Jump to content

IMG - Vote on Wednesday


gingerjon
 Share

Recommended Posts

I don’t think there are enough letters in the Alphabet to reflect the grading the Broncos would get currently.

I assumed the reference to London was in terms of targeting an increase in the fan base here, and not about having a competitive team present in SL, which as we know would cost many millions over many many years to achieve.

Maybe Magic weekend could head to London as part of that strategy?

personally im not keen on a complete name change. I think the challenge is to take what we have and make it the most recognisable. Though I’d be happy with a return to “Rugby Super League”.

Edited by EastLondonMike
  • Like 2

Newham Dockers - Champions 2013. Rugby League For East London. 100% Cockney Rugby League!

Twitter: @NewhamDockersRL - Get following!

www.newhamdockers.co.uk

Link to comment
Share on other sites


2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

They lacked bottle last time and gave too much benefit of the doubt to the existing clubs imho. But I think a large part of that was that they didn't rate the clubs pushing for their spots. 

So they were biased ? , And you don't think that will happen again ? , If it is an ' added value ' only decision , then geography will again enter their criteria , is that fair ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GUBRATS said:

So they were biased ? , And you don't think that will happen again ? , If it is an ' added value ' only decision , then geography will again enter their criteria , is that fair ? 

To be honest GUBRATS, you are making up your own points that don't relate to mine. Your arguments are dishonest here as you are stating things I haven't said, or believe. 

Happy to discuss it again when you aren't just being awkward because you are angry. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dave T said:

To be honest GUBRATS, you are making up your own points that don't relate to mine. Your arguments are dishonest here as you are stating things I haven't said, or believe. 

Happy to discuss it again when you aren't just being awkward because you are angry. 

Not angry , just disappointed , I don't recall the sport growing last time , and can't see where it will grow with the same thing this time 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Not angry , just disappointed , I don't recall the sport growing last time , and can't see where it will grow with the same thing this time 

These things are complicated. 

You know my view, I'm not massively fussed about what structure we have, I think the other things are probably more important, but if people are going to highlight structures as a success or failure, then it is hard to ignore the fact that the game has been on a downward trend in many areas since licensing was abandoned. 

My view is that isn't the core reason, but for many it will be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Damien said:

Its only because of the World Cup its 27, it would have been 29 otherwise. I never thought you minded loops either!

There is no way clubs will accept 22, 29 to 22 is a heck of a drop which isn't going to happen in my opinion. Some of these games will be replaced by something I feel (and I hope that isn't Challenge Cup group games) This is to me is always why 14 makes sense and 26 games but it doesn't look like that is going to happen.

It could be to make room for another competition to sell to TV. As Super League is going to remain at 12 for now there could be a Super League Cup with three groups of four playing home and away, with the group winners and best runners up in the semi finals. Home group games counting on season tickets so there is still around the same number of home games as now. After the final there could then be a two or three week gap before Super League starts.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Liverpool Rover said:

It could be to make room for another competition to sell to TV. As Super League is going to remain at 12 for now there could be a Super League Cup with three groups of four playing home and away, with the group winners and best runners up in the semi finals. Home group games counting on season tickets so there is still around the same number of home games as now. After the final there could then be a two or three week gap before Super League starts.

Yeah don’t think so, they talked about not cannabilisng events and no loop fixtures so think it will be something more internationally minded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Dunbar said:

But I feel that all these decisions around structure and grading systems lose sight of some of the underlying principles of what sport should be about.  

Our game was literally founded because people disagreed on some BS notion of what sport should "be about".

It's 2022.  

new rise.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the big differences between this proposal and last time is that this is a partnership with IMG. Assuming they can sell this to enough clubs to get it through, their role will be about getting more money into the sport.  

That means new investors and better TV deals. They will have been sounding out potential investors and no doubt talking to Sky etc as well. If you look at the way pro sports operate now its about seriously wealthy individuals buying in. That will be the plan for London for sure, and probably a few other clubs as well. On the plus side for our sport is that buying in is relatively cheap for big time investors. On the downside is the image of the sport in England as a regional small-time game and the fact that at the moment there's virtually no money in the game.

In order to get new cash you have to offer growth potential (i.e. can turn a B in the Championship into an A if you spend enough and the whole comp generating more income), but also limit downside risk. The carrot of an A grading makes investment far more attractive as it will limit exposure to one bad season.

The other thing about getting in new investment is that they will have to create a buzz about the sport and make it something investors want to be associated with. Rebranding is part of that. Super League always was a duff name to me. I'd rather we go for a pithy acronym (like NFL, NRL, AFL).

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, ShropshireBull said:

So I´m in SL as a Cat B club and I go to sponsors , they tell me well we´d love to but we dont know whether you´ll be in the league in 2 years time so no. Likewise players and coaches. It´s a self fulfilling prophecy. 

OR ….. you go to sponsors and say ‘Our club is currently a Category B club but we have a strategy to attain Category A status.  Your investment will help us towards achieving Category A status and in turn that will make the club a more appealing prospect to future investors as Category A clubs are exempt from being removed from the league’.

Two sides to the argument.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the life of me, I can't fathom how anyone would want to entertain the current London Club as being "invited" to Superleague? 
If IMG are so sure that a club is needed in the Capital, then they can certainly afford to Bankroll it, but it should be 100% 'THEIR' project and should abide by all the same rules as the rest of the clubs.
I for one wouldn't support another experiment. Watching the Broncos has been depressing enough over the years, but the idea of watching another entity, in all probability do it correctly, would be too much to take. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got up to page 19 when a thought struck me.

Putting football to one side, all other major team sports in the UK such as RL, RU and Cricket are either at or approaching a watershed moment.

Cricket is only surviving because of its international presence.  But One-Day internationals and Test Cricket are under threat by the growth of 20/20 leagues around the world that can pay players exorbitant amounts for a few weeks work.  The ECCB’s response is the Hundred.  Can this plug the gap if there is a reduction in the number of One-Day internationals and Test Matches and TV income falls?

Rugby Union survives on the international game and deep pockets of wealthy backers.  If some of those backers decide to leave the club game then the income from international games will not cover existing costs at club level.  So RU will have to cut its cloth to survive or look at a more innovative structures for financial growth. 

Rugby League - IMHO the partnership with IMG is a reflection that the game finally realised that continuing ploughing the same old furrow is no longer practicable.  Fundamental change is needed, not just for today, but to be able to compete in tomorrows sporting landscape.

So this may be the point where RL leads the way in showing other sports that radical changes is the only way forward.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not understanding the logic of re-branding, re-naming Super League. If there are too many Super Leagues, surely there are also too many Premierships, Premier Leagues, Championships, Elite Leagues. 

Judging by what seems to me a thoroughly lazy effort by IMG so far - they have one model that has worked elsewhere (has it?) and they are going to apply it to us without much thought about our idiosyncrasies - we are going to end up with something called EuroLeague Rugby.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

I'd like to know why they think this will bring in more money ? , And how much they expect to make out of it ?

I am sure that everyone on this Forum would like to know the answer.  I hope that IMG make an absolute shedload of money from this as that will mean the game has tapped into untold wealth and Chairmen of clubs will once again be able to buy the finest sheepskin jackets from Man at C&A to wear on inclement days!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Dave T said:

I'm not massively fussed about what structure we have, I think the other things are probably more important

As a very wise poster suggested, they will announce: So this is the structure, some bits of that will look a bit different, and here's a long paragraph about everything else that could easily wind up being more important.

And all the discussion would be about whether Leeds should be a Category A club because their terrace doesn't have a roof or do you remember how Wakefield sketched a pic of a ground and that's the sole reason they got in.

(I forgot that we would also have some stuff about academies.)

Anyway, here's the paragraph I was suggesting would exist and no one would really mention: This work will sit alongside other workstreams being led by IMG and other parts of the Endeavor network to maximise the commercial potential of the sport and build deeper relationships with fans and new audiences. These include content production and innovation, domestic and international distribution of media rights, digital transformation powered by IMG’s digital sports arm Seven League, brand strategy delivered by Endeavor’s cultural marketing agency 160over90, streaming through Endeavor’s OTT platform Endeavor Streaming and data collection, betting product development and streaming rights via its sports data and betting technology business IMG Arena.

  • Like 2

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, David Shepherd said:

Hudds, Wigan, Hull, London and TOXIII aren't owners or primary tenants. That should preclude them from having an A in my opinion.  Can't have top flight clubs being subservient to another sport's fixture scheduling and not generating maximum matchday and non-rugby income.

What about clubs who are too reliant on one person for financial input? They don’t deserve a Cat. A as that person could walk away at the drop of a hat. Wigan, Saints, Hull, Warrington, Hull KR, Catalans, Wakey, Huddersfield, Leigh. Anyone I’ve missed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Gomersall said:

What about clubs who are too reliant on one person for financial input? They don’t deserve a Cat. A as that person could walk away at the drop of a hat. Wigan, Saints, Hull, Warrington, Hull KR, Catalans, Wakey, Huddersfield, Leigh. Anyone I’ve missed?

Financial assessment, including sustainability, should also form part of the criteria.

You'd assume the scores would be weighted too with some criteria counting for more than others.

  • Like 1

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

As a very wise poster suggested, they will announce: So this is the structure, some bits of that will look a bit different, and here's a long paragraph about everything else that could easily wind up being more important.

And all the discussion would be about whether Leeds should be a Category A club because their terrace doesn't have a roof or do you remember how Wakefield sketched a pic of a ground and that's the sole reason they got in.

(I forgot that we would also have some stuff about academies.)

Anyway, here's the paragraph I was suggesting would exist and no one would really mention: This work will sit alongside other workstreams being led by IMG and other parts of the Endeavor network to maximise the commercial potential of the sport and build deeper relationships with fans and new audiences. These include content production and innovation, domestic and international distribution of media rights, digital transformation powered by IMG’s digital sports arm Seven League, brand strategy delivered by Endeavor’s cultural marketing agency 160over90, streaming through Endeavor’s OTT platform Endeavor Streaming and data collection, betting product development and streaming rights via its sports data and betting technology business IMG Arena.

Agreed. 

My long term position has been that doing the basics right is more important than anything structurally, although I understand why structure is included. 

But from reading more, they are talking about things that are mentioned here a lot. 

Scrapping games (including magic) to create scarcity and avoid cannibalisation. I'm interested to see how this goes, even though I'm nervous about us reducing our season too much. 

Matchday event, branding, internationals, digital, broadcasting, expansion strategy, focus on challenge cup - all mentioned and all great stuff. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, EastLondonMike said:

I don’t think there are enough letters in the Alphabet to reflect the grading the Broncos would get currently.

I assumed the reference to London was in terms of targeting an increase in the fan base here, and not about having a competitive team present in SL, which as we know would cost many millions over many many years to achieve.

Maybe Magic weekend could head to London as part of that strategy?

personally im not keen on a complete name change. I think the challenge is to take what we have and make it the most recognisable. Though I’d be happy with a return to “Rugby Super League”.

What Magic Weekend?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Gomersall said:

Batley would still go up next season if they win at the weekend. The new assessment system doesn’t kick in until the end of 2023 if I read it right.

Indeed.

And on-field performance is a part of it. We don't yet know how big a part but it's in there.

So Batley would score higher on that, wherever they finished in SL 22, than any side in the Championship.

  • Like 1

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reduction in games should boost quality. 

You'd hope that a 22 games instead of 27 reduces injuries by 20% or so less at a stroke, but given cumulative effect that might be more like 25%-30%. 

I think a challenge cup group stage or a new competition is likely, maybe 4x5 with other championship and league 1 in an 1895 style cup. 

2 H, 2A then SF and Final- with a nod that this is secondary competition- so bring through youngsters 

Edited by Rugbyleaguesupporter
Clarify
  • 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...