Jump to content

League Restructure Thread (Merged Threads)


Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, redjonn said:

Too be honest I never understand that their isn't enough quality.... unless the SL academies are not doing a good enough job. Every year their is X new players coming through, so every year times that X is a number of players that can be further coached... that's a fair number after so many years... 

Seems to me the less SL clubs we have must mean more academy SL players are discarded from SL... or are just fillers in a large squad not getting paid much nor coached extensively until they can be swapped out with more low paid academy players...

Its all nuts to me...

 

Quota's and academies is part of the overall quality problem for me. Clubs sign fairly average overseas players who have already reached their potential and will never be anything more than average. But with the threat of relegation for some and the over-riding desire to win trophies for others signing these kind of players is preferable for many clubs to bringing through their own academy players and giving them a chance to establish themselves in the 1st team. I'm sure given a decent chance more academy players would establish themselves and go on to improve to be something far better than the average overseas players (thus improving the overall quality of the competition). But there's little desire, or incentive for this to happen under the current rules.

If we want an improvement in quality the lower the quota number to say 3 or 4 and have a rule that says these players must have played at least 75-80 first team games in the NRL.

It should also have a rule on the number of your own academy players in your Top 25 squad (say 13 or 14) which would force clubs to invest in them more, and couple this with a greater SC dispensation for your home grown (say only 75% counts on the cap for every home grown player).

You'll still get some journeymen players coming to SL but they will be in far less numbers and it will weed out the low quality ones who weren't good enough to establish themselves in the NRL in the first place. Having the SC Home grown dispensation also means that rich clubs can't just buy up every good youngster, it gives each club a better chance of retaining them. while staying within the cap limit.

  • Like 2

St.Helens - The Home of Rugby Champions

Saints Men's team - Triple Champions & Double Winners ; Saints Women's team - Treble Winners ; Thatto Heath - National Conference Champions

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Fewer academies might actually help the game overall. The wastage rate of players is huge.

Junior teams lose their best players, which makes it harder to field junior teams. Some of the players are chosen to make up the numbers and have no real prospect of making it. And then age 18/19, most of them get released.

An alternative might be to have say 4 Academies (25 players each = 100), which is probably more than get signed pro each season anyway.

This would reduce the impact on junior teams losing players and the "wastage rate" of players joining academies only to be released atv18/19.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Wakefield Ram said:

Fewer academies might actually help the game overall. The wastage rate of players is huge.

Junior teams lose their best players, which makes it harder to field junior teams. Some of the players are chosen to make up the numbers and have no real prospect of making it. And then age 18/19, most of them get released.

An alternative might be to have say 4 Academies (25 players each = 100), which is probably more than get signed pro each season anyway.

This would reduce the impact on junior teams losing players and the "wastage rate" of players joining academies only to be released atv18/19.

The RFL tried to reduce the number of Academies recently, it resulted in a lot of complaints from those clubs losing their Academy licence. This was followed by an immediate backtracking of the decision.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, wiganermike said:

The RFL tried to reduce the number of Academies recently, it resulted in a lot of complaints from those clubs losing their Academy licence. This was followed by an immediate backtracking of the decision.

For those missing out the return of the reserves may result in some of the 19 yo's deemed not good enough to get a second chance elsewhere

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

I expect it would be the same as Magic currently is - the fans of the last 2 teams playing and some neutrals.

Personally, I'm not overly convinced by Magic as a concept, but if it has to stay in the calendar then I'd much rather it was a CC round. The lopsided SL fixture list it creates is problematic for the integrity of the comp in my opinion. But Magic is a big event in RL's calendar (and we don't have many) and a lot of fans seem to rave about it.

Problem you have is how long is the gap between the previous round and your magic cup ? 

Fans book travel and accommodation months before , what if their club doesn't make it ?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Problem you have is how long is the gap between the previous round and your magic cup ? 

Fans book travel and accommodation months before , what if their club doesn't make it ?

There is also the issue that the CC Final was recently reported as moving back to being in May. How many people would be keen to sit through multiple games in late March or early April?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Sky are driving this change, how are they doing that?

Are they saying "we want no more than 10 teams in Superleague"?

Or are they saying "we're giving you less money" and the clubs are thinking "we need to split this fewer ways"?

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Griff said:

If Sky are driving this change, how are they doing that?

Are they saying "we want no more than 10 teams in Superleague"?

Or are they saying "we're giving you less money" and the clubs are thinking "we need to split this fewer ways"?

They're giving less money under the next 2 year deal and they put the sport on notice that it has those 2 years to demonstrate its value to them if it wants further deals after that.

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Big Picture said:

They're giving less money under the next 2 year deal and they put the sport on notice that it has those 2 years to demonstrate its value to them if it wants further deals after that.

It's not quite an answer to the question I asked.

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Griff said:

It's not quite an answer to the question I asked.

You asked how Sky is driving this change and I answered you.  The cut in the rights fee and the real possibility that they'll walk away after 2 more years is behind this.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

You asked how Sky is driving this change and I answered you.  The cut in the rights fee and the real possibility that they'll walk away after 2 more years is behind this.

With all due respect, you haven't. I didn't expect a definitive answer, to be honest. I don't expect the answer to be made public. We'll never know.

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, wiganermike said:

There is also the issue that the CC Final was recently reported as moving back to being in May. How many people would be keen to sit through multiple games in late March or early April?

Or find a stadium willing to hold it ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So not read through all this but it seems that the top division will swell to 14 to accomodate Toulouse and Fev without throwing Leigh under the bus thwn shrink back to 10 which is madness.

The reduction is clearly linked to a reduced funding so no reduction to the few at the top and no need to cull any clubs.

What is worrying is how reliant we are on the TV deal to survive. 

The 10 that stay in the top division need to be picked on stratergy with a view to expand back to 12 at the next TV deal but i feel it will be a crazy season with 

Leigh

Fev

Cas

Salford 

Being relegated.

This would be devastating to leave the worst stadia in the wakey region in the top flight and also to loose any top representation in Manchester would be a blow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Wakefield Ram said:

Fewer academies might actually help the game overall. The wastage rate of players is huge.

Junior teams lose their best players, which makes it harder to field junior teams. Some of the players are chosen to make up the numbers and have no real prospect of making it. And then age 18/19, most of them get released.

An alternative might be to have say 4 Academies (25 players each = 100), which is probably more than get signed pro each season anyway.

This would reduce the impact on junior teams losing players and the "wastage rate" of players joining academies only to be released atv18/19.

Yes, fewer players is the answer!

Jesus wept

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Wakefield Ram said:

Fewer academies might actually help the game overall. The wastage rate of players is huge.

Junior teams lose their best players, which makes it harder to field junior teams. Some of the players are chosen to make up the numbers and have no real prospect of making it. And then age 18/19, most of them get released.

An alternative might be to have say 4 Academies (25 players each = 100), which is probably more than get signed pro each season anyway.

This would reduce the impact on junior teams losing players and the "wastage rate" of players joining academies only to be released atv18/19.

It’s a difficult situation as all Academies have huge attrition rates due to a) having to wait to see if the Player is good enough at an early age and b) very low ‘pass’ rates where the Player makes it a 1st team standards or not.

There is also the issue of having a big enough squad to fulfil fixtures.

Only 1, 2 or 3 make it, on a very good year, and that depends on the Clubs standard. (SL, Champs, L1)

The answer lies somewhere in between the Club and the Community Club.  IMO it would be more like an ongoing Centre of Excellence where the player, if he is borderline, still goes into the pro Club for testing, training, matches etc plus being monitored by the Pro club while he’s in the amateur game.

Obvs there are those who won’t make it or drop out of their own accord.  There are some that make it, but not at that Clubs level and end up at a Club in the lower leagues with still a chance of the big time late on.

It will be interesting to see how those lads go on today in the Roses game.  You have 2 selected, Hull have 4 and Leeds 6 or 7, from memory.

The answer, imo, isn’t to do away with pro clubs having Academies though, or even meld them in some cases.  More the fact that good coaches will develop kids better than career coaches doing it for a job and money alone.  There are very few of the former.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Lowdesert said:

It’s a difficult situation as all Academies have huge attrition rates due to a) having to wait to see if the Player is good enough at an early age and b) very low ‘pass’ rates where the Player makes it a 1st team standards or not.

There is also the issue of having a big enough squad to fulfil fixtures.

Only 1, 2 or 3 make it, on a very good year, and that depends on the Clubs standard. (SL, Champs, L1)

The answer lies somewhere in between the Club and the Community Club.  IMO it would be more like an ongoing Centre of Excellence where the player, if he is borderline, still goes into the pro Club for testing, training, matches etc plus being monitored by the Pro club while he’s in the amateur game.

Obvs there are those who won’t make it or drop out of their own accord.  There are some that make it, but not at that Clubs level and end up at a Club in the lower leagues with still a chance of the big time late on.

It will be interesting to see how those lads go on today in the Roses game.  You have 2 selected, Hull have 4 and Leeds 6 or 7, from memory.

The answer, imo, isn’t to do away with pro clubs having Academies though, or even meld them in some cases.  More the fact that good coaches will develop kids better than career coaches doing it for a job and money alone.  There are very few of the former.

I keep banging the same drum but nobody is listening!

All community clubs want to see their best players reach their full potential whether that's in the pro game or international amateurs, but these coaches/officials know the majority of the lads going to the academies won't make it as professionals as they aren't good enough and a lot of those rejected players don't go back to their original amateur club when their pro contract ends.

Put simply, we can't afford to lose players at that age year on year. 

Let's open discussions with the community clubs and get their take on things as opposed to the subservient relationship that's there now 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Lowdesert said:

It’s a difficult situation as all Academies have huge attrition rates due to a) having to wait to see if the Player is good enough at an early age and b) very low ‘pass’ rates where the Player makes it a 1st team standards or not.

There is also the issue of having a big enough squad to fulfil fixtures.

Only 1, 2 or 3 make it, on a very good year, and that depends on the Clubs standard. (SL, Champs, L1)

The answer lies somewhere in between the Club and the Community Club.  IMO it would be more like an ongoing Centre of Excellence where the player, if he is borderline, still goes into the pro Club for testing, training, matches etc plus being monitored by the Pro club while he’s in the amateur game.

Obvs there are those who won’t make it or drop out of their own accord.  There are some that make it, but not at that Clubs level and end up at a Club in the lower leagues with still a chance of the big time late on.

It will be interesting to see how those lads go on today in the Roses game.  You have 2 selected, Hull have 4 and Leeds 6 or 7, from memory.

The answer, imo, isn’t to do away with pro clubs having Academies though, or even meld them in some cases.  More the fact that good coaches will develop kids better than career coaches doing it for a job and money alone.  There are very few of the former.

Only 2 of the u17s at Leeds are being paid a penny this year to play. 1 has already played for the first team multiple times and the other can't be far behind.

The rest, including those in the academy origin clash, are playing for free. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

The rest, including those in the academy origin clash, are playing for free. 

If you've got a sporty kid, I honestly think rugby league would be so far down the list of sports you'd want them to go for these days.

  • Like 2

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it does go to 14 I would assume they will try and kneecap the newer clubs (Leigh, Featherstone, Toulouse) by having them on less central funding (or even zero central funding) compared to the 11 currently on full distribution?

Ridiculous I hear you cry, it will all be fair and above board!

If they do, it would have to drop to something like £1.3-1.35m 14 ways. That isn't going to happen.

 

Edited by Scubby
  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

If you've got a sporty kid, I honestly think rugby league would be so far down the list of sports you'd want them to go for these days.

I have a 2 and bit year old. I doubt he'll ever play RL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Hela Wigmen said:

That’s the thing. There’s pretty minor details  to be fiddled with to make Magic a different spectacle from just some teams playing fixtures in a different stadium than their ordinary one that comes down to marketing, PR and advertising rather than much else. It’s quite lazily arranged. The 2020 Magic seemed to have a bit more thought put into it, with a fan park as a trail through the city centre rather than in a small car park by a Metro station, as done previously. 

I *think* there was meant to be an improved fanzone in Newcastle last year wasn't there?

I think this event needs real effort from a non-RL entertainment point of view. The last time I went to Newcastle we had a fanzone outide of the ground where you can't get a beer or owt. Just a couple of sponsor stalls.

There have been some great fanzones - some decent entertianment etc. I suppose the problem that SL will see is that when they have made less effort the crowds haven't dropped - but I think that misses the point. They haven't capitalised on what Magic Weekend is. I always make the point that this should be sold as a festival - Super League Fest or something. It should be as much about top bands playing a set between games - an after party, fun and games during the day - but those things have always been done as an afterthought once we have sold tickets. They should be a key part of the ticket sales process. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I *think* there was meant to be an improved fanzone in Newcastle last year wasn't there?

I think this event needs real effort from a non-RL entertainment point of view. The last time I went to Newcastle we had a fanzone outide of the ground where you can't get a beer or owt. Just a couple of sponsor stalls.

There have been some great fanzones - some decent entertianment etc. I suppose the problem that SL will see is that when they have made less effort the crowds haven't dropped - but I think that misses the point. They haven't capitalised on what Magic Weekend is. I always make the point that this should be sold as a festival - Super League Fest or something. It should be as much about top bands playing a set between games - an after party, fun and games during the day - but those things have always been done as an afterthought once we have sold tickets. They should be a key part of the ticket sales process. 

Yeah, from memory it was supposed to ‘start’ in Newcastle City Centre somewhere and go up to towards the stadium, which sounded positive and an improvement on 2018, where it was in a small gravel car park like area outside of a Metro station where you couldn’t get food or drink and it was a couple of stalls and a photo opportunity with the Super League trophy and Paul Sculthorpe. 

There was a logo a few years prior that had a bit of a festival type approach to it but that seemed to be about it. I agree with all of what you say though, it should be all of those things at the forefront of the event, alongside the games themselves, not an after thought. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • John Drake changed the title to League Restructure Thread (Merged Threads)

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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...