League Restructure Thread (Merged Threads)

[Harry Stottle]

1 minute ago, OriginalMrC said:

The South Midlands is almost exclusively white. As I said none of what you are saying makes any sense at all. Stop digging 

OK boss

[Tommygilf]

3 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Yep, what else could it be to those who have no interest or not liking?

What's the difference between them and me?

[Tommygilf]

2 hours ago, steve oates said:

Thank you for a considered post. You actually thought about it rather than making a gross incorrect assumption and then going off on one.

Historically we did gain clubs in Coventry and Newcastle, and we lost them both pretty quickly. What we have now is built on better foundations. BTW we haven't lost Bramley, they play at amateur level now......

 

https://bramleybuffs.com

The point I made in that and other posts is that because of our hard division between amateur and professional, we in the game see clubs leaving the pro ranks as "lost". Whereas it seems Bramley have found a level they can operate at, just having to do so in a different way to the normal pyramid structure of other sports.

[Chronicler of Chiswick]

1 hour ago, DI Keith Fowler said:

Did I read on a previous page there's supposed to be some announcement today?

Apparently - perhaps they can't find an old envelope to scribble on the back of.

[Derwent Parker]

1 hour ago, whatmichaelsays said:

I think this is a bit of a reductive argument. Nobody (with any sense) is saying "make RL like darts" and I think it's simplistic to respond to any suggestion of "what other sports do" with a dismissive "we can't be like [insert sport here]".

The aim should not be to be like [insert sport here] but to instead, look at what lots of different sports do to address lots of different challenges - all of which they have in common with rugby league. We're not a unique sport and we don't have unique problems.

• So look at what we can learn from cricket - a sport which identified a problem with aging audiences, and made changes to appeal to new, younger audiences. Is that something RL wants - diverse, younger audiences? 
• Look at what we can learn from darts about making our events much more of a spectacle for TV and occasions that sell-out well in advance (and often without going on general sale). Is that not something RL wants? Demand for tickets?
• Look at what we can learn from the NBA, which used social media to arrest a decline in TV viewership - particularly amongst younger demographics. Is that what RL wants - improved TV viewership and digital engagement?
• Look at what we can learn from American football about going to new markets and geographical expansion (the NFL started as a very regional competition). Is that something RL wants? 
• Look at how British Triathlon and British Cycling took advantage of the profile of well-known athletes who were thrust into the spotlight to reverse falling participation, increase sponsorship and increase funding. Does RL want its stars to be more visible, inspiring participation and attracting commercial and government funding? 
• Look at how football has used digital media to engage young audiences that have likely been priced-out of matchday attendance. Also look at how football has heavily promoted 5/7-a-side as a more accessible way to play the game. 
• Look at what we can learn from "second clubs" in other sports, such as Everton, who have managed to address a problem of filling empty seats when they're competing against more successful competitors who offer better facilities and are, for the most part, competing for the same audiences in an area with higher-than-average levels of deprivation.   

Can we copy and mimic everything that each of those sports did to address those issues? No. Some of them aren't workable and some of them aren't affordable, and no one thing is going to be a solution in itself. But the point is that we can still learn from them, find our own solutions to the problems that RL very much has/had in common with each of those sports and do as many of them as possible as well as the sport can. 

One of those points was brought about earlier [mimicking the NFL] by Mr Sadler and look at all the panic amongst the Super Greed followers that caused.

It doesn't really matter which good ideas are suggested.

The game is being ruined by greed as said earlier the current plan is trying to alienate 45% of the current clubs.

Just so the top clubs can get richer??

[Tommygilf]

6 minutes ago, Derwent Parker said:

One of those points was brought about earlier [mimicking the NFL] by Mr Sadler and look at all the panic amongst the Super Greed followers that caused.

It doesn't really matter which good ideas are suggested.

The game is being ruined by greed as said earlier the current plan is trying to alienate 45% of the current clubs.

Just so the top clubs can get richer??

Mimicking the NFL is literally the idea behind what Super League was set up to do. Consolidate the game in key areas, ensure minimal overlap or competition in each market, target new markets aggressively. Mr Sadler's proposal did none of that because it didn't borrow from the NFL at all.

[Whippet13]

Looks like £5m for the RFL in 2022 with 2 x 10 still on the table for 2023 

Super League clubs working with RFL to plot smooth future for (sportsmole.co.uk)

[HawkMan]

League structures eh? Here's an idea..

To be introduced ASAP preferably next season. 

No relegation from SL,  top 8 from Championship  added to form 20 team SL in two conferences, places determined by league positions. 

Conference A

SL 1st place, 3rd,5th, 7th,9th and 11th,  Championship 2nd, 4th,6th, and 8th.

Conference B 

SL 2,4,6,8,10 ,12 and Championship 1,3,5,and 7.

Remaining clubs Championship and L1 to form new Championship. 

   ELIMINATION PHASE

Conferences A and B , ten teams each play other twice. = 18 games.

Top 4 in each qualify for;

   QUALIFYING PHASE

8 teams carry over points and record from Elimination phase, play 4 teams from other conference home and away, 8 more games equals 26 in total for season.  Top 4 into semi finals and Grand Final.

Beaten semi finalists 27 game season, GF teams 28 game season. 

   REPECHAGE TOURNAMENT 

12 teams that don't qualify for QUALIFYING PHASE enter REPECHAGE, on offer a new trophy, something to play for AND playing for their place in SL for following season. 

12 teams , points record etc NOT CARRIED OVER, into three groups of 4. 6 matches equals 24 game season  EXCEPT three group winners and best second placed team go into semi finals and REPECHAGE FINAL - Trophy awarded.

Two of the three bottom teams in the three groups,  the two with worst records play off against top 2 in Reconstructed Championship for SL place. 

TV MONEY- more teams means less money right? Not necessarily,  there's no reason why teams can't have different amounts from tv pot, a sliding scale depending on league positions. Higher you finish more of a % of the pot you get next season.

[OriginalMrC]

18 minutes ago, Whippet13 said:

Looks like £5m for the RFL in 2022 with 2 x 10 still on the table for 2023 

Super League clubs working with RFL to plot smooth future for (sportsmole.co.uk)

So basically they have spent all this time deciding how to divide up the money? Great of them to highlight they are giving the RFL money when it's less than half they were giving before

[Harry Stottle]

2 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

What's the difference between them and me?

And me if it comes to that matter, or any one else who has a preference for whatever sport, or again me not liking football, or anything to do with an internal combustion engine sports wise.

[Mumby Magic]

30 minutes ago, HawkMan said:

League structures eh? Here's an idea..

To be introduced ASAP preferably next season. 

No relegation from SL,  top 8 from Championship  added to form 20 team SL in two conferences, places determined by league positions. 

Conference A

SL 1st place, 3rd,5th, 7th,9th and 11th,  Championship 2nd, 4th,6th, and 8th.

Conference B 

SL 2,4,6,8,10 and Championship 1,3,5,and 7.

Remaining clubs Championship and L1 to form new Championship. 

   ELIMINATION PHASE

Conferences A and B , ten teams each play other twice. = 18 games.

Top 4 in each qualify for;

   QUALIFYING PHASE

8 teams carry over points and record from Elimination phase, play 4 teams from other conference home and away, 8 more games equals 26 in total for season.  Top 4 into semi finals and Grand Final.

Beaten semi finalists 27 game season, GF teams 28 game season. 

   REPECHAGE TOURNAMENT 

12 teams that don't qualify for QUALIFYING PHASE enter REPECHAGE, on offer a new trophy, something to play for AND playing for their place in SL for following season. 

12 teams , points record etc NOT CARRIED OVER, into three groups of 4. 6 matches equals 24 game season  EXCEPT three group winners and best second placed team go into semi finals and REPECHAGE FINAL - Trophy awarded.

Two of the three bottom teams in the three groups,  the two with worst records play off against top 2 in Reconstructed Championship for SL place. 

TV MONEY- more teams means less money right? Not necessarily,  there's no reason why teams can't have different amounts from tv pot, a sliding scale depending on league positions. Higher you finish more of a % of the pot you get next season.

Ffs. Nice and simple that. I'll reiterate it again. Don't change the structure. It's Leadership we need not another restructure. If people think the structure needs changing yet again then they are deluded.

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

5 hours ago, ivans82 said:

RL has many problems , but the London question is fairly easy to explain . Most people in London pre RL are attached to some football team or other sporting side which they have been born into , they might watch RL for a change but their real allegiances lie elsewhere , initially Fulham had good crowds which dwindled with time ,even when the Broncos got to the Challenge Cup Final there was barely a thousand people sporting their colours , ....in short if a person like Richard Branson couldn`t make a go of it , it`s a tough job . Cardiff likewise , drew good crowds to start with , then they turned their backs .

I holnestky believe if we could have stated up in 2019 and be consolidating now then we'd be on a big upwards curve right now in terms of membership/attendance. The mood was very vibrant and bright. All clubs need success I know but we are particularly I'm vulnerable to it

[Harry Stottle]

38 minutes ago, HawkMan said:

League structures eh? Here's an idea..

To be introduced ASAP preferably next season. 

No relegation from SL,  top 8 from Championship  added to form 20 team SL in two conferences, places determined by league positions. 

Conference A

SL 1st place, 3rd,5th, 7th,9th and 11th,  Championship 2nd, 4th,6th, and 8th.

Conference B 

SL 2,4,6,8,10 and Championship 1,3,5,and 7.&

Remaining clubs Championship and L1 to form new Championship. 

   ELIMINATION PHASE

Conferences A and B , ten teams each play other twice. = 18 games.

Top 4 in each qualify for;

   QUALIFYING PHASE

8 teams carry over points and record from Elimination phase, play 4 teams from other conference home and away, 8 more games equals 26 in total for season.  Top 4 into semi finals and Grand Final.

Beaten semi finalists 27 game season, GF teams 28 game season. 

   REPECHAGE TOURNAMENT 

12 teams that don't qualify for QUALIFYING PHASE enter REPECHAGE, on offer a new trophy, something to play for AND playing for their place in SL for following season. 

12 teams , points record etc NOT CARRIED OVER, into three groups of 4. 6 matches equals 24 game season  EXCEPT three group winners and best second placed team go into semi finals and REPECHAGE FINAL - Trophy awarded.

Two of the three bottom teams in the three groups,  the two with worst records play off against top 2 in Reconstructed Championship for SL place. 

TV MONEY- more teams means less money right? Not necessarily,  there's no reason why teams can't have different amounts from tv pot, a sliding scale depending on league positions. Higher you finish more of a % of the pot you get next season.

Error alert :- Quote

 

Conference A

SL 1st place, 3rd,5th, 7th,9th and 11th,  Championship 2nd, 4th,6th, and 8th.

Conference B 

SL 2,4,6,8,10 and Championship 1,3,5,and 7.

What happens to 12th placed SL club? 

I know just being pedantic.

[Harry Stottle]

33 minutes ago, OriginalMrC said:

So basically they have spent all this time deciding how to divide up the money? Great of them to highlight they are giving the RFL money when it's less than half they were giving before

Quite,

Mr Davy says that P&R is definitely still a requirement, but I assume that's not going to be between SL 2 and League 1, how would they afford to compete, and I still cannot see how they can incorporate funding to make any SL 2 club with a possible chance of ever competing in SL 1 through promotion unless they have a very rich backer.

[DI Keith Fowler]

Figured it's my turn to post a structure since we've all had a punt. Any negative opinions I will dismiss as having not read my proposals properly as is de rigueur. 

Making three basic assumptions here from the Adam Pearson interview and the general feel of what's leaking out.

First it's 2x10 from 2023, second there is a determination for PE of some sort, third there's going to be a short form version of RL as part of the future plans.

2023 season kicks off with SL 1 & 2 made up of 20 clubs, playing each other home and away with a magic weekend for a total of 19 regular season games. 10 of these are played in the first half of the season culminating in Magic weekend on the early May bank holiday and a short break.

The season then breaks into the summer period with a Hundred style short form competition* made up of entirely new teams representing geographical areas (think Lancashire, Cumbria, West Yorkshire, South of France, London, Wales). Players are drafted into each club with the clubs having 1st preference over any player from their area, some areas such as London that haven't got enough local players to choose from will have priority on overseas players. As in the Hundred the games will be double headers with the equivalent Women's games and a summer festival atmosphere aimed at a new and younger audience. 

This is funded through the PE investment, with some of the PE money going into making up the shortfall in the new 20 team SL with regards to the current Sky contract. 

Games are initially given away to the BBC at a reduced rate, with the remaining games on Sky forming part of the number required by the SL contract in the first season (as in Sky would not be happy if they had no games to show June/July/August).

The grand final of this competition is followed by a short break before the regular season resumes culminating in a top 4 play off and 1 team relegated/promoted from each division. 

The undoubted success of such a competition will drive towards a standalone TV deal for the short form competition with both the BBC and Sky which when combined with the SL TV deal will increase overall income which can be re-invested/paid to the new Championship under SL2/paid back to the PE firm.

Whilst the aim would be the for the new tournament to be an event in it's own right, the intention would also be to draw a new audience to the long form version of the game at the traditional/new expansion clubs. There's no reason to stay at 2x10 forever if there were investors wanting to start a new club.

*I have no idea what the short form of the game will be, we would have to be trialling it next season looking at reduced numbers (maybe 11 a side, maybe 9), 30 minute halves etc.

[Harry Stottle]

17 minutes ago, Mumby Magic said:

Ffs. Nice and simple that. I'll reiterate it again. Don't change the structure. It's Leadership we need not another restructure. If people think the structure needs changing yet again then they are deluded.

Exactly so, Sky's grievance and ultimatum is with SL, it is the quality of the product ebbing away for whatever reason i.e. coaching, rules, gamesmanship, lack of stars and personalities that has drove the wedge in, why people cannot see this is strangling the life out of the sport and do something to change it I don't know, those in the leadership have proven they are incapable of making the adjustments that are necessary, nor are they going to vote themselves out of a job, but it will be OK in the end and right itself, did you not realise we have THE GREATEST GAME!

[Just Browny]

1 hour ago, HawkMan said:

League structures eh? Here's an idea..

To be introduced ASAP preferably next season. 

No relegation from SL,  top 8 from Championship  added to form 20 team SL in two conferences, places determined by league positions. 

Conference A

SL 1st place, 3rd,5th, 7th,9th and 11th,  Championship 2nd, 4th,6th, and 8th.

Conference B 

SL 2,4,6,8,10 ,12 and Championship 1,3,5,and 7.

Remaining clubs Championship and L1 to form new Championship. 

   ELIMINATION PHASE

Conferences A and B , ten teams each play other twice. = 18 games.

Top 4 in each qualify for;

   QUALIFYING PHASE

8 teams carry over points and record from Elimination phase, play 4 teams from other conference home and away, 8 more games equals 26 in total for season.  Top 4 into semi finals and Grand Final.

Beaten semi finalists 27 game season, GF teams 28 game season. 

   REPECHAGE TOURNAMENT 

12 teams that don't qualify for QUALIFYING PHASE enter REPECHAGE, on offer a new trophy, something to play for AND playing for their place in SL for following season. 

12 teams , points record etc NOT CARRIED OVER, into three groups of 4. 6 matches equals 24 game season  EXCEPT three group winners and best second placed team go into semi finals and REPECHAGE FINAL - Trophy awarded.

Two of the three bottom teams in the three groups,  the two with worst records play off against top 2 in Reconstructed Championship for SL place. 

TV MONEY- more teams means less money right? Not necessarily,  there's no reason why teams can't have different amounts from tv pot, a sliding scale depending on league positions. Higher you finish more of a % of the pot you get next season.

Thanks but we shouldn't be pursuing any structure which sees half of the games organised in a mad panic part of the way through the season. We know that RL attendances thrive on certainty: that's why a Leeds v Wakefield Boxing Day friendly at breakfast time pulls in a better gate than the same fixture would get in an end of season playoff game.

As Mumby Magic says above, there is no magic structure that changes everything for the better and everyone agrees to. We need good, objective leadership for the whole game.

[Harry Stottle]

8 minutes ago, DI Keith Fowler said:

Figured it's my turn to post a structure since we've all had a punt. Any negative opinions I will dismiss as having not read my proposals properly as is de rigueur. 

Making three basic assumptions here from the Adam Pearson interview and the general feel of what's leaking out.

First it's 2x10 from 2023, second there is a determination for PE of some sort, third there's going to be a short form version of RL as part of the future plans.

2023 season kicks off with SL 1 & 2 made up of 20 clubs, playing each other home and away with a magic weekend for a total of 19 regular season games. 10 of these are played in the first half of the season culminating in Magic weekend on the early May bank holiday and a short break.

The season then breaks into the summer period with a Hundred style short form competition* made up of entirely new teams representing geographical areas (think Lancashire, Cumbria, West Yorkshire, South of France, London, Wales). Players are drafted into each club with the clubs having 1st preference over any player from their area, some areas such as London that haven't got enough local players to choose from will have priority on overseas players. As in the Hundred the games will be double headers with the equivalent Women's games and a summer festival atmosphere aimed at a new and younger audience. 

This is funded through the PE investment, with some of the PE money going into making up the shortfall in the new 20 team SL with regards to the current Sky contract. 

Games are initially given away to the BBC at a reduced rate, with the remaining games on Sky forming part of the number required by the SL contract in the first season (as in Sky would not be happy if they had no games to show June/July/August).

The grand final of this competition is followed by a short break before the regular season resumes culminating in a top 4 play off and 1 team relegated/promoted from each division. 

The undoubted success of such a competition will drive towards a standalone TV deal for the short form competition with both the BBC and Sky which when combined with the SL TV deal will increase overall income which can be re-invested/paid to the new Championship under SL2/paid back to the PE firm.

Whilst the aim would be the for the new tournament to be an event in it's own right, the intention would also be to draw a new audience to the long form version of the game at the traditional/new expansion clubs. There's no reason to stay at 2x10 forever if there were investors wanting to start a new club.

*I have no idea what the short form of the game will be, we would have to be trialling it next season looking at reduced numbers (maybe 11 a side, maybe 9), 30 minute halves etc.

Good idea, just wait untill the SL clubs have to hand over their star players for the regional teams, and get ready to don the crash helmets if said players get long term injuries.

 

[Just Browny]

5 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Exactly so, Sky's grievance and ultimatum is with SL, it is the quality of the product ebbing away for whatever reason i.e. coaching, rules, gamesmanship, lack of stars and personalities that has drove the wedge in, why people cannot see this is strangling the life out of the sport and do something to change it I don't know, those in the leadership have proven they are incapable of making the adjustments that are necessary, nor are they going to vote themselves out of a job, but it will be OK in the end and right itself, did you not realise we have THE GREATEST GAME!

Sky don't care whether the game is exciting. They don't email the Premier League asking them to widen the goals after a few nil-nils on Soccer Sunday. That's you putting your views in Sky's mouths.

They will care about whether their punters find the game exciting, measured by how many eyes are on screens. We can help this (and they can help too) with sensible kick off times, full stadia and good stories / narratives / contests.

[Dave T]

2 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

Mimicking the NFL is literally the idea behind what Super League was set up to do. Consolidate the game in key areas, ensure minimal overlap or competition in each market, target new markets aggressively. Mr Sadler's proposal did none of that because it didn't borrow from the NFL at all.

I don't think that's true in the slightest. 

The original proposal had Wigan, Saints, Cheshire (Widnes/Wire), Leeds, Bradford, Halifax, Calder (Cas/Fev) etc. plus a few major city teams. 

The original SL proposal borrowed pretty much nothing from the NFL. 

[Harry Stottle]

14 minutes ago, Just Browny said:

Sky don't care whether the game is exciting. They don't email the Premier League asking them to widen the goals after a few nil-nils on Soccer Sunday. That's you putting your views in Sky's mouths.

They will care about whether their punters find the game exciting, measured by how many eyes are on screens. We can help this (and they can help too) with sensible kick off times, full stadia and good stories / narratives / contests.

If you don't believe the game has deteriorated in quality then that is your prerogative, I do, and I believe that is what Sky is afraid of less people finding it not delivering will mean less eyes on screens has you put it.

[whatmichaelsays]

10 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

If you don't believe the game has deteriorated in quality then that is your prerogative, I do, and I believe that is what Sky is afraid of less people finding it not delivering will mean less eyes on screens has you put it.

The quality of games is a subjective issue and I doubt it's that point that Sky are specifically concerned about. The Burnley v Leeds United game on Sunday was poor quality, but Leeds will still be one of the most televised clubs (and probably the most televised outside of the 'big six' this season). 

What isn't subjective is the audience figures and I think that is what Sky is challenging SL on. It's up to SL to provide content that puts bums on sofas, encourages people to take out (or keep) subscriptions, and makes it easier for them to sell advertising slots. 

You don't necessarily need to "raise the quality" to do that, but what you do need to do is improve how you package and present that event, how you build up the hype and anticipation and how you create a sense of FOMO around the event. That's where RL really misses the trick. I couldn't go to either Rhinos game this weekend, but I'm not sure my weekend was worse-off for it. 

 

[Tommygilf]

28 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I don't think that's true in the slightest. 

The original proposal had Wigan, Saints, Cheshire (Widnes/Wire), Leeds, Bradford, Halifax, Calder (Cas/Fev) etc. plus a few major city teams. 

The original SL proposal borrowed pretty much nothing from the NFL. 

How is that not what I just described?

[M j M]

My first decision as new RFL dictator will be a guarantee of no structure changes from now for a decade. 

When will people see that all this constant changing stuff drives negative perceptions of the sport and disenchantment? The notion that we are still discussing changes which will be implemented from the start of next season is ridiculous. The rules and rewards teams built their 2021 squads around should never be changed after that season started.

The current structure is perfectly sound and rational for the size and nature of our sport. Just leave it alone, stop sacrificing bits of the sport's credibility in the name of mindless tinkering and deluded beliefs in silver bullets. Focus on the important stuff.

[Sir Kevin Sinfield]

8 hours ago, Wakefield Ram said:

The idea that Rugby League can be re-packaged like darts is a nonsense. Darts isn't a sport it's a TV show, a drinking event night out which is televised. Has there been a big increase in local darts leagues?

We need the game to be more exciting to watch. I watched 1994 Leeds v Wigan and it was fast , exciting, end to end stuff. Our game has mostly turned into a predictable, arm wrestle based on completion rates and avoiding errors.

Re-structure as a solution is just re-arranging the deckchairs on the Titanic.

Like Rugby Union 7’s and 20/20 cricket? Of course Rugby League could come up with a similar concept. Those competitions are very different from Super League though and I agree yet another restructure would be ridiculous.