite correct. Games can certainly generate very positive exposure, a cult following and fans for life. However unless RL struck very lucky with a team of die hard RL fans, who are also fantasticly talented developers, it would cost millions, tens of millions for a Madden or FIFA quality game. Development is an expensive business.