IMG looking to ditch Super League branding

[idrewthehaggis]

The easiest way to herd cats is to convince them they aren't being herded. Dangle a reward and most choose to follow you.

My reading agrees it demonstrates as Tommy says:

3 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

I think IMG coming on board is the single biggest recognition by the RFL and the Super League executives that they have neither the organisational framework or the technical ability to take the game forward by themselves anymore.

And I'd contend also because they do not have the authority or skills to manage the opposition of vested interests at the top. 

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

20 minutes ago, Martyn Sadler said:

Not a fan, but the guy deserves to have his genuine achievements recognised, especially compared with what came afterwards for Super League.

It's possible to have a strategic vision but the difficulty lies in implementing it if you have one.

As IMG will discover, they have little control over the clubs, whose cooperation they would require to implement any proposed strategy.

The secret of herding cats is the problem the game faces.

One thing that’s guaranteed: You can’t implement something you haven’t got. Nigel Wood lacked the capacity to think and act strategically. The rest of it is then always somewhat moot, however true. 

[RP London]

10 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

This does ignore the fact the Sport doesn't have any money to spend, relatively. We couldn't recruit anyone as an alternative.

It also ignores the fact that this is a widely used model in business and that it can have a very positive affect rather than the slightly older fashioned "pay for a service" style which can be extremely ineffectual. This is even more so when the basis of any quote/pitch is hard to define as no research into what is needed has been done. The way IMG are working is a model that works and can get best results simply because they will do what is necessary (after the research points them in that direction) rather than do things that are largely ineffectual or completely unnecessary but some "suits" thought that was what was needed after doing 0 or just about 0 Market Research/analysis to find out. The name change is one example, they are exploring it, but then may well leave it alone if that is what the research tells them is best.

[Madrileño]

3 hours ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

 

2) Rugby League has a large, vocal group within it's support base that harks back to the old days, and is resistant to change. 

 

Really?

You would never know that from the posts on here.

Edited December 22, 2022 by Madrileño

[Martyn Sadler]

2 hours ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

@Martyn Sadler I understand that, like all people in positions of authority being criticised, Nigel was not wholly incompetent and disastrous at every facet of his job, every day. Life isn't that simple, so its fine to add some balance. But you serially go way beyond that, here and elsewhere. Please be honest with yourself: Rugby League under his leadership went backwards, and it was apparent to anybody who ever dealt with him that he lacked capability in a number of areas absolutely crucial to success in the role.

You are misunderstanding my attitude to Nigel's stewardship of the RFL.

I defend him against invalid criticisms, in particular the financial ones. He played an important role in rescuing the RFL after the 2000 World Cup and he stopped the organisation from leaking funds from that point onwards.

He was the tournament director for the 2013 World Cup, which was an extraordinary success without government financial backing that we saw in the more recent tournament.

He was responsible for expanding Rugby League footprint in North America with the Wolfpack and I'm sure that club would still have been operating if it hadn't been for the pandemic.

2 hours ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

He was a classic case of "effective number 2, promoted to ineffective number 1". We see it all the time in business. The skillset of an FD, or a COO, is vastly different to that required of a CEO. They are complementary roles, but not often interchangeable. Many of those differences are behavioural, around team- or thinking-style, or personality based ones - so hard to develop or learn, in order to bridge that gap. There's a huge research base on this. 

I largely agree with you about this. He was a strong FD but couldn't easily translate that to being the CEO.

Nigel was a poor communicator, suspicious of other people's motives and was reluctant to take people into his confidence.

But he was actually the most strategic thinker I've met in Rugby League, although he was unable to sell his ideas to others. That has tended to overshadow his legacy.

[RP London]

32 minutes ago, Martyn Sadler said:

 

But he was actually the most strategic thinker I've met in Rugby League, although he was unable to sell his ideas to others. That has tended to overshadow his legacy.

Just to take this point. You've met a fair few, is he better than say Richard Lewis who is often lauded for developments? if so was Lewis more of a great "project manager" style of leader who took the ideas from people like Nigel and made them really work.. which would be where the CEO vs COO/FD argument comes in?? 

(i know thats a few questions leading on from one another and the secondary may be overruled by the answer to the first, but thought it easier than coming backwards and forwards).

[Martyn Sadler]

29 minutes ago, RP London said:

Just to take this point. You've met a fair few, is he better than say Richard Lewis who is often lauded for developments? if so was Lewis more of a great "project manager" style of leader who took the ideas from people like Nigel and made them really work.. which would be where the CEO vs COO/FD argument comes in?? 

(i know thats a few questions leading on from one another and the secondary may be overruled by the answer to the first, but thought it easier than coming backwards and forwards).

I didn't really see much evidence that Richard was a strategic thinker at all.

He got rid of Great Britain, which was a massive strategic mistake, and introduced licensing in a cack-handed way.

I think he was very over-rated as the RFL CEO and quickly made it a part-time role as he took up the Sport England position on his way to Wimbledon. He had little commitment to Rugby League, whereas Nigel has spent his life in it.

But he did have a smoother personality than Nigel, as if that should count for anything.

[Madrileño]

31 minutes ago, Martyn Sadler said:

I didn't really see much evidence that Richard was a strategic thinker at all.

He got rid of Great Britain, which was a massive strategic mistake 

Your opinion, but certainly not everyone's. 

[MatthewWoody]

On 15/12/2022 at 23:05, The 4 of Us said:

The Rugby League

The Rugby Championship 

Reclaim the name. 

[RP London]

1 hour ago, Martyn Sadler said:

I didn't really see much evidence that Richard was a strategic thinker at all.

He got rid of Great Britain, which was a massive strategic mistake, and introduced licensing in a cack-handed way.

I think he was very over-rated as the RFL CEO and quickly made it a part-time role as he took up the Sport England position on his way to Wimbledon. He had little commitment to Rugby League, whereas Nigel has spent his life in it.

But he did have a smoother personality than Nigel, as if that should count for anything.

 

Interesting to hear as you have been closer than most to the people I would think. 

Scrapping Great Britain was a difficult call. It had been something talked about for a while especially while playing as GB but not at world cups etc..  

Was govt funding from the devolved govts based on separate international teams? I certainly remember that being brought up a lot as a major factor. 

 

[Henson Park Old Firm]

 

[Tommygilf]

15 hours ago, Henson Park Old Firm said:

 

Whilst the Super League trophy obviously holds so many memories for me as a Leeds fan, I can't think of another single image that surmises Rugby League in this country more than that of Rob and Kev. 

[steve oates]

On 22/12/2022 at 08:22, Harry Stottle said:

Totally unfair HKB, I am of that age group you choose to chastise.

As far as I am concerned the sport can partake of what it wants/needs to do to gain popularity and new audiences, but the main attraction for me is what happens in the 80 or so minutes between the first and last whistle, I will still do what I have done and known for nigh on 60 years get there in good time for the kick off and vacate on it's conclusion, that is my choice.

No need whatsoever to try to put any blame on the older generation with the often misused "they don't like change much" and the pathetic "things were better in the old days", it is the younger ones who will choose to keep this sport going or let it demise, the future is in your hands, fortunately we old buggers have brought it to where it is today we have not deserted the sport it is up to you lot to carry it on, good luck with that.

I was around in the old days Harry and was 12 when I saw my first match in Leeds. Obviously I took it all in and can remember it to this day. It was certainly the case that the "Demographic" then was no different to now. As a 10 year old I was searching the terraces for other kids, and there weren't many. When I tried the Junior Supporters club I was welcome with open arms by a handful only, of like enthusiasts.

That was in the days when we "played out" a lot as there were no computer games. It was also in the days when RL was struggling, but even when a recovery came along through BARLA and a new man at the head of the RFL  (so can you name that man??) crowd increases didn't include loads of kids

Oh and yes the comments were certainly rude and unfair........

[Harry Stottle]

51 minutes ago, steve oates said:

I was around in the old days Harry and was 12 when I saw my first match in Leeds. Obviously I took it all in and can remember it to this day. It was certainly the case that the "Demographic" then was no different to now. As a 10 year old I was searching the terraces for other kids, and there weren't many. When I tried the Junior Supporters club I was welcome with open arms by a handful only, of like enthusiasts.

That was in the days when we "played out" a lot as there were no computer games. It was also in the days when RL was struggling, but even when a recovery came along through BARLA and a new man at the head of the RFL  (so can you name that man??) crowd increases didn't include loads of kids

Oh and yes the comments were certainly rude and unfair........

David Oxley.

[steve oates]

On 22/12/2022 at 08:42, GUBRATS said:

Gets on my goat with the old flat cap and whippet rubbish essentially blaming the fans who do go for the fans that don't. I hope IMG can work their magic , but if it does include stifling the ambition and dreams of fans outside the chosen few then like you I'll be finding something else to do 

Well you know this is not about "Magic", and certainly the UFC's unfortunate experience of what happens if you give IMG full control (let alone sheds of money) is probably something that rings the alarm bells among the chairmen. Hence there is no money up front for IMG.

The only conundrum that is left for me is that which Martin Sadler poses i.e. a 12 year deal.  Why??

Well it seems to me that this is obviously about SKY and their loss of of interest, and no interest from any other broadcasters.  I can see why Superleague have given IMG a long remit to find life saving TV deals. We may be on for a lower but palatable deal  this time, but we have to look forward to a day when we again have to go cap in hand when the deal after that is even less.

There's plenty of politics in there, and no doubt SL chairmen are wondering where will we be in 12 years time, and the deal with IMG may provide the third party ammunition to give the hard word to clubs that something has to radically change. 

I do recall when Superleague came along as a concept, the idea was for clubs to amalgamate to create bigger clubs with greater fan bases and richer boards of directors by amalgamating existing teams by merger. Cas, Featherstone and Wakey were to become one Superclub, and at risk of upsetting HKB,  Rovers and FC were down to merge as well. Harry and your good self Gubrats were set to be Wigan fans 

Those who are of a younger age or were not following the game pre 1996 may find this incredulous, those who remember this know it was serious. The question is are we trapped by tradition or is there now mileage in that 1996 plan IMG could be asked to deliver?

[Harry Stottle]

19 minutes ago, steve oates said:

Those who are of a younger age or were not following the game pre 1996 may find this incredulous, those who remember this know it was serious. The question is are we trapped by tradition or is there now mileage in that 1996 plan IMG could be asked to deliver

And I think it would be recieved with exactly the same derision by the fans now as it was back then, Uncle Mo backtracked quick enough when he realised how many fans would turn their backs on the game never to return.

[ATLANTISMAN]

22 hours ago, Martyn Sadler said:

I didn't really see much evidence that Richard was a strategic thinker at all.

He got rid of Great Britain, which was a massive strategic mistake, and introduced licensing in a cack-handed way.

I think he was very over-rated as the RFL CEO and quickly made it a part-time role as he took up the Sport England position on his way to Wimbledon. He had little commitment to Rugby League, whereas Nigel has spent his life in it.

But he did have a smoother personality than Nigel, as if that should count for anything.

100% SPOT ON Martyn.

 

Paul

[steve oates]

2 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

David Oxley.

Thanks mate, I've seen him many times at Leeds games.........

So I didn't forget the face

[steve oates]

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

And I think it would be recieved with exactly the same derision by the fans now as it was back then, Uncle Mo backtracked quick enough when he realised how many fans would turn their backs on the game never to return.

You maybe right, but then again SKY were happy not to upset the fans back then........

As their enthusiasm to pay Superlegue wanes maybe SKY will turn their backs never to return....

They needed us then, perhaps we need them more now......

And what if the game here becomes a closed shop of the big clubs - you know, "Category "A" only

Then maybe future fans may choose the big clubs to support.....

[Big Picture]

2 hours ago, steve oates said:

Well you know this is not about "Magic", and certainly the UFC's unfortunate experience of what happens if you give IMG full control (let alone sheds of money) is probably something that rings the alarm bells among the chairmen. Hence there is no money up front for IMG.

The only conundrum that is left for me is that which Martin Sadler poses i.e. a 12 year deal.  Why??

Well it seems to me that this is obviously about SKY and their loss of of interest, and no interest from any other broadcasters.  I can see why Superleague have given IMG a long remit to find life saving TV deals. We may be on for a lower but palatable deal  this time, but we have to look forward to a day when we again have to go cap in hand when the deal after that is even less.

There's plenty of politics in there, and no doubt SL chairmen are wondering where will we be in 12 years time, and the deal with IMG may provide the third party ammunition to give the hard word to clubs that something has to radically change. 

I do recall when Superleague came along as a concept, the idea was for clubs to amalgamate to create bigger clubs with greater fan bases and richer boards of directors by amalgamating existing teams by merger. Cas, Featherstone and Wakey were to become one Superclub, and at risk of upsetting HKB,  Rovers and FC were down to merge as well. Harry and your good self Gubrats were set to be Wigan fans 

Those who are of a younger age or were not following the game pre 1996 may find this incredulous, those who remember this know it was serious. The question is are we trapped by tradition or is there now mileage in that 1996 plan IMG could be asked to deliver?

Unfortunately that wasn't much of a plan at all, even if mergers like those could somehow have been made workable.

Cobbling two (or three in the one case) small clubs together wouldn't have created big clubs, it would only have created slightly bigger small clubs which wouldn't likely have rated any better for Sky than the tarted-up version of the old Championship they were given instead.  So the results likely wouldn't have been materially better than they were.

8 minutes ago, steve oates said:

You maybe right, but then again SKY were happy not to upset the fans back then........

As their enthusiasm to pay Superlegue wanes maybe SKY will turn their backs never to return....

They needed us then, perhaps we need them more now......

And what if the game here becomes a closed shop of the big clubs - you know, "Category "A" only

Then maybe future fans may choose the big clubs to support.....

What "big clubs" are you talking about there?  By the standards of big time major pro sport, there aren't any big clubs in British RL, only small clubs and not-so-small clubs.  Any clubs whose management worries about things like how many "away fans" their opponents will bring along to augment their modest revenues are certainly not big clubs.

[steve oates]

1 hour ago, Big Picture said:

Unfortunately that wasn't much of a plan at all, even if mergers like those could somehow have been made workable.

Cobbling two (or three in the one case) small clubs together wouldn't have created big clubs, it would only have created slightly bigger small clubs which wouldn't likely have rated any better for Sky than the tarted-up version of the old Championship they were given instead.  So the results likely wouldn't have been materially better than they were. What "big clubs" are you talking about there?  By the standards of big time major pro sport, there aren't any big clubs in British RL, only small clubs and not-so-small clubs....................

I've heard all that 100 times (Literally) buy hey, your an RL fan and you care. Have a great Xmas........

[Billy King's Boots]

On 22/12/2022 at 12:27, Madrileño said:

Really?

You would never know that from the posts on here.

It were never like this before the internet...

[Tommygilf]

3 hours ago, steve oates said:

I've heard all that 100 times (Literally) buy hey, your an RL fan and you care. Have a great Xmas........

Surely you aren't using that as a criticism???