Get them in Super League

[gingerjon]

9 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

There was a massive backlash to taking the licences away from the 3 you mention, the RFL and this illustrious commitee who had worked so tirelessly to come up with the 10 licences they awarded then tried to substansiate in a lengthy press release why they had done so, receiving the criticism they immediately said OK we were wrong, they didn't stand their ground and argue their case

So there was an initial award, then an appeals process, then some joint working and, at the end of that, three clubs who had engaged with the RFL were awarded licences subject to review (taking the total to 13 and including some who are closer than Wigan and Leigh).

[Harry Stottle]

1 minute ago, The storm said:

Im the biggest critic of my club

But i was still there yesterday with my dad,cousin and 2 nieces

And widnes born players in our squad are pretty evident to see

In '19 Leigh had over 10 local born lads in the squad, but alas it was a system that would bear no fruit, I applaud Widnes for doing it but is it because Widnes can't afford any other way?

[The storm]

2 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

In '19 Leigh had over 10 local born lads in the squad, but alas it was a system that would bear no fruit, I applaud Widnes for doing it but is it because Widnes can't afford any other way?

We cant

We have no rich benefactor yet

But one day it will surely happen. 

But our amature teams still produce harry smith and lewis dodd and danny richardson so the talent is here

[Harry Stottle]

1 minute ago, gingerjon said:

So there was an initial award, then an appeals process, then some joint working and, at the end of that, three clubs who had engaged with the RFL were awarded licences subject to review (taking the total to 13 and including some who are closer than Wigan and Leigh).

OK Hull and HKR are in close proximity then 50 miles from the next club with a licenced academy, Leigh have Wigan 7 miles, Warrington 10 miles and Saints 13 miles all of who do regular shopping in Leigh, it will take a great deal of convincing me that those avenues were kept open purposefully by denying Leigh a licence.

[Man of Kent]

If IMG is interested in turning Super League into a licensed comp a la Euro League basketball, London, Newcastle and Bradford are good candidates to be 'associate clubs' with short-term licenses (as opposed to long-term licences for the likes of Leeds, Saints, Wigan et al)

[Jughead]

3 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

If IMG is interested in turning Super League into a licensed comp a la Euro League basketball, London, Newcastle and Bradford are good candidates to be 'associate clubs' with short-term licenses (as opposed to long-term licences for the likes of Leeds, Saints, Wigan et al)

Based on what, exactly?

Theres a handful of clubs better equipped than those three. 

[Harry Stottle]

19 minutes ago, Jughead said:

Based on what, exactly?

Theres a handful of clubs better equipped than those three. 

Aye, but those 3 have large populations, now the thing is can 2 of them get any through the gates and would the third one be able to replicate it's standing as of 15/16 years ago.

[Cerulean]

“Getting them in Super League” is probably a worthwhile objective. Super League is a tired looking organisation: the pinnacle of Northern Hemisphere rugby league remains Wigan v Saint Helens, Warrington v Leeds, Hull v Hull KR. It’s looking tedious and it needs revitalising.

But:

History and common sense observation tells us that any new team acquiring a place in Super League will only be successful and remain successful if they are successful on the field, and win most of their games. The initial 10,000 crowd will dwindle quickly as losses mount up. In the search for a decent share of leisure spending, in these times when almost anything is available, it  is probably not going to look attractive belonging to an organisation where the highlight of your activity is a visit of three or four biggish names each year. The enthusiasm of the backers will fade as the money runs out. This has all happened before.

The only way for a new team to do well, on a long term basis, is for it to be a very good and successful team for a long time. I suspect the only way for this to happen is for Super League/ RFL to fully back, support, sponsor and assist the new team, to any extent it can, even by adjusting funding, salary cap, selective fixture timing, and every other opportunity, to just about ensure its success. This should always have been done with London. Even now, it would only work for one team at a time: a full decade, probably, for two new teams.

Is there enthusiasm for such an approach among the few who have hold of the power?

[dkw]

Getting any club into SL at the moment is completely worthless while "SL" is not willing or competent enough to help these clubs to become a worthy and useful addition. 

[Loiner]

16 hours ago, daz39 said:

A few weeks ago on here and on RL forums all over there was a massive clamour to expand the geography of Super League by adding teams from various cities around the country, among them Newcastle, Bradford and York were touted as perfect replacement clubs and possible saving graces of our dying game....

Fast forward a couple of months and we now see one of these teams shipping 100 points today, another getting hammered 3 weeks running while now announcing they are going part time, and the other continuing to be a basket case of a club with a handful of diehard fans still offering support.

Do those who offered that opinion previously still stand by it or has reality/normality kicked in? 

I've nothing against 2 of those clubs at all so bear them no malice, just simply interested to see if those who almost demanded they be put into Super League still hold the same thoughts?

Please enlighten us on which one you do have a problem with? Fwiw it should be a 14 team super league and get rid of the ridiculous loop fixtures. 

[sweaty craiq]

10 minutes ago, dkw said:

Getting any club into SL at the moment is completely worthless while "SL" is not willing or competent enough to help these clubs to become a worthy and useful addition. 

To have a chance you need to be able to throw a million at it in the Champ and recruit on the basis of being “certs” for promotion when players are free to talk and put the money in front of them ps there are no certs in sport. If we go up we will have the non feds settled, will have kept the core Feds from this season and already signed the vast majority from SL already, a couple more to come and unearth I rough diamond or two from the Championship. Second bottom is a result.

[The Future is League]

14 hours ago, DEANO said:

Don’t forget that Leigh as good as thy are aren’t allowed in sl with their current squad

Massive rebuild will be required by them if they win the Championship grand final, and all the better players will be signed up by then

[PEANUT HEAD]

4 hours ago, gingerjon said:

That doesn't include Leigh who don't have a top tier academy because they failed the criteria.

What criteria is that it seems very fluid to me, leigh and surrounding ares is an hot bed of amateur RL yet london can have an academy, is the criteria that you cant have an academy because the surrounding SL clubs may not get the pick of the best young talent. 

[Man of Kent]

1 hour ago, Jughead said:

Based on what, exactly?

Theres a handful of clubs better equipped than those three. 

They all have elite academies, which in the case of London and Newcastle have strategic importance by dint of expanding the gene pool.

[Jughead]

16 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

They all have elite academies, which in the case of London and Newcastle have strategic importance by dint of expanding the gene pool.

Are both part-time clubs with no assets in front of ever decreasing crowds and onfield poor performers. 

[Man of Kent]

4 minutes ago, Jughead said:

Are both part-time clubs with no assets in front of ever decreasing crowds and onfield poor performers. 

That's why you'd give them a short-term license. They are worth a go due to strategic importance, but if they fail to meet certain criteria after a set period, boot them out and let someone else have a go.

[Jughead]

1 minute ago, Man of Kent said:

That's why you'd give them a short-term license. They are worth a go due to strategic importance, but if they fail to meet certain criteria after a set period, boot them out and let someone else have a go.

An undisclosed length “short term licence” is unlikely to yield any major changes at any club with the threat of such licence being rescinded and finances changing dramatically. 

[Big Picture]

1 hour ago, Cerulean said:

“Getting them in Super League” is probably a worthwhile objective. Super League is a tired looking organisation: the pinnacle of Northern Hemisphere rugby league remains Wigan v Saint Helens, Warrington v Leeds, Hull v Hull KR. It’s looking tedious and it needs revitalising.

But:

History and common sense observation tells us that any new team acquiring a place in Super League will only be successful and remain successful if they are successful on the field, and win most of their games. The initial 10,000 crowd will dwindle quickly as losses mount up. In the search for a decent share of leisure spending, in these times when almost anything is available, it  is probably not going to look attractive belonging to an organisation where the highlight of your activity is a visit of three or four biggish names each year. The enthusiasm of the backers will fade as the money runs out. This has all happened before.

The only way for a new team to do well, on a long term basis, is for it to be a very good and successful team for a long time. I suspect the only way for this to happen is for Super League/ RFL to fully back, support, sponsor and assist the new team, to any extent it can, even by adjusting funding, salary cap, selective fixture timing, and every other opportunity, to just about ensure its success. This should always have been done with London. Even now, it would only work for one team at a time: a full decade, probably, for two new teams.

Is there enthusiasm for such an approach among the few who have hold of the power?

There are two problems with what you laid out there.

1. The SL/RFL is skint and simply can't afford any other approach than the one they've tried and failed before, and even if they could afford it there would be too much opposition from other clubs and their fans.  Even the NRL doesn't give new franchises the level of support they ought to get, as can be seen by Redcliffe's struggles to put a competitive team together for when they start play.

2. If Wigan vs Saint Helens, Warrington vs Leeds, Hull vs Hull KR are tedious, how would London vs Wigan, London vs Saint Helens, London vs Warrington, London vs Leeds, London vs Hull or London vs Hull KR be any less tedious in the eyes of Londoners which after all is what would determine whether it would succeed?

2 hours ago, Man of Kent said:

If IMG is interested in turning Super League into a licensed comp a la Euro League basketball, London, Newcastle and Bradford are good candidates to be 'associate clubs' with short-term licenses (as opposed to long-term licences for the likes of Leeds, Saints, Wigan et al)

The problem IMG would face there is that none of the clubs would really deserve a long term license if meaningful criteria were applied, they'd likely all fall short of that criteria.

[RigbyLuger]

5 hours ago, steve oates said:

London and Newcastle sadly don't have the talent for an academy and the reduction in kids playing where few play anyway makes it a waste of time and money and it's probably no fun for the kids and parents.

People should actually look at the academy league and see where London and Newcastle are.........

Massively adrift...

Leeds have three players from the NE in their squad. Women like, but still.

[RigbyLuger]

2 hours ago, Cerulean said:

“Getting them in Super League” is probably a worthwhile objective. Super League is a tired looking organisation: the pinnacle of Northern Hemisphere rugby league remains Wigan v Saint Helens, Warrington v Leeds, Hull v Hull KR. It’s looking tedious and it needs revitalising.

 

Regardless of what I think, does anyone say the same about the staleness of the union top division?

[David Shepherd]

17 minutes ago, RigbyLuger said:

Regardless of what I think, does anyone say the same about the staleness of the union top division?

They're used to being bored

[Dallas Mead]

15 hours ago, Number 16 said:

Leigh will be a fantastic addition to SL.

A well run, if small, club. 

They'll add to SL's footprint across the UK.

Excellent Academy system.

Strengthen the attraction of SL to national broadcasters and sponsors.

What's not to love.

“They'll add to SL's footprint across the UK.”

Say what now?

[Man of Kent]

37 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

 

The problem IMG would face there is that none of the clubs would really deserve a long term license if meaningful criteria were applied, they'd likely all fall short of that criteria.

 

Leeds, Saints and Wigan would fall short of long-term licence criteria? What?!

[LeytherRob]

1 hour ago, The Future is League said:

Massive rebuild will be required by them if they win the Championship grand final, and all the better players will be signed up by then

Would be the case if we waited til then to start recruiting, but recruitment for SL 23 has been underway since April/May. New players just can't/won't be announced until conclusion of the season

[Big Picture]

5 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

Leeds, Saints and Wigan would fall short of long-term licence criteria? What?!

If the criteria included being solvent and not dependent on their owners covering operating losses, more than likely.