Jump to content

Funding cuts could mean the end for Coventry Bears


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, steve oates said:

Wakefield, Cas and Fev? Can we just keep Wakey? and all will be OK?

Hull & HKR   do we only need one of them? Step HKR down??

Fax and Huddersfield? Do we only save one of them??

Leigh and Wigan - only needs Wigan??

To lose five clubs and consequently lose 30,000 dedicated fans of the axed clubs and lose investors like Fulton, Campbell, Hudgell and Beaumont will instantly kill the game.

Are you actually serious here??

You appear to be advocating the culling of a sizeable number of rugby league teams for a variety of scarcely credible reasons.

I'd get down from that high horse of yours.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3

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


1 hour ago, Hopping Mad said:

As you say, uncanny parallels (these days, speedway, too, is similarly ignored by the national media and participation has dropped off a cliff).

Speedway squandered - by simply giving most of the money to the riders - the relative fortune it received in recent years for Sky’s live coverage of top-flight meetings. Then, Sky pulled the plug...

The BSPA came in for a lot of criticism but a lot of the problems in speedway were of the promotors own making. There were several proposals to harmonise things such as the tracks owning the bikes and having a salary cap etc but at each AGM they were voted down. The main objectors being successful clubs like Poole Pirates who, ironically, ran out of money and are now in the second tier. Speedway's biggest issue was payments to riders, where the more successful a club was then the more it paid its riders due to the payment per point system and the ludicrous bonus point payments. The more they won by then the more it cost. Workington Comets had a phenominally successful season in 2018 winning every trophy open to them then promptly went bust !

But in general terms it is a valid comparison as it is a sport that took its cash windfall from Sky and squandered it with no thought about the future. Not a penny was invested in infrastructure or development, it all went into riders pockets.

  • Like 3

I’m not prejudiced, I hate everybody equally

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

You appear to be advocating the culling of a sizeable number of rugby league teams for a variety of scarcely credible reasons. 

SKY money supports the professional clubs who attract the viewers that pay the subs. I don't advocate the culling of any clubs? Where have I said that?? Your high horse comment adds nothing to the debate.

The bottom line is there will be no small clubs at all if the SKY contract goes, and probably no big ones either? SKY are paying less money, and they want a better SL product for that...  The idea of taking more money away from the SL clubs who have had their SKY money chopped down already to continue to support small clubs is very nice and may make you look all inclusive, and win support for that.............

But if SL means RL survives the bulk of the SKY money has to go to SL.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In terms of clubs who can/will survive the funding cuts below SL then the most obvious candidates for ceasing to continue are the clubs who don't own their own stadiums and are unable to generate additional income. Those clubs who merely rent the stadium on match days will be most at risk. Those who have physical assets to generate income will probably be able to at least survive, though perhaps not as easily as they do now. There are some clubs in L1 who are getting a couple of hundred paying spectators and that is their sole income apart from central funding. They have no additional income from bars, advertising etc. So if they get £20k central funding then maybe another £15-20k in gate money over the season then they're trying to run a club on maximum £40k. Even if they paid every penny out to players then you're looking at £1,600 per player in 25 man squad, which equates to about £90 per match. Players will decide its not worth it especially with all of the travelling required in L1. So even if clubs do survive there'll be a shortage of players who are good enough to play at that level.

I’m not prejudiced, I hate everybody equally

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Scubby said:

For many sports the governing body has the national team and international aspect to generate funds. The performance of the RFL in the 8 years following the 2013 World Cup has been significantly below par. Allowing pet projects like Great Britain to interrupt brand growth and failing to capitalise on the opportunities it did create was small time and short sighted.

Clubs like Coventry and Newcastle should be feeding off the energy created by the governing body's vision for the whole game. Not hoping for scraps thrown by SL clubs.

Yup, pretty much my point mate. The Our League stuff is positive, but we seem a good way off monetising it. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Spidey said:

The RFL are the governing body and should act as so. SL tried to breakaway then went back. Both as bad as each other in their ineptness

I suppose my point is that as SLE hold the money, they genuinely hold the power. That makes it difficult for the RFL to flex its muscles here unfortunately. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Yup, pretty much my point mate. The Our League stuff is positive, but we seem a good way off monetising it. 

Our league is a legacy of half arsed attempts to do something and not put any kind of strategic plan behind it. It has been going on long enough now to be able to monetise but it is so far off because the game won't invest to prosper.

This was launched in early November 2019 right in the middle of the ludicrous loss making Great Britain tour 😕 Seriously, talk about mixed messaging.

https://www.rugby-league.com/article/56000/england-rugby-league-supporters-club-launched-

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I suppose my point is that as SLE hold the money, they genuinely hold the power. That makes it difficult for the RFL to flex its muscles here unfortunately. 

When SL came to the RFL for help that was the time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Spidey said:

When SL came to the RFL for help that was the time

I don't think that is really the narrative though tbh. Common sense may suggest merging of resources, but the RFL needs that as much, probably more than SLE. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah jaysus, I keep saying, every time something like this happens that this is it, RL can go do one, I’ll walk away, but I can’t, I love this game, from the under 6s at Siddal up to Melbourne Storm and all points in between, but bloody hell the game makes itself a hard entity to love.

  • Like 5

"Freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice, socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality" - Mikhail Bakunin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I don't think that is really the narrative though tbh. Common sense may suggest merging of resources, but the RFL needs that as much, probably more than SLE. 

RFL run the academies, administration & referees, they are the recognised Governing Body - they have more power that they portray but don't use it.  SL was beginning to look weak, failed PE, Elstone resigning, low TV deal. RFL could have got a grip of the game, but now we've still got all the RFL v SL rubbish going on

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

It’s a terrible tragic decision, expecting League One clubs to take an 80% reduction is so ludicrously selfish from both Super League and Championship clubs. It’ll mean 23 years hard work at the likes of Coventry will all go to waste.

Should have been done as a percentage across the board, how would Super Greed clubs like a 80% cut

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

17 hours ago, DavidM said:

Let the SL clubs take the hit , it’s their product Sky want to pay less for due it being increasingly average . Give more money not less to clubs further down the pyramid in championship and league one , neglect them and super league will cut itself off at the knees in time . And give them more exposure on telly rather than the same old tedious repetitive stuff . Take the blinkers off , rugby league isn’t just super league 

Well said

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Spidey said:

Thus showing the power a Governing Body holds... even though they choose not to use it

But the £25m tv deal is a commercial deal between Sky TV and SLE, and it always will be. The RFL are still the governing body, I'm not sure what kind of hardball we are talking about here? 

SLE will always control where the money that SLE takes in goes. 

Nigel Wood's tv deal was clearly very good on two fronts, firstly the value in total, and secondly the 'whole game' approach it took with record funding outside of the SL. The downside is that the tactics used and how much was being routed elsewhere was probably too aggressive and caused the split. 

I'm not sure we will ever go with a joint CEO again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that funding cuts would have to mean rugby league wouldn't exist in Coventry, as much as it wouldn't exist at a semi-professional level. Coventry was a pretty strong amateur club before they entered League 1 in 2015 and also had a decent junior set up covering lots of age groups. 

It does a disservice to Coventry's past volunteers and indeed amateur clubs nationally to act like this is a binary choice between having RL in Coventry and not having RL in Coventry. They just wouldn't be paying players.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven’t read all the comments, it’s too depressing, but the way SL and the RFL are behaving it’s close to the final straw for me, if clubs close because of their actions I’m done with the game, it’s like supporting a dying horse. 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Saint 1 said:

I don't think that funding cuts would have to mean rugby league wouldn't exist in Coventry, as much as it wouldn't exist at a semi-professional level. Coventry was a pretty strong amateur club before they entered League 1 in 2015 and also had a decent junior set up covering lots of age groups. 

It does a disservice to Coventry's past volunteers and indeed amateur clubs nationally to act like this is a binary choice between having RL in Coventry and not having RL in Coventry. They just wouldn't be paying players.

 

I am told there are amateur clubs in St Helens. Perhaps if all funding was removed from that club, people might still go to a game 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The article says their playing budget is under £60k. That's really not very much in the grand scheme of things across a squad of 20 players.

Playing devil's advocate somewhat but how little can we pay players whilst claiming to be a professional sport? 

I hope Coventry manage to find a solution to the cuts and continue their progress. They have always seemed to be the best run of the expansion clubs that came in to League One a few years ago and are seeing some rewards on the pitch.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Eddie said:

I haven’t read all the comments, it’s too depressing, but the way SL and the RFL are behaving it’s close to the final straw for me, if clubs close because of their actions I’m done with the game, it’s like supporting a dying horse. 

I think it is with a lot of us and i really don't think the people who run the game here are aware of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Colin James said:

The article says their playing budget is under £60k. That's really not very much in the grand scheme of things across a squad of 20 players.

Playing devil's advocate somewhat but how little can we pay players whilst claiming to be a professional sport? 

I hope Coventry manage to find a solution to the cuts and continue their progress. They have always seemed to be the best run of the expansion clubs that came in to League One a few years ago and are seeing some rewards on the pitch.

I don't think Coventry, or clubs paying that much, are claiming to be a full time professional club though. 

(And they've probably got more value for that than Rochdale say.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Saint 1 said:

I don't think that funding cuts would have to mean rugby league wouldn't exist in Coventry, as much as it wouldn't exist at a semi-professional level. Coventry was a pretty strong amateur club before they entered League 1 in 2015 and also had a decent junior set up covering lots of age groups. 

It does a disservice to Coventry's past volunteers and indeed amateur clubs nationally to act like this is a binary choice between having RL in Coventry and not having RL in Coventry. They just wouldn't be paying players.

 

Excellent post that makes the real world point that Superleague is dead if they don't up their game. If Superleague dies the game will die as a relevant sport. The problem with having  pro RL in Coventry is it's blocked from developing to any great level when Wasps RUFC and Coventry RUFC hold the lions share of the Rugby talent and audience. We took an International there and got a great crowd for a great game but as observers said at the time once the game was over the local dad's and lad's went back to their Rugby Union clubhouses.

Lot's of died in the wool and part monied RL fans have tried to set up clubs all over, over 100 years and have all gone. The point about Coventry is it's a relative success, but not as a professional club. Further to that if Coventry and other non-SL clubs don't concede a share of SKY monies to SL going forward, then they are asking for SL to downgrade, when SKY sports are asking them to upgrade. Flying the flag for the semi pro clubs may seen to some to be a noble cause for some who call the enemy "Supergreed" but the reality is quite the reverse. All the money going to SL maintains the section of the game that guarantees the future.

"Supergreed" is one of the most ridiculous terms used on here. 

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...