IMG Grading Unveiled

[MattSantos]

6 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

How does the criteria favour a club like wakefield for example?

They're already in Superleague, therefore have a leg up when considering Fandom (25%), Finances (25%) through central funding & business performance (able to attract more income by being in SL) and Performance (25%).  They've also had the benefit of these advantages to help sort out a Stadium (15%).

 

 

[Chrispmartha]

4 minutes ago, MattSantos said:

They're already in Superleague, therefore have a leg up when considering Fandom (25%), Finances (25%) through central funding & business performance (able to attract more income by being in SL) and Performance (25%).  They've also had the benefit of these advantages to help sort out a Stadium (15%).

 

 

That’s all presuming you know how the grades are awarded.

E.G finances may well take into account the money they have had from being in SL.

But anyway whatever system you put in place SL clubs will have a ‘leg up’

[The Blues Ox]

5 hours ago, Chrispmartha said:

Then those clubs you mention that would struggle in the champ might end up there with the grading.

We know they probably wont though don't we? They have a huge financial advantage over any championship team but Ive said many times on here, using Wakey as an example, you could interchange them with about 6 or 7 Championship clubs and they probably wouldn't do any worse infact we might just find one that could kick on and do a whole lot better.

[GUBRATS]

7 hours ago, Chrispmartha said:

If they’ll never be ready why is promoting them on the field a good idea?

Maybe. Because it's SPORT ? 

You get promoted and then become better 

Whereas if you take away the sport part , it will become much harder 

You know this , what are you even asking ? 

[GUBRATS]

7 hours ago, Chrispmartha said:

Then those clubs you mention that would struggle in the champ might end up there with the grading.

Course they will  

Would location be any part of that ' grading ' ? 

[GUBRATS]

7 hours ago, Chrispmartha said:

But isn’t that the point of grading? Just leaving it up to onfield results has ended up with the clubs you are talking about in SL

Just have grading , don't bother actually playing 

[GUBRATS]

6 hours ago, ELBOWSEYE said:

Do promotions work, they probably have a 90 % failure rate. Just having a system based on simple premis of winning the league below is flawed in our sport, not enough available players to stay up unless the relegated team keep full-time or as leigh have done is gamble early. The IMG way may give team's a chance of staying in the top division. 

Without doubt , as nobody will be coming up ,unbelievable

[GUBRATS]

4 hours ago, Chrispmartha said:

That’s all presuming you know how the grades are awarded.

E.G finances may well take into account the money they have had from being in SL.

But anyway whatever system you put in place SL clubs will have a ‘leg up’

" Into account " ? , So how do they negativity mark down the money the extra exposure of bein in SL for 20 years ? ,Bonkers 

[Chrispmartha]

6 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

Maybe. Because it's SPORT ? 

You get promoted and then become better 

Whereas if you take away the sport part , it will become much harder 

You know this , what are you even asking ? 

Is the NRL not sport then?

[Chrispmartha]

5 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

" Into account " ? , So how do they negativity mark down the money the extra exposure of bein in SL for 20 years ? ,Bonkers 

Quite easily.

Team A has been in SL for 20 years but only gets the same amount of fans and fan engagement as Team B that has been in the Championship, Team A also has worse facilities than Team B and has consistently been at the bottom of SL.

[glossop saint]

3 hours ago, Chrispmartha said:

Quite easily.

Team A has been in SL for 20 years but only gets the same amount of fans and fan engagement as Team B that has been in the Championship, Team A also has worse facilities than Team B and has consistently been at the bottom of SL.

That is a very easy decision to make. But what if team A gets only 100 more fans? And only makes 1k more in non-centralise revenue? Is that enough to promote team B?

What if it is 2000 more fans and 10k more revenue? There should be (and there might be, we don't know yet) some form of weighting to allow for increased away fans from Leeds Wigan etc and extra exposure in national media causing increased sponsorship etc.

There shouldn't be a big increase in the grading coefficient following a promotion or decrease following a relegation as fundamentally not a huge amount will necessarily change within a club.

[redjonn]

As some of the discussion has shown their is a degree of subjectivity as to how certain criteria will be applied.  We ain't seen the detail but if it isn't clearly and transparently defined then in reality it will be subjective.   By whom for me would be a question, a single person or a committee.

At least with initially just deciding whom is in and whom out,,, or just leaving it to P&R as now, that is whom finishes bottom is replaced by the lower league club it isn't subjective, except for the initial decision.  

For me the system will cause some dissent on an ongoing basis as their will be a subjective element - maybe each year when a club is not promoted together with negative media coverage. I suspect in that case it will affect some Championship league fans enthusiasm for the sport and maybe wider RL interested fans. 

[The Blues Ox]

5 hours ago, Chrispmartha said:

Quite easily.

Team A has been in SL for 20 years but only gets the same amount of fans and fan engagement as Team B that has been in the Championship, Team A also has worse facilities than Team B and has consistently been at the bottom of SL.

I would have very little complaints if it actually turned out that the gradings were worked out similar to this. I'm very sceptical though although I would still only make it so the top team in the championship was eligable for promotion because for me personally the chance of onfield success is the only thing that is keeping me watching the sport at this level.

 

It's not something you can really look forward to telling the grand kids. "I was there when it was announced we got an extra point for fan engagement back in 2025" does not have the same ring to it as "I was there when we won the Challenge Cup in 2025".

Edited March 18, 2023 by The Blues Ox

[Agbrigg]

On 16/03/2023 at 16:36, Saint Toppy said:

Having just 1 wealthy board member will always be a big risk. Is Davey the only guy with money on the Huddersfield board ?

Saints are in the fortunate position that while Eamon McManus was the one who originally bought the club and invested heavily, one of the first things he did was to replace almost the entire board of directors with people who were wealthy in their own right, so that he wasn't the only one investing. Bringing on board Mike Coleman was probably the ultimate appointee given (on paper at least) the guy is classed as a Billionaire

This is not aimed directly at Saints, but these clubs such has Saints have very wealthy backers and yet the seem to demand more and more of the limited cake. They seem also to be happy to starve the lower leagues of any outside finance. When clubs  at the bottom are surviving on scraps, it's hard to imagine how they can grow and achieve the IMG criteria to rise up the pecking order. 

Just my opinion but I think in order for the game to grow in general, the wealth needs spreading wider and not all at the top of the pyramid

[Harry Stottle]

6 minutes ago, The Blues Ox said:

I would still only make it so the top team in the championship was eligable for promotion because for me personally the chance of onfield success is the only thing that is keeping me watching the sport at this level.

You and loads of others I suspect Oxy.

Everyone who is of the opinion that the Championship can be a good League in it's own right, does not realise that the individuals who support these teams have the ambition for their clubs to play at the top level, and denying that could lead to many turning their backs on the sport.

I think this IMG grading system will eventually put up a barrier of us and them and crossing the divide of the Championship to SL will not have that opportunity as we do now, I am still all for the rewards of finishing top in the Championship means promotion and finishing bottom of SL gets you relegated I can not see how failure can and could be rewarded, and albeit at the moment we still have P&R, in time - which could be in as little as two or three years - under the grading system I forsee there will be no transfer of teams between the divisions.

[Oxford]

32 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

I am still all for the rewards of finishing top in the Championship means promotion and finishing bottom of SL gets you relegated I can not see how failure can and could be rewarded,

I think your argument that movement between divisions could disappear is sound. If that is the case then the RFL, SL and IMG need to be honest about that or their claims of transparency of process are a disingeuous as a Keighley Chairman proposing two teams being relegated is needed and that it will will ensure progress. Of course that could just be a bargaining position.

Your point about rewarding failure is a good one seemingly but without the top division being an equal playing field failure may be or become the only option for some perfectly well run sides. The fact that people assume the percieved top clubs as wonderfully run and anyone at the bottom of SL as badly managed organisations is as illogical as it is based on a largely unfair system. That unfairness is broken now and again but this is just the exception that proves the norm. It is also almost entirely based on success which can disappear, and long term planning and stability are killed by P&R as much as they are by a model reliant on achieving success.

Once again the divisions based on self interest throughout the game were made clear on these pages. When SRD Chairman Paul King suggested a draft system for the whole sport this was more or less debunked by a series of posts championing the status quo. I don't wish this to become a debate about the draft and I bring it up only as an indication of the level of support for things to carry on as they are by people who seemingly support the IMG model. In other words TGG's problems are the cake and eat it model of progress.

 

Edited March 18, 2023 by Oxford

[Liverpool Rover]

21 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

Said the fan of the club already in SL 

They'll never be ready , and won't have any money 

There was a time when Hull KR didn't have the money until Hudgell took over. I don't see why someone wouldn't be interested in investing in a championship club if they know that a high enough grading would make them a lot less likely to be relegated with the stability that could bring.

[Oxford]

6 minutes ago, Liverpool Rover said:

a lot less likely to be relegated with the stability that could bring.

And there it is in a nutshell what this is all about and why IMG have it as a goal.

It still smacks of the probelms all being located in the sport itself and not enough on outside influences and market forces.

I do see the argument for the focus being what you have control over but when other sports changed they looked at what the market said not what was wrong with things like the darts itself. They looked at how it was presented to the public and what might attract a bigger audience. The fact that it's so succesful with a presentaion that looks like a 1950's advert from the US should tell us what can be done with very little, if nothing else.

Edited March 18, 2023 by Oxford

[Derwent Parker]

16 hours ago, The Blues Ox said:

We know they probably wont though don't we? They have a huge financial advantage over any championship team but Ive said many times on here, using Wakey as an example, you could interchange them with about 6 or 7 Championship clubs and they probably wouldn't do any worse infact we might just find one that could kick on and do a whole lot better.

Yes you are right - The top 12 have a gross unfair advantage on the rest. But you think that's bad the bottom 18 are also in this IMG grading plan. IMG are also telling League One teams to aim high as well and grading them too.

So imaging When L1 teams gets their annual 20K. Right you have to improve your team, therefore your gates and fandom etc, - you also have to do up your ground and fit a large screen and if you have any money left from your 20K you should fit some LED lights? - Jolly good.

They should not be telling us to do the impossible - they should be helping us do it.

For example using their knowledge and contacts to get more money in and bring ALL THE TEAMS up to same level.

BUT THEY WONT cos any extra money that comes in will go to the 12 who already have the most.

All this IMG grading is going to do is make the gaps wider.

[Derwent Parker]

3 hours ago, Agbrigg said:

This is not aimed directly at Saints, but these clubs such has Saints have very wealthy backers and yet the seem to demand more and more of the limited cake. They seem also to be happy to starve the lower leagues of any outside finance. When clubs  at the bottom are surviving on scraps, it's hard to imagine how they can grow and achieve the IMG criteria to rise up the pecking order. 

Just my opinion but I think in order for the game to grow in general, the wealth needs spreading wider and not all at the top of the pyramid

I agree with you - but there's fans out there of at least 12 clubs - will be hoping to tear you a new one? -[ hope i can get away with that, just been banned for a while for not being civil to CM]

I once said that [still do actually] and heard every excuse under the sun as to why any team "not Elite" dont deserve it.

[Guest]

An NRL system could work but only under specific requirements. The NRL invests a huge amount of money into the secondary competitions.

So lets say 20% of any broadcasting revenue must be shared among lower tier clubs. The strongest clubs and most financially secure would have to be included. If that means Leigh stay in and Wakefield or Salford are out then so be it.

The IMG system has clearly disappointed a lot of people and I remain unconvinced but then I'm not sure the current model of promotion and relegation works. Perhaps if the funding model above was put in place but you would to ensure clubs weren't spaffing it up the wall.

[Agbrigg]

2 hours ago, Derwent Parker said:

I agree with you - but there's fans out there of at least 12 clubs - will be hoping to tear you a new one? -[ hope i can get away with that, just been banned for a while for not being civil to CM]

I once said that [still do actually] and heard every excuse under the sun as to why any team "not Elite" dont deserve it.

Don't worry about me I have been supporting Wakey for far too long. As a club Wakey are sat right at the bottom of the top table and this year will be their last. But even at the top table ,it's a league within a league and I suspect that if outside finance falls even further as many suspect it will. The top 12 will soon be culled to the top 10. This sport is run for the benefit of an handful of clubs, no one else really matters and every decision that IMG make will be designed to keep it that way. 

For instance if Pro/semi pro RL totally disappeared for good from Cumbria , there are certain people of vast influence within the game who would not give two hoots. 

[GUBRATS]

1 hour ago, NW10LDN said:

An NRL system could work but only under specific requirements. The NRL invests a huge amount of money into the secondary competitions.

So lets say 20% of any broadcasting revenue must be shared among lower tier clubs. The strongest clubs and most financially secure would have to be included. If that means Leigh stay in and Wakefield or Salford are out then so be it.

The IMG system has clearly disappointed a lot of people and I remain unconvinced but then I'm not sure the current model of promotion and relegation works. Perhaps if the funding model above was put in place but you would to ensure clubs weren't spaffing it up the wall.

This investment in the secondary competitions ? , Would it happen if they weren't feeder clubs ? 

What attendances do they get ?

[Guest]

3 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

This investment in the secondary competitions ? , Would it happen if they weren't feeder clubs ? 

What attendances do they get ?

The RFL could force the SL clubs to accept a 20% share for clubs. They don't have to be feeders.

[GUBRATS]

3 minutes ago, NW10LDN said:

The RFL could force the SL clubs to accept a 20% share for clubs. They don't have to be feeders.

That really isn't the issue , essentially you are suggesting they ' buy off ' the lower tiers , does that just make it right ?