Jump to content

Another SL restructure is being planned


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Northern Eel said:

I hear what you are saying. The salary cap was introduced to try and stop clubs spending money they don't have and therefore avoid administration/insolvency. My guess would be that in removing the salary cap, we would go back to some of the financial meltdowns suffered in the past. I am not suggesting micro-management, just a way of the governing body of the sport investing in the future of its 'biggest' competition. 

Not necessarily. You can have fiscal controls that prevent financial mismanagement, have an effect on preventing a "Wigan in the 80s" situation and ensure that clubs that are commercially successful can invest that success in improving the on-field product. An FFP-style system could very much do that. 

A hard cap doesn't really serve any purpose. It doesn't make the league more competitive (because smaller clubs get poorer value from it), it doesn't improve the product on the field (because it supresses the wages of the talent, adding further incentive for them to go elsewhere) and it doesn't prevent financial problems (because there is no link between the cap and commercial performance). 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 473
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Sorry but your disrespect for proud Rugby League clubs is wrong. I'll leave it to Leigh and Wakefield fans to speak up for their own historic clubs but here's my take on Hull Kingston Rovers. Rov

14 teams. 2 teams to be relegated at seasons end. top 5 playoffs. no more loop fixtures. Thats what I’d like to see 👍

You know what is likely then? 10 teams, more loop fixtures.

2 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

Not necessarily. You can have fiscal controls that prevent financial mismanagement, have an effect on preventing a "Wigan in the 80s" situation and ensure that clubs that are commercially successful can invest that success in improving the on-field product. An FFP-style system could very much do that. 

A hard cap doesn't really serve any purpose. It doesn't make the league more competitive (because smaller clubs get poorer value from it), it doesn't improve the product on the field (because it supresses the wages of the talent, adding further incentive for them to go elsewhere) and it doesn't prevent financial problems (because there is no link between the cap and commercial performance). 

So why do smaller clubs get poorer value from it? Is it down to their income generation?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Northern Eel said:

So why do smaller clubs get poorer value from it? Is it down to their income generation?

Let's create a scenario - imagine you are an out-of-contract player and your options are:

Option A; Club with a decent track record of competing for honours, maybe getting into major finals every now and then, training in excellent facilities, playing in a state-of-the-art venue in front of good crowds and a good record on player welfare. 

Option B: Club consistently fighting relegation, minimal chance of playing in showpiece events, training on "Dogs**t Park", playing in a dump every second week in front of small crowds, and for a chairman who has no problem going to the press to slag-off his players, pressuring them to take pay cuts with sinister "we will remember it if you don't comply" messages and telling you to "grow a pair" in the local rag if you have a problem with the way in which the club is run. 

How much more money would Club B have to throw at you to convince you to join them instead of Club A? 

That's how smaller clubs get poorer value from the salary cap. 

Edited by whatmichaelsays
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

Let's create a scenario - imagine you are an out-of-contract player and your options are:

Option A; Club with a decent track record of competing for honours, maybe getting into major finals every now and then, training in excellent facilities, playing in a state-of-the-art venue in front of good crowds and a good record on player welfare. 

Option B: Club consistently fighting relegation, minimal chance of playing in showpiece events, training on "Dogs**t Park", playing in a dump every second week in front of small crowds, and for a chairman who has no problem going to the press to slag-off his players, pressuring them to take pay cuts with sinister "we will remember it if you don't comply" messages and telling you to "grow a pair" in the local rag if you have a problem with the way in which the club is run. 

How much more money would Club B have to throw at you to convince you to join them instead of Club A? 

That's how smaller clubs get poorer value from the salary cap. 

2 down, 2 up would possibly solve much of that. Equally, if the small crowds are not going to naturally increase, and the money is not available to improve the infrastructure, then some sound financial advice wouldn't be a bad thing to listen to.

But, this is just one facet of the thread. Ultimately, clubs need to be help to account in some way for the way they operate and a range of minimum standards should, in my view, not only be expected, but prevail.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think many on here would be surprised at the thinking at some of the top clubs (The majority) would like to see a strong London and Toulouse in, out of the current clubs I would say its 7/8  in favour  v 4/5 against.

 

Paul

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Manfred Mann said:

The only restructuring that makes any sense is a return to licensing, but with the rules of licensing enforced, unlike last time. This means modern 10,000 seat minimum stadium, and a fan attendance average of at least 5,000 or even 6,000. A viable business plan would also be necessary, of course.

That would end the burden of having Salford, Wakefield and probably Leigh weighing down Super League. If Castleford can’t get a 21st century stadium to play in, then they too will have to go. Their current stadium is an embarrassment and a disgrace. It would certainly guarantee the participation of Toulouse, and possibly other French or North American clubs, in Super League. It would give hope to Bradford (assuming their business side is guaranteed), Newcastle, York and London. 

The restructuring change I propose would surely make Super League more attractive to TV broadcasters and commercial sponsors.

Leigh meet you criteria,Bradford don’t 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Manfred Mann said:

The only restructuring that makes any sense is a return to licensing, but with the rules of licensing enforced, unlike last time. This means modern 10,000 seat minimum stadium, and a fan attendance average of at least 5,000 or even 6,000. A viable business plan would also be necessary, of course.

That would end the burden of having Salford, Wakefield and probably Leigh weighing down Super League. If Castleford can’t get a 21st century stadium to play in, then they too will have to go. Their current stadium is an embarrassment and a disgrace. It would certainly guarantee the participation of Toulouse, and possibly other French or North American clubs, in Super League. It would give hope to Bradford (assuming their business side is guaranteed), Newcastle, York and London. 

The restructuring change I propose would surely make Super League more attractive to TV broadcasters and commercial sponsors.

Stop it MM I don't like agreeing with you 😁

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Hela Wigmen said:

Twelve team closed shop Super League with minimum standards introduced and long term plans for growth to 14, 16 etc. Diluting the competition further by adding two teams now is not the route to go down and in eighteen months, people will want change. Again. 

Minimum standards ? Now where have we heard that before lol and still some have never achieved them.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Fevrover said:

Minimum standards ? Now where have we heard that before lol and still some have never achieved them.

This every time. Until we have strong governance we can’t have licensing. When the incumbent clubs have so much control things won’t change

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Fevrover said:

Minimum standards ? Now where have we heard that before lol and still some have never achieved them.

Exactly. It’ll never happen because the apple cart would take a beating but an independent body implementing minimum standards rather than retaining the status quo is vital to the sport. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Funnily there's a furore going on about a European closed shop Super League proposal for football. Gary Neville describes it as a disgrace despite his Man U in favour of it. Everyone is against it apparently,  because of the betrayal of loyal fans down the pyramid,  lack of relegation from proposed league,  creating a cartel of clubs which no one else could join. However some want exactly that for RL .Yes the money in RL is a fraction of football,  but the principle is the same. Or am I missing something?

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, HawkMan said:

Funnily there's a furore going on about a European closed shop Super League proposal for football. Gary Neville describes it as a disgrace despite his Man U in favour of it. Everyone is against it apparently,  because of the betrayal of loyal fans down the pyramid,  lack of relegation from proposed league,  creating a cartel of clubs which no one else could join. However some want exactly that for RL .Yes the money in RL is a fraction of football,  but the principle is the same. Or am I missing something?

Completely different situations. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hela Wigmen said:

Completely different situations. 

Exactly , just as the NFL,NRL, NBA,MLS and loads of other various sports structures around the planet 

What is the same is the UK sporting psyche 

It is interesting that people complain of clubs having unhealthy amounts of influence in RL , and yet this is exactly what these football clubs are trying to do 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

We still can’t get around the problem that for a licensing system (which should still allow the possibility of teams moving up), we need a minimum of 12 strong clubs, who can be clearly differentiated from the rest. We don’t have that in SL now, and of the potential candidates constantly put forward you have to say they all have flaws so are not shoe ins by any stretch.

Toulouse - probably the strongest outside candidate, however we are still in a global pandemic so logistically a problem.

London - the club who alienates its fans, seems to run along with little planning and is about to embark on yet another ground move.

Newcastle and York - 2 clubs who are coming along nicely, let’s not destroy anything by fast tracking, which never seems to work well.

Bradford - desperately needs a period of stability

Fev- 3 teams with a WF postcode might not be so attractive to sponsors or investors, shame the one with potentially the best set up of the 3 is the one outside. However retaining P&R may solve that one.

Theres no one else, despite dreams of some on here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, The storm said:

Several clubs have gone stale and fail to add impact to the competition 

 

Salford

Wakefield

Leigh 

 

Should all stand to one side 

Leigh have only played a handful of games yet you’ve written them off already. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

This is the 3rd season Leigh have played in Super League. They’ve shown their worth to Super League before, it’s on a par with Wakefield and Hull kr. 

Hull KR? They can average 8k when playing terribly, they’re a big club and an asset to the competition.
I’d relegate Leeds, their crowds are tiny as a percentage of the city’s population, and they’re falling every season too. 

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

This is the 3rd season Leigh have played in Super League. They’ve shown their worth to Super League before, it’s on a par with Wakefield and Hull kr. 

Sorry but your disrespect for proud Rugby League clubs is wrong. I'll leave it to Leigh and Wakefield fans to speak up for their own historic clubs but here's my take on Hull Kingston Rovers.

Rovers have an ever improving stadium on the back of big investment and have pumped money into the youth system with the esteemed John Bastain leading the way. They will soon be purchasing the stadium and already own the leasehold.

They have average crowds of over 8,000 and a class leading community involvement programme. They support the East Hull community and have been praised by local politicians for their wonderful efforts in providing education and opportunities for the disadvantaged.

Craven Park is the centre of the East Hull community a deprived area which benefits from the huge efforts of Neil Hudgell, Paul Lakin and the Hull KR club.

Mose Masoe has been supported for 2 years on full pay with the club active in the fundraising for this Rovers family member. 

I am proud of this club and now we seem to be improving on the field too. What exactly is your problem?

  • Like 12
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

This is the 3rd season Leigh have played in Super League. They’ve shown their worth to Super League before, it’s on a par with Wakefield and Hull kr. 

Leigh have shown promotion and relegation doesn’t work. Had Leigh got the nod a long time ago or around the expansion period, they’d be a different club to the one who has been promoted twice and relegated once in the past five seasons they’ve completed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Oldbear said:

We still can’t get around the problem that for a licensing system (which should still allow the possibility of teams moving up), we need a minimum of 12 strong clubs, who can be clearly differentiated from the rest. We don’t have that in SL now, and of the potential candidates constantly put forward you have to say they all have flaws so are not shoe ins by any stretch.

Toulouse - probably the strongest outside candidate, however we are still in a global pandemic so logistically a problem.

London - the club who alienates its fans, seems to run along with little planning and is about to embark on yet another ground move.

Newcastle and York - 2 clubs who are coming along nicely, let’s not destroy anything by fast tracking, which never seems to work well.

Bradford - desperately needs a period of stability

Fev- 3 teams with a WF postcode might not be so attractive to sponsors or investors, shame the one with potentially the best set up of the 3 is the one outside. However retaining P&R may solve that one.

Theres no one else, despite dreams of some on here.

How does relegation help anything? It still means at 1 or 2 (at least) clubs never gave a chance to develop. 

Sheff Utd had a good winning season. last year. They are relegated now.  They still get loads old money for the privilege.  RL has zero to offer, only bankruptcy.

P&R in our stuation is a sick joke.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Northern Eel said:

This. Absolutely this.

Work out what the core function of the SL clubs needs to be in order to sustain themselves as commercial entities and set the minimum standards based on that. Then, consider the role they play in supporting rugby league their local area. 

Get rid of dual registration and use the mandatory academy system to generate the very best players. Cherry pick those who will make it almost immediately into Super League and offer up the remaining youngsters to the other local clubs, but for the whole season. Slap an expectation on at least 4 home grown players in a 21-man matchday squad, but keep the marquee rules to attract the best oversees stars.

We need to be brave as a sport, which is why it is critically important that it is not run by the clubs themselves. You either sign up and agree to reach the standards, or disappear. 

The sport should not be run by the clubs?

Who pays for the sport?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rupert Prince said:

How does relegation help anything? It still means at 1 or 2 (at least) clubs never gave a chance to develop. 

Sheff Utd had a good winning season. last year. They are relegated now.  They still get loads old money for the privilege.  RL has zero to offer, only bankruptcy.

P&R in our stuation is a sick joke.

If we had more than 12 strong clubs, I.e. ones that are differentiated from the rest, then we could have licensing with the opportunity to add extra clubs as they are deemed ready, not relegate any. However we don’t even have 8, so what do you do if you still want a 12 club SL? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, DimmestStar said:

Sorry but your disrespect for proud Rugby League clubs is wrong. I'll leave it to Leigh and Wakefield fans to speak up for their own historic clubs but here's my take on Hull Kingston Rovers.

Rovers have an ever improving stadium on the back of big investment and have pumped money into the youth system with the esteemed John Bastain leading the way. They will soon be purchasing the stadium and already own the leasehold.

They have average crowds of over 8,000 and a class leading community involvement programme. They support the East Hull community and have been praised by local politicians for their wonderful efforts in providing education and opportunities for the disadvantaged.

Craven Park is the centre of the East Hull community a deprived area which benefits from the huge efforts of Neil Hudgell, Paul Lakin and the Hull KR club.

Mose Masoe has been supported for 2 years on full pay with the club active in the fundraising for this Rovers family member. 

I am proud of this club and now we seem to be improving on the field too. What exactly is your problem?

This is why I dont want licensing. Hull KR pull in solid crowds from a great fan base and create two great games a season for TV with Hull.  

Licensing always looks to bin off clubs like Hull KR with awful talk of mergers.  Lock clubs in if it is good for international RL but door should never be closed to your KR's or Fev's

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

This is why I dont want licensing. Hull KR pull in solid crowds from a great fan base and create two great games a season for TV with Hull.  

Licensing always looks to bin off clubs like Hull KR with awful talk of mergers.  Lock clubs in if it is good for international RL but door should never be closed to your KR's or Fev's

Hull KR need not be binned by licensing. Why would they be?

Featherstone definitely needs to be binned. I have been to their ground on game day. They have a paltry fan base, and little prospect of good commercial sponsorship in their tiny, nationally unknown social backwater of west Yorkshire.

After Toulouse is highly successful, as they will be, Super League needs to have a future place for Avignon, and perhaps even Paris, Toronto and Ottawa. Featherstone in Super League would be a depressing drag on growth of the game

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Manfred Mann said:

Hull KR need not be binned by licensing. Why would they be?

Featherstone definitely needs to be binned. I have been to their ground on game day. They have a paltry fan base, and little prospect of good commercial sponsorship in their tiny, nationally unknown social backwater of west Yorkshire.

After Toulouse is highly successful, as they will be, Super League needs to have a future place for Avignon, and perhaps even Paris, Toronto and Ottawa. Featherstone in Super League would be a depressing drag on growth of the game

Only three clubs that don’t exist? Why not Mogadishu?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...