Jump to content

League Restructure Thread (Merged Threads)


Recommended Posts


26 minutes ago, JohnM said:

If a club owns it own stadium, where's the money come from? Directors loans? Commercial loans? There is a cost to all that. Years ago, the Inland Revenue sold all its offices and now leases them back. Same for many commercial organisations.  

 

 

Mind you thats what some private equity houses do... sell the property and give themselves huge dividends from the income whilst loading the business with debt... Didn't that happen to many care homes that subsequent went bust once the first private equity firm sold on and the property owner raising the rent/lease, etc.

Then again it often works well initially...  I can see the HMRC selling property and then renting back less space whilst the other space is rented out by the new property owner.

I guess what I am saying it depends on the contracts and ability to see ahead... in the case of a RFL club I suspect they wouldn't be looking ahead too well...

sorry to side track...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Mumby Magic said:

I still can't believe Martyn, that you continuing to peddle out this "idea". It's hard enough for the die hard fan to understand let alone potential new fans. I'll make up a random idea the keep it going until everyone has ran out of steam. If you feel this is the way forward then our game is truly stuffed.

Fair points MM. But no one understands it, or has read all 3000 words. The RFL is too this or that.......

I had to pitch something yesterday on the phone that was potentially worth tens of thousands of pounds for my company. The guy on the other end said "can you explain it to me a a couple of sentences?" - that is how long I had to hold his attention. If I couldn't get him to understand it then it was 100% my fault not his. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GUBRATS said:

Yes , and your ability to develop it and the income streams it can produce 

I have never understood why Wigan Warriors do not play at the Wign MBC majority owned Leigh Sports Village, if the Wigan club are to pay rent then put it back into the Borough it makes sense and benefits everyone of it's residents, and before anyone says it 12,000 capacity is enough for all but maybe 2 games a season for Wigan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Scubby said:

Fair points MM. But no one understands it, or has read all 3000 words. The RFL is too this or that.......

I had to pitch something yesterday on the phone that was potentially worth tens of thousands of pounds for my company. The guy on the other end said "can you explain it to me a a couple of sentences?" - that is how long I had to hold his attention. If I couldn't get him to understand it then it was 100% my fault not his. 

Could anyone describe Martyn’s proposal in a couple of sentences? I doubt it. 

1 minute ago, Harry Stottle said:

I have never understood why Wigan Warriors do not play at the Wign MBC majority owned Leigh Sports Village, if the Wigan club are to pay rent then put it back into the Borough it makes sense and benefits everyone of it's residents, and before anyone says it 12,000 capacity is enough for all but maybe 2 games a season for Wigan.

I mean, for one, it’s in Leigh and not Wigan and two, I imagine that Wigan have ambitions of average crowds in excess of 12,000. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hela Wigmen said:

Could anyone describe Martyn’s proposal in a couple of sentences? I doubt it. 

I mean, for one, it’s in Leigh and not Wigan and two, I imagine that Wigan have ambitions of average crowds in excess of 12,000. 

It wasn't so long ago that very few Wigan matches dipped below 12k

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hela Wigmen said:

Could anyone describe Martyn’s proposal in a couple of sentences? I doubt it. 

I mean, for one, it’s in Leigh and not Wigan and two, I imagine that Wigan have ambitions of average crowds in excess of 12,000. 

Not sure if this is deliberately intended to hook a fish but I’ll bite.

You’d have the same reaction if a helpful suggestion were made that Widnes move to Warrington or indeed Warrington to St Helen’s. 

Quite apart from the the fact Leythers definitely don’t consider themselves Wiganers or vice versa, the distance of the LSV from Wigan’s traditional home is further than the 6 or so miles from the Bolton Wanderers stadium that was briefly flirted with when Central Park was sold. Ownership of ground has nothing to do with it.

12,000 capacity would certainly be enough as only the players would bother going. 

  • Haha 1

030910105148.jpg

http://www.wiganstpats.org

Producing Players Since 1910

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Scubby said:

Fair points MM. But no one understands it, or has read all 3000 words. The RFL is too this or that.......

I had to pitch something yesterday on the phone that was potentially worth tens of thousands of pounds for my company. The guy on the other end said "can you explain it to me a a couple of sentences?" - that is how long I had to hold his attention. If I couldn't get him to understand it then it was 100% my fault not his. 

Been there done that, and when proposals came across my desk that presumably the author had sat with a Thesaurus while composing they would get filed vertically in the nearest available waste paper bin.

Simple plain English is best, everyone then knows what you are talking about.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fighting irish said:

I don't think anyone has admitted they don't have a basic understanding of his proposal?? I don't understand what you mean by that, is it a typing error?

I'm not patronising anyone, I'm inviting people (who have read the document) to argue the case, for or against. No-one, other than you has so far, responded with anything more than a few words.

You say it's too preposterous to give a detailed analysis, well ok I accept that that is your opinion.

To answer your question, regarding Toulouse, I think they have spent the time and money with the intention of being able to vie for the title of European Super League Champions. (Or European RL Champions).

Martin's plan would allow them to do that. It certainly doesn't confine them to, (what did you call it?) the half assed nations Conference west! (Isn't that clear, from the document?)

Now you are under no obligations to continue this conversation. I'm asking if there is anyone else out there who has a considered opinion on the subject. I think its worthy of some debate with someone who doesn't think it's too preposterous to give it some detailed thought and I'm inviting them to engage with me.

By the way, given your recent tranche of posts on this subject I'd say, you were guilty of attempting to patronise, nay belittle, both Martin and myself and just insisting that his idea is too fluffy, preposterous or that the game is too small, isn't a very convincing, nor rational argument to support your conclusions.

Perhaps reading so many academic papers, has inflated your ego somewhat?

Anyway, please don't feel obliged to defend your position, I'm not trying to goad you into continuing if you'd rather not..

Please also, don't think me churlish, that's not my intention. I'm merely fishing for a broader base of opinion.

The broader base of opinion was given some time ago. In the post below this you say at last to comments that were made dozens of pages ago.

Martyn's plan isn't radical, it is the same race to the bottom mentality and trying to bring everyone along together that keeps holding the sport back. It does nothing but send the sport back to being a part time competition and completely cripples our top clubs. This makes it far less appealing to sponsors and broadcasters and will see even more players going to the NRL and Rugby Union. Even Martyn says that no one would expect Sky to broadcast Championship level fixtures. Therefore, this format adds absolutely no value and it is again propping up clubs that offer no value to what broadcasters actually pay for. What needs to happen is to enhance and give more to broadcasters for what they do actually want to televise.

The whole thing is built on flawed comparisons with other sports and countries that only tell half the story, such as the false comparisons with the growth of the NFL. When the other half is pointed out this simply gets dismissed or ignored. Comparisons with MLS and conferences are done in a similar manner without any critical thought of the obvious differences and a complete dismissal when the flaws are pointed out.

There is no getting away from the fact that there are vast inequalities in funding and a team getting £80,000 will never compete with a team that gets £1.28 million. That is before the vast differences in turnover outside of this. Some of our so-called professional clubs are worse off and weaker than amateur clubs in places like Wigan. When this is pointed out condescending, vague answers get returned about funding not set in stone. When replies are made that completely equal funding means clubs only getting around £600,000 each, and destroys any pretence of a full-time competition or having big clubs, this gets ignored.

If anything, this plan will be counter productive and will simply destroy smaller clubs and will be downright dangerous for players. It will be like when the likes of Hemel were destroyed in League 1 when they weren’t ready, but on a much larger scale. What is the attractiveness for fans of the big clubs of Wigan playing at two glorified amateur grounds such as Oldham’s or Swinton’s? Fans will turn off in droves. Similarly there is no appeal for fans of lower league clubs in watching their team get annihilated. It will also certainly not allow clubs to build and grow in a sustainable manner, as again Hemel’s experience showed.

I do get the feeling that if anyone else had come up with this plan you wouldnt be backing it the same.

Edited by Damien
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Damien said:

The broader base of opinion was given some time ago. In the post below this you say at last to comments that were made dozens of pages ago.

Martyn's plan isn't radical, it is the same race to the bottom mentality and trying to bring everyone along together that keeps holding the sport back. It does nothing but send the sport back to being a part time competition and completely cripples our top clubs. This makes it far less appealing to sponsors and broadcasters and will see even more players going to the NRL and Rugby Union. Even Martyn says that no one would expect Sky to broadcast Championship level fixtures. Therefore, this format adds absolutely no value and it is again propping up clubs that offer no value to what broadcasters actually pay for. What needs to happen is to enhance and give more to broadcasters for what they do actually want to televise.

The whole thing is built on flawed comparisons with other sports and countries that only tell half the story, such as the false comparisons with the growth of the NFL. When the other half is pointed out this simply gets dismissed or ignored. Comparisons with MLS and conferences are done in a similar manner without any critical thought of the obvious differences and a complete dismissal when the flaws are pointed out.

There is no getting away from the fact that there are vast inequalities in funding and a team getting £80,000 will never compete with a team that gets £1.28 million. That is before the vast differences in turnover outside of this. Some of our so-called professional clubs are worse off and weaker than amateur clubs in places like Wigan. When this is pointed out condescending, vague answers get returned about funding not set in stone. When replies are made that completely equal funding means clubs only getting around £600,000 each, and destroys any pretence of a full-time competition or having big clubs, this gets ignored.

If anything, this plan will be counter productive and will simply destroy smaller clubs and will be downright dangerous for players. It will be like when the likes of Hemel were destroyed in League 1 when they weren’t ready, but on a much larger scale. What is the attractiveness for fans of the big clubs of Wigan playing at two glorified amateur grounds such as Oldham’s or Swinton’s? Fans will turn off in droves. Similarly there is no appeal for fans of lower league clubs in watching their team get annihilated. It will also certainly not allow clubs to build and grow in a sustainable manner, as again Hemel’s experience showed.

Interesting points but I'm not sure you understand the subtleties and nuances.

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Hela Wigmen said:

Could anyone describe Martyn’s proposal in a couple of sentences? I doubt it. 

I mean, for one, it’s in Leigh and not Wigan and two, I imagine that Wigan have ambitions of average crowds in excess of 12,000. 

Really are you sure, I am sure I have seen it multiple times on these pages that "Leigh is a small village IN Wigan" so much so that I have started to believe it.

Yes I will agree with the ambitions in relation to attendances by the Wigan club, but I am not so sure that the sport is in a recoverable position from the declining popularity it is experiencing, I think it is on a very slippery slope downwards.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Scubby said:

I had to pitch something yesterday on the phone that was potentially worth tens of thousands of pounds for my company. The guy on the other end said "can you explain it to me a a couple of sentences?" - that is how long I had to hold his attention. If I couldn't get him to understand it then it was 100% my fault not his.

Are you sure it wasn`t you who said to him " can I explain it to you in a couple of sentences " - I`ve got to get back to the Total Rugby League Forum !!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Scubby said:

It wasn't so long ago that very few Wigan matches dipped below 12k

But it is doing now Scubby, and so are many other clubs, OK these are testing times, but and obviously this is my opinion I don't think that the sport will be back to where it was pre pandemic, and even then those figures were down on previous years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

But it is doing now Scubby, and so are many other clubs, OK these are testing times, but and obviously this is my opinion I don't think that the sport will be back to where it was pre pandemic, and even then those figures were down on previous years. 

Wigan have literally no excuses. It is one of the unique towns on the map where people think of RL. It has lost its way for sure but it has also shown it can deliver regular crowds of 14-15k for standard league games and 20-25k for big ones.

I don't think the club has helped itself by becoming an apparent high profile NRL feeder club and then players players returning and not hitting the heights. The club was regularly getting gates under 10,000 in the 1999-2001 period and bounced back. It can again but Wigan fans are not stupid - they want to see the best the competition can offer each week.

Edited by Scubby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Damien said:

The broader base of opinion was given some time ago. In the post below this you say at last to comments that were made dozens of pages ago.

Martyn's plan isn't radical, it is the same race to the bottom mentality and trying to bring everyone along together that keeps holding the sport back. It does nothing but send the sport back to being a part time competition and completely cripples our top clubs. This makes it far less appealing to sponsors and broadcasters and will see even more players going to the NRL and Rugby Union. Even Martyn says that no one would expect Sky to broadcast Championship level fixtures. Therefore, this format adds absolutely no value and it is again propping up clubs that offer no value to what broadcasters actually pay for. What needs to happen is to enhance and give more to broadcasters for what they do actually want to televise.

The whole thing is built on flawed comparisons with other sports and countries that only tell half the story, such as the false comparisons with the growth of the NFL. When the other half is pointed out this simply gets dismissed or ignored. Comparisons with MLS and conferences are done in a similar manner without any critical thought of the obvious differences and a complete dismissal when the flaws are pointed out.

There is no getting away from the fact that there are vast inequalities in funding and a team getting £80,000 will never compete with a team that gets £1.28 million. That is before the vast differences in turnover outside of this. Some of our so-called professional clubs are worse off and weaker than amateur clubs in places like Wigan. When this is pointed out condescending, vague answers get returned about funding not set in stone. When replies are made that completely equal funding means clubs only getting around £600,000 each, and destroys any pretence of a full-time competition or having big clubs, this gets ignored.

If anything, this plan will be counter productive and will simply destroy smaller clubs and will be downright dangerous for players. It will be like when the likes of Hemel were destroyed in League 1 when they weren’t ready, but on a much larger scale. What is the attractiveness for fans of the big clubs of Wigan playing at two glorified amateur grounds such as Oldham’s or Swinton’s? Fans will turn off in droves. Similarly there is no appeal for fans of lower league clubs in watching their team get annihilated. It will also certainly not allow clubs to build and grow in a sustainable manner, as again Hemel’s experience showed.

I do get the feeling that if anyone else had come up with this plan you wouldn't be backing it the same.

equal funding means clubs only getting around £600,000 each, and destroys any pretence of a full-time competition or having big clubs IS NOT TRUE -  there are a few teams outside of SL that are full time and dont get the 1.8 million?

Giving teams around £600,000 each - will simply destroy smaller clubs IS NOT TRUE - An extra £520,000 for each team outside SL will allow the smaller teams to bulk up their squad. - which will bring the quality up and close the gap.

The only reason to argue against Martyn's plan is the SL / Big teams dont want the gap closed and dont want to share the CF.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JohnM said:

If a club owns it own stadium, where's the money come from? Directors loans? Commercial loans? There is a cost to all that. Years ago, the Inland Revenue sold all its offices and now leases them back. Same for many commercial organisations.  

 

 

Warrington were given the stadium FOC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Derwent Parker said:

equal funding means clubs only getting around £600,000 each, and destroys any pretence of a full-time competition or having big clubs IS NOT TRUE -  there are a few teams outside of SL that are full time and dont get the 1.8 million?

Giving teams around £600,000 each - will simply destroy smaller clubs IS NOT TRUE - An extra £520,000 for each team outside SL will allow the smaller teams to bulk up their squad. - which will bring the quality up and close the gap.

The only reason to argue against Martyn's plan is the SL / Big teams dont want the gap closed and dont want to share the CF.

Hi Martyn. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

I have never understood why Wigan Warriors do not play at the Wign MBC majority owned Leigh Sports Village, if the Wigan club are to pay rent then put it back into the Borough it makes sense and benefits everyone of it's residents, and before anyone says it 12,000 capacity is enough for all but maybe 2 games a season for Wigan.

Wigan have a long term contract at the DW so they couldn't move. I'm not sure how long Leigh's lease is but Robin Park has a capacity of 1200 which will be adequate for Leigh in the Championship. It is also a council owned facility but has the advantage of Wigan holding the lease. I'm confident Leigh would be able to negotiate a better rent deal than at LSV and also share the bar and food sales which they get nothing from at LSV I think. It would be a big win-win for both clubs.       

Edited by Whippet13
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Derwent Parker said:

equal funding means clubs only getting around £600,000 each, and destroys any pretence of a full-time competition or having big clubs IS NOT TRUE -  there are a few teams outside of SL that are full time and dont get the 1.8 million?

Giving teams around £600,000 each - will simply destroy smaller clubs IS NOT TRUE - An extra £520,000 for each team outside SL will allow the smaller teams to bulk up their squad. - which will bring the quality up and close the gap.

The only reason to argue against Martyn's plan is the SL / Big teams dont want the gap closed and dont want to share the CF.

This wasn't even Martyn's plan. Martyn's plan has the same inequality we see now, just on a different scale with some teams getting £1.28 million v teams getting £80,000. For that £80,000 you get a team at the level as London Skolars or West Wales now.

£600,000 is an average wage of £24,000. I don't care what is technically possible, that is not an appealing wage for any potential sportsmen. Most would be better off working and playing part time RU at a rubbish level. No one in their right mind would consider that you can run a full time elite competition that is attractive to broadcasters on that. Even as is some Super League clubs are scraping the barrel when it comes to this. What you will certainly see is a disappearance of all the community work, youth development, work in schools, summer camps and all the other good work that the top SL clubs do. Everything will be cut back. All for nothing as the Leeds and Wigans of this world will still annihilate the Swintons and West Wales. Then after all that we will see another reduction in Sky money in the next TV deal as Sky are not getting the elite competition they are paying for.

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

3 minutes ago, Scubby said:

Wigan have literally no excuses. It is one of the unique towns on the map where people think of RL. It has lost its way for sure but it has also shown it can deliver regular crowds of 14-15k for standard league games and 20-25k for big ones.

I don't think the club has helped itself by becoming an apparent high profile NRL feeder club and then players players returning and not hitting the heights. The club was regularly getting gates under 10,000 in the 1999-2001 period and bounced back. It can again but Wigan fans are not stupid - they want to see the best the competition can offer each week.

I am not just highlighting the Wigan club Scubby, as I have said in previous posts I do think that the sport is in decline in popularity, it is OK coming on these pages and reading about the views of the devotees of the sport who care about its welfare, desires and prospects for a better future, but these pages do not reflect or represent what is happening out there in the real world.

We keep hearing that we are populated in the stadiums with those sitting in heavens (or hells) waiting room, and we have need to attract newbies to just to fill the spots they will vacate just to keep on an equilibrium, but we need far far more than just that, and what is the sport doing about it, zilch all. It must be considered by the games administrators that the product we see on the TV will sell itself over and above all the other sports, pastimes and recreations that are available and competing for everyone's money these days, but what we witnessing as far as the game on the box is concerned is a once exciting game that is fast becoming stale and boring, the amount of people I have spoken to who 'can't be bothered' any longer with Rugby League is growing all the time, even the pubs in and around town are complacent about it, but full when there is a football match on.

What happened to the expected crowds that would happen when the restrictions were lifted? OK all manner of excuses can be directed as to why they are not as big as expected, but I honestly believe people have got out of the habit, and those who have continued to watch on the box can not see anything to entice them back, the sport needs to change in its approach and attitdue by the administrators and most definatley in it's frontline offering being the game on the pitch.

Sorry for sounding so glum, but these are the views of someone who has been involved in this sport for well over half a century, and still a season ticket holder, I never would for one minute thought that I would see myself with this attitude but there we have it, and I think if I am like this what are people who do not have the same passion for the game as I have need to be convinced to get along.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

I am not just highlighting the Wigan club Scubby, as I have said in previous posts I do think that the sport is in decline in popularity, it is OK coming on these pages and reading about the views of the devotees of the sport who care about its welfare, desires and prospects for a better future, but these pages do not reflect or represent what is happening out there in the real world.

We keep hearing that we are populated in the stadiums with those sitting in heavens (or hells) waiting room, and we have need to attract newbies to just to fill the spots they will vacate just to keep on an equilibrium, but we need far far more than just that, and what is the sport doing about it, zilch all. It must be considered by the games administrators that the product we see on the TV will sell itself over and above all the other sports, pastimes and recreations that are available and competing for everyone's money these days, but what we witnessing as far as the game on the box is concerned is a once exciting game that is fast becoming stale and boring, the amount of people I have spoken to who 'can't be bothered' any longer with Rugby League is growing all the time, even the pubs in and around town are complacent about it, but full when there is a football match on.

What happened to the expected crowds that would happen when the restrictions were lifted? OK all manner of excuses can be directed as to why they are not as big as expected, but I honestly believe people have got out of the habit, and those who have continued to watch on the box can not see anything to entice them back, the sport needs to change in its approach and attitdue by the administrators and most definatley in it's frontline offering being the game on the pitch.

Sorry for sounding so glum, but these are the views of someone who has been involved in this sport for well over half a century, and still a season ticket holder, I never would for one minute thought that I would see myself with this attitude but there we have it, and I think if I am like this what are people who do not have the same passion for the game as I have need to be convinced to get along.

 

You are not alone mate, and much of our disagreements on here are around failing to grasp the shoots of optimism that actually exists within the game. Take the situation with Toulouse (which we often disagree on 🙂 ) my feeling is by 2023 we could have 2 strong French clubs where we had none 20 years earlier. So how do you make that 2 into 4 or 6?

Same with the SL, we cannot just accept and lie down when Sky want to reduce the TV pot by 30% and put us on two years notice. We have to listen, learn and do whatever is necessary to - not just stop the decline - but to grow again. There is a direct correlation between Sky valuing the elite level less (i.e. giving them less money) and the discussions on completely removing funding from League 1. We need Wigan and Leeds and Catalans and Hull et al to be as big as they possibly can be to help those that sit underneath.

Restructuring is required only to initiate and accelerate growth. If we continue to value the promoted club less than the 11 other members of SL then we are not actually wanting them to succeed and grow the sport - we are managing its decline. This practice flows over to the fans that love the game and ultimately makes them feel glum and demotivated to attend games and follow the sport.

Edited by Scubby
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Damien said:

This wasn't even Martyn's plan. Martyn's plan has the same inequality we see now, just on a different scale with some teams getting £1.28 million v teams getting £80,000. For that £80,000 you get a team at the level as London Skolars or West Wales now.

£600,000 is an average wage of £24,000. I don't care what is technically possible, that is not an appealing wage for any potential sportsmen. Most would be better off working and playing part time RU at a rubbish level. No one in their right mind would consider that you can run a full time elite competition that is attractive to broadcasters on that. Even as is some Super League clubs are scraping the barrel when it comes to this. What you will certainly see is a disappearance of all the community work, youth development, work in schools, summer camps and all the other good work that the top SL clubs do. Everything will be cut back. All for nothing as the Leeds and Wigans of this world will still annihilate the Swintons and West Wales. Then after all that we will see another reduction in Sky money in the next TV deal as Sky are not getting the elite competition they are paying for.

I dont know who originally designed that plan - NFL style - But it was Martyn who brought it up in this topic that's why i refer to it as Martyn's plan.

As said before the plan has merits only the monies badly shared out that will scupper it.

You state £600,000 is an average wage of £24,000 - but teams have other revenues of income.  Someone way back in this debate [too far back to find] stated that Saints have a turnover of 4 - 5 million plus - so a drop of 1 million will not be good but should not mean them having to go part time!

Even if money is shared equal there will be a gap in strength  at start until lower sides build but not for ever.

If the money is shared equally all teams can build back better [where have i heard that ?]  and although the top teams will still be the strongest and will /should stay at the top - the rest should close the gap.

You state Leeds and Wigans of this world will still annihilate the Swintons and West Wales - i cant see how you know that unless you can see future, if so lottery numbers for Friday please.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

   Load of Bulls--t saying £6ook only allows £24k a player .In a 14 team division clubs would have income from entrance money.Average 7000 at a modest £15 and there is income of over £1.3 million + advertising and corporate income.Have a hybrid of full time and part time players in each team.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, sentoffagain2 said:

   Load of Bulls--t saying £6ook only allows £24k a player .In a 14 team division clubs would have income from entrance money.Average 7000 at a modest £15 and there is income of over £1.3 million + advertising and corporate income.Have a hybrid of full time and part time players in each team.

You don't think clubs have other outgoings? Your last sentence contradicts your first also.

Let's put the current salary cap up to £3 million. That is the funding difference you are talking about. Im sure you'd bleat about that.

Edited by Damien
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, sentoffagain2 said:

   Load of Bulls--t saying £6ook only allows £24k a player .In a 14 team division clubs would have income from entrance money.Average 7000 at a modest £15 and there is income of over £1.3 million + advertising and corporate income.Have a hybrid of full time and part time players in each team.

That is a return to a part time sport at the highest level you write of @sentoffagain2 . Some players training in the day and others in the evenings. This is how you think SL could go to help us grow and create more revenue from TV and commercial income? 

 

  • Like 1
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...