Championship and League One Funding

[DavidM]

13 hours ago, yipyee said:

I would be more worried if it was a whole area thrown away but when there is an elite club a stones through away its not too bad as the pyramid remains intact.

London going PT is a worry, other heartland clubs = no issue

I think I’m in the heartland but I’d need to put a stone on a rocket launcher to get it to the nearest ‘ elite ‘ club . Risking losing  any club is a worry , a big worry and should be totally unacceptable . These clubs with their hardworking staff , their fans and communities are integral to the sport . Any pyramid is only as strong as it’s base .  And most fans have no emotional link or interest in watching someone else . Lose  clubs , lose fans , lose players , lose interest 

[Damien]

12 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

The thing is those with 150K budgets have not done "perfectly fine" by your own admission they are clubs finishing lower down the leagues.

They are sustainable, which in RL counts for a lot, and are finishing lower because some clubs above them are getting 4 times the funding. I'm not sure how you could ever expect them to bridge such an unfair gap.

[Harry Stottle]

On 07/09/2021 at 19:01, Marauder said:

So we squeeze everyone under the super league because sky broadcast it, what about all the others in the food chain, cut them and super league wouldn't last long, as the clubs die so will support for the game and that will lead to the player pool also going #### up.

There are those fan's of SL clubs who cannot see or comprehend this decline in the sport as you describe happening, they have a  veil shrouding their short term insular thinking considering the sport is going to leap and bound forward with cutting poorer clubs others adrift, it will have the opposite effect resulting in the sport going into a downward spiral and eventually vanishing up it's own backside.

[Harry Stottle]

13 minutes ago, Davo5 said:

But it’s not levelling down,having the same central funding doesn’t prevent the likes of Beaumont spending money  to assemble higher quality squads if they so wish.

That is very true Dave, but to what tune would a Championship owner have to invest in a roster to be anywhere near even bottom 2 or 3 SL standard?

[Davo5]

2 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

That is very true Dave, but to what tune would a Championship owner have to invest in a roster to be anywhere near even bottom 2 or 3 SL standard?

Given your own clubs performances this year with a Championship level squad,a hell of a lot but any club going up would have to replace most of their team anyhow regardless of Championship funding,that’s just the way of P&R.

[Toby Chopra]

22 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

The thing is those with 150K budgets have not done "perfectly fine" by your own admission they are clubs finishing lower down the leagues.

How is it that collectively SL should not be "levelled down" but it is OK for that to be the case in the Championship?

I know that there are those amongst us, who wish to keep those upstarts in their rightful place of staying in the Championship, doing as you suggest and levelling the Championship Down could and should only come about if P&R is taken out off the structure and we go to a full time Licencing system , if that is what you want just say it, levelling down as you suggest could not work with promotion on the table then my friend watch those fans below SL who have had their ambition taken away start ebbing away and those clubs going through the motions till they eventually fold. Prior to the 8'S being instigated the Championship was a miserable place to be, crowds were low, and it was dying a slow and painfull death, putting Promotion back on the agenda awakened aspirations, desire and intentions the standards went up and fans wanted to part of a journey of expectation.

I don't think you need unbalanced funding in the Championship to keep P&R. Recent experience shows us that there's no real benefit from funding 3 or 4 clubs to run at hybrid, or skeleton pro level, so that they stand a chance in SL when they go up. They still struggle as the gulf is so large and the structural challenges of assembling a squad remain. 

So let's make the Championship equally part time, and if the winner wants to assemble a full time squad and take up the place, then let's do what we can to help them in other ways. I like the idea of quota and registration flexibility for example. 

A club like Leigh shouldn't be scared of this, in fact I think it would thrive in a much more sustainable manner. The clubs like Leigh with the biggest fan bases would rise to the top due to the spending power of higher gate receipts and better sponsors, without having to be drawn into an arms race with clubs being artificially boosted with extra money. And if they win the Championship, then can decide if they want to step up. 

[Toby Chopra]

Just now, Davo5 said:

Given your own clubs performances this year with a Championship level squad,a hell of a lot but any club going up would have to replace most of their team anyhow regardless of Championship funding,that’s just the way of P&R.

Exactly. This is where the argument of needing to run skeleton pro squads in the championship falls down. It doesnt really make any difference to SL survival. 

[Damien]

Lets face it the difference between £600,000 funding and £125,000 funding in the Championship is to fund a select couple of clubs to aim for Super League by allowing them to be full time and buy loads of over the hill players and players that aren't good enough for Super League. There is zero value to the game in that and it does not improve the Super League, the competition Sky pay for and which funds everything else. Yes people may say the same about Super League clubs buying over the hill NRL players but they completely miss the point, that does improve the top end and does improve the quality of the product that Sky pay for.

[Harry Stottle]

On 07/09/2021 at 20:34, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

My initial post was that League One clubs shouldn’t be facing the biggest cuts in terms of % reduction. 

The fact is Championship and League One clubs have £2m to share around. I’d propose something like £50k x 10 in League One, £100k x 12 in Championship as a baseline figure which would then leave £300k leftover for prize money depending on finishing league position. 

The proposal to give some League One clubs only £20k, down from £75k will see some of those clubs going bust imo. 

You remind me of the story of the tilted lady during the war, who was helping the war effort by lecturing to the Women's Institute on how to spend money best to  utilise food to go further, she suggested buying Fish Heads and Tails from the fishmonger to make a nutritious soup, apparently she stood down and left the auditorium when one poor women stood up and asked, "Who buy's all the Fish middles then".

Just give that a moments thought Mi'Lud, and consider what you are saying.

[Harry Stottle]

On 07/09/2021 at 20:35, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

Leigh didn’t earn promotion, hence the reason for them only getting partial funding, which was still significantly more than they’d of got playing in the Championship as they’d of expected.

FFS, you really have got it bad haven't you.

[Harry Stottle]

On 07/09/2021 at 20:51, Scubby said:

So no confirmation then? Remember Toronto had zero in 2020.

Correct me if I am wrong Scubby, but was that not the deal they signed up for? I am sure if Toronto really had a cast iron counter to take it higher they would have done so.

 

[Gooleboy]

4 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

FFS, you really have got it bad haven't you.

He must be related to Syd Hines!

[Harry Stottle]

On 07/09/2021 at 22:46, ShropshireBull said:

A pathway yes.  500,000 for some champ teams with no academy or infrastructure of their own. Mental.  Said it before but we could have built a new stadium for Welsh RL, Salford/Swinton on the money we ###### away on the champ. 

Why have some Championship clubs not got academies?

[Harry Stottle]

18 hours ago, mozzauk said:

Totally agree, and shows what little respect the Super League has for the lower leagues....

It's about time the RFL started to think more about how it gets money in from other people than Sky and invest in the game, and not destroy the game.... RL Needs to grow not die by a thousands cuts from Ralph "the butcher" Rimmer

SL is Ralph's passport to staying in a well paid job, he will never rock that boat for Captain Leneghan, first officer McManus and a couple more high ratings!

[Scubby]

15 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Correct me if I am wrong Scubby, but was that not the deal they signed up for? I am sure if Toronto really had a cast iron counter to take it higher they would have done so.

 

I am not interested in another Toronto debate Harry. The point I was making was that in 2020 11 SL clubs got full funding and the other got zero, and it 2021 11 SL clubs got full funding and the other got £1m. So the precedent is there for them to not provide an equal share of funding to the new club joining SL. This also happened in 1999 with Gateshead receiving 50% central distribution.

[Harry Stottle]

44 minutes ago, Davo5 said:

Given your own clubs performances this year with a Championship level squad,a hell of a lot but any club going up would have to replace most of their team anyhow regardless of Championship funding,that’s just the way of P&R.

There was a strategy that was to be employed this season if Leigh had remained in the Championship, there were many squad places available Dav, and the intention was to improve the team as the season progressed, but we all now know that would not have happened with the way the pandemic has hit.

[Harry Stottle]

34 minutes ago, Damien said:

Lets face it the difference between £600,000 funding and £125,000 funding in the Championship is to fund a select couple of clubs to aim for Super League by allowing them to be full time and buy loads of over the hill players and players that aren't good enough for Super League. There is zero value to the game in that and it does not improve the Super League, the competition Sky pay for and which funds everything else. Yes people may say the same about Super League clubs buying over the hill NRL players but they completely miss the point, that does improve the top end and does improve the quality of the product that Sky pay for.

Well that isn't Sky's mindset Damien, please for the sake of clarity tell me how in the last 7 years under the present contract how SL has improved?

[Harry Stottle]

20 minutes ago, Scubby said:

I am not interested in another Toronto debate Harry. The point I was making was that in 2020 11 SL clubs got full funding and the other got zero, and it 2021 11 SL clubs got full funding and the other got £1m. So the precedent is there for them to not provide an equal share of funding to the new club joining SL. This also happened in 1999 with Gateshead receiving 50% central distribution.

The die may well have been cast Scubby, guess we will just have to wait and see, I wouldn't put anything past that illustrious group of men though!

[newbe]

Think it's gone under the radar, but travel costs are being withdrawn aswell. More pressure on league 1 clubs. 

[OriginalMrC]

1 minute ago, newbe said:

Think it's gone under the radar, but travel costs are being withdrawn aswell. More pressure on league 1 clubs. 

Yes, costs for Bears 10-15k per year which is partly covered by a travel grant. I'd imagine Skolars, West Wales and Cumbrian clubs cost more. That won't be available next year 

[Damien]

18 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Well that isn't Sky's mindset Damien, please for the sake of clarity tell me how in the last 7 years under the present contract how SL has improved?

What's not Sky's mindset? Sky pay many millions for Super League, that is a fact. Sky aren't interested in showing the Championship and its current value is zero, that is a fact. Distribution of funds needs to take this into account.

I never said Super league had improved. I think quite the opposite, which makes it even more bizarre trying to prop up full time clubs in a league that adds no value. Every penny, within reason, should be spent on making Super League as good and as valuable as it can be. The entire game relies on that. I have made it clear time and again that I believe in funding for the Championship and League 1 but it needs to be at a sensible, sustainable, part time level.

It stand to reason that giving SL clubs less will certainly see it deteriorate more and will reduce its value further. Over time that only negatively impacts on the entire pyramid, as we are seeing now. Super League doing well and getting a bumper TV deal positively effects the entire pyramid, as we have seen in the current TV deal. As much as it may pain some people that support lower league clubs, the types that denounce Super League as Super greed etc, their entire lower clubs existence is in the hands of a successful Super League.

[The Phantom Horseman]

1 hour ago, Damien said:

Lets face it the difference between £600,000 funding and £125,000 funding in the Championship

Genuine question, does anyone have any verifiable evidence of how much Championship clubs receive in central funding?

The last time I saw figures published was four or five years ago, when the top 2 teams each year certainly did get a much bigger chunk - from memory about 750k and 700k, with third and fourth getting about 450/500k, and thus downwards.

However, I'm fairly sure that 2 or 3 years ago this was all changed so that the incremental level was massively reduced - the higher-placed clubs still received more, but the difference in funding was greatly reduced.

Either then or shortly afterwards, the "Return On Investment" criteria was introduced, which meant that the amount clubs received was dependent on things like whether or not they ran a juniors team, a ladies team, a PDRL team, etc, along with other factors such as OurLeague subscribers.

I don't think the RFL publish these funding figures so it's interesting to see people bandying them about. If there's a reliable source of who gets what it would be interesting to read.

[Harry Stottle]

56 minutes ago, OriginalMrC said:

Yes, costs for Bears 10-15k per year which is partly covered by a travel grant. I'd imagine Skolars, West Wales and Cumbrian clubs cost more. That won't be available next year 

OUCH!

Just for interest what is the current system on the NCL, is there any subsistence or is the travel totally down to the clubs

[Blind side johnny]

1 hour ago, Damien said:

What's not Sky's mindset? Sky pay many millions for Super League, that is a fact. Sky aren't interested in showing the Championship and its current value is zero, that is a fact. 

 

They are televising the play-offs this year so you need to recalculate.

[OriginalMrC]

35 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

OUCH!

Just for interest what is the current system on the NCL, is there any subsistence or is the travel totally down to the clubs

Really not sure, travel expenses in L1 are high due to the geographical spread.