Who will have an A licence and why?

[GeordieSaint]

2 hours ago, Dave T said:

I don't think the emergence of the young lads this year, coinciding with our 11th place is a great advertisement for your theory. 

There is merit in what ST has said (for a change) in my opinion. Wrench looks quality but can’t get a regular start. Why?

(Thewlis I have seen less of so can’t comment.)

[Dave T]

36 minutes ago, GeordieSaint said:

There is merit in what ST has said (for a change) in my opinion. Wrench looks quality but can’t get a regular start. Why?

(Thewlis I have seen less of so can’t comment.)

Yes, when I get round to it I'll reply to Toppy, and I agree there are some good points made. However, I think Wrench was injured. He played when fit. He had 13 appearances this year (12 starts) , Thewlis had 19. We even shipped out Charnley part way through to cater for these. 

Where the lads are good enough, they play. 

 

[Dave T]

2 hours ago, Saint Toppy said:

On the contrary, some of your better performing players this year were your own academy lads opposed to all your underperforming big money signings.

Wire are pretty much guaranteed to get an A Licence so with no relegation to worry about this would be the perfect opportunity to change their model from a buying club to a promote from within first club. If they accept they'll be unlikely to be serious challengers for the next 3-5 years or so while they build then they'll reap the rewards further down the track. Lets face it they've tried to buy their way to SL success and failed so there's obviously some merit in the theory that success comes from having a successful academy and opportunity system in place.

The principle of what you say has merits.

But I'll go back to the fact that if Saints, Leeds and Wigan get first dibs on the best talent, if Wire start to just play ours, we will be weaker, not stronger. 

It's too simplistic to just say Wire don't play youth. Surely the point is that the youth isn't at the required level. Accepting that some will obviously be treated poorly. 

I'm sure Jack Welsby would get a game at Wire. 

None of this is to belittle the efforts that Saints, Wigan and Leeds put in, they do a great job, but you've acknowledged that a club like Wire is putting the money, time and effort in but not the same outcomes. Our views on the root cause differ. 

 

[GeordieSaint]

51 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Yes, when I get round to it I'll reply to Toppy, and I agree there are some good points made. However, I think Wrench was injured. He played when fit. He had 13 appearances this year (12 starts) , Thewlis had 19. We even shipped out Charnley part way through to cater for these. 

Where the lads are good enough, they play. 

 

I hope you are right Dave. You’ll be stronger in the long term as will the sport on these shores.

[Dave T]

5 minutes ago, GeordieSaint said:

I hope you are right Dave. You’ll be stronger in the long term as will the sport on these shores.

I don't disagree, but I do think we are a little too obsessed with keeping our game local. We should be rewarding youth development, but I think it is too loaded in favour of it at the moment and it is making it nigh on impossible for the monopoly to be broken. 

There should be more than one way to build your club and win the league. Many who support this current approach celebrated Toronto's approach to signing players in, telling us that it isn't up to them to develop players. 

Chasing and overtaking the big clubs, with such restrictive rules is a challenge. The evidence - nobody else in SL has won SL! 

[Tommygilf]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

Where the lads are good enough, they play. 

 

I do get that, but if you're having a poor season, its better to at least get the kids some minutes and experience to set them in good stead. 

How many dire seasons have Leeds had, even including the first half of this season! But you start to give kids minutes and gametime and yeah its not all fantastic, but they at least get the chance. And this is Leeds, who most Leeds fans think have been poor at bringing through youth over the past decade.

[Loiner]

It's probably me but what happens if a category A team we will say Leeds for arguments sake finish rock bottom 12th and a category B team finishes above them. Does that mean a team who didn't finish last goes down? 

[yipyee]

On 03/10/2022 at 18:02, GUBRATS said:

Is it just me because I don't understand any of this post

Just you, maybe you are part of the problem then

[yipyee]

10 minutes ago, Loiner said:

It's probably me but what happens if a category A team we will say Leeds for arguments sake finish rock bottom 12th and a category B team finishes above them. Does that mean a team who didn't finish last goes down? 

Think if the highest B in the championship scores higher than a B grade club in SL then they will switch regardless of how high they finished. This is fair 

[redjonn]

8 hours ago, Dave T said:

It isn't a non-issue though, as long as you have B clubs in SL. 

It isn't vanishing, it's not like we are getting more and more big clubs. 

Hopefully this will address that, but this proposal effectively leaves annual P&R on the table for the foreseeable future. 

I agree and would expect a reasonable number of B grade clubs in the top division currently known as Super League.

IMG proposals are a template aimed over a longish period, say 10 years.  Thus I assume initially their will not be many A grade clubs or my view being that the criteria should be challenging for clubs in order to improve and sustain whatever gradings.

I do not expect many A grades initially otherwise its a mockery if nearly all current SL clubs are already at A grade.

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, redjonn said:

I agree and would expect a reasonable number of B grade clubs in the top division currently known as Super League.

IMG proposals are a template aimed over a longish period, say 10 years.  Thus I assume initially their will not be many A grade clubs or my view being that the criteria should be challenging for clubs in order to improve and sustain whatever gradings.

I do not expect many A grades initially otherwise its a mockery if nearly all current SL clubs are already at A grade.

I think we'll probably have the 6 I named give or take one or two. 

But the aim is to get to 14 Grade A clubs pretty quickly. That will be a hell of a shift. 

[redjonn]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

I think we'll probably have the 6 I named give or take one or two. 

But the aim is to get to 14 Grade A clubs pretty quickly. That will be a hell of a shift. 

Yes, but I think the criteria will become a bone of contention amongst current SL clubs. The danger for IMG's strategy is that the tough criteria aiming at growing the sport of which the grading is the fundamental component to IMG is that the criteria is water down to what they would like.  Thus to me we are were we are now and not making any strategic difference to the future,   hence not greatly improving all they wish to be improved.

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, redjonn said:

Yes, but I think the criteria will become a bone of contention amongst current SL clubs. The danger for IMG's strategy is that the tough criteria aiming at growing the sport of which the grading is the fundamental component to IMG is that the criteria is water down to what they would like.  Thus to me we are were we are now and not making any strategic difference to the future,   hence not greatly improving all they wish to be improved.

Yes, I agree, I think it'll be a challenge. I think we still face many of the challenges we always have. 

The real interesting stuff is in how they will support the game in delivering more stronger clubs. Because I don't think just saying everyone needs to become Grade A will be enough. So the real proof is in the other stuff. 

[gingerjon]

Just now, Dave T said:

So the real proof is in the other stuff. 

The stuff that, rather brilliantly, AND AS I PREDICTED, absolutely no one is writing about or discussing because RL obsesses about structure *all the time*, thus leaving them to get on with what they, presumably, want to get on with.

[Toby Chopra]

16 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I think we'll probably have the 6 I named give or take one or two. 

But the aim is to get to 14 Grade A clubs pretty quickly. That will be a hell of a shift. 

I really struggle to see how they will double the number of Cat As in such a short space of time. If a club isn't good enough in 2023, what possible big improvements will have been made by 2026? You can't drive revenues up that quickly. Maybe stadium builds, but is Wakey and Cas getting a new stand each really the difference? Leigh and Fev already have better stadiums, so it can't be. 

The only significant criteria I could think of that could be achieved that quickly is pure money - an investor guarantees £5mln investment over 5 years and you're in? 

Edited October 4, 2022 by Toby Chopra

[Dave T]

4 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

The stuff that, rather brilliantly, AND AS I PREDICTED, absolutely no one is writing about or discussing because RL obsesses about structure *all the time*, thus leaving them to get on with what they, presumably, want to get on with.

Calm down Nostradamus. 

 

[gingerjon]

3 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Calm down Nostradamus. 

 

I just think it's funny.

We'll have a 700 page thread going into minute detail about minor points of category distinctions and grading, endless loop conversations about loop fixtures and, in the end, the success will be down to what is brought in externally and we have no clue what is being done there whatsoever, and will likely never actually discuss it.

[redjonn]

6 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

The stuff that, rather brilliantly, AND AS I PREDICTED, absolutely no one is writing about or discussing because RL obsesses about structure *all the time*, thus leaving them to get on with what they, presumably, want to get on with.

well yes and I think I said similar particularly as they themselves said too much focus on format and structure and not product.   Yet the major factor is the league and format structure, well how to achieve that format and league structure.

Although as I've said elsewhere I can see how in the long term this new format and structure may achieve an improved product. Not in any short term and I think need to ensure the some focus on the shorter term. Even getting a good marketing function will take time and its that which will have a big impact eventually. In the mean time better promotional aspects will help.

[Dave T]

10 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

I just think it's funny.

We'll have a 700 page thread going into minute detail about minor points of category distinctions and grading, endless loop conversations about loop fixtures and, in the end, the success will be down to what is brought in externally and we have no clue what is being done there whatsoever, and will likely never actually discuss it.

I don't thing its surprising that people are discussing a structure change after them announcing plans for a structure change. 

[gingerjon]

9 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I don't thing its surprising that people are discussing a structure change after them announcing plans for a structure change. 

We discuss structure all the time.

[Dave T]

Just now, gingerjon said:

We discuss structure all the time.

Usually it's on the back of a Gledhill podcast. Those threads deserve dismissing. The first major announcement from our new strategic partner is well worthy of discussion. 

On this thread or another I praised their unique idea of aligning our season so we can play internationals at the end of the year and a mid-season international. Any thoughts on that utterly unique and brilliant suggestion from them? 

[yipyee]

9 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Usually it's on the back of a Gledhill podcast. Those threads deserve dismissing. The first major announcement from our new strategic partner is well worthy of discussion. 

On this thread or another I praised their unique idea of aligning our season so we can play internationals at the end of the year and a mid-season international. Any thoughts on that utterly unique and brilliant suggestion from them? 

My thoughts are that me for one wanted to see a full international vs France or Wales (or both) and instead got a nothing game against a made up concept of players who were allowed by their clubs to play in a nothing game for a nothing cup that ment nothing to anyone and was only announced weeks before it was played allowing little build up or anticipation.

[Dave T]

9 minutes ago, yipyee said:

My thoughts are that me for one wanted to see a full international vs France or Wales (or both) and instead got a nothing game against a made up concept of players who were allowed by their clubs to play in a nothing game for a nothing cup that ment nothing to anyone and was only announced weeks before it was played allowing little build up or anticipation.

It's been mentioned that we'd play France, but I suppose my confusion was more around the fact that we already have this calendar that was highlighted as an initiative from IMG. 

[yipyee]

33 minutes ago, Dave T said:

It's been mentioned that we'd play France, but I suppose my confusion was more around the fact that we already have this calendar that was highlighted as an initiative from IMG. 

Not sure we do, I can't remember the last proper mid season test and the end of season  calender has been pretty non exsistant since the abolishment of the 4 nations

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, yipyee said:

Not sure we do, I can't remember the last proper mid season test and the end of season  calender has been pretty non exsistant since the abolishment of the 4 nations

That's simply not true.

While we've chosen to play CNAS over the last couple of years, we have also played NZ in Denver, Samoa in Sydney, France and Exiles over the years (we even went to Aus to get battered by the Aussies years back too!). . But its always welcome if we confirm that this is a fixture that will be regular without the need for debate. 

We have had end of season internationals ever since we 'aligned the global calendars' around 26 years ago! The only time the RFL hasn't had any games was during Covid in 2020, when the planned Ashes was cancelled, and 2021 we played only 1 test as the RLWC was postponed. 

I'm really not sure in what world you are in to suggest we dobt do internationals each Autumn.