IMG Grading Unveiled

[Derwent Parker]

22 minutes ago, del capo said:

Am I missing something?

' Non centralised funding '   to me means showing sound finances without  the up to £2 mil  RFL handouts currently available to SL clubs.

On that basis will  not more than a few Championship clubs who over the last couple of years  have had to cut their cloth accordingly  outscore SL ones ?

Well said 

The unfair CF has ruined our game.

[MattSantos]

Just now, Tommygilf said:

Its silly to suggest that community clubs would be involved in this format. 

It is a proposal for the whole game that naturally focuses on the elite levels (all 3 leagues) - because their success determines the success of the rest of it. No interest there, no community game. Everyone grows which benefits everyone else in the vicinity.

I refer to my post earlier. Unless they're plans to redistribute wealth and how they will fix the underlying problems within the sport, then it's as you said yourself, its for the elite and not a 'whole game solution'.

 

 

[Jughead]

2 minutes ago, Damien said:

I'm just catching up on this but it's pretty much as expected. I'm not sure on the catchment criteria but I suppose it depends on how it would work. I can understand it being used as a tick for new areas where RL isn't played but I'm uneasy about it being used to favour someone already being part of the club over someone else trying to join.

It’s to be based on the census, so Wigan and Leigh will seemingly be penalised based upon being within the same borough. 

[Derwent Parker]

24 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

"Are you or are you not a jam eater?"

"Yes."

Whitehaven are the Jam eaters -  Workington are the highsiders

[Colin James]

I wonder how they will audit attendance figures. I have doubts on the accuracy of some as it is and this seems to incentivise inflating your crowds.

[Harry Stottle]

21 minutes ago, Jughead said:

I’ve been bored so on the performance aspect, I’ve had a go at it. I’ve ranked teams 1-36 based upon their final rankings over the last three completed seasons (2019, 2021 and 2022) and then found an average and ranked them as such;

4 points- Anyone with an average of 12 or less

3 - Anyone with an average of 12.01 to 19

2 - Anyone with an average of 19.01 to 26

1 - Anyone with an average of 26.01+

With that in mind, the clubs are ranked as follows;

5 points - St Helens

4.25 - Wigan and Warrington

4 - Catalans, Leeds, Castleford, Salford, Huddersfield, Hull, Hull KR, Wakefield

3.26 - Leigh 

3.1 - Featherstone

3 - Halifax, York, London Broncos, Batley, Bradford, Toulouse

2.1 - Sheffield, Whitehaven, Barrow

2 - Widnes, Dewsbury, Swinton, Newcastle

1.1 - Workington, Keighley

1 - Oldham, Rochdale, Doncaster, North Wales, Hunslet, Midlands, London Skolars, Cornwall. 

But those three years you mention are only for illustration purposes, the system as I said doesnt come into effect untill 2025, it will be the the years preceding that being '22, '23 and '24 that will determine the performance scores or it should do.

[gingerjon]

Just now, Derwent Parker said:

Whitehaven are the Jam eaters -  Workington are the highsiders

But don't Whitehaven fans believe Workington are the jam eaters?

[Toby Chopra]

20 minutes ago, Derwent Parker said:

My opinion if they want to protect top teams and guarantee all 'A' teams are in SL - OK

BUT- if there is a 'B' team in SL and a 'B' team wins Champ them P&R should kick automatically as normal[no exceptions] , when all SL are A teams then you need to be an A etc

This is how it was presented at first, and I was on board with that.

But deciding the 'B' superleague places by mostly off field criteria and which favour some pretty weak SL incumbents is a mistake.

[Tommygilf]

2 minutes ago, MattSantos said:

I refer to my post earlier. Unless they're plans to redistribute wealth and how they will fix the underlying problems within the sport, then it's as you said yourself, its for the elite and not a 'whole game solution'.

 

 

And as I've always thought when talk of "wealth redistribution" is spoken about, what do you do when there is no wealth?

Lets be clear, that is where the sport is currently. 3 Super League clubs can't afford to spend the cap either through a benefactor or their own revenues. At least 2 more would struggle to do so without said benefactors. 

If all clubs, or at least the majority, are pushing towards a common goal of growing, then even those totally opposed to any idea will benefit from it. 

The Elite will be what brings in the money into the game, firstly through Super League, then Internationals, then the Challenge cup, then the Championship and so on.

Some people thought the Championship would bring in a good amount of TV money, and logically Super League would bring in more but both would be a sign of a healthy position. That evidently has not happened at all, and so a different path is being taken.

Adhering to and striving for these standards will benefit any club that tries it. But they won't turn clubs into entities they aren't or possibly cannot be. 

[Gav Wilson]

32 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

I think Sky will say P and R or go find a tv deal somewhere else as well. Making a huge amount of fixtures worthless. 

I must be imagining things when I see a channel called Sky Sports NFL on my TV guide for 6 months of the year.

[Derwent Parker]

5 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

But don't Whitehaven fans believe Workington are the jam eaters?

They are just not clever enough to remember the craic

[Guest]

20 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Why is that Paul, could it be that IMG will be history?

Rugby league in england won't be far behind.

[Just Browny]

I like:

- the public detail

- the weightings given to the various elements

- the fact primacy of tenure is in there

-  the fact it looks like it has been produced by a professional organisation.

I don't like:

- the use of population in the catchment area criteria. It feels very difficult to get right

I'd like to see:

- far more prominence of the women's, wheelchair, disability, community elements. Even if they are intrinsic to some of the categories, if Team x misses out to Team y and it is explained that that Team y got in due to its women's team, we will have conspiracy theories coming out of our ears. Better to make these things prominent.

Overall it is encouraging.

[Harry Stottle]

22 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

The details will be in that further handbook that we haven't yet seen and may not see until the vote is taken.

I think we will see it Ginger, if not by Keighley then by some other disgruntled club.

We were all told at the outset that this would be a system that every club can aim to get to the top, but if the carrot to success is dangled to far away clubs may just say f*^k it, and vote against it.

[The Blues Ox]

9 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

I think we will see it Ginger, if not by Keighley then by some other disgruntled club.

We were all told at the outset that this would be a system that every club can aim to get to the top, but if the carrot to success is dangled to far away clubs may just say f*^k it, and vote against it.

I can't wait for them to announce that current SL teams get 2 votes.  

[Derwent Parker]

20 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

And as I've always thought when talk of "wealth redistribution" is spoken about, what do you do when there is no wealth?

Lets be clear, that is where the sport is currently. 3 Super League clubs can't afford to spend the cap either through a benefactor or their own revenues. At least 2 more would struggle to do so without said benefactors. 

If all clubs, or at least the majority, are pushing towards a common goal of growing, then even those totally opposed to any idea will benefit from it. 

The Elite will be what brings in the money into the game, firstly through Super League, then Internationals, then the Challenge cup, then the Championship and so on.

Some people thought the Championship would bring in a good amount of TV money, and logically Super League would bring in more but both would be a sign of a healthy position. That evidently has not happened at all, and so a different path is being taken.

Adhering to and striving for these standards will benefit any club that tries it. But they won't turn clubs into entities they aren't or possibly cannot be. 

No

SL teams are paid 2M per season for being in the elite league. [SL]

Give Fev or Keighley or a few other teams 2M for each of the next few seasons and give a few of the lower SL teams L1 CF and see where we are in a few years.

Drop Wakefield [no offence just an example] and give them 25K per year or whatever it is  and promote Keighley and give them 2M for next few years - how will those 2 teams look in a few years???

They are the elite because they are paid to be not because they earned it.

No team in the lower leagues can compete with hat 2M handout  [Leigh exeption]

Edited March 9, 2023 by Derwent Parker

[The Blues Ox]

50 minutes ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

Non of this will make any difference at all a couple of years from now.

Makes it exciting for a little while but ultimatley you are probably right and in 2-3 years we will be discussing another rebrand.

[Damien]

19 minutes ago, Jughead said:

It’s to be based on the census, so Wigan and Leigh will seemingly be penalised based upon being within the same borough. 

That seems a little daft because St Helens is just as far from Wigan as Leigh so all should be penalised equally. Then it seems a little weird penalising Leeds because of Hunslet. I appreciate there is no straightforward way of doing it but pretty much no heartland team should get an advantage based on that.

[Derwent Parker]

2 minutes ago, The Blues Ox said:

I can't wait for them to announce that current SL teams get 2 votes.  

Wouldn't be surprised if they get 3

[Jughead]

2 minutes ago, Damien said:

That seems a little daft because St Helens is just as far from Wigan as Leigh so all should be penalised equally. Then it seems a little weird penalising Leeds because of Hunslet. I appreciate there is no straightforward way of doing it but pretty much no heartland team should get an advantage based on that.

It does seem so but as you say, whatever way you cut it, you’re going to get some form of disgruntlement somewhere. 

[Guest]

Just now, Derwent Parker said:

No

SL teams are paid 2M per season for being in the elite league. [SL]

Give Fev or Keighley or a few other teams 2M for each of the next few seasons and give a few of the lower SL teams L1 CF and see where we are in a few years.

Drop Wakefield [no offence just an example] and give them 25K per year or whatever it is  and promote Keighley and give them 2M for next few years - how will those 2 teams look in a few years???

They are the elite because they are paid to be not because they earned it.

No team in the lower leagues can compete with hat 2M handout  [Leigh exeptin]

Those clubs get the most money because they draw viewers. Shocking to see how many people within rugby league don't understand sports rights. Sky/C4 won't be agreeing to any deal which sees funding for the SL clubs slashed in favour of Fev or Keighley. 

[ATLANTISMAN]

I can see another drop in the next SKY deal unless some serious changes are made TBH I would go the self production route.

 

P 

[Tommygilf]

5 minutes ago, Derwent Parker said:

No

SL teams are paid 2M per season for being in the elite league. [SL]

Give Fev or Keighley or a few other teams 2M for each of the next few seasons and give a few of the lower SL teams L1 CF and see where we are in a few years.

Drop Wakefield [no offence just an example] and give them 25K per year or whatever it is  and promote Keighley and give them 2M for next few years - how will those 2 teams look in a few years???

They are the elite because they are paid to be not because they earned it.

No team in the lower leagues can compete with hat 2M handout  [Leigh exeption]

Firstly they don't get £2 million a season.

Secondly they all contribute to the content that earns that TV contract.

Thirdly, it isn't a gift.

[Tommygilf]

5 minutes ago, Damien said:

That seems a little daft because St Helens is just as far from Wigan as Leigh so all should be penalised equally. Then it seems a little weird penalising Leeds because of Hunslet. I appreciate there is no straightforward way of doing it but pretty much no heartland team should get an advantage based on that.

That's why I'd go with regions tbh. North West, Yorkshire and the Humber, Greater London, West Midlands, North East and the South West are covered and at least get the point across without being as you say unduly unfair to some just because of the decisions of 1974. These are broadly coterminous with the economic areas, save for Sheffield who may take sligh umbridge at losing some of its "city region" to its south.

[Harry Stottle]

7 minutes ago, NW10LDN said:

Those clubs get the most money because they draw viewers. Shocking to see how many people within rugby league don't understand sports rights. Sky/C4 won't be agreeing to any deal which sees funding for the SL clubs slashed in favour of Fev or Keighley. 

Or London !!!