Jump to content

The promoted Championship team.


Recommended Posts

46 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I suspect there are a few that have clubs in top flights based on regions/areas fulfilling that capacity.

But thats not what i asked, you intimated yourself that they're run by clubs.

Are there any structures where the governing bodies appoint coaches and pay for everything in place of the clubs managing talent? The answer will be no as it's a crazy thought experiment that ultimately doesnt serve a purpose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


1 minute ago, Barley Mow said:

So if you take central Yorkshire - that area currently has three academies. As I see it (happy to be corrected if I'm wrong) each of those academies will produce around 3 players each year who go into the senior squad. Maybe a few more than that will go to other clubs as pro or (more likely semi-pro). So around 7 or 8 total who make it each season.

To get those 7 or 8, the clubs have to be able to run a squad for the academy of around 30 players. Although there will be some that are borderline and may or may not make it professionally, there will be kids going into the elite academies at the moment who the coaches know have next to no chance of making it professionally - but they need the numbers to allow the future stars to get a game. Those numbers are then multiplied across all academies.

A lot of the lads who don't make it get put off the sport and don't go back to the community game at all after leaving their academies.

Regional academies would mean that only those with a real chance of succeeding would be taken on. Hopefully that would mean more of the rest stay within the community game, but it would also increase the playing standard of the academy competition.

If there were a bumper crop of quality prospects in central Yorks one year and not enough places for them all, then someone not taken on there could be offered to neighbouring area academies.

On your second point, a regional academy system would give all clubs an equal opportunity of signing the best young players - on leaving the academy, every player would be a free agent and any club could approach them.

By contrast, at the moment the RFL decides which clubs can have an elite academy and are therefore worthy to have the advantage of being more competitive in under the salary cap with the ability to be better by promoting from within. Then they provide funding for them to have those advantages, at the expense of those clubs who weren't considered worthy!

The current structure is convoluted lunacy. Every club should be mandated to run an academy/under 18s. To continue the example, that would be Leeds, Bradford, Huddersfield, Keighley, Dewsbury. Fev, Cas, Wakey, Batley.  If you can't run an academy, then you shouldnt be a club in the pyramid.

You mention yourself that a lot of lads who dont make it, often leave the game, but you want to increase that number by diluting the 25 per squad for the clubs above into 1 regional squad of 30. It's madness.

You then talk about offering players to a different region? Which region? What if that region is better? Again, you're effectively writing players off at 16-18.

Again, who coaches these players? Who provides all the facilities that they need? You want the RFL to manage this? is this a joke? Who then manages that at the RFL from a standards perspective etc etc etc. At the moment, the good clubs are in the communities as a way of attracting and developing talent, yet you want to take that away from them. It's madness i tell thi.

Tell me where this model works in any other sport

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, MattSantos said:

The current structure is convoluted lunacy. Every club should be mandated to run an academy/under 18s. To continue the example, that would be Leeds, Bradford, Huddersfield, Keighley, Dewsbury. Fev, Cas, Wakey, Batley.  If you can't run an academy, then you shouldnt be a club in the pyramid.

You mention yourself that a lot of lads who dont make it, often leave the game, but you want to increase that number by diluting the 25 per squad for the clubs above into 1 regional squad of 30. It's madness.

You then talk about offering players to a different region? Which region? What if that region is better? Again, you're effectively writing players off at 16-18.

Again, who coaches these players? Who provides all the facilities that they need? You want the RFL to manage this? is this a joke? Who then manages that at the RFL from a standards perspective etc etc etc. At the moment, the good clubs are in the communities as a way of attracting and developing talent, yet you want to take that away from them. It's madness i tell thi.

Tell me where this model works in any other sport

I seem to be on this train on my own, perhaps I'm turning into one of those people who posts crazy league structure threads and think they are reasonable suggestions! I'll go and have a lay down in a dark room and reset.

What I will say about the current academy system though is that it gives an advantage to some Super League clubs over others and to some Championship clubs over others. If we are leaving academies with the clubs, then I agree that clubs within the same division need to be treaded equally.

I don't think we could mandate academies at all 33 English pro/semi-pro clubs - most don't apply for licences because they couldn't afford to run them and the number of players for academies at every club without destroying the community game definately doesn't exist.

But there should certainly be a level playing field, whether that is:

1. Any club can have an elite academy but they get no funding from RFL.

2. All Super League clubs must have an elite academy and nobody else can.

The issues with these that I highlighted earlier would need resolving though.

 

 

 

 

... I'd still prefer regional academies though 😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, MattSantos said:

But thats not what i asked, you intimated yourself that they're run by clubs.

Are there any structures where the governing bodies appoint coaches and pay for everything in place of the clubs managing talent? The answer will be no as it's a crazy thought experiment that ultimately doesnt serve a purpose.

If the ends are the same, what is the qualitative difference?

Whilst the governing body doesn't directly run the given academies, they certainly have oversight and are the one's who accredit them to the level they are at. In RL terms that could mean only Huddersfield and Leeds having an academy in West Yorkshire, only Warrington in Cheshire, FC in Hull. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Barley Mow said:

 

What I will say about the current academy system though is that it gives an advantage to some Super League clubs over others and to some Championship clubs over others. If we are leaving academies with the clubs, then I agree that clubs within the same division need to be treaded equally.

I don't think we could mandate academies at all 33 English pro/semi-pro clubs - most don't apply for licences because they couldn't afford to run them and the number of players for academies at every club without destroying the community game definately doesn't exist.

But there should certainly be a level playing field, whether that is:

1. Any club can have an elite academy but they get no funding from RFL.

2. All Super League clubs must have an elite academy and nobody else can.

The issues with these that I highlighted earlier would need resolving though.

 

 

 

 

... I'd still prefer regional academies though 😉

Absolutely agree that the current system is unfair and it should be the same across all leagues.

I dont think we can mandate it across all clubs, hence i would have a feeder system. To get into the main structure, you 100% should have an academy / youth set up.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

If the ends are the same, what is the qualitative difference?

Whilst the governing body doesn't directly run the given academies, they certainly have oversight and are the one's who accredit them to the level they are at. In RL terms that could mean only Huddersfield and Leeds having an academy in West Yorkshire, only Warrington in Cheshire, FC in Hull. 

What is the end? They're not the same...

They absolutely should have oversight and that should be primarily about protection for athletes, quality of delivery etc. If grading is the way forward, then the RFL should be supporting clubs on how to improve, nit punishing / revoking services.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

28 minutes ago, Barley Mow said:

I seem to be on this train on my own, perhaps I'm turning into one of those people who posts crazy league structure threads and think they are reasonable suggestions! I'll go and have a lay down in a dark room and reset.

What I will say about the current academy system though is that it gives an advantage to some Super League clubs over others and to some Championship clubs over others. If we are leaving academies with the clubs, then I agree that clubs within the same division need to be treaded equally.

I don't think we could mandate academies at all 33 English pro/semi-pro clubs - most don't apply for licences because they couldn't afford to run them and the number of players for academies at every club without destroying the community game definately doesn't exist.

But there should certainly be a level playing field, whether that is:

1. Any club can have an elite academy but they get no funding from RFL.

2. All Super League clubs must have an elite academy and nobody else can.

The issues with these that I highlighted earlier would need resolving though.

 

 

 

 

... I'd still prefer regional academies though 😉

Your argument boils down to "Either all restaurants must be a michelin starred restaurant (but not charge double for the privilege) or all french restaurants must have a star". 

The reality is all clubs can have an academy now, and with the correct commitment and doing (not just saying this is what were going to do with a pot of money that we say is over there) get recognised as an elite academy. The fact that some clubs have been granted elite status, but don't have the development output of Saints/Wigan/Leeds shows that we will never have a truly "fair" system. I would argue that it isnt "fair" that a club can put next to no effort into running an academy, and yet get the same funding as those teams that do take it seriously. 

Perhaps a good way to look at this instead would be rather than the RFL funding academies granted elite status, instead when a player is selected for England their is a kick back for the academy which developed them ? 

Edited by Magic Superbeetle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, MattSantos said:

What is the end? They're not the same...

They absolutely should have oversight and that should be primarily about protection for athletes, quality of delivery etc. If grading is the way forward, then the RFL should be supporting clubs on how to improve, nit punishing / revoking services.

 

 

The end is an academy system that produces players whilst not overmining/decimating the amateur game in a given area. That is to say having the appropriate number of academies to player levels (in a given region).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

The end is an academy system that produces players whilst not overmining/decimating the amateur game in a given area. That is to say having the appropriate number of academies to player levels (in a given region).

Who is to say what that appropriate number is? Can't we just let market forces dictate and leave it to the clubs in that region to work with amateur clubs as everyone sees fit?

I know this is a forum and people like to bang on, but it shouldn't be that difficult. The current structure, as i understand it is a complete farce. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MattSantos said:

Who is to say what that appropriate number is? Can't we just let market forces dictate and leave it to the clubs in that region to work with amateur clubs as everyone sees fit?

I know this is a forum and people like to bang on, but it shouldn't be that difficult. The current structure, as i understand it is a complete farce. 

The RFL are the people to say what that number is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

I suspect there are a few that have clubs in top flights based on regions/areas fulfilling that capacity.

Cricket isn't too far off, although obviously their top flight teams are regionally based anyway, but look at the university centres of excellence as an example - the ECB funds six regional centres of excellence to develop pro cricketers for all of the counties - Loughborough, Oxford (mostly Oxford Brookes players rather than Oxford University), Cambridge, Durham, Leeds/Bradford etc. 

Football actually has an interesting structure in that although it is individual club based, the FA assigns areas that don't have a pro team to other clubs. So for example, Leyton Orient are responsible for North Essex.

My concern with having one over-arching structure per region is that players who don't make it on the say so of one academy coach get lost to the game without an obvious alternative. If you take the argument that Widnes academy was picking up the players that Saints, Wigan, Warrington didn't want at age 16 (not sure that's entirely true, but let's assume it was), the fact that we have ~40 current pro players who came out of Widnes Academy means that providing a second chance to those players worked out pretty well. I think I saw something that said 5 or 6 out of the 21-man squads for the GF were ex Widnes academy.

A draft is obviously a complete non-starter in terms of UK employment law.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Welshleaguelover said:

Double edged sword.

It would be great for Batley to beat Leigh. Beaumont's meltdown would be wonderful.

But Batley don't have the infrastructure to be in Super League and, as other posters have already mentioned, don't aspire to be in Super League either.

Anyway, I'm expecting an easy win for Leigh but would love an upset.

But give them 1.5 million in central funding and a year to have a go , get new sponsors etc and I suspect they will have alot more money the season after in the champ. If they win they go up and Wakey breath a sigh of relief. Leigh are going to win comfortably though and spend the cap. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 25/09/2022 at 17:17, Barley Mow said:

I'd be in favour of RLF run regional academies. I can't speak for people you are questioning, but I'd see it working like this:

- Academies run by the RFL instead of clubs - This means there is no 'favouring' some clubs by having academy licences and funding and wage cap deductions when other clubs don't.

- Regional basis - Est Yorks, Central Yorks, Wst York, Est Lancs, Wst Lancs, Northern (based around Carlisle/Penrith to cater for Cumbria & North East), South of England, Midlands. With the RFL now only being directly responsible for England this doesn't include Wales, etc but I'd be happy to see a Wales academy in if WRL wanted to.

 - Eight academies ensures that the number of players who typically currently get taken on as pro/semi-pros would get a place, but would reduce the numbers taken out of the community game to make up numbers with no prospect of making it professionally, thereby helping to sustain the community game as well and improving standards within the academies overall.

- Academies to play each other home and away once - 14 matches. This year academies played 13 regular season matches each.

- RFL to employ the coaches, etc.

- Each academy assigned a geographic boundary to their area. They can take on players currently living, playing or being educated in their area. If that left a decent prospect without an academy place because his 'area' was particularly strong that year, then another academy could sign them on the agreement of his home area.

- On leaving the academy, players are able to sign with any club as a free agent. No draft, I don't think it works in a British context.

- Academies' funding - RFL would use the funds they currently give to the licenced academies, plus either an increased share of TV money (clubs to take a reduction, but those currently with licences would no longer be spending money on academies) or clubs pay a fee to the academies upon signing a player they have trained.

I couldn't agree more. The current system rigs the Game competitively and is one of the reasons why each seasons sees the same names triumph.

With reduced finances, working together is fiscally sensible, but would raise standards.

  • 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...