IMG Grading Unveiled

[gingerjon]

11 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

At the start of every season ( when we sell the ST s ) most fans aspirations are " to be better than last season " , for some that will be to win the competition and progress up the ladder , for others that will to be stay in a higher tier compared to the previous season , I've never heard any fan say " I don't care really " 

Interesting.

So there will be different motivations for different supporters? And these can change?

[RP London]

14 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

That's fair enough , just out of interest if they brought the same in football , where would Wednesday be placed ? IYO 

Probably the championship. 

The thing with Wednesday and football shows the same as the issue with RL.. we are spending so much money to get out of or stay in leagues (from the premier league late 90s to getting out of league one now) that the stadium is falling apart at the seems.. that money though secures you nothing (as has been shown by the likes of Wednesday) and that is a very very dangerous problem and why there are so many issues with football clubs and finances..

I've lost my RL club once and nearly lost my football team twice, while the highs can be high the lows are very low and, for me, if they can get a level in RL that is self sustainable (for the most part) and brings in a large amount of money that does get properly filtered across the leagues (which is still to be seen as we aren't there yet) then that can only be a good thing. If we have to give up P&R (which we are not) for a few years, or permanently, then i see that as a small price to pay. P&R is an unpredictable fight that cost a lot of money and is high risk. In a sport that is just a sport then that is ok but in a sport that needs to be a business (therefore a professional sport) it is a high risk environment, the type of high risk that most businesses would be advised to avoid, hence newer sports that were professional from the start or leagues that were started as pure professional leagues, tend not to have it.

By keeping P&R with the caveats that we are I am hoping that we find that balance. 

[RP London]

15 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

At the start of every season ( when we sell the ST s ) most fans aspirations are " to be better than last season " , for some that will be to win the competition and progress up the ladder , for others that will to be stay in a higher tier compared to the previous season , I've never heard any fan say " I don't care really " 

But in this system you can still do that... you can still be better than the season before. There is still a league table, there is still a cup to play for, these things are still measured. 

(dont tell anyone either because its a secret..... but you can still get promoted and you can still get relegated too... )

[gingerjon]

Just now, RP London said:

But in this system you can still do that... you can still be better than the season before. There is still a league table, there is still a cup to play for, these things are still measured. 

(dont tell anyone either because its a secret..... but you can still get promoted and you can still get relegated too... )

Look, just because it has been consistently said that there will be promotion and relegation, and that it has been confirmed that teams will always be able to enter even the top tier, please do not be so naïve as to think that means there will be promotion and relegation and that teams will always be able to enter the top tier.

[Chrispmartha]

19 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

At the start of every season ( when we sell the ST s ) most fans aspirations are " to be better than last season " , for some that will be to win the competition and progress up the ladder , for others that will to be stay in a higher tier compared to the previous season , I've never heard any fan say " I don't care really " 

And how does IMGs proposals stop any of that?

[Oxford]

1 minute ago, gingerjon said:

Interesting.

So there will be different motivations for different supporters? And these can change?

As usual it's been a long road and alot of discussion to get to the glaringly obvious.

The jeopardy side of the argument that all games have to mean something is untenable though, if all the games for the team you support don't mean something to you why turn up and why buy the merch?

And if you don't, are you just claiming to be a supporter of that club whilst dibbing in and out as it suits you?

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

9 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

In that case you fully understand the points being made , providing you have a genuine emotional attachment to them 

By that logic, does that mean you don't fully understand the points that people have been making about P&R via the new grading system, because you are too emotionally invested in your team?

[Jughead]

1 hour ago, GUBRATS said:

No , but they are obviously looking at improving the crowds they do get 

No one is stopping them from doing that in a way in which they see fit. Not even those baddies at IMG. 

[glossop saint]

1 hour ago, GUBRATS said:

Following Stockport I'd suggest he's dreaming ( hoping ) of getting into the next tier up from where they are now , that's how this works , you obviously just don't understand that 

Honestly no. I enjoy the experience of going to games. Meeting friends for a drink. Being part of a crowd and an atmosphere. Wanting to see my team win especially if against a rival or a friends team. Yes I pay attention to the table but I go for the game not for the season.

Besides which it is a false comparison as Tommy suggested. Football is a different sport with a much much greater strength in depth. Even at conference level the money, facilities, fan engagement, media coverage etc outweighs certainly the Championship and potentially even SL. Football isn't the the position where it needs to grow to avoid scrambling around for pennies, certainly at the top level. A more accurate comparison would be union or cricket.

[Oxford]

Just now, glossop saint said:

but I go for the game not for the season.

I'll repeat that for those who find it difficult for whatever reason

I go for the game not for the season!

I go for the team not for the season

I go for TGG not for the season.

[Archie Gordon]

Bluntly, three things:

There is a risk with using poorly or unweighted data that progressive and well performing clubs get stuck in the Championship because (a) they can't get on Sky/C4/BBC, (b) they receive £1m+ less in TV income, (c) the Championship attracts lower scores across other fandom and financial measures than SL (*which are inherent to the division and not the club*). 

There is a risk that removing P&R on the field leads to *some* fans stopping attending. This will further impact risk 1.

Pointing this out isn't being shouty, getting hot-and-bothered, doom mongering, or calling IMG baddies.

[Jughead]

12 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

Bluntly, three things:

There is a risk with using poorly or unweighted data that progressive and well performing clubs get stuck in the Championship because (a) they can't get on Sky/C4/BBC, (b) they receive £1m+ less in TV income, (c) the Championship attracts lower scores across other fandom and financial measures than SL (*which are inherent to the division and not the club*). 

There is a risk that removing P&R on the field leads to *some* fans stopping attending. This will further impact risk 1.

Pointing this out isn't being shouty, getting hot-and-bothered, doom mongering, or calling IMG baddies.

None of the above has been articulated in any way by Keighley, for example.

[Michael Bates]

25 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

Bluntly, three things:

There is a risk with using poorly or unweighted data that progressive and well performing clubs get stuck in the Championship because (a) they can't get on Sky/C4/BBC, (b) they receive £1m+ less in TV income, (c) the Championship attracts lower scores across other fandom and financial measures than SL (*which are inherent to the division and not the club*). 

There is a risk that removing P&R on the field leads to *some* fans stopping attending. This will further impact risk 1.

Pointing this out isn't being shouty, getting hot-and-bothered, doom mongering, or calling IMG baddies.

Finally someone gets it.

Championship teams can't (or shouldn't) be able to perform better than any Super League teams based on what was outlined in the post I've quoted. The fact that there is / are potentially situation(s) where they do is absolutely damning on the Super League club in that situation. If they haven't been spending all their extra money on having a good team, developing their stadium or attracting bigger crowds to the game, what exactly have they been doing?

The bottom line is not whether Featherstone, Halifax, Keighley, Toulouse, Belgrade, AEK Athens (or whoever is the club du jour) are good enough to be in Super League, it's why is there even a possibility that they are better than existing clubs (on IMG's criteria) given the huge funding disparity.

[Harry Stottle]

13 hours ago, Chrispmartha said:

I too find it odd that some people need something to be ‘on the line’ to really enjoy a game of RL or attend it.

But were all different and it’s each to their own.

Then why is it those important games where the results do matter are better attended?

Chris, for many many years I have taken in multiple games each weekend from kids to youth to open age, as well as the pro game and nearly all on TV, I have probably attended more games than most and I keep returning simply because I enjoy it, not all games are of a critical nature but those that are get the senses flowing you are more involved in the proceedings - well I am at least, and when it is your team it means that much more.

I actually feel sorry for those who cannot differentiate from just spectating to having the emotions pumping, as I say if my team is in SL and it effectively becomes a closed shop I will be choosing which and when to attend no season ticket for me, if my team was in the Championship with no clear pathway to SL as in on field promotion I think that would be (after my passing my diamond anniversary) divorce proceedings for me 'live' with the pro game, been there done that and would not return, I will not be short getting my RL fix there are loads of community games happening in my area.

[Oxford]

2 minutes ago, Michael Bates said:

If they haven't been spending all their extra money on having a good team, developing their stadium or attracting bigger crowds to the game, what exactly have they been doing?

That's exactly what they're all doing all the time and Championship sides as well.

The nature of any failure of result in ofsted world is to look at the failure. A real , organised and long term solution would move away from one size fits all ideas and into what can be done for that club/side in this area?

But we can't, we don't and we won't so all our discussions become pointless and useless even by the standards of forums and social media.

[Harry Stottle]

10 hours ago, RP London said:

I'm an eagles fan and Sheffield wednesday fan.. through good and bad... promotions, relegation, cup finals and semi finals, outside the closed shop etc... I still think this is the best way to go.. 

 

Wouldn't do for us all to be the same, if we were this site would be ever so boring.

[gingerjon]

44 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

Bluntly, three things:

There is a risk with using poorly or unweighted data that progressive and well performing clubs get stuck in the Championship because (a) they can't get on Sky/C4/BBC, (b) they receive £1m+ less in TV income, (c) the Championship attracts lower scores across other fandom and financial measures than SL (*which are inherent to the division and not the club*). 

There is a risk that removing P&R on the field leads to *some* fans stopping attending. This will further impact risk 1.

Pointing this out isn't being shouty, getting hot-and-bothered, doom mongering, or calling IMG baddies.

There is nothing in the plan that envisages on-field P&R being removed for the foreseeable future though?

[Harry Stottle]

3 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

Following Stockport I'd suggest he's dreaming ( hoping ) of getting into the next tier up from where they are now , that's how this works , you obviously just don't understand that 

Oh he does Gubby, don't underestimate @Tommygilfit just doesn't suit his agenda. Someone who has gone through the education system as he has knows full well there are many rungs of the ladder to step on to reach the top, unless he left primary school on Friday and presented his dissertation on the Monday that is.

[RP London]

7 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Wouldn't do for us all to be the same, if we were this site would be ever so boring.

Indeed, though would let me get more work done... 

 

I'm just trying to look at what is best for the sport as a whole, what seems to be the biggest argument is club centric and clubs specific that x team or y team need an opportunity, which is fair and its not being taken away, or a personal "I dont like it" style reason (again fair opinion but we cannot please everyone all of the time and if we please more people doing something else then those in the minority will fall by the wayside, it has always and will always be that way). But the majority of teams haven't got anywhere near super league or (for some) other divisions for 25 years so it will make little or no difference to them except by raising the commercial value (which is what this is attempting to do) and therefore the money that can then be spent across the game raising all ships (to quote Kayakman!). Taking team emotion out and looking at the game as a whole I do really believe this is what is needed (especially as it isnt taking away P&R). For my team we now know exactly what we need to do to get to the top table, if we cant do that then fair enough, but at least we know where to aim the money. 

We all love underdog stories, the Wimbledons, even the Eagles of '98 type stories but we love them because they are rare... Wimbledon was because someone came in with deep pockets and spent it.. all we are saying now is, cool you can do that but instead of just spending it on the team please spend it on these other things that actually mean when you decide you have had enough that club is not ruined just for your few years of fun.. I dont think that is a bad way to go to be honest (with my Wednesday hat on I wish Chansiri was targeted to spend his money more for the club so its stable!)

[whatmichaelsays]

16 hours ago, Big Picture said:

Re those ABC1 types living on the game's doorstep so to speak, I think we can discount the possibility that they don't know what RL is.  Surely they've heard enough about from locals and/or local media to know what it is.

I think we can discount a failure to try reaching them too, the chronic lack of money in the game would practically force clubs to try reaching everyone in their vicinity.

That would suggest that RL isn't offering something they want.  The lack of city-based teams at the top of the pyramid is one difference between RL and other sports, so are the facilities (in some cases), image, advertising, match day experience, merchandise, branding, etc which you mentioned.  The lack of city-based teams at the top of the pyramid contributes to image and almost certainly in a negative way, and the lack of money is an obstacle to providing a match day experience, merchandise, etc. comparable to what other, bigger sports offer.

And the top of the pyramid lacking city-based teams and instead being full of teams from smallish, unfashionable, economically disadvantaged towns is the primary reason for that lack of money.  Those current clubs simply can't access the sort of money needed to put on something comparable to what bigger sports offer, and their matches don't rate well enough on TV to retain the money the game was getting before, let alone generate an increase.

That's why I conclude that the problems can not be solved within the game's current structure.

This all feels very "correlation is causation" with plenty of confirmation bias thrown in for good measure. 

None of what you say really answers that question of how we get more people - and a more diverse range of people - watching rugby league. It's just "everything is fine, the product is fine, we just don't have enough cities". It seems to place all of the blame on just one of the "four Ps" of marketing, and neglecting the possibility that the other three could also be the problem. 

If Leeds can't pull in wealthy punters from the "golden triangle" of North Leeds for a game against world champion St Helens, why would they find it any easier for a game against London or Newcastle? How many people are genuinely thinking, "I like the look of that, but the population of St Helens is only 180,000 people?". 

If we are struggling to pull in younger audiences in the heartlands, why would a team in Bristol be able to pull in younger audiences, and why would they be able to do something that our heartland clubs can't do? 

If a city-based club like Bradford finds it difficult to engage the Asian community on their doorstep, why would a club in West London find it any easier?

Like I say, geography is a right answer to a particular question. But for the big question - the real question - that we should be trying to answer, it's really not the issue. The issue comes down to the people the sport wants to reach, what those people want in return for their leisure time and money, and what the sport can do to deliver that. The location is, at best, secondary. 

[Harry Stottle]

26 minutes ago, Michael Bates said:

Finally someone gets it.

Championship teams can't (or shouldn't) be able to perform better than any Super League teams based on what was outlined in the post I've quoted. The fact that there is / are potentially situation(s) where they do is absolutely damning on the Super League club in that situation. If they haven't been spending all their extra money on having a good team, developing their stadium or attracting bigger crowds to the game, what exactly have they been doing?

The bottom line is not whether Featherstone, Halifax, Keighley, Toulouse, Belgrade, AEK Athens (or whoever is the club du jour) are good enough to be in Super League, it's why is there even a possibility that they are better than existing clubs (on IMG's criteria) given the huge funding disparity.

Obviously there are a lot who don't get it Micheal, being those who can't see the wood for the trees those telling us that the "opportunity" is there for clubs to traverse the leagues, it will only be such if the bar is set low enough and the intention is to move to a bigger populated SL division say 14 teams, as you say no SL team should be beaten by a Championship club on the criteria count.

If anyone believes they can please give examples of which Clubs can swop places please, after season 2025.

[RP London]

23 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

There is nothing in the plan that envisages on-field P&R being removed for the foreseeable future though?

I believe we are now into having to say this on every page... 

[RP London]

7 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

This all feels very "correlation is causation" with plenty of confirmation bias thrown in for good measure. 

None of what you say really answers that question of how we get more people - and a more diverse range of people - watching rugby league. It's just "everything is fine, the product is fine, we just don't have enough cities". It seems to place all of the blame on just one of the "four Ps" of marketing, and neglecting the possibility that the other three could also be the problem. 

If Leeds can't pull in wealthy punters from the "golden triangle" of North Leeds for a game against world champion St Helens, why would they find it any easier for a game against London or Newcastle? How many people are genuinely thinking, "I like the look of that, but the population of St Helens is only 180,000 people?". 

If we are struggling to pull in younger audiences in the heartlands, why would a team in Bristol be able to pull in younger audiences, and why would they be able to do something that our heartland clubs can't do? 

If a city-based club like Bradford finds it difficult to engage the Asian community on their doorstep, why would a club in West London find it any easier?

Like I say, geography is a right answer to a particular question. But for the big question - the real question - that we should be trying to answer, it's really not the issue. The issue comes down to the people the sport wants to reach, what those people want in return for their leisure time and money, and what the sport can do to deliver that. The location is, at best, secondary. 

absolutely bang on the money.

[Harry Stottle]

3 minutes ago, RP London said:

I believe we are now into having to say this on every page... 

Yes on field  P&R is for this year, but beyond that?

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

6 minutes ago, RP London said:

I believe we are now into having to say this on every page... 

I may just add it to my signature in big, bold, red letters