gingerjon Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 10 hours ago, Archie Gordon said: Just to add that I think it's wrong to see funding well-run clubs in the Championship as "funding the Championship". The blurring comes (for mine) when people say that funding the Championship and League 1 is funding the community game or the grassroots. Because that's not what it is. Rightly or wrongly, it is funding for semi professional rugby league and the debate should be about how much that is worth. (My view: take away the disparities in funding within the division and go from there.) 1 Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archie Gordon Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 15 minutes ago, gingerjon said: The blurring comes (for mine) when people say that funding the Championship and League 1 is funding the community game or the grassroots. Because that's not what it is. Rightly or wrongly, it is funding for semi professional rugby league and the debate should be about how much that is worth. (My view: take away the disparities in funding within the division and go from there.) No - I don't think funding clubs in the Championship is community spend. (Community spend does need increasing but let's not muddy the waters). I do think it is sensible to spend a reasonable amount of money on challenger clubs though, whatever division they sit in. To repeat an earlier point, investing nearly £2m in Leigh one year and nearly £zero the next (and vv) is an obviously abysmal idea. For clarity, I consider Wakefield, Salford, etc., as challenger clubs (cat B essentially). They, too, ought to get less than they do now until they score higher on the IMG card. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Stottle Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 12 hours ago, Chrispmartha said: Would St Helens be current World Champions if they had a £1m cut in funding in previous years? Always two sides to an argument Chris, would say Fev still be in the Championship had they been recieving an extra million £ per year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Stottle Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 12 hours ago, Chrispmartha said: So A clubs get the full £2million? But B clubs in SL get £1m to compete against the clubs who get £2m? Thats not really going to work out well is it. That was my thought as well, and if we had 6 Championship teams with B's and the rest with C's that would be the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whatmichaelsays Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 10 hours ago, redjonn said: taking that principle I guess within SL apart from say approx 6 clubs one could apply the last paragraph. I don't think Sky to take someone else's argument pay for SL because of the weaker 4 or 5 clubs. Its the top/stronger clubs they pay for, the weaker one's gain from that. Sky don't care if some of the weaker SL clubs were replaced by others. How many is up to debate. I can see why giving clubs area to focus on and give grading on how well they are doing. I guess an analogy would be a Ofsted. I am just of the opinion that the individual grading points should not determine promotion where clubs are of a similar grade B assuming we have P/R. We shackle the strong financial clubs via the salary cap to the lowest denominator, yet prevent a grade A from being relegated if they finish bottom. On the one hand we shackle them, on the other we protect them. Although as I've said earlier in this thread my fundamental dislike is the score card approach. Having experienced such in the company I worked following consultant input to then realise it was a major distraction focusing time and effort and was ripped up to focus on the basics of growing our subsequently more and highly successful business. Of course this is a sport. It's certainly reasonable to suggest that even within the relatively small confines of SL, the funding that goes into some clubs generates a better return than it does in others, but that isn't a justification for spreading that investment even thinner into the lower leagues. If anything, it's a justification for giving a greater share of funding to those clubs that provide the best returns (be that commercial, media coverage, talent development, etc). But we don't do that because I think it's generally accepted that having a league of six playing each other isn't beneficial - we accept that the funding needs to be spread to create a competitive balance, and 12 clubs at present is the chosen model. There are flaws in the grading system, but I do think it is a good enough compromise to achieve what we're led to believe it sets out to do - to encourage clubs to invest in improving the commercial performance of their clubs, to retain some element of on-field meritocracy and to preserve the value of the game's biggest asset. I know this isn't a universally popular view, but had Leeds come a cropper in one of their flirtations with the middle eights or in the Agar era, that's a huge commercial hit to the sport and one that it arguably couldn't afford to take. But if fans and stakeholders of Championship and L1 clubs feel they deserve a bigger share of that pie, I'd suggest that their argument needs to be somewhat stronger than "but what about Wakefield?". Say we divert 10% of Leeds' central funding and give that to Hunslet - what does the game get in return for that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrispmartha Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said: Always two sides to an argument Chris, would say Fev still be in the Championship had they been recieving an extra million £ per year? And you are missing the point. You are wanting to reward lower teams at the expense of the successful ones. Why should Featherstone get the same funding from Sky Sports as St Helens? And to answer your question, yes Fev might well still be in the championship if the other top clubs in the Championship we’re getting £1m funding aswell. Set out your pitch to me as to why you would defund the top sides in SL and give it to Featherstone? Why does Featherstone deserve the money over St Helens? Edited March 23, 2023 by Chrispmartha 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RP London Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 17 hours ago, Barley Mow said: No system is going to achieve every objective (especially one I thought up on the spur of the moment when I should have been working!) Any system will prioritise different things: I like the idea of rewarding clubs for developing their infrastructure, fan base, etc, but think that on field P&R should be retained. Rewarding them financially through central funding achieves both of those aims, even though it may not prioritise others. That's as far as I got with the idea. Totally understand you hadn't costed a full plan etc.. wasn't meaning to do what a few people on do and imply people on here should have any full answer and solve a problem in one post that experts have failed to solve for 20+ years. My main point is about speed and P&R stops that speed and speed of change is what we need now. As I've said before, if you can keep p&r between the Bs then I that can still work on this but at that point there needs to be a waiting so that a nom SL club can get an A and leapfrog it so that we also get the speed of change that we need. That keeps the best of both worlds.. but if P&R cannot cope with that system then I think that is the sacrifice that is needed for the change to happen.. it doesn't have to be gone for good but to get this change maybe it has to go for a while. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RP London Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 13 hours ago, Harry Stottle said: Don't forget that there was a period in the last 10 years that Fev would have been promoted but for the Closed Shop, so your 30 years does not really stack up. And eagles... twice.. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Stottle Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 33 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said: And you are missing the point. You are wanting to reward lower teams at the expense of the successful ones. Why should Featherstone get the same funding from Sky Sports as St Helens? And to answer your question, yes Fev might well still be in the championship if the other top clubs in the Championship we’re getting £1m funding aswell. Set out your pitch to me as to why you would defund the top sides in SL and give it to Featherstone? Why does Featherstone deserve the money over St Helens? Christopher, no need to go into a diatribe, I know you are very protective of the share out of the funding money, it was just a simple retort to your equally simple question. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barley Mow Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 15 minutes ago, RP London said: Totally understand you hadn't costed a full plan etc.. wasn't meaning to do what a few people on do and imply people on here should have any full answer and solve a problem in one post that experts have failed to solve for 20+ years. My main point is about speed and P&R stops that speed and speed of change is what we need now. As I've said before, if you can keep p&r between the Bs then I that can still work on this but at that point there needs to be a waiting so that a nom SL club can get an A and leapfrog it so that we also get the speed of change that we need. That keeps the best of both worlds.. but if P&R cannot cope with that system then I think that is the sacrifice that is needed for the change to happen.. it doesn't have to be gone for good but to get this change maybe it has to go for a while. Although I'll wait to see more detail, based on what's been released so far there would have to be significant weighting introduced in favour of non-SL clubs. It currently looks very unlikely that any club will be able to achieve an A grade if they aren't already in Super League. I'm not anticipating any leapfrogging. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Stottle Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 12 minutes ago, RP London said: And eagles... twice.. Also Leigh twice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeordieSaint Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 45 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said: And you are missing the point. You are wanting to reward lower teams at the expense of the successful ones. Which is unfair… quite ironic as unfairness is the argument for not removing P&R etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrispmartha Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 18 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said: Christopher, no need to go into a diatribe, I know you are very protective of the share out of the funding money, it was just a simple retort to your equally simple question. It’s not about me being protective of the money, I dare say my club would probably be ok with a cut in funding. My point of view is that to move the sport forward we need to make the top end of the sport better and I believe the grading system gives the lower clubs a blueprint on how to join that top end. Distributing money so we focus on making the P&R battle better is focusing on the wrong bit. 5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattSantos Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 13 hours ago, Dave T said: You think all 36 clubs should get an equal split? I've been thinking about this. Would it be such a bad idea? There is a finite amount of money in the game derived from TV money. This would be spent where it is now, on players etc but by a more varied number of clubs; the talent is therefore spread and we get a more even comp. It wouldn't work now, for obvious reasons, but once the C and lower grade B clubs have called it a day, maybe a move to a conference style system and a mirror of the NFL model would work? I really do think it could. 1 Running the Rob Burrow marathon to raise money for the My Name'5 Doddie foundation: https://www.justgiving.com/fundraising/ben-dyas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spidey Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 I do think there could be something done with funding / prize money in SL. make the difference between finishing positions enough that climbing say from 10th to 9th at end of season is worth something? I think there’s only negligible differences - happy to be corrected 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerjon Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 35 minutes ago, Spidey said: I do think there could be something done with funding / prize money in SL. make the difference between finishing positions enough that climbing say from 10th to 9th at end of season is worth something? I think there’s only negligible differences - happy to be corrected Wouldn't want Super League to become as distorted by funding imbalances as the Championship Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hull Kingston Bronco Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 15 hours ago, Derwent Parker said: They have to overspend because they are not gifted the 2M you are "Gifted" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. Sky pay media rights for a product. The clubs that create that product receive money, in order to create the product. Would you have it shared equally amongst all the clubs? Do you think Sky would pay for the part-time, semi-pro Super League product you'd have as a result? The result of your alternative distribution of TV rights money would be... no TV rights money any more. I guess we'd all be finally equal though eh. 2 Apparently this site says I "won the day" here on 23rd Jan, 19th Jan, 9th Jan also 13th December, whatever any of that means. Anyway, 4 times in a few weeks? The forum must be going to the dogs - you people need to seriously up your game. Where's Dutoni when you need him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derwent Parker Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 12 hours ago, GeordieSaint said: Yes they do - hence why they get a chunk of the money already. The vast majority however, rightly remains in SL. I think you interpreting 20K out of 2Million a "chunk" - think we will have to sgree to differ on that - its "crumbs" really 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hull Kingston Bronco Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 15 hours ago, Harry Stottle said: Don't forget that there was a period in the last 10 years that Fev would have been promoted but for the Closed Shop, so your 30 years does not really stack up. Fair point, I'll take that on board and adjust my argument: I believe well-run, progressive Championship clubs have a greater than "once in 28 years" chance of making the elite comp under the new proposals, and so it is not a disadvantage for them. 1 Apparently this site says I "won the day" here on 23rd Jan, 19th Jan, 9th Jan also 13th December, whatever any of that means. Anyway, 4 times in a few weeks? The forum must be going to the dogs - you people need to seriously up your game. Where's Dutoni when you need him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrispmartha Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Derwent Parker said: I think you interpreting 20K out of 2Million a "chunk" - think we will have to sgree to differ on that - its "crumbs" really Is this £2m figure you keep stating the actual figure? or the £20k for that matter Edited March 23, 2023 by Chrispmartha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hull Kingston Bronco Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 2 hours ago, Harry Stottle said: Always two sides to an argument Chris, would say Fev still be in the Championship had they been recieving an extra million £ per year? I think it's perfectly possible that Featherstone could be as strong as Cas or Wakefield had they been in Super League from the start, with the same funding. It wouldn't be fair to argue otherwise. But I don't think the sport needs 3 teams from the same tight geographic area in a 12 team league, if it is to maximise its broadcast attractiveness or commercial value. Complexities like that are what IMG are trying to factor in with the grading system. 1 Apparently this site says I "won the day" here on 23rd Jan, 19th Jan, 9th Jan also 13th December, whatever any of that means. Anyway, 4 times in a few weeks? The forum must be going to the dogs - you people need to seriously up your game. Where's Dutoni when you need him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spidey Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 32 minutes ago, gingerjon said: Wouldn't want Super League to become as distorted by funding imbalances as the Championship Depends what you define as funding v prize money I suppose. I get the point, I just think there should be more financial reward for results on the field Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerjon Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 3 minutes ago, Spidey said: Depends what you define as funding v prize money I suppose. I get the point, I just think there should be more financial reward for results on the field Yes, I don't have any immediate answers but, clearly, prize money is no longer particularly valuable in rugby league - or else the amounts would be publicly available like they used to be in RL and still are in most sports. I'd like that to change, mostly for the reasons you say. But the issue, and so much of the arguments from everyone hinges on this issue, is that the money in rugby league is at such a low level that weighted distribution (however decided) tends to entrench positions. 1 Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derwent Parker Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 3 hours ago, Archie Gordon said: No - I don't think funding clubs in the Championship is community spend. (Community spend does need increasing but let's not muddy the waters). I do think it is sensible to spend a reasonable amount of money on challenger clubs though, whatever division they sit in. To repeat an earlier point, investing nearly £2m in Leigh one year and nearly £zero the next (and vv) is an obviously abysmal idea. For clarity, I consider Wakefield, Salford, etc., as challenger clubs (cat B essentially). They, too, ought to get less than they do now until they score higher on the IMG card. That is what I suggested when I mentioned this earlier. Hypothetical CFs [could be 1.5/1/0.5 etc] Cat A- all get 2M as they do know - and SL safety Cat B - all get 1.3M Cat C - all get same - something sensible but not crumbs This will be more fair and the Bs that swap between SL and Champ will not lose their CF and when income rises give the Categories a % across the board. Make the step from A to B same as B to C [could be 1.5/1/0.5 etc] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RigbyLuger Posted March 23, 2023 Share Posted March 23, 2023 Do Championship clubs give any of their TV deal to League One? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now