Championship and Championship 1.Where now

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

25 minutes ago, OriginalMrC said:

To be honest I've given my thoughts already in this thread and tired trying to convince people like yourself who believe shrinking the footprint of RL in this country is the way to go. 

I'm genuinely confused as to how you've drawn that conclusion from my posts. That isn't what I wrote at all. I can only assume that you haven't read them properly, or have projected viewpoints on to it that I have never stated.

I can appreciate it is difficult to discuss this topic when you're so emotionally invested in it, but I am genuinely interested to hear your views on the questions posed, as you haven't addressed them in your other posts.

The funding from TV broadcasts isn't a charity giveaway, so it's perfectly reasonable to question the return on that investment across all levels of the game. Questioning the value of any investment isn't the same as believing that "shrinking the footprint of RL in this country is the way to go." It's merely asking whether the investment is being channeled appropriately to maximise development. For me, I would rather have seen multiple Cramlington Rockets type clubs formed and supported in areas such as Oxford, Hemel and Gloucester, than have spent that money on 3 pro clubs that now cease to exist with little to show for it.

Given that it appears the funding for League 1 is likely to be substantially reduced moving forward, it would seem a good time to look at the return on investments at all levels of the game.

[OriginalMrC]

31 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

I'm genuinely confused as to how you've drawn that conclusion from my posts. That isn't what I wrote at all. I can only assume that you haven't read them properly, or have projected viewpoints on to it that I have never stated.

I can appreciate it is difficult to discuss this topic when you're so emotionally invested in it, but I am genuinely interested to hear your views on the questions posed, as you haven't addressed them in your other posts.

The funding from TV broadcasts isn't a charity giveaway, so it's perfectly reasonable to question the return on that investment across all levels of the game. Questioning the value of any investment isn't the same as believing that "shrinking the footprint of RL in this country is the way to go." It's merely asking whether the investment is being channeled appropriately to maximise development. For me, I would rather have seen multiple Cramlington Rockets type clubs formed and supported in areas such as Oxford, Hemel and Gloucester, than have spent that money on 3 pro clubs that now cease to exist with little to show for it.

Given that it appears the funding for League 1 is likely to be substantially reduced moving forward, it would seem a good time to look at the return on investments at all levels of the game.

Sorry but that is exactly what you have said. You've been pretty clear that Coventry should be taken out of the Rugby League pyramid. 

And you don't patronise me by saying I am emotionally invested and therefore somehow incapable of thinking clearly. I'm not naive enough to think that the central funding is a 'charity giveaway'. 

Your last paragraph is strange because return on investments has been a big part of the RFL strategy over the last couple of years and will continue to be the case going forward. At the end of the day I believe that everything the Bears bring to the table is worth the small amount of money invested in them. You don't, and you are entitled to your opinion so let's leave it at that. 

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

1 hour ago, OriginalMrC said:

Sorry but that is exactly what you have said. You've been pretty clear that Coventry should be taken out of the Rugby League pyramid.

Please quote me where I've said that. Polarising the arguments in this extreme way results in the discussion degenerating. These arguments are not about Coventry per se, so please try to not take them personally.

1 hour ago, OriginalMrC said:

And you don't patronise me by saying I am emotionally invested and therefore somehow incapable of thinking clearly.

If you're emotionally invested then that's a good thing - there's no need to be so defensive.

1 hour ago, OriginalMrC said:

Your last paragraph is strange because return on investments has been a big part of the RFL strategy over the last couple of years and will continue to be the case going forward.

Why's that strange? Sounds like the RFL agree that return on investment is important!

1 hour ago, OriginalMrC said:

At the end of the day I believe that everything the Bears bring to the table is worth the small amount of money invested in them. You don't, and you are entitled to your opinion so let's leave it at that. 

And that's fine. As you say we can agree to disagree. I'm not convinced that the money paid to League 1 clubs offers the best return on the investment, and would prefer to see the money spent on long term sustainable development plans. I'd rather see multiple community clubs with several age groups springing up than see semi pro clubs like Hemel and Oxford being unsustainable and disappearing. Also I'm not convinced that some heartlands clubs offer enough of a return on investment either. There's going to be far less money floating about from next year, so some tough decisions are going to have to be made that will likely impact many League 1 clubs.

And you still haven't responded to the questions I asked, which is a shame.

 

[newbe]

ShropshireBull  just looked at Hemel fixtures on there web site seems they have a team in the Southern Conferance league, a reserve team in East region, U-18,16,14,12's. + minis. Seems they are regrouping and found the right level. Pathways for players open to get picked up by London Broncos. 

 

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

3 minutes ago, newbe said:

ShropshireBull  just looked at Hemel fixtures on there web site seems they have a team in the Southern Conferance league, a reserve team in East region, U-18,16,14,12's. + minis. Seems they are regrouping and found the right level. Pathways for players open to get picked up by London Broncos. 

 

This for me is obviously a lot more sustainable, and isn't costing 75k of TV funding. I'm not sure why some people seem to think this is less worthy than running a semi pro team in League 1. This is sustainable development that helps to expand the footprint of the game. They're performing a far more useful function than the semi pro Hemel that played in League 1.

[newbe]

7 hours ago, ShropshireBull said:

Sounds positive. I don't want to lock anyone out of any level of the pyramid (though I do want to lock the two french teams in). If Hemel are winning games, being competitive and in a few years want to apply to step up that's great. 

Think the Chairman is quite happy were the club are now. He knew what was going to happen with the new TV deal. They have boys at Broncos so they can play at a higher level.

[Ivarr the Boneless]

I used to watch Oxford. When they withdrew one of the owners told me he thought they could have turned the club around. However, they weren't willing to run up the required losses during the reboot as they expected League One to be cut adrift within five years.

They didn't view Oxford as a candidate for the Championship, even if extended. As such, if their prediction came true, they would not be able to recover losses endured turning the club around.

it's looking a smart call now sadly.

 

[Harry Stottle]

11 hours ago, ShropshireBull said:

Well that is SL and Championship, they are two separate tiers with P and R. P and R allows teams to be part time in Champ but scale up and reach for promotion should they wish (such as York, Thunder, etc). If you get relegated, reduce budget accordingly. I'm against a closed shop. 

You definitely lock the two French teams in to SL though, their reduced money and minimum french play caps the trade off for them to be able to guarantee sponsors they will always be in top flight. 

Two points 

Firstly you say you are against a closed shop but allowing the 1st division £1.3M more in funding than than the 2nd division would all but ensure even more so than in today's funding an immediate return via relegation to the 2nd division for the promoted team, the only players available will the one's from the relegated team, who do you think will commit to signing for a 'hopeful' promotion team before they have secured promotion which incidently is on the penultimate weekend of the season. Expanding that statement for the team you are relegating, in your system they will have no 'parachute' ensuring the vast majority of their player's if any at all can afford ford to stay with the club. 

Your funding value of £200,000 averaged out in a small squad of say 25 player's equates to just £8,000 per player towards a playing wage!

Secondly, I just don't understand this "love-in" of protecting teams from relegation that perform in the very same format as their contemporaries it is totally abhorrent, you state the French have a trade off in giving them a lower level of funding, but it doesn't matter a jot in your system if they had no funding whatsoever to buy player's, they could play the Villeneuve Leopards U'17s it just doesn't matter at all if they are uncompetitive. 

Think about it, there was ghast and horror on these pages when we employed the Super 8's, many stating that if a SL club is relegated which could be in a one off competitive fixture such as the £1M game perhaps on an unfavourable bounce of the ball or a mistaken refereeing decision many people in that SL club would/could lose their jobs, not just the players but the coaches, backroom staff, ticket office, shop, hospitality, ground staff, security etc, etc, but in this harebrained 'protectionist' system such as yours you would be relegating a team that most likely would have performed better than a French team containing a minimum number of sub-standard French Nationals, you are not even giving all the players and staff of a possible relegated club a fighting chance of a one-off game, in your 14 team league there are at least 26 games which don't matter.

NO MATTER HOW YOU TRY TO DRESS IT UP, PROTECTING TEAMS FROM RELEGATION IS NOT SPORT IF THE RESULT OF GAMES DOES NOT MATTER.

[bowes]

On 29/04/2021 at 16:09, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

There is a Southern Conference that runs without funding. Could the Bears play in this competition if League 1 was disbanded and funding disappeared? It would be a shame if there wasn't a suitable level for them to play at.

The Southern Conference is two regional leagues neither of which covers the midlands, so no it wouldn't be a suitable level to play at. It's also a much lower playing standard.

[bowes]

On 28/04/2021 at 18:41, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

League One looks like it could be in trouble. Let’s turn the negative into a positive. Spitting the League into a League One North and League One South would significantly reduce travel costs for clubs at that level, while also allowing us to bring in new expansion clubs into League One South, at a level their more likely able to compete at.

Name the teams you'd have in a League One South.

[JM2010]

13 minutes ago, bowes said:

Name the teams you'd have in a League One South.

Maybe the Southern Conference could be used. Have around 8 teams in a League 1 South using existing semi pro clubs and any Southern Conference teams that would like to step up. Then keep East and West leagues below that. 

If League 1 is going to die then at least there would be somewhere for the clubs to play.

It doesn't even have to be semi pro but maybe funding could be given for travel etc

 

[Sir Kevin Sinfield]

24 minutes ago, bowes said:

Name the teams you'd have in a League One South.

London Skolars, a new London side, Hemel, South Wales Scorpions, West Wales Raiders, Gloucestershire all golds, Bristol Sonics, Nottingham Outlaws, Coventry Bears, and any other new sides that  want to apply and step up.

[wiganermike]

3 hours ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

London Skolars, a new London side, Hemel, South Wales Scorpions, West Wales Raiders, Gloucestershire all golds, Bristol Sonics, Nottingham Outlaws, Coventry Bears, and any other new sides that  want to apply and step up.

South Wales Scorpions were taken over by West Wales Raiders so I don't think the Scorpions still exist. After their experience of League 1 would Hemel want to step up again or are they happier where they are now?

I know a few people keep suggesting a North/South split to cut travel should League 1 cease to operate as it does presently but I think an East and West split would be better if there were to be a regional set up below the Championship. That way the more southerly clubs would be able to regularly play clubs from the northern heartland and would be able to more readily see how they were developing as clubs rather than creating an instantly much stronger North division that was supposedly on par with a weaker South division. In an East and West split the top teams in each would be of a pretty even standard to those in the other division with the same applying when comparing the weaker teams in one division to those weaker teams in the other division.

[Griff]

4 hours ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

London Skolars, a new London side, Hemel, South Wales Scorpions, West Wales Raiders, Gloucestershire all golds, Bristol Sonics, Nottingham Outlaws, Coventry Bears, and any other new sides that  want to apply and step up.

Typical.   Just plonk teams in places where you'd like to have one and hope the fans rock up.

It's a tried and tested method.  Unfortunately, the tests haven't been all that successful.

[PhilCarrington]

4 hours ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

London Skolars, a new London side, Hemel, South Wales Scorpions, West Wales Raiders, Gloucestershire all golds, Bristol Sonics, Nottingham Outlaws, Coventry Bears, and any other new sides that  want to apply and step up.

Can't see any of the current London clubs wanting to step up and not sure how you'd get enough players for a new club to come in. As for Bristol Sonics and Gloucestershire all golds - have you just pulled the same list of out from when you first suggested this?

How many promotion spots would you give for North and South into the Championship?

[Jeff Stein]

Fascinating fact: Llanelli is further away from New River than Doncaster, Hunslet, Keighley, Oldham and Rochdale.

Yet some people think this is the basis for an easy travelling unfunded amateur league

[JonM]

56 minutes ago, Jeff Stein said:

Fascinating fact: Llanelli is further away from New River than Doncaster, Hunslet, Keighley, Oldham and Rochdale.

Yet some people think this is the basis for an easy travelling unfunded amateur league

Llanelli to Widnes is about 150 miles on largely empty A roads. Widnes to Hull KR is 123 miles on a motorway that is often at a standstill. Widnes, Warrington, St. Helens are all a shorter drive from Llanelli than Colwyn Bay for the Wales derby.

[Sir Kevin Sinfield]

16 hours ago, PhilCarrington said:

Can't see any of the current London clubs wanting to step up and not sure how you'd get enough players for a new club to come in. As for Bristol Sonics and Gloucestershire all golds - have you just pulled the same list of out from when you first suggested this?

How many promotion spots would you give for North and South into the Championship?

I’d go for a combined League One North and League One South play off. As things stand at the moment the promotion places would go to the League One North sides as they’re stronger, in time that country change.

[zylya]

52 minutes ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

I’d go for a combined League One North and League One South play off. As things stand at the moment the promotion places would go to the League One North sides as they’re stronger, in time that country change.

How are you expecting the weaker L1S teams to get stronger in comparison to their L1N counterparts, when they don't get to play those stronger teams?

In addition, your League One South team list has just three teams who are currently in L1 and a load of amateur teams. How are you expecting these amateur teams to make the jump to semi professionalism?

Currently, many of the southern teams get their highest attendances against some of the traditional clubs. How are you expecting clubs like London Skolars and Coventry, who are already operating on tight budgets, to manage with the loss of revenue? London vs West Wales is hardly a local rivalry. Or Bristol vs Nottingham.

[Death to the Rah Rah's]

Does anyone on here have any idea of what it would cost to get Active League as it’s own stand alone channel on satellite TV?

if there was some way of linking that in with the Aussie game as well as showing filler games from some of the other nations, then surely it would be an easier sell than the current phone/tablet app format?

[bowes]

On 02/05/2021 at 11:11, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

London Skolars, a new London side, Hemel, South Wales Scorpions, West Wales Raiders, Gloucestershire all golds, Bristol Sonics, Nottingham Outlaws, Coventry Bears, and any other new sides that  want to apply and step up.

Bristol Sonics and South Wales Scorpions have both folded.

Nottingham would probably be reluctant to switch to a league that's probably not too different in standard from their current league but with more travelling.

I don't know how Hemel or Gloucestershire All Golds would feel about joining, and it may be possible to get extra Welsh or London teams to join but it doesn't really look like a League 1 South. Maybe NCL South but even not all clubs would meet off field criteria and it would be a demotion for the semi-pro clubs.

[BJW]

On 29/04/2021 at 22:35, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

This for me is obviously a lot more sustainable, and isn't costing 75k of TV funding. I'm not sure why some people seem to think this is less worthy than running a semi pro team in League 1. This is sustainable development that helps to expand the footprint of the game. They're performing a far more useful function than the semi pro Hemel that played in League 1.

Where did you get that figure from and can you supply me a link? Insider information from their last L1 season lets me know how much they actually got.

[OriginalMrC]

1 minute ago, BJW said:

Where did you get that figure from and can you supply me a link? Insider information from their last L1 season lets me know how much they actually got.

Yep another myth about L1, the figure is around £50-60k, or approx the average Superleague salary. But of course as we all know cutting this funding from L1 clubs will save Rugby League. 

[OriginalMrC]

4 hours ago, bowes said:

Bristol Sonics and South Wales Scorpions have both folded.

Nottingham would probably be reluctant to switch to a league that's probably not too different in standard from their current league but with more travelling.

I don't know how Hemel or Gloucestershire All Golds would feel about joining, and it may be possible to get extra Welsh or London teams to join but it doesn't really look like a League 1 South. Maybe NCL South but even not all clubs would meet off field criteria and it would be a demotion for the semi-pro clubs.

This league one South idea has been talked about so many times but no one has yet to convince me it will benefit the game, aside from supposedly saving a small amount of central funding. There is also the small issue of flaws in these proposals, some of which you have highlighted above 

[bowes]

2 hours ago, OriginalMrC said:

This league one South idea has been talked about so many times but no one has yet to convince me it will benefit the game, aside from supposedly saving a small amount of central funding. There is also the small issue of flaws in these proposals, some of which you have highlighted above 

Hopefully one day they'll be able to create a southern version of the NCL, but I don't think we're there yet. League 1 South seems a step too far.