Can IMG make Rugby League into a more successful sport?

[Oxford]

When people use emotive words and Phrases like

“But, IMG will drag us from the dark ages.”

and are perfectly transparent about clubs being "cast adrift" you sort of know what this means, where it's heading and where it will end up.

And Dave

10 hours ago, Dave T said:

I don't think anyone advocates abandoning clubs and towns that have a strong history of RL or have a good presence. 

I think this might mean exactly the opposite.

Mind you given the cost of profits crisis at the moment it'll mean I'll have a bit more disposable income when it happens.

[steve oates]

11 hours ago, Dave T said:

I don't think anyone advocates abandoning clubs and towns that have a strong history of RL or have a good presence. What people tend to say is that basing a strategy around clubs that have ultimately failed in the hope that they will become huge again is a flawed one.

There is no reason to believe that there couldn't be a decent level of interest in RL in other major cities in the UK. RL isn't some weird local freaks how, its an exciting sport that can be appreciated by anyone. 

But you're right in that we need loads of money to deliver expansion.....

Bradford once failed to the point their crowds were numbered in the hundreds, years later they were a massive club again.  Hull Kingston Rovers went into a decline that saw them on 1,000 crowds playing in the third division now they are a well supported Superleage club again. Just a couple of examples that show, with respect, your wrong on this.

What we need and what succeeds is to channel rich owners towards established clubs, because they are "oven ready" well supported clubs with good infrastructures. Widnes lost their owner and their SL place but they have the support and infrastructure to rise again if they could find that Rich owner. Semor Kurdi excites RL expansionists because he puts £Millions into Newcastle. That's his choice probably because he's based in Newcastle where he has a big union club. His investments would undoubtedly see him in Superleague if he chose to pick up an established sizeable M62 club. 

You say there is no reason to believe that other city's in the UK cannot show a decent level of interest. We took RL to London and 40 years on a few hundred watch it few play it. We took the game to Sheffield where they were close to the player pool and they won the cup, but owners walked away as Sheffield people showed little interest in watching and playing. Is there actually a decent level of players and supporters in Newcastle who go back 20 years??  We also took the game the Cardiff, how interested were they there??. We took a big international to Coventry, it had no effect.

The evidence actually points to the fact I am probably wrong that we need "loads of money to deliver expansion". You can't pay kids and schools to take up RL, you can't pay people to come and watch the new RL club. So the bottom line is clear. If you want RL to be as strong as it can be, then base it where money men want to buy into it and locals want to play and watch it. Those indignantly huffing and puffing at me just need to consider the realities......... 

[gingerjon]

17 minutes ago, steve oates said:

Bradford once failed to the point their crowds were numbered in the hundreds, years later they were a massive club again.  Hull Kingston Rovers went into a decline that saw them on 1,000 crowds playing in the third division now they are a well supported Superleage club again. Just a couple of examples that show, with respect, your wrong on this.

What we need and what succeeds is to channel rich owners towards established clubs, because they are "oven ready" well supported clubs with good infrastructures. Widnes lost their owner and their SL place but they have the support and infrastructure to rise again if they could find that Rich owner. Semor Kurdi excites RL expansionists because he puts £Millions into Newcastle. That's his choice probably because he's based in Newcastle where he has a big union club. His investments would undoubtedly see him in Superleague if he chose to pick up an established sizeable M62 club. 

You say there is no reason to believe that other city's in the UK cannot show a decent level of interest. We took RL to London and 40 years on a few hundred watch it few play it. We took the game to Sheffield where they were close to the player pool and they won the cup, but owners walked away as Sheffield people showed little interest in watching and playing. Is there actually a decent level of players and supporters in Newcastle who go back 20 years??  We also took the game the Cardiff, how interested were they there??. We took a big international to Coventry, it had no effect.

The evidence actually points to the fact I am probably wrong that we need "loads of money to deliver expansion". You can't pay kids and schools to take up RL, you can't pay people to come and watch the new RL club. So the bottom line is clear. If you want RL to be as strong as it can be, then base it where money men want to buy into it and locals want to play and watch it. Those indignantly huffing and puffing at me just need to consider the realities......... 

Embarrassing.

[Oxford]

4 minutes ago, steve oates said:

Just a couple of examples that show, with respect, your wrong on this.

Is that the norm or the exceptions though?

 

4 minutes ago, steve oates said:

We took RL to London and 40 years on a few hundred watch it few play it.

This contradicts your point above.

Also we half heartedly took RL to London, mostly without any idea what was involved then we kept P&R which will ensure Londoners turn away very quickly.

The idea that you turn up with a great sport like RL without making it "Showtime!"  and as impressive as possible is so stupid and devoid of any comprehension that it beggars belief.

And the role of an increasingly hostile and dismissive media has been consistently underestimated, undervalued and no attempt has been made to combat this. In fact the one constant, guaranteed and eternal failure of a strategy has been accepting our place and trying to appear nice in the hope things will improve. RL is a sport with the attitudes of a loser and the media provides it with the appearance of one. If, as many suggest on here, your fate is in your own hands then RL lost every game through the number of errors it made, makes and continues to make.

 

 

[Dave T]

18 minutes ago, steve oates said:

Bradford once failed to the point their crowds were numbered in the hundreds, years later they were a massive club again.  Hull Kingston Rovers went into a decline that saw them on 1,000 crowds playing in the third division now they are a well supported Superleage club again. Just a couple of examples that show, with respect, your wrong on this.

What we need and what succeeds is to channel rich owners towards established clubs, because they are "oven ready" well supported clubs with good infrastructures. Widnes lost their owner and their SL place but they have the support and infrastructure to rise again if they could find that Rich owner. Semor Kurdi excites RL expansionists because he puts £Millions into Newcastle. That's his choice probably because he's based in Newcastle where he has a big union club. His investments would undoubtedly see him in Superleague if he chose to pick up an established sizeable M62 club. 

You say there is no reason to believe that other city's in the UK cannot show a decent level of interest. We took RL to London and 40 years on a few hundred watch it few play it. We took the game to Sheffield where they were close to the player pool and they won the cup, but owners walked away as Sheffield people showed little interest in watching and playing. Is there actually a decent level of players and supporters in Newcastle who go back 20 years??  We also took the game the Cardiff, how interested were they there??. We took a big international to Coventry, it had no effect.

The evidence actually points to the fact I am probably wrong that we need "loads of money to deliver expansion". You can't pay kids and schools to take up RL, you can't pay people to come and watch the new RL club. So the bottom line is clear. If you want RL to be as strong as it can be, then base it where money men want to buy into it and locals want to play and watch it. Those indignantly huffing and puffing at me just need to consider the realities......... 

Your evidence that 'proves I am wrong' is laughable, and tbh proves my point. 

Bradford is still a terrible example, they are still a basket case of a club really. Hull KR have done well, but that was my point, we don't abandon them, they can strengthen and come back if they are good enough. But we didn't base any kind of strategy around hoping Hull KR could return to being a big club. 

Your point that only a few hundred watch it in London, therefore it's a failure is completely at odds with all the places like Oldham, Swinton, Cumbria, etc that you want to focus on that are also failures. 

Your posts are without any logic, creative thinking, or anything really - they simply amount to "heartlands, heartlands, heartlands". 

[Damien]

12 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Your evidence that 'proves I am wrong' is laughable, and tbh proves my point. 

Bradford is still a terrible example, they are still a basket case of a club really. Hull KR have done well, but that was my point, we don't abandon them, they can strengthen and come back if they are good enough. But we didn't base any kind of strategy around hoping Hull KR could return to being a big club. 

Your point that only a few hundred watch it in London, therefore it's a failure is completely at odds with all the places like Oldham, Swinton, Cumbria, etc that you want to focus on that are also failures. 

Your posts are without any logic, creative thinking, or anything really - they simply amount to "heartlands, heartlands, heartlands". 

Great management and a great owner got Hull KR to where they are now. They are a shining light to any club in the doldrums really. They have steadily grown and developed both on and off the field for 2 decades. They have shown that little incremental improvements here and there really begin to add up and that its not all about just waiting for a big benefactor or a new stadium. You can be very proactive in these things too.

They certainly didn't get any help, quite the opposite as I think the RFL/Super League would have been quite happy to have had just 1 Hull team when Hull KR looked way off ever being a SL club. That's not to say they were hindered but there was never any real push to say we need a 2nd Hull club in SL.

[RP London]

what investment did Sheffield get? apart from the £1m to merge with Huddersfield, go away and never be seen again (until a determined few people started it again and struggled to be allowed back into the league structure by the RFL and clubs).. 

When London was being invested in by the RFL with DOs it was starting to see real growth in the schools and amateur club levels.. sadly that was pulled and it all fell to bits from there.. 

 

 

[Damien]

58 minutes ago, RP London said:

what investment did Sheffield get? apart from the £1m to merge with Huddersfield, go away and never be seen again (until a determined few people started it again and struggled to be allowed back into the league structure by the RFL and clubs).. 

When London was being invested in by the RFL with DOs it was starting to see real growth in the schools and amateur club levels.. sadly that was pulled and it all fell to bits from there.. 

If anything I think history shows that investment does work. It gets people playing the game, particularly through schools, and creates more amateur clubs. We have seen this in various places, whether that be London, Newcastle or Glasgow.

[M j M]

It might be hard to accept but if we had a sum of money to invest in one club then Bradford might well be the best return we could get on that.

The reality is that the easiest wins we can get are getting more people in the supposed heartlands to attend games and watch on TV. And that is easiest with a large city with an established name.

Expansion done properly needs to be done from a position of strength, you need the ££ the strong part gets from its commercial deals to support the very, very long process of establishing the game in a substantial way in new areas.

[Dave T]

24 minutes ago, M j M said:

It might be hard to accept but if we had a sum of money to invest in one club then Bradford might well be the best return we could get on that.

The reality is that the easiest wins we can get are getting more people in the supposed heartlands to attend games and watch on TV. And that is easiest with a large city with an established name.

Expansion done properly needs to be done from a position of strength, you need the ££ the strong part gets from its commercial deals to support the very, very long process of establishing the game in a substantial way in new areas.

That may very well be the case - I think the challenge is what would millions of pounds of investment in Bradford look like? I think the reality is that the missing piece in Bradford is stadium, and I'm just not convinced that would be the best return on millions of quid of investment. Maybe a 25k seater ground in RL territory that isn't Hudds could be a benefit for semi finals, internationals, Summer Bash, Championship Grand Finals etc. but it feels like quite a tactical investment when I suspect reducing ground costs isn't going to be a game changer. 

I think the question becomes "if we had say, £30m to invest where would it be?" and I'm not sure the benefits are that great. Surely Leeds, Hudds and Bradford themselves are tapping into the fertile grassroots already?

Full disclosure, I'm not sure central funding for a club is a good option, I think we could pour money down the drain. But I could see investment in assets (properly not the weird thing they did with Odsal) being a thing.

Edited July 12, 2022 by Dave T

[Oxford]

19 minutes ago, M j M said:

It might be hard to accept but if we had a sum of money to invest in one club then Bradford might well be the best return we could get on that.

The reality is that the easiest wins we can get are getting more people in the supposed heartlands to attend games and watch on TV. And that is easiest with a large city with an established name.

Expansion done properly needs to be done from a position of strength, you need the ££ the strong part gets from its commercial deals to support the very, very long process of establishing the game in a substantial way in new areas.

Good points there MjM,  the Bulls would be the easiest to parachute in, there's certainly a market and a brand and that would be the argument of Nobby and others I imagine.

The large city argument only holds water if you have a successful elite side though that is not a reason against Bradford being included.

If IMG has envisaged by those who don't care about casualties or colateral damage goes ahead we'll find out, won't we?

[Damien]

40 minutes ago, M j M said:

It might be hard to accept but if we had a sum of money to invest in one club then Bradford might well be the best return we could get on that.

The reality is that the easiest wins we can get are getting more people in the supposed heartlands to attend games and watch on TV. And that is easiest with a large city with an established name.

Expansion done properly needs to be done from a position of strength, you need the ££ the strong part gets from its commercial deals to support the very, very long process of establishing the game in a substantial way in new areas.

Best return in what way though? Even with a great team and big crowds it became financially unsustainable as they chased success.  As I said previously for 30 odd years of my life Bradford never particularly had big crowds. Is that Bradford a great return? Is it just money down the drain? How many times have Bradford gone bust in their history?  Its certainly not a great track record. I think a lot of people's views are clouded by the Bullmania era.

I don't think a fairly decent sum of money would even touch the sides when it comes to restoring Bradford and could be a complete waste. You may well get more bang for your buck in a relatively clean slate and stable club with someone like Newcastle or even someone like York if you are going down the strategic route. Both cities and I suspect both less RL when it comes to image and perception to the outside world. I'm not advocating that either but certainly think it would be cheaper and more perhaps more sustainable. 

Edited July 12, 2022 by Damien

[M j M]

3 minutes ago, Damien said:

Best return in what way though? Even with a great team and big crowds it became financially unsustainable as they chased success.  As I said previously for 30 odd years of my life Bradford never particularly had big crowds. Is that Bradford a great return? Is it just money down the drain? How many times have Bradford gone bust in their history?  Its certainly not a great track record. I think a lot of people's views are clouded by the Bullmania era.

I don't think from a purely financial point of view the Bulls were any less sustainable than Wigan or Huddersfield say are today. They just didn't have anyone to put the money in to cover the losses.

That may still be the case, but I don't know what the answer to that is, or whether we have to build our league around which clubs have wealthy backers and which don't.

[Jughead]

Would Bradford really be a good use of money? Unless vacant land and someone with deep pockets (in excess of £10m, most likely) magically appears, I’m not sure it’s realistic. 

 

[Damien]

Just now, M j M said:

I don't think from a purely financial point of view the Bulls were any less sustainable than Wigan or Huddersfield say are today. They just didn't have anyone to put the money in to cover the losses.

That may still be the case, but I don't know what the answer to that is, or whether we have to build our league around which clubs have wealthy backers and which don't.

Wigan and Huddersfield don't play in a hole of a ground that costs a fortune just to maintain and that puts people off attending. Whilst they don't own their grounds, well actually Huddersfield partly do, they can still generate income in ways Bradford can't even dream about. For example I'm not sure Bradford can cater for corporates like Wigan do or make income from activities at Robin Park like they do.

[M j M]

59 minutes ago, Damien said:

Wigan and Huddersfield don't play in a hole of a ground that costs a fortune just to maintain and that puts people off attending. Whilst they don't own their grounds, well actually Huddersfield partly do, they can still generate income in ways Bradford can't even dream about. For example I'm not sure Bradford can cater for corporates like Wigan do or make income from activities at Robin Park like they do.

Part of any investment into a club like Bradford would be to stabilise the ground situation.

One of the few, good, long-term investment made by the previous club was the Coral Stand (as was) at Odsal, which continues to provide useful revenue (https://www.bradfordbulls.co.uk/venue-hire/our-facilities).

[Tommygilf]

Whilst I can see the arguments and logic behind Bradford being the "easy win" for any investment, that is extremely short term in thinking.

One of the things that IMG are indicating towards when they mention "reimagining what rugby league is" is a recognition that the demographics of RL-Land are changing, rapidly.

West Yorkshire is increasingly becoming a commuter zone for Leeds in a trend that will only continue to increase. Likewise in Greater Manchester and Merseyside with Manchester and Liverpool. The traditional RL base is decreasing in size as social mobility, emigration to bigger cities and the general (lack of) popularity of the sport across the country means it is easy to fall out of touch. The sport seems so reliant on tactile, in person active participation currently to keep fans engaged in a world where being transient, particularly in your youth, is becoming increasingly the norm. 

Is RL capable of moving with those new audiences as its traditional base declines? Does it know how to sell Wakefield vs Cas to people who didn't grow up in the game (or even those that did but supported Leeds for example) and moved to the area for cheaper housing in commuter distance? Likewise how relevant are a Bradford team playing in a sport that a lot of the local area neither play themselves, watch on TV nor are that interested in more generally because it isn't popular in the country as a whole?

Warrington I know used to do some advertising in Polish, though I think that has stopped now for some reason? Why?

I think it speaks to something that crops up again and again on these threads. RL is very comfortable talking to "the people that know". Preaching to the converted may make some aspects toxic, but it generally keeps everyone in their comfort zone. IMG are going to have to break out of that. Internationals will be a good start, an easy win most likely. The club game is where the long term changes will be most prominent.

[Honor James]

I have always been wary of the idea that, above all, Rugby League needs to `get bigger', 'do X to grow'. `do Y to grow' etc. ad nauseum.

What is wrong with being `small' so long as your `small' is sustainable?

Diamonds are generally on the small side, glass baubles can be considerably bigger but who (with any brain at all) would swap even a small diamond for a big glass bauble?

Or, to put that another way: Rugby League is a bit like caviar; you don't need much of it to realise that once acquired, it is a taste you will always prefer to the ordinary.

[Dallas Mead]

13 minutes ago, Honor James said:

I have always been wary of the idea that, above all, Rugby League needs to `get bigger', 'do X to grow'. `do Y to grow' etc. ad nauseum.

What is wrong with being `small' so long as your `small' is sustainable?

Diamonds are generally on the small side, glass baubles can be considerably bigger but who (with any brain at all) would swap even a small diamond for a big glass bauble?

Or, to put that another way: Rugby League is a bit like caviar; you don't need much of it to realise that once acquired, it is a taste you will always prefer to the ordinary.

You know the latest Sky deal is 40% down on the last one, right?  What makes the next deal “sustainable “?

[redjonn]

19 minutes ago, Dallas Mead said:

You know the latest Sky deal is 40% down on the last one, right?  What makes the next deal “sustainable “?

guess that depends upon what someone means by... sustainable.

[Guest]

21 minutes ago, Dallas Mead said:

You know the latest Sky deal is 40% down on the last one, right?  What makes the next deal “sustainable “?

Well the rumor is that the 2x10 structure is coming in from 2024 and Sky are willing to increase their deal for it.

[Tommygilf]

46 minutes ago, Honor James said:

I have always been wary of the idea that, above all, Rugby League needs to `get bigger', 'do X to grow'. `do Y to grow' etc. ad nauseum.

What is wrong with being `small' so long as your `small' is sustainable?

Diamonds are generally on the small side, glass baubles can be considerably bigger but who (with any brain at all) would swap even a small diamond for a big glass bauble?

Or, to put that another way: Rugby League is a bit like caviar; you don't need much of it to realise that once acquired, it is a taste you will always prefer to the ordinary.

What is sustainable about a falling TV contract and stagnant (at best) crowds Even standing still is going backwards.

We are rapidly heading towards a universal age with social media. It is critically important to be a present force in the cities that will be cultural leaders of this new era to stay relevant even where we are strong(ish) now.

[gingerjon]

49 minutes ago, Honor James said:

What is wrong with being `small'

Pretty much everything.

And any attitude that suggests it's fine is on a par with people who get annoyed when their favourite band gets popular.

[Dave T]

3 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

What is sustainable about a falling TV contract and stagnant (at best) crowds Even standing still is going backwards.

We are rapidly heading towards a universal age with social media. It is critically important to be a present force in the cities that will be cultural leaders of this new era to stay relevant even where we are strong(ish) now.

 

2 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Pretty much everything.

And any attitude that suggests it's fine is on a par with people who get annoyed when their favourite band gets popular.

I do think we have a bit of a problem with RL. In this country in terms of articulating what our aims and goals are, what we realistically want the sport to be. And we sometimes conflate the sport and the pro-sport or a competition. 

Sometimes we just get a bit carried away with wanting the game to be huge, and have unrealistic expectations that are probably impossible to deliver. For example Big Picture basically wants UK RL to be something completely different, that it never has been, nor ever will be. 

Similarly, at the other end of the scale we have the likes of Steve on this thread who wants to see investment go no further than Widnes. 

We then have a scale, in between that, but we can all be guilty of fantasy stuff that doesn't help this tension. 

I do think the game needs a sensible plan, clearly articulated, for growth. That doesn't have to be SL being a Euro comp, or a Northern Hemisphere super comp, it could be far more modest, but there has to be growth - of turnover, of fans, of commercial income, of players, of investors etc. At the moment, the lack of a laid out plan does just lead to frustrations and criticism which are sometimes all over the place. 

For me, the makings of a growth plan would address things like:

1. How we will grow the participation in schools, colleges and unis. 

2. How we will support community development in population centres, new and existing. 

3. How we will monetise France and truly embed French RL within the UK pyramid where appropriate. 

4. How we will grow the England brand 

5. How we will grow our blue riband events. 

6. How we will position and promote the pro leagues to maximise attendances and viewing figures. 

In reality, we could ignore expansion (other than in the France bullet), we could focus on the core game and work towards creating an environment where investors want to join the UK pyramid, whether in other UK cities or beyond. 

I expect if we all had to create a growth plan, they would all be very different, and I expect there are 101 different things we can do and focus on, but at the moment I have no idea what we are trying to do. 

[Oxford]

13 minutes ago, Dave T said:

In reality, we could ignore expansion (other than in the France bullet), we could focus on the core game and work towards creating an environment where investors want to join the UK pyramid, whether in other UK cities or beyond. 

The real nub of all this is in this sentence if you also assault the media citadel so it can't ignore you.