IMG Grading Unveiled

[The Phantom Horseman]

2 minutes ago, dboy said:

How do Wigan/Leigh, Salford, Swinton, Saints, Wire et al fare?

Well Wigan, St Helens, and Warrington all score 1 point for catchment area, compared with 1.5 points for the imminent RL powerhouses of London Skolars, Hunslet, Doncaster, Sheffield, Cornwall, Midlands etc.

[dboy]

1 minute ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

Don't worry, you can always come and borrow our training centre again if you're really struggling.

Our players can't stop injuring themselves on our lush, flat, full-sized pitch - imagine the carnage if we made them run round on your farmers field of kids-sized pitch!

And many will require a tetanus booster before venturing past Sharlston.

[Tommygilf]

5 minutes ago, dboy said:

How do Wigan/Leigh, Salford, Swinton, Saints, Wire et al fare?

Only Wigan and Leigh are in the same Metropolitan Borough. Swinton come under Trafford because their home ground is in Sale, rather than Salford. The others are all in their own council areas I believe.

You'll have to check the populations yourself!

[dboy]

31 minutes ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

He's suggesting they finish 12th overall over the 3-year period, isn't he? Which teams above Wakefield in his table would have scored fewer points in this system over the 3 years in your opinion?

He's suggesting a score which is incorrect.

Under any treatment - averaging placement and giving it a score, or taking 3 yearly scores and averaging them, Wakey score 3.

They may well actually place 12th (I think I added Leigh to be 3.05), but if he's made error there, he's made it elsewhere.

TBH, "performance" will be fairly transparent score system - it's the stuff like catchment, fandom, media where dark arts are going to be performed.

[dboy]

7 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Only Wigan and Leigh are in the same Metropolitan Borough. Swinton come under Trafford because their home ground is in Sale, rather than Salford. The others are all in their own council areas I believe.

You'll have to check the populations yourself!

Wasn't suggesting they are all the same place, though I do realise most people that side of the hill are related.

I'll wait for the official stuff rather than seeking out conurbation data.

Thanks for the stuff you have shared though; it has helped.

[superten]

On 10/03/2023 at 12:22, MattSantos said:

Performance scores. Ave score over the last 3 years based on league position (not playoffs - other than winning it of course)

Team	Ave
Saints	4.76
Wigan	3.94
Catalans	3.78
Leeds	3.64
Warrington	3.49
Huddersfield	3.41
Cas	3.30
Hull	3.27
Hull KR	3.19
Salford	3.16
Wakey	3.01
Leigh	2.91
Toulouse	2.86
Fev	2.62
Halifax	2.46
Batley	2.35
Bradford	2.24
Whitehaven	2.13
York	1.91
Widnes	1.91
London	1.91

 

 

where are Sheffield ?

[TheReaper]

1 hour ago, redjonn said:

Maybe but another way to look at it would be... spend money on better players, improving the standards of performance and hence entertainment on offer giving IMG a better product to market and advertise, thus making it easier to do...

Just putting an alternate perspective/being devils advocate and as such sometimes have to consider a much broader analysis... whether it would be successful is another question.

Thinking that on-field performance is the only thing that's important in terms of entertainment, is a big part of where the sport is where it is.

[superten]

Looking at the proposal i think most clubs could achieve a B grade with long term planning. The problem is most clubs want instant success to many teams seem to think it there right to be at the top table. A ten year plan by a club could be the way to go about it. Slowly improve stadium till you reach maximum points. At the same time start several young age groups teams as they go through the years your developing a bond between those kids and your club.Also there parents tend to become fans of that club. So your slowly building up your fan base.    Social media points shouldn't be hard to get. Another point is that super league is not the be all and end all. When there was no promotion before it didn't mean it was the end of the Championship. There are some good games in the championship and rivalries has been built up in recent years. I do think the championship should be increased to a 16 team league. I know that only leaves  8 teams in league 1 but i think we could bulk that up with offering amateur clubs to participate in that league while remaining Amateur.       

Edited July 5, 2023 by superten

[JonM]

4 minutes ago, superten said:

Looking at the proposal i think most clubs could achieve a B grade with long term planning. 

Yep. Widnes could gain a point by getting a couple of hundred people to move to Runcorn in time for the next census. Unless the catchment criterion changes from 130K to 131K at some point.

[overtheborder]

Interesting having had a read through the document - I'll start by saying I'm not a fan of anything other than on-field performance contributing to what league you play in (apart from the usual standard of ground stuff most leagues have in sport), but this is particularly interesting in that a lot of this seems to feed into a cycle which, while I'm definitely not saying is deliberate, seems to keep the current SL sides in the top league. Things like on-field success has an impact on crowds, social media following, finances etc., so the current top sides have an advantage. If Championship games are on viaplay for example, you'd assume that has a lower subscription rate and so by default even the worst-watched SL sides on Sky I'd have thought pull in far more viewers for their games. Advantage SL again - and so on and so forth. This isn't a rant at all to be fair, but it seems like you'd have to do a lot to win promotion as a non-SL side.

There's also the question of what happens if there are more than 12 A-grade clubs? Or have I missed that?

[Tommygilf]

7 minutes ago, overtheborder said:

There's also the question of what happens if there are more than 12 A-grade clubs? Or have I missed that?

Fantastic, but unlikely scenario, the league expands

[TheReaper]

double post

Edited July 5, 2023 by TheReaper

[idrewthehaggis]

7 hours ago, OriginalMrC said:

There's a handful of clubs outside SL with the facilities (and potential fan bases) to match. 

And yup "handful."

To be truthful, is it enough to have the required two divisions to facilitate P and R?

Secondly whilst Post Codes are to send letters, local government boundaries exist to define where a council delivers services. 

They would be a very crude mechanism to detail where a particular club derives its support from or its "catchment."

Eg Warriors and  Chorley, Saints and Liverpool, SRD and Manchester and Castleford and Hades.

It hence demonstrates how miserily ignorant and un transparent RL statistics are.

Whilst it is pretty much common knowledge where, what numbers attend football and cricket, it would seem the stats for RL are absent. I mean some clubs dont release attendance figures, others seem to have plethora of "corporates" that get included whether or not they are used. Estimating the number of season tickets for clubs is guestimation.

And as for finances.............

Edited July 5, 2023 by idrewthehaggis

[bobbruce]

4 hours ago, The Blues Ox said:

Whoever gets promoted really has some huge decisions to make. If by some miracle Fax were to make it and I think Fev should think along similar lines, I would make very little improvements to the playing squad as its very likely they will finish last with the type of player they can bring in so it would really be in their best interests to stay part time and bank the Tv money and wait to see where they stand on the mock grades. That money could then be used to try and increase points scored in areas away from the pitch. Going full time could be a disaster for the club as if they don't make the grade it will put them under real financial pressure the season after not to mention make it really difficult to put together a competitive squad in the championship the following season.

 

Probably won't matter longterm anyway as we will have something new in place in 3-4 years again.

If a team didn’t go full time on promotion to SL I wouldn’t let them up. There should be a few things that are non negotiable going full time running a reserves and an academy are just three basics. 

[The Blues Ox]

7 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

If a team didn’t go full time on promotion to SL I wouldn’t let them up. There should be a few things that are non negotiable going full time running a reserves and an academy are just three basics. 

I actually agree although the reserves and academy isn't something that could just happen overnight and again if that team were to get relegated then they would have to sack off their reserves and academy again which isn't ideal. As it is, and because there is no criteria covering it the smart thing would be to bank the money and bring in some more quality part time players knowing that you are likely to finish bottom anyway but with a decent squad I would expect the best part time players to be able to at least be competitive and pick up the odd win. Contrast that with bringing in the worst full time players and likely getting spanked every week makes it an interesting proposition.

[Wakefield Ram]

2 hours ago, Saint Toppy said:

Reading this entire thread I wouldn't say its this at all. There's been a few bitter & twisted posters, largely supporters who's clubs are never going to get into SL under the IMG proposals (ignoring the fact they were highly unlikely to under straight P&R anyway), but by & large this thread has just sparked some healthy debate on the specifics of the grading criteria.

The vast majority of people can see the game is in trouble (though many disagree to the extent of it), but most also seem to be in agreement that something has to change. The majority also seem to be generally in favour of IMG's proposals in principal with the main disagreements just being over individual criteria & scoring systems. I also suspect that much of that disagreement is biased towards the position their own clubs would find themselves in under the proposals. Any criteria that disadvantages their club is bound to be opposed by the fans of that club.

This all assumes that people will want to watch pretty much the same teams doing 5 one man drives and a kick, players abusing referees and players suffering brain injuries (concussions) on a regular basis. And a total lack of a regular international competition against the likes of Australia, NZ, Samoa.... 

The product is predictable, dull and repetitive for the most part, the "arm wrestle" which most games are is boring to casual observers.

[Daft old hooker]

17 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

If a team didn’t go full time on promotion to SL I wouldn’t let them up. There should be a few things that are non negotiable going full time running a reserves and an academy are just three basics. 

As there is not really a reserve league for championship teams and you have to have a license to run an academy unfortunately makes this impossible 

[GUBRATS]

7 pages since last night , are they worth reading ? 

Oh and has the ' whataboutery ' started yet ?

[WakefieldCityLoyal]

11 minutes ago, The Blues Ox said:

I actually agree although the reserves and academy isn't something that could just happen overnight and again if that team were to get relegated then they would have to sack off their reserves and academy again which isn't ideal. As it is, and because there is no criteria covering it the smart thing would be to bank the money and bring in some more quality part time players knowing that you are likely to finish bottom anyway but with a decent squad I would expect the best part time players to be able to at least be competitive and pick up the odd win. Contrast that with bringing in the worst full time players and likely getting spanked every week makes it an interesting proposition.

It’s certainly an interesting proposition.   Especially if the relegated team keep their reserves and established academy and do what they can to improve every other expect of IMG score.   If the promoted team is on a similar or lower IMG score it’s interesting how they would approach it.   

[Agbrigg]

26 minutes ago, idrewthehaggis said:

 

Whilst it is pretty much common knowledge where, what numbers attend football and cricket, it would seem the stats for RL are absent. I mean some clubs dont release attendance figures, others seem to have plethora of "corporates" that get included whether or not they are used. Estimating the number of season tickets for clubs is guestimation.

 

I have always said, the two biggest fantasy's in Rugby League are that all teams don't fiddle the salary cap and the other is attendance figures quoted by some clubs.

I know the easiest way to get into the top IMG bracket attendance wise is just to post figures, no one checks and most people believe.

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

8 hours ago, Veridical said:

Well, that’s not what the cover page of the document says. It says that the “ultimate purpose” of grading is to “incentivise clubs”.

Yes it is. It's to show them what they need to focus on in order to progress. But in the real world there are some things that clubs can't change easily, and those things still have a relative value to the sport. 

So far it seems only catchment is uninfluenceable, so it's clear the overwhelming majority of the criteria can be directly improved by the clubs.

There's no contradiction here. 

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

8 hours ago, Dovster said:

I don't know if you'll know ths one or not but you seem very knowledgeable on the subject.

Could a grade B club with 8 points be promoted and a grade B club with 14 points be relegated from SL?

I don't think a club with 8 points would replace a club with 14 points under this system, no. It's the grading points that determine promotion and relegation. A Championship club with 8 points would replace a Super League club with 7.5 points though. 

[Derwent Parker]

3 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

This system won't even see 50% of that 12 years RP, it will be either ripped up or SL clubs will go their own way which will be the death knell for the sport.

Sorry Harry but i dont think it will be the death knell for the sport only the death knell for Full time?

Teams in L1  are getting next to nothing 25k ish from CF, Champ a bit more maybe 100k - so its not going to change much if SL goes there own way or we dont get a tv deal.

These grading system has made the gap bigger now so SL is a different comp already.

Leigh timed it to perfection [congrats to DB] - Fev might do similar but most cant match that.

There is a lot of great rugby played in Champ and L1 at Part time level, they couldn't compete with Toronto or Leigh and Fev etc but most other matches are just as good to watch

[ATLANTISMAN]

I can see a surprise one here in a new franchise set up 

 

P 

[redjonn]

1 hour ago, TheReaper said:

Thinking that on-field performance is the only thing that's important in terms of entertainment, is a big part of where the sport is where it is.

gosh, how do you read into my single comment that I think its the only thing thats important or that is what others in the sport may think... begs believe