Jump to content

Please Remove Automatic Relegation


Recommended Posts


22 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Piffle,

Let's see when club's start going to wall with a lack of funding.

Aye, heartland clubs will get parachute payments and not be as vulnerable to being cut completely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jughead said:

That’s the problem. We treat everyone the same despite their being great differences between so many. 
There will always be differences but why favour certain clubs ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

👍

With Promotion and Relegation as well may I add, that would make it far more interesting for those at the bottom of the NRL.

If that were to happen you can expect the broadcast deal and revenue to plummet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, tec said:
1 hour ago, Jughead said:

That’s the problem. We treat everyone the same despite their being great differences between so many. 
There will always be differences but why favour certain clubs ? 

The salary cap favours certain clubs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

👍

With Promotion and Relegation as well may I add, that would make it far more interesting for those at the bottom of the NRL.

Penrith and Parramatta were near the bottom of the NRL a few years ago and they are now at the top. The Bulldogs made back to back Grand Finals 7/8 years ago and are now at the bottom. It is the very nature of not having P&R in the NRL that allows clubs to create cycles of success. You can't just bin off Brisbane because they were #### for a couple of years.

Edited by Scubby
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Omott91 said:

If that were to happen you can expect the broadcast deal and revenue to plummet.

Nay nay Mr Wilkes, there would be far more interest in the dog fight to avoid relegation not only for the fans of the club's involved but also the viewer's who just might with those games that have nothing at stake may not tune in, I would wager the being figures would rise.

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

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

👍

With Promotion and Relegation as well may I add, that would make it far more interesting for those at the bottom of the NRL.

Haha they'd have outback towns like Leigh & Fev from country rugby league rising to glory 😂👏 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Please Remove Automatic Relegation"

Please Don't...

If you want to change things up and allow sides to 'grow' drop the salary cap completely and we could well soon have a SL of financially strong clubs including as many non heartland teams as can afford to be there.......... a new TWP or Toulouse with genuine wealth and prospects could just breeze past the likes of Wake or Salford then.

Maybe in a few years of no cap at all we'd end up with 10 or 12 genuinely wealthy strong clubs miles ahead of the rest (regardless of SL funding) and then a model similar to the NRL might be worth looking at.

Unfortunately 1/2 of SL are weak clubs and would never vote to remove the cap...... it's what is keeping them hanging on in there.

england_identity2.jpg1921_button.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same old arguments being repeated every since uncle Mo first announced Super League back in 94 and its the same old teams who want to retain promotion and relegation despite the reality that its too big a gap to plug in 7 months of rugby as Leigh, London and Toronto have found out.

My own thoughts are that promotion should be scrapped, as previously said further up this thread, there isn't the player pool for promoted teams to pick up 6-7 players immediately to strengthen their side which invariably leads to all their good work in getting promoted being immediately undone.

I think the time has come to take a step back from the old arguments, take stock and look to the future with a realistic development plan to expand Super League and the Championship and jettison what's left of the professional clubs as they don't offer the game any value.

I would go a step farther and look to develop the top division of the NCL to replace the defunct League One and give them a higher profile and some funding (not on the same level as League One clubs were getting) to allow them to gradually improve their facilities and player pathways into the professional game with elite training and more representative games linking in with Superleague but not through Academies so that these players can develop with their own club.

If the likes of Leigh, Toulouse, Fev or whoever gets the additional 2 places in Superleague, they should not be worrying about relegation for 5 years to give them time to settle and build the club both on and off the field; BUT after 4 seasons, underperforming teams (both on and financially off the field)) could be put on notice that they could be replaced by championship teams waiting in the wings to take their place if they don't improve sufficiently.

That should hopefully even out the Championship into a more competitive league as clubs won't be spending more than their income by chasing the golden goose that Super League is perceived to be, while at the same time allowing the smaller clubs time to adjust to the Super League business model. 

Edited by Death to the Rah Rah's
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Death to the Rah Rah's said:

Same old arguments being repeated every since uncle Mo first announced Super League back in 94 and its the same old teams who want to retain promotion and relegation despite the reality that its too big a gap to plug in 7 months of rugby as Leigh, Saints and Toronto have found out.

My own thoughts are that promotion should be scrapped, there isn't the player pool for promoted teams to pick up 6-7 players immediately to strengthen their side which invariably leads to all their good work in getting promoted being immediately undone.

I think the time has come to take a step back from the old arguments, take stock and look to the future with a realistic development plan to expand Super League and the Championship and jettison what's left of the professional clubs as they don't offer the game any value.

I would go a step farther and look to develop the top division of the NCL to replace the defunct League One and give them a higher profile and some funding (not on the same level as League One clubs were getting) to allow them to gradually improve their facilities and player pathways into the professional game with elite training and more representative games linking in with Superleague but not through Academies so that these players can develop with their own club.

If the likes of Leigh, Toulouse, Fev or whoever gets the additional 2 places in Superleague, they should not be worrying about relegation for 5 years to give them time to settle and build the club both on and off the field; BUT after 4 seasons, underperforming teams (both on and financially off the field)) could be put on notice that they could be replaced by championship teams waiting in the wings to take their place if they don't improve sufficiently.

That should hopefully even out the Championship into a more competitive league as clubs won't be spending more than their income by chasing the golden goose that Super League is perceived to be, while at the same time allowing the smaller clubs time to adjust to the Super League business model. 

Hi deathly one, just for the sake of discussion please tell me are you affiliated in any way to a Championship club?

I am and although I can see some merit in what you propose but having been in the Championship through the previous journey of licencing I wouldn't be going again knowing that my club would be in a one way street for the next 5 years if we were outside SL, and in discussions on these pages before with fans of other clubs who have ambition they have expressed the same, and what about the ambitious owners who invest for the opportunity to be promoted, would they stay, I doubt it. So yes I see your point about the Championship evening itself out, but I don't believe achieving it by this method is the correct way after all it is a levelling down, not a levelling up which should be the right way.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 13/02/2022 at 07:08, devonhawk said:

Totally disagree. It is because Super Dooper League became closed shop, that so many clubs on the outside of it are struggling. 

I would even suggest going to 3 up, 3 down. It would kick the perennial strugglers up the backside and encourage more investment in Championship clubs.

 

You could give Toulouse a billion pounds if they can only sign players other SL clubs don't want due to the short period to build a SL team that it makes no difference.

The gap between leagues is the problem 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Division 1 conference, comprising of 10 teams (Big 10, if you like)

Division 2 conference, comprising of 8 teams.

Div 1 play each other H & A and Div 2 conference once (26 games)

Div 2 play each other H & A and Div 1 conference teams once (24 games)

Concentrates playing quality (needed to become competitive with Australia), creates massive crunch/ must win games (excitement), removes the “cliff edge trapdoor” that currently exists into/out off SL. 
 

If Toulouse were playing the top 10 just once this year - that would be far more beneficial for the Toulouse, the whole sport, all of the clubs in SL & Championship and the overall competition. 
Ditto; Leigh & London in previous years.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

How?

Essentially the main problem with the salary cap is that it only works if every club's coin is worth the same. They aren't, so it doesn't. 

Lets look at various levels:

Big clubs: Wigan, Leeds, Saints etc.

They can pay good players less than they would be able to demand at Wakey or Salford because these clubs offer the best facilities, chances of silverware, and stability (unlikely to get relegated).

Clubs at the bottom of SL

The SC effectively protects them from Relegation now. Any upcoming side can't spend to overcome the adaptation from the Championship and have the same problem lower SL clubs have with recruiting quality by having to paying more to an even greater level. IMO DB at Leigh could absolutely afford to put Leigh ahead of Wakey, Salford, even KR, but he can't because of the cap. In the Premier League, promoted clubs often have to spend as much as those at the top to overcome their inherent disadvantage.

Expansion/non-heartland Clubs

Like lower super league clubs, expansion clubs often find that their money doesn't get them as much as the big boys. Not only are they a more risky bet for players given the history of new clubs in the sport, but often they aren't given enough recognition for the difference in cost of living. London Broncos did have a "London weighting" of 10% iirc which wasn't nearly enough to compensate for the difference between Castleford and Greater London. Toronto were given nothing. On top of that, given the density of the RL player base, you often have to pay players more to convince them to move from their homes and support networks.

Conclusion

So ultimately if you are a reasonably successful club in a relatively cheap to live location close to the RL heartlands - the cap is fantastic! If not, it presents significant issues and bakes them into the system.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tommygilf said:

Essentially the main problem with the salary cap is that it only works if every club's coin is worth the same. They aren't, so it doesn't. 

Lets look at various levels:

Big clubs: Wigan, Leeds, Saints etc.

They can pay good players less than they would be able to demand at Wakey or Salford because these clubs offer the best facilities, chances of silverware, and stability (unlikely to get relegated).

Clubs at the bottom of SL

The SC effectively protects them from Relegation now. Any upcoming side can't spend to overcome the adaptation from the Championship and have the same problem lower SL clubs have with recruiting quality by having to paying more to an even greater level. IMO DB at Leigh could absolutely afford to put Leigh ahead of Wakey, Salford, even KR, but he can't because of the cap. In the Premier League, promoted clubs often have to spend as much as those at the top to overcome their inherent disadvantage.

Expansion/non-heartland Clubs

Like lower super league clubs, expansion clubs often find that their money doesn't get them as much as the big boys. Not only are they a more risky bet for players given the history of new clubs in the sport, but often they aren't given enough recognition for the difference in cost of living. London Broncos did have a "London weighting" of 10% iirc which wasn't nearly enough to compensate for the difference between Castleford and Greater London. Toronto were given nothing. On top of that, given the density of the RL player base, you often have to pay players more to convince them to move from their homes and support networks.

Conclusion

So ultimately if you are a reasonably successful club in a relatively cheap to live location close to the RL heartlands - the cap is fantastic! If not, it presents significant issues and bakes them into the system.

Excellent post.

I'd also add that those top clubs get the pick of youth. Who then develop and have reduced salary on terms of the cap, only so much of what they are paid counts on the cap

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

Excellent post.

I'd also add that those top clubs get the pick of youth. Who then develop and have reduced salary on terms of the cap, only so much of what they are paid counts on the cap

Thank you

Oh yeah absolutely on junior players, I forgot that tbh but it is another example of the inherent biases in the system. It is a self fulfilling prophecy.

I think it exposes how many of the key points in the game are effectively just compromises between self-interested parties rather than policies supporting a strategic aim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Tommygilf said:

Thank you

Oh yeah absolutely on junior players, I forgot that tbh but it is another example of the inherent biases in the system. It is a self fulfilling prophecy.

I think it exposes how many of the key points in the game are effectively just compromises between self-interested parties rather than policies supporting a strategic aim.

I think initially it's a good system to encourage development within your own team. 

The problem is it's flawed and I imagine this was unintended.

Because top clubs get the pick off all the best 14 year olds, they are bound to develop the best athletes from each years cohort. The key for me is spreading the talent at 14 somehow, if recruitment was even at 14 and 16 I would have no issue with cap reduction for self developed players. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

I think initially it's a good system to encourage development within your own team. 

The problem is it's flawed and I imagine this was unintended.

Because top clubs get the pick off all the best 14 year olds, they are bound to develop the best athletes from each years cohort. The key for me is spreading the talent at 14 somehow, if recruitment was even at 14 and 16 I would have no issue with cap reduction for self developed players. 

Arguably there are only 2 ways to do that.

Licensing to make every club guaranteed to be in Super League so that over time club offerings equal out to juniors (and that would take a while anyway).

Or remove/massively increase the cap so that clubs can spend in areas they want to compete in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Arguably there are only 2 ways to do that.

Licensing to make every club guaranteed to be in Super League so that over time club offerings equal out to juniors (and that would take a while anyway).

Or remove/massively increase the cap so that clubs can spend in areas they want to compete in.

Or apply service areas limiting recruitment at 14 to your own team.

Not sure this could be applied at 16 legally 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Death to the Rah Rah's said:

Same old arguments being repeated every since uncle Mo first announced Super League back in 94 and its the same old teams who want to retain promotion and relegation despite the reality that its too big a gap to plug in 7 months of rugby as Leigh, London and Toronto have found out.

My own thoughts are that promotion should be scrapped, as previously said further up this thread, there isn't the player pool for promoted teams to pick up 6-7 players immediately to strengthen their side which invariably leads to all their good work in getting promoted being immediately undone.

I think the time has come to take a step back from the old arguments, take stock and look to the future with a realistic development plan to expand Super League and the Championship and jettison what's left of the professional clubs as they don't offer the game any value.

I would go a step farther and look to develop the top division of the NCL to replace the defunct League One and give them a higher profile and some funding (not on the same level as League One clubs were getting) to allow them to gradually improve their facilities and player pathways into the professional game with elite training and more representative games linking in with Superleague but not through Academies so that these players can develop with their own club.

If the likes of Leigh, Toulouse, Fev or whoever gets the additional 2 places in Superleague, they should not be worrying about relegation for 5 years to give them time to settle and build the club both on and off the field; BUT after 4 seasons, underperforming teams (both on and financially off the field)) could be put on notice that they could be replaced by championship teams waiting in the wings to take their place if they don't improve sufficiently.

That should hopefully even out the Championship into a more competitive league as clubs won't be spending more than their income by chasing the golden goose that Super League is perceived to be, while at the same time allowing the smaller clubs time to adjust to the Super League business model. 

Without automatic yearly promotion there won't be any Championship clubs waiting in the wings , so SL will remain as it is 

  • Like 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...