IMG - Thought's, suggestions and comments to move the game forward

[Death to the Rah Rah's]

I'm not sure if there's a dedicate thread for the IMG proposals, so apologies if there is, but in light of the St. Helens / Wakefield tweets yesterday, what's everyone's general thoughts as to what conclusions IMG will take from their study and discussions with club owners, and what recommendations do you think they might make?

My thought's are that they will take aspects from the original merger document put together by Maurice Lindsey 27+ years ago and that future league structures will be given to clubs on a merit/points scoring /vetting system, initially free from relegation for 5 years rather than final league positions which some seem to think is the obvious way forward

I would say points could be scored for the following:

• Financial stability (the more self sustainable *without continued cash input from one person - the higher the points)
• Business plan with details cash flow forecast
• Stadium (both ownership and condition)
• Local population 
• Ladies
• Reserve and youth development
• Saturation  *ie: clubs tapping into the same market, players, sponsorship, spectators etc,)

Sure there are many other points to add, that's just my initial thoughts 

This is just a bit of speculative fun, so please don't take it too seriously

     

[Man of Kent]

I quite like the RU idea of issuing perpetual (but tradeable) shares to top flight clubs, which give the holder the right to central funding. It obviously makes it harder for promoted clubs to challenge (unless they were relegated the previous year) but it also protects the 'elite' while retaining P&R (if we're retaining P&R).   

[The Blues Ox]

I think we should all rate our clubs on the criteria above and then average that out if there is multiple posters from some clubs and then we can pick which teams should be in and which should miss out. 

I will start with Fax:-

• Financial stability - 9
• Business plan with details cash flow forecast - 8
• Stadium (both ownership and condition) -7 (one of the best around but marked down on ownership and income restraints)
• Local population -3
• Ladies -10
• Reserve and youth development -6 (Partnership with local college academy)
• Saturation   0 (all local talent from the area is snapped up by Wigan, Leeds and Huddersfield)

Obviously Im totally unbiased. 

[Man of Kent]

12 minutes ago, The Blues Ox said:

I think we should all rate our clubs on the criteria above and then average that out if there is multiple posters from some clubs and then we can pick which teams should be in and which should miss out. 

I will start with Fax:-

• Financial stability - 9
• Business plan with details cash flow forecast - 8
• Stadium (both ownership and condition) -7 (one of the best around but marked down on ownership and income restraints)
• Local population -3
• Ladies -10
• Reserve and youth development -6 (Partnership with local college academy)
• Saturation   0 (all local talent from the area is snapped up by Wigan, Leeds and Huddersfield)

Obviously Im totally unbiased. 

Minus 43? You're in! 

[The Future is League]

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

I'm not sure if there's a dedicate thread for the IMG proposals, so apologies if there is, but in light of the St. Helens / Wakefield tweets yesterday, what's everyone's general thoughts as to what conclusions IMG will take from their study and discussions with club owners, and what recommendations do you think they might make?

My thought's are that they will take aspects from the original merger document put together by Maurice Lindsey 27+ years ago and that future league structures will be given to clubs on a merit/points scoring /vetting system, initially free from relegation for 5 years rather than final league positions which some seem to think is the obvious way forward

I would say points could be scored for the following:

• Financial stability (the more self sustainable *without continued cash input from one person - the higher the points)
• Business plan with details cash flow forecast
• Stadium (both ownership and condition)
• Local population 
• Ladies
• Reserve and youth development
• Saturation  *ie: clubs tapping into the same market, players, sponsorship, spectators etc,)

Sure there are many other points to add, that's just my initial thoughts 

This is just a bit of speculative fun, so please don't take it too seriously

     

Ground criteria.

Junior academies

School holidays junior Rugby League camps

Proper match day marketing and not just a poster in a pub advertising the next home games.

That's just for starters

[JM2010]

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

I'm not sure if there's a dedicate thread for the IMG proposals, so apologies if there is, but in light of the St. Helens / Wakefield tweets yesterday, what's everyone's general thoughts as to what conclusions IMG will take from their study and discussions with club owners, and what recommendations do you think they might make?

My thought's are that they will take aspects from the original merger document put together by Maurice Lindsey 27+ years ago and that future league structures will be given to clubs on a merit/points scoring /vetting system, initially free from relegation for 5 years rather than final league positions which some seem to think is the obvious way forward

I would say points could be scored for the following:

• Financial stability (the more self sustainable *without continued cash input from one person - the higher the points)
• Business plan with details cash flow forecast
• Stadium (both ownership and condition)
• Local population 
• Ladies
• Reserve and youth development
• Saturation  *ie: clubs tapping into the same market, players, sponsorship, spectators etc,)

Sure there are many other points to add, that's just my initial thoughts 

This is just a bit of speculative fun, so please don't take it too seriously

     

In reference to the highlighted bit. Won't be long til the arguments start

[Dallas Mead]

Train station.

[Death to the Rah Rah's]

1 hour ago, The Future is League said:

Ground criteria.

Junior academies

School holidays junior Rugby League camps

Proper match day marketing and not just a poster in a pub advertising the next home games.

That's just for starters

I think marketing is an area the RFL could really have taken a lead in over the last few years, especially for the teams below Super League. In the age of digital marketing, they could have employed a marketing company to develop a range of professionally designed editable templates that lower league clubs could personalise to promote their club in a professional way.

That would save club's considerable expense as well as valuable volunteer hours  

[Tommygilf]

A major issue the RFL have raised with the pro clubs is player insurance. As Union faces lawsuits, League is struggling to find insurers willing to offer cover, and those that are are sending the premiums up 4 fold or more.

This is just one part of the same message that should be going to IMG:

"How do we make the most money and attract the most attention with the assets we currently have?"

And as a further point to that:

"How do we keep on continuing to attract that revenue and attention?"

Both of those are very broad definitions. "Assets we have" particularly is massively open to interpretation.

[Scubby]

I mentioned it on the other thread. The governance of the elite competition is the one major thing they can do.

You need an executive committee with the power to make big decisions. You cannot have 12 member clubs squabbling and voting on every single thing and expect progress.

[Jughead]

I don’t think the structure is near the top of the things that are most important, though I do get the need for a discussion on it due to the TV deal expiring. 

Push for change at Sky, is vital. Channel 4 (and Premier) have raised the bar from the floor and have provided good content that’s interesting and insightful with a good range of different contributors whilst Sky has seemed to get worse with every passing year. Bill Arthur struggles to tell the story and add to the story to create tension, excitement or any other emotive feeling. The lead commentator needs that ability and that’s just never going to be Bill. There’s also far too many people involved. Carney, Brooks, Barrie, Terry, Wilkin, JJB, Arthur and Clarke is too many and certainly nowhere near enough quality. The summarisers are poor, Barrie and Terry are like two half cut men in a pub rambling on and Jon Wells is better but I don’t really know what he’s good at. 

I wouldn’t be against a dedicated social media company working for the sport to create engaging, interesting content that appeals to a broader range of people than we presently do. There’s stuff like Fantasy Rugby League that is criminally under-utilised for a younger audience and while we’re alright at podcasts, I think we need to move a bit more with the times and have a couple of offerings available.

Take governance away from the Super League clubs and don’t allow for them to find their man to replace them. 

[Oxford]

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

I'm not sure if there's a dedicate thread for the IMG proposals

My honest opinion is that we should give up the ghost.

[Cowardly Fan]

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

I think marketing is an area the RFL could really have taken a lead in over the last few years, especially for the teams below Super League. In the age of digital marketing, they could have employed a marketing company to develop a range of professionally designed editable templates that lower league clubs could personalise to promote their club in a professional way.

That would save club's considerable expense as well as valuable volunteer hours  

Almost a decade ago I emailed them a rough plan for an expanded version of this - have a centralised marketing team, to deliver efficiencies in communications, creative and insight for RFL clubs.  Problem for businesses the size of clubs is they can't afford or don't need the expertise full-time so either have to keep it basic or overpay agencies.  There would be significant savings in doing the work for several clubs and they could still have their own marketing plans.  

To be fair they did have a meeting with me and had some plans for something on a more limited scale.  Expect the difficulty will always be getting the clubs to invest and realise commercially they are competing with other forms of entertainment, not each other.  

[GUBRATS]

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

I'm not sure if there's a dedicate thread for the IMG proposals, so apologies if there is, but in light of the St. Helens / Wakefield tweets yesterday, what's everyone's general thoughts as to what conclusions IMG will take from their study and discussions with club owners, and what recommendations do you think they might make?

My thought's are that they will take aspects from the original merger document put together by Maurice Lindsey 27+ years ago and that future league structures will be given to clubs on a merit/points scoring /vetting system, initially free from relegation for 5 years rather than final league positions which some seem to think is the obvious way forward

I would say points could be scored for the following:

• Financial stability (the more self sustainable *without continued cash input from one person - the higher the points)
• Business plan with details cash flow forecast
• Stadium (both ownership and condition)
• Local population 
• Ladies
• Reserve and youth development
• Saturation  *ie: clubs tapping into the same market, players, sponsorship, spectators etc,)

Sure there are many other points to add, that's just my initial thoughts 

This is just a bit of speculative fun, so please don't take it too seriously

     

Why does it matter how many ladies you have ?

[Pie tries]

No.1 International game needs sorting. Rolling four year plan - updated every year. Get a grip of Australia.

Lions tours. Ashes (even if only once every four years). Something we can sell TV rights for.

European ladder, maybe multiple leagues of three with set criteria at each level. Regular, set known years in advance games from Dublin, Cardiff to Serbia. Something for countries to aspire for. Something we can sell TV rights for, even if only eventually.

Super League - and the rest - have a plan for each team. New development teams, satellite clubs, even if only short season summer comps - potential huge for this. Plan for 14 team SL, even if years times come

Get rid of salary cap, replace it with debt limit for each club. If someone wants to spend own money - no debt on club - let them.

Marketing……digital….got to be so much better.

Be far more aggressive with central and local governments. RL is the beating heart of so many (northern) communities- government owes us, we’ve done more than any other sport in terms of community life / cohesion. They owe us - get in their faces. We get minimal help, challenge this big time…use our political MP group properly.

Community….target the millions who have made this country their home, poles, Asians, Ukrainian everyone (bar Russians). Get them engaged and playing TGG. We’ve always been welcoming to anyone and everyone - let’s be brilliant at it…

Massive opportunity with women’s game, across all U.K.

Fill Wembley for CCF - with locals….and same with magic.

Feel free to rip apart, if I’d had more than two minutes I’d have come up with about 100 other ideas.

Do more, massively more…

 

 

Edited July 25, 2022 by Pie tries

[Barley Mow]

8 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Why does it matter how many ladies you have ?

I'll tell you when you're a bit older! 

[GUBRATS]

1 hour ago, Cowardly Fan said:

Almost a decade ago I emailed them a rough plan for an expanded version of this - have a centralised marketing team, to deliver efficiencies in communications, creative and insight for RFL clubs.  Problem for businesses the size of clubs is they can't afford or don't need the expertise full-time so either have to keep it basic or overpay agencies.  There would be significant savings in doing the work for several clubs and they could still have their own marketing plans.  

To be fair they did have a meeting with me and had some plans for something on a more limited scale.  Expect the difficulty will always be getting the clubs to invest and realise commercially they are competing with other forms of entertainment, not each other.  

Posted something similar ( on a more localised basic way ) a decade ago , also tried at the start of licencing to talk to the 20 lower tier clubs to sort out their own collective merchandise supply company , clueless was their response

[dboy]

Can't have gone bust in the last 10 years.

Must have a train station.

Must have a full-sized pitch.

Must have primacy of tenure at home stadium.

Can't base importance on being at a convenient central location for a meeting over a hundred years ago.

Can't be a pit village in a WF postcode.

Must have updated dugouts within the last 2 weeks (Wakey's will be done tomorrow, trust me).

[GeordieSaint]

6 hours ago, Scubby said:

I mentioned it on the other thread. The governance of the elite competition is the one major thing they can do.

You need an executive committee with the power to make big decisions. You cannot have 12 member clubs squabbling and voting on every single thing and expect progress.

Most important issue that’s needs implementing.

[Pulga]

The more I think about it the less hopeful I am anything will change. 

Looking at the NRL and SL and it's clear these are not the same games. While the game was born because of classism, the working class seems to have moved on in most of the world. Super League is basically a peasant's sport. It seems to be like lottery winners. Most gamblers aren't financially literate. That's why nearly every lottery winner ends up dead or completely broke within a few years of winning.

The English game is completely illiterate when it comes to sports/event management. Sponsors buy in and then the money is gone in a short amount of time.

There's no planning, no long term view. I know IMG have been brought in because there is no answers within the game but the game is still populated by those same people.

The sanctity by which a lot of English fans hold P&R at is quite scary. It means the product for broadcasters is never certain. Why would anyone pay for that? 

I don't see any more forward thinking from anyone within the game over there. I think the relationship with IMG will quickly disintegrate.

[Copa]

All matches broadcast. Currently it’s difficult to support a team unless you live in the local area.

[Pulga]

Double post

Edited July 26, 2022 by Pulga

[gingerjon]

4 hours ago, Pulga said:

The more I think about it the less hopeful I am anything will change. 

Looking at the NRL and SL and it's clear these are not the same games. While the game was born because of classism, the working class seems to have moved on in most of the world. Super League is basically a peasant's sport. It seems to be like lottery winners. Most gamblers aren't financially literate. That's why nearly every lottery winner ends up dead or completely broke within a few years of winning.

The English game is completely illiterate when it comes to sports/event management. Sponsors buy in and then the money is gone in a short amount of time.

There's no planning, no long term view. I know IMG have been brought in because there is no answers within the game but the game is still populated by those same people.

The sanctity by which a lot of English fans hold P&R at is quite scary. It means the product for broadcasters is never certain. Why would anyone pay for that? 

I don't see any more forward thinking from anyone within the game over there. I think the relationship with IMG will quickly disintegrate.

We disagree on a lot of your solutions but I think your assessment there of the problems is pretty much spot on.

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Pulga said:

The more I think about it the less hopeful I am anything will change. 

Looking at the NRL and SL and it's clear these are not the same games. While the game was born because of classism, the working class seems to have moved on in most of the world. Super League is basically a peasant's sport. It seems to be like lottery winners. Most gamblers aren't financially literate. That's why nearly every lottery winner ends up dead or completely broke within a few years of winning.

The English game is completely illiterate when it comes to sports/event management. Sponsors buy in and then the money is gone in a short amount of time.

There's no planning, no long term view. I know IMG have been brought in because there is no answers within the game but the game is still populated by those same people.

The sanctity by which a lot of English fans hold P&R at is quite scary. It means the product for broadcasters is never certain. Why would anyone pay for that? 

I don't see any more forward thinking from anyone within the game over there. I think the relationship with IMG will quickly disintegrate.

Wouldn't worry so much. NRL may introduce a pride round next year so there won't be enough players to field 17 teams. I think the talk of Pacific expansion is over now.

[David Dockhouse Host]

11 hours ago, Cowardly Fan said:

Almost a decade ago I emailed them a rough plan for an expanded version of this - have a centralised marketing team, to deliver efficiencies in communications, creative and insight for RFL clubs.  Problem for businesses the size of clubs is they can't afford or don't need the expertise full-time so either have to keep it basic or overpay agencies.  There would be significant savings in doing the work for several clubs and they could still have their own marketing plans.  

To be fair they did have a meeting with me and had some plans for something on a more limited scale.  Expect the difficulty will always be getting the clubs to invest and realise commercially they are competing with other forms of entertainment, not each other.  

Last sentence is spot on