Jump to content

League Restructure Thread (Merged Threads)


Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, Scubby said:

By the NRL/RPLA rules everyone has to spend 95% of their A$10m cap each year if they want to or not. They can't pay £800k like Salford or Wakefield. That is £5.6m equivalent in sterling.

Then they will be looking for cheap pickings from elsewhere to mix with players like Tedesco who can command 10% of the cap.

It is no co-incidence that a club like Canberra (who has trouble getting Sydney and Queensland stars to relocate) went after a glut of cheaper English equivalents. Pay A$500k for John Bateman or A$900k for Angus Critchton. Pay A$300k for Ryan Sutton or $A600k for Matt Lodge. Even write off £150k in transfer fees to get George Williams for A$500k instead of paying A$1m to tempt Mitch Moses.

The thing is even the cheaper salaries for British players are 2-3x what they are getting here. Add on the favourable exchange rate and you are laughing. Looking for hidden young gems in the British game is much more profitable than paying overs for a 16-year-old from Penrith that everyone is after.

It is what top level football has been doing for decades.

I don't disagree with any of that.

But the trickle has yet to become a flood.

Which is not to say that it might not do so.

Even then, many young players would go over there for a limited period, rather than forever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 2.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
3 minutes ago, Martyn Sadler said:

They certainly have done until now and I hope they can overcome the financial impact of the pandemic.

I just think at the moment there is a great deal of financial uncertainty throughout the Rugby League world.

Even the NRL may have to pull its horns in eventually on TV deals.

Regardless, for the next five years (if you add on home grown, exemptions and third parries) the NRL will be paying around £100m per year on players and SL around £20m. 

The RFL allowing clubs to pay a SL squad player less than £15k last year was one of the saddest most pathetic concessions I have seen in elite sport. In fact it is not becoming of an elite sport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm remembering a lecture I'd heard by a guru and was struck by something he said, which seems to resonate here.

He said (and I'm paraphrasing) ''Once you realise that half your lungs are growing out in the fields and in the woods, its obvious you can't cut down all the trees and expect to get off scott-free''.

You can't exist, in isolation.

Even the (Super?) SuperLeague clubs exist in an inter-dependent ecosystem.

The lower echelons depends on them to provide the glamour and to create incentives and they (SL) depend on the lower levels to provide the players and fanbase (cash) they need.

The overarching modus-operandi in the RL ''family'' is dog eat dog, short term, amoral, existentialism.

The democratic, one club, one vote system is no protection, if the majority are willing to vote the minority into oblivion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Martyn Sadler said:

The NRL clubs have some major financial problems at the moment.

I'm not sure they are as strong or as well-equipped as you clearly think they are.

An interesting read here Martyn which depends on peoples point of view

Do the NRL clubs want to keep their competition a closed shop or do the clubs have real money problems, or perhaps a combination of both?

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/extremely-surprising-clubs-say-now-not-the-right-time-for-nrl-expansion-20210812-p58iaz.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, lucky 7 said:

An interesting read here Martyn which depends on peoples point of view

Do the NRL clubs want to keep their competition a closed shop or do the clubs have real money problems, or perhaps a combination of both?

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/extremely-surprising-clubs-say-now-not-the-right-time-for-nrl-expansion-20210812-p58iaz.html

It's because there is only actual real value in admitting 2 new clubs. That is, a 9-game round (extra TV game each week) to sell. Add one more and you are only sharing things 17 ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, lucky 7 said:

I think that Rimmer favoured a 14 team Super League for 1 season shows to me he will do everything he can this season to make sure that Leigh don't get relegated. That for me is worrying. Surely he isn't going to put obstacles in the way of the team that wins the Championship Grand Final is he?

I posted earlier in this thread that my opinion on the proposed single season of 14 was to placate some teams at the lower end of SL and top end of Championship in order to garner their support and votes in favour of the proposal. It would have kept Leigh up and given them a shot in 2022 at bagging a spot in the top ten (if relegated they would be chasing top 6 just to make the second ten), it would have promoted an extra team from Championship this year guaranteeing two of the leading clubs a place in the 2x10s (as no team in the 14 team SL could miss out) rather than needing to scrap for a top 6 place in Championship. For those that didn't get one of the 2 promotion spots it would have seen the two strongest competitors removed as they would be in SL with no SL team replacing them making it easier for a top half Championship outfit to secure a top 6 place and a spot in the second ten than it would otherwise be. The single season of 14 was always an odd looking part of the proposal but it seems an unwillingness to share the pot with more clubs will prevent it from happening.

Two tens is still attainable by relegating 3 and promoting 1 in 2022 (following 1 up, 1 down as planned this year).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, fighting irish said:

I'm remembering a lecture I'd heard by a guru and was struck by something he said, which seems to resonate here.

He said (and I'm paraphrasing) ''Once you realise that half your lungs are growing out in the fields and in the woods, its obvious you can't cut down all the trees and expect to get off scott-free''.

You can't exist, in isolation.

Even the (Super?) SuperLeague clubs exist in an inter-dependent ecosystem.

The lower echelons depends on them to provide the glamour and to create incentives and they (SL) depend on the lower levels to provide the players and fanbase (cash) they need.

The overarching modus-operandi in the RL ''family'' is dog eat dog, short term, amoral, existentialism.

The democratic, one club, one vote system is no protection, if the majority are willing to vote the minority into oblivion.

If you asked all the SL clubs would they accept losing the clubs in the bottom league for good if it meant their own club got another £2m a year I bet all of them would vote yes. There is no RL family as you say, its self preservation and short termism and damn the rest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, dkw said:

If you asked all the SL clubs would they accept losing the clubs in the bottom league for good if it meant their own club got another £2m a year I bet all of them would vote yes. There is no RL family as you say, its self preservation and short termism and damn the rest.

They would also use very little of that money to avoid paying some of their elite athletes more than the minimum wage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, fighting irish said:

I'm remembering a lecture I'd heard by a guru and was struck by something he said, which seems to resonate here.

He said (and I'm paraphrasing) ''Once you realise that half your lungs are growing out in the fields and in the woods, its obvious you can't cut down all the trees and expect to get off scott-free''.

You can't exist, in isolation.

Even the (Super?) SuperLeague clubs exist in an inter-dependent ecosystem.

The lower echelons depends on them to provide the glamour and to create incentives and they (SL) depend on the lower levels to provide the players and fanbase (cash) they need.

The overarching modus-operandi in the RL ''family'' is dog eat dog, short term, amoral, existentialism.

The democratic, one club, one vote system is no protection, if the majority are willing to vote the minority into oblivion.

are you sure its one club one vote?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Martyn Sadler said:

They certainly have done until now and I hope they can overcome the financial impact of the pandemic.

I just think at the moment there is a great deal of financial uncertainty throughout the Rugby League world.

Even the NRL may have to pull its horns in eventually on TV deals.

Do you think the NRL has reached its ceiling regarding TV deals?

I'm not sure how much more money the NRL can generate due to Australia's isolated position and the relatively small population. 

The UK and Europe has much more potential to generate big income for RL competitions but unfortunately it's a minority sport here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Scubby said:

They would also use very little of that money to avoid paying some of their elite athletes more than the minimum wage.

I'm sure they would all use it sensibly, put it towards the long term health of the game, build on youth and bringing in fans.....

Nah, would just mean the ageing NRL players and their agents would get paid more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dkw said:

If you asked all the SL clubs would they accept losing the clubs in the bottom league for good if it meant their own club got another £2m a year I bet all of them would vote yes. There is no RL family as you say, its self preservation and short termism and damn the rest.

It's clear that self interest plays a part in all decisions like this - but I have to ask, if clubs were solely run on this basis, why on earth have vast amounts of money been pumped into clubs outside of SL?

Why were expansion clubs ever tried? 

Why did we ever move from 12 to 14?

There is so much we do that really doesn't fit this narrative. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Scubby said:

It will of course cause a meltdown...

Many of the people who post the most have been here for a decade or more. They were 20-something when they arrived. They have seen it all, they are close to giving up because the sport doesn't want to help itself.

Sky's latest offer shows something drastic is needed. No one is queueing up to save RL. No one. Most of its own supporters want to destroy it.

Justify this sweeping statement Einstein.

Sport, amongst other things, is a dream-world offering escape from harsh reality and the disturbing prospect of change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Spidey said:

It used to be SL 3 Votes Championship 2 and League One 1

French clubs 0, I believe.

Sport, amongst other things, is a dream-world offering escape from harsh reality and the disturbing prospect of change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Scubby said:

Nope

Wrong again then?

This could get habit-forming.

Sport, amongst other things, is a dream-world offering escape from harsh reality and the disturbing prospect of change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Dave T said:

It's clear that self interest plays a part in all decisions like this - but I have to ask, if clubs were solely run on this basis, why on earth have vast amounts of money been pumped into clubs outside of SL?

Why were expansion clubs ever tried? 

Why did we ever move from 12 to 14?

There is so much we do that really doesn't fit this narrative. 

Because most of those ideas were either external (IE the RFL), someone else's problem (IE League 1 clubs voting in Toulouse and Toronto who would be gone from their league in a year) or were sold as a benefit to them/something that didn't impact them as much as it could (IE 13 home games a season or only 3 players per club max being picked for England mid season or perhaps most poignantly Toronto can come up but have no Sky money).

RL, when left solely to the clubs, is the story of Turkey's not voting for Christmas. 

Every development, be that financial support for the lower leagues and wider game, new expansion or overseas teams, or creating a mid season international window, seems like drawing blood from a stone. Clubs either have to be bribed or outright bypassed to get some major developments in place.

Just to clarify the opposition to these moves is almost never from a position of strategic differences, as it is almost always from a position of preserving their own position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Scubby said:

Many = a lot. Many does not = all

You do understand the effects of extrapolation in your arguments, don't you?

Keep digging.

Sport, amongst other things, is a dream-world offering escape from harsh reality and the disturbing prospect of change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not strictly on this subject , but not really worth a thread of its own 

I was following a Stobarts Truck on the M6 this morning , rear of truck was livered out with an advert , that car finding company Ryland Clarke fronts up for ' Cinch ' , I found it interesting 

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.