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

[tim2]

1 hour ago, Derwent Parker said:

Before Cornwall come along the RFL were happy to run League one with  10 teams in - which was 18 games, they never bothered how that would affect their finances?

And how will that work out? They probably thought that slashing their funding meant they wouldn't be able to afford the travel costs of more games.

Edited August 24, 2022 by tim2

[tim2]

37 minutes ago, The storm said:

2x10 would be the end of the sport. 

 

Totally meaninglesd serving a few rich clubs only

It also shuts up a lot of gobby part-time clubs who want a bit of that lovely Super league money.

[Derwent Parker]

33 minutes ago, The storm said:

2x10 would be the end of the sport. 

 

Totally meaninglesd serving a few rich clubs only

However !!

If they still funded the other teams???

Because there is a chance IMG would insist giving the £75k back to L1 - as they may not be as greedy as the SL teams?

2 x 10 would leave 16/17 teams in L1 which is a full fixture list 30 games or 32 - which is not a killer as L1 dont play many cup games?

That is as it used to be and as it should be.

But I cant see that happening as SG teams will be hoping to get the remaining £20K per team off the L1 clubs?

[Derwent Parker]

3 minutes ago, tim2 said:

And how did that work out?

Its #### - but it didn't stop them doing it?

[tim2]

7 minutes ago, Derwent Parker said:

Its #### - but it didn't stop them doing it?

One of a series of poor decisions affecting smaller clubs dating back to... no, can't think of a date when they cared.

[Derwent Parker]

9 minutes ago, tim2 said:

One of a series of poor decisions affecting smaller clubs dating back to... no, can't think of a date when they cared.

That would be when the Sky money came in

[tim2]

5 minutes ago, Derwent Parker said:

That would be when the Sky money came in

Clubs disappeared, and initiatives were stunted, long before that.

[gingerjon]

1 minute ago, tim2 said:

Clubs disappeared, and initiatives were stunted, long before that.

The killing off of Mansfield/Nottingham was before Sky, for example.

[Derwent Parker]

7 minutes ago, tim2 said:

Clubs disappeared, and initiatives were stunted, long before that.

Yes but back then teams came and went due to their own cause and circumstances.

What we have her is 12 teams out of the 37 being kept in the top league because they are each given almost £2Million each that is 1.8Million more each than each the bottom 11 teams.

Any 2 teams in the top 12 get about the same as the whole of the other 25 teams added together.

That's a disgrace. - and that is why the game is a mess.

Back, pre sky money Wigan and Widnes etc had great teams but they did that on their own merit with their own backers - they were not paid £2M per season to stay there.

[Big Picture]

4 hours ago, steve oates said:

I do agree wholeheartedly on your last sentence 100% bang on.

You say "No possible structure involving teams in smallish, unfashionable, economically disadvantaged towns will ever be able to generate the revenues needed and that's just the way it is"

My real world view is that No possible structure involving towns and city's outside the unfashionable, economicaly disadvantaged M62 will be able to generate the revenues (or produce the players needed) either. 

Why do you consistently push for RL clubs in big towns and cities where Rugby Union and soccer are king?

We can only get investment from people who want to invest and they are all from our smallish, unfashionable, economically disadvantaged towns, to which they have a connection.  Even the London owner is from Oldham.....

In other words then, you seem to think that nothing can generate the revenues the game needs to compete with other sports and have a future and it's simply a question of managing the decline until (as John Kear suggested might happen in an interview a few years ago now) pro RL ceases to exist in Britain altogether.

I'm well aware that within the present setup and under the constraints of that setup and its small time outlook and practices, only persons with a connection to the smallish, unfashionable, economically disadvantaged towns and their small time clubs are interested in investing.  In the case of Warrington, we've seen that even a club owned by someone with a background in the entertainment business struggles to extend its reach beyond the limited demographic of its traditional followers.  Something else is clearly needed.

You mistake me it you think I want to see "RL" clubs in big cities, I've come to understand that the name Rugby League is also part of the game's problem because outsiders either don't even know that another version of rugby exists or they look down on RL because they perceive it as a small time, downmarket regional game with limited appeal and its offerings (both in the club game and Internationals) conform to that perception.  I agree with the other forum members who've suggested that the game needs a new name to get around that problem.

[tim2]

1 hour ago, gingerjon said:

The killing off of Mansfield/Nottingham was before Sky, for example.

Nottingham, Chorley and Blackpool were all "relegated" in 1993.

Mansfield actually beat Wakefield in their first game.

[gogledd]

2 hours ago, tim2 said:

And how will that work out? They probably thought that slashing their funding meant they wouldn't be able to afford the travel costs of more games.

the RFL used to pay League 1 central funding AND travel expenses. Not only have they slashed central funding but have also stopped travel expenses which clubs now have to find from elsewhere. I'm amazed that a League 1 team hasn't folded this year.

[Cougarmaniac]

I increasingly believe the SL should be separated from the Champs/L1 on a straight pro/semi-pro split. Hand out licences if you must. Dabble with expansion if you must. But don't neglect the semi-pro clubs who need an independent, and above all, fair competition with a tangible reward. Why can't the Champs/L1 emulate the NCL - six different winners in the last six completed seasons, and I don't see anyone from West Hull bemoaning that the fact that their imminent title victory is tarnished by not being able to earn promotion to mix with the might of Cornwall and West Wales next season. Develop and brand the semi-pro second-tier as a stand-alone entity, and let the SL, and any aspirations thereof, look after itself.

[gogledd]

16 minutes ago, Cougarmaniac said:

I increasingly believe the SL should be separated from the Champs/L1 on a straight pro/semi-pro split. Hand out licences if you must. Dabble with expansion if you must. But don't neglect the semi-pro clubs who need an independent, and above all, fair competition with a tangible reward. Why can't the Champs/L1 emulate the NCL - six different winners in the last six completed seasons, and I don't see anyone from West Hull bemoaning that the fact that their imminent title victory is tarnished by not being able to earn promotion to mix with the might of Cornwall and West Wales next season. Develop and brand the semi-pro second-tier as a stand-alone entity, and let the SL, and any aspirations thereof, look after itself.

First, Congratulations to Cougars winning League 1 in fine style this season. Looking forward to our visit on Sunday.

Now your in Championship and hopefully your success continues and you remain there in 2023, but if you continually improve wouldn't you want a shot at Super League?

 

[Gerrumonside ref]

I wish that survey had more emphasis on how we can get more women and families to attend again as that to me was RL’s USP against football/soccer.  It was a safer, more family friendly zone.  

Cheap tickets/boozy lads might put some money in the coffers and generate a shouty atmosphere, but I think it also puts off families and women from attending in the numbers they once did which used to help with general crowd behaviour (obviously there’ll always been examples of drunken people of all sexes).  Be great if we could have a balance.

Facilities at grounds needs to match expectations found at other grounds too at other sporting events.

Another factor that strikes me when comparing US sport to ours is that to avoid mass drunken behaviour, the idea of eating at baseball, basketball, NFL etc is all part of the experience.  It’s not a silver bullet, but serving really great food (not necessarily burgers/hot dogs) might encourage fans to eat it and temper the effects of the drink.

Seems to me that we are living in a time when liking sport as a woman has never been more popular.  We often use populations on these threads and talk about families, but we do seem to ignore sometimes the female fan in those projections, lapsed female fan or prospective female fan.  I just hope IMG don’t.

I write this after speaking to a couple of dispirited ex fans, but I reckon there might be a general picture too.

 

 

 

 

[Big Picture]

44 minutes ago, Cougarmaniac said:

I increasingly believe the SL should be separated from the Champs/L1 on a straight pro/semi-pro split. Hand out licences if you must. Dabble with expansion if you must. But don't neglect the semi-pro clubs who need an independent, and above all, fair competition with a tangible reward. Why can't the Champs/L1 emulate the NCL - six different winners in the last six completed seasons, and I don't see anyone from West Hull bemoaning that the fact that their imminent title victory is tarnished by not being able to earn promotion to mix with the might of Cornwall and West Wales next season. Develop and brand the semi-pro second-tier as a stand-alone entity, and let the SL, and any aspirations thereof, look after itself.

There does need to be a split of that sort, but not between any of the tiers in the current structure.  The split needs to be between a whole new entity and the entirety of the current structure, the small clubs in SL whose management worries about "away fans" and the like simply don't have the stature necessary to lift the game out of the mess it's in now.

[ATLANTISMAN]

The survey is embarrassing and totally pointless same old questions sadly:( Nothing will change.

In reality we need a  10 team Super League  call it what you want personally i would do a deal to license the NRL brand NRL Europe (Vibrant Championship  league underneath) New franchise applications every 3/5 years.

* 18 matches (Quality ones) + 1 extra match with a draw Home team if they win only get 1 point away team 2 (Equals things up) 

 * Play offs and Final

 * NRL v NRL Europe Origin match every year

* All franchises to run Academy Women's and Wheelchair

* Tests set in stone after the Grand Final

Cost to get this going around 500 Million for security clubs to receive 5 years upfront of 25 Million each

* 6 teams from the traditional areas + Franchise  in London + Catalans Dragons and Toulouse + 1 more 

* Draft 

 

Before you all fall off your stools the NY Giants is currently valued at 4.85 Billion US$ for a serious American investor this is peanuts.

 

The money is out there just needs sourcing.

 

Watch the game fly after this lets hope it happens before we all end up in a lead box miserable as hell drinking warm Tetley's:)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Death to the Rah Rah's]

If the overall view of the professional game is reflected in this thread, then IMG have one hell of a job to try and rebuild the credibility of sport within its own supporter base before they even try to target new supporters!

I personally have never felt as disillusioned with the game as I do at present.

I have zero confidence in the people running the game, and I include the community game reps in that statement as the amateur game is also on its backside, with little chance of anything improving in the near future.

The RL World Cup hasn't caught my imagination and I think they will continue to struggle to sell tickets for the tournament. Let's be honest, the marketing has been nothing short of pitiful and yet another example of the RFL taking supporters for granted and just expecting them to 'turn up' on mass for big games.

As a sport we have become used to buying 'cheap' tickets for big matches and as a result they are now struggling to sell tickets at what is probably their true market value as the RFL have 'cheapened' the sport with their previous marketing strategy of selling it 'on the cheap'.

The best recommendation IMG could make is to get rid of the RFL hierarchy and replace them with some fresh experienced sports administrators that know what they are doing.

The likes of Rimmer & Co need to go - and need to go now!

If we want an even competition then we have to even out the distribution of central funding.

Funding should be given to clubs for infrastructure, not final league positions.

There should be an annual club 'health check' and assessment with points given for each area ie: commercial, reserve, structures etc. and central funding paid on that basis.

Reserve rugby should be manditory for professional clubs and a contribution to travelling expenses for coach travel should come from central funds on a mileage basis - the likes of the Cumbrian, Welsh and Cornwall clubs should be given help with travelling as they do more miles annually than their Lancs and Yorkshire counterparts which eats into their budgets and makes them all less competitive 

[RigbyLuger]

10 hours ago, Man of Kent said:

It should be welcomed that our great sport consults fans like this but, unless the results of the survey are published, they could totally ignore the responses for all we know. 

Has the RFL ever published survey results before?

Did Rugby League LIVE release theirs earlier this season come to think of it?

Edited August 24, 2022 by RigbyLuger

[Agbrigg]

having done the survey and read all the responses there is no doubt in my mind its as follows

2 x 10

revamped CC with group structure

A midi season 100 type City comp. Think initially this will be 4 team mini league consisting of these 4 cities

Leeds, Wigan, St Helens and Warrington.   (sorry Hull, unless you merge of course)

[M j M]

4 minutes ago, Agbrigg said:

having done the survey and read all the responses there is no doubt in my mind its as follows

2 x 10

revamped CC with group structure

A midi season 100 type City comp. Think initially this will be 4 team mini league consisting of these 4 cities

Leeds, Wigan, St Helens and Warrington.   (sorry Hull, unless you merge of course)

Who do they think are going to be watching any of these things?

[Agbrigg]

8 minutes ago, M j M said:

Who do they think are going to be watching any of these things?

This is RL, that gets worked out later

[Man of Kent]

A summer 9s comp could be quite good and would surely be on terrestrial TV.

It would be a fascinating talking point as rivals take the field together, ie Saints & Wigan, the Hull clubs. 

Headingley, Warrington, Hull KR to host?

[Dave T]

4 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

A summer 9s comp could be quite good and would surely be on terrestrial TV.

It would be a fascinating talking point as rivals take the field together, ie Saints & Wigan, the Hull clubs. 

Headingley, Warrington, Hull KR to host?

I think the problem comes when it becomes clear that people don't really care that much about 9's. 

I must admit,  if we are going to try and package a new product,  like The Hundred,  I think there may be something in an adapted game, lasting maybe 30 minutes,  mens and womens,  combined scores or something. It may sound silly,  but then so do most cricket adapted versions if yiu actually read the rules. 

Of course,  I'm not convinced following cricket is the way to go,  but there may be something there. 

[Man of Kent]

31 minutes ago, Agbrigg said:

having done the survey and read all the responses there is no doubt in my mind its as follows

2 x 10

revamped CC with group structure

A midi season 100 type City comp. Think initially this will be 4 team mini league consisting of these 4 cities

Leeds, Wigan, St Helens and Warrington.   (sorry Hull, unless you merge of course)

Not sure you’ve thought it through, chief. These would be very short matches so you’d need more than four teams to make it an event.