Club Grading Predictions

[Chrispmartha]

Just now, Archie Gordon said:

Haha. But even that bit is unclear. I thought the LED reference was to perimeter advertising boards!

No its the floodlights.

Watch Fevs game on Monday to see why it’s important 

[The Phantom Horseman]

33 minutes ago, The storm said:

My 14 team super league prediction in no particular order

 

St helens.... Nailed on

 

Warrington. Nailed on

Wigan... Nailed on

Catalan dragons.... Nailed on

London broncos

Newcastle thunder

York

Toulouse

Hull

Hull kr

Bradford bulls

Huddersfield giants

Leigh leopards

Salford red devils

Castleford tigers..... Who are totally at risk

Are you saying that everything that was unveiled yesterday is going to go in the trash bin? There's no chance of London Broncos (or indeed Newcastle) getting anywhere near SL based on those criteria.

[David Shepherd]

1 hour ago, The storm said:

My 14 team super league prediction in no particular order

 

St helens.... Nailed on

 

Warrington. Nailed on

Wigan... Nailed on

Catalan dragons.... Nailed on

London broncos

Newcastle thunder

York

Toulouse

Hull

Hull kr

Bradford bulls

Huddersfield giants

Leigh leopards

Salford red devils

Castleford tigers..... Who are totally at risk

No Leeds?

There's no way London, Newcastle, York and Bradford are getting in for at least 3-4 years. They're nowhere near on many of the new metrics.

[Gav Wilson]

18 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

I think that is a fair assesment of where York are likely to end up. Comfortably above 10 say, but not yet close enough to that important 15.

YORK RLFC chairman Clint Goodchild believes that the grading criteria that was outlined publicly by IMG yesterday was reassuring.

[Hopping Mad]

3 hours ago, The Blues Ox said:

I bet Big Nige isn't either.

An asset sweating?

[Michael Bates]

4 hours ago, ShropshireBull said:

Thats exactly what it says . 

Quote from Batley chairman

“If you managed to get a Grade B you'd be eligible for promotion but that's not the case, is it? We need to find out how many points we've got and can we get some more. I thought our target was to get enough to be a Grade B but that's clearly not the target, the target is to get enough points to be in the top twelve, that's probably not possible. It means we're not eligible for promotion no matter how much we improve in the next year or so."

Pretty damning when one of your stakeholders feels lied to tbh.

I was under the impression in the same way as the Batley chairman is. That if you were category B you'd be eligible for promotion by winning the Championship but it seems it's done based on score alone. So, hypothetically a team that finishes fifth in Super League could be replaced by a team that finished seventh in the Championship?

With Super League teams taking more of the central funding, raising more through match day income due to higher crowds and having the ability to host large non-rugby events, it's hard to see how a Championship club ever replaces a Super League club.

You raise standards across the board by funding the "lesser" clubs more than the clubs that are at the top already. That creates stagnation.

[sam4731]

2 hours ago, Agbrigg said:

well 24hrs gone by, loads of discussion and yet no one has a clue how all this will pan out. We don't even know for sure how many teams will be in the top league.

We do know how many teams there will be. 12. It says on the document.

[Chrispmartha]

11 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

Problem is that Champ clubs are already well behind on Fandom and League position which is half. Rvenue is heavily dependent on what league you are in so no champ club is above any 12th SL team.  

Again SB, how do you know this won't be taken into consideration?

 

[SalfordSlim]

18 hours ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

You're deluded...and obsessed 

I'd have stopped after deluded.

[Oxford]

SRD A++

 I may have downplayed their score.

[zylya]

On 10/03/2023 at 16:04, ShropshireBull said:

Problem is that Champ clubs are already well behind on Fandom and League position which is half. Rvenue is heavily dependent on what league you are in so no champ club is above any 12th SL team. Not going to be possible. Unless they are expanding the league. Or being more cyncical perhaps the plan is to just kill off most semi professional clubs who realize they can´t make it without having the guts to franchise and build around the survivors. 

Yes but league position is ranked 1-36 and is worth 4 points. So if you're 12th in SL then you're likely getting almost exactly the same as 1st in Championship but 1st in Championship also gets a bonus for winning the comp. If it's equally weighted across 1-36 then the difference between 12th and 13th (top of Champ) is 0.11 points. Winning the Championship is +0.25 bonus so actually a net positive of 0.14 points over the bottom team in SL.

Revenue is based on non-centralised turnover, so any central funding from being in a particular league won't count (i.e. no specific advantage for being in Super League) and on top of that, there's also a smaller portion assigned to non-centralised turnover as a %age of total turnover - so every extra £ a Champ club earns will be worth more on that valuation than a SL club (since they will have lower central funding). While there will obviously be some income that a club gets (tickets, sponsors etc) for being in Super League over Championship, well-run clubs with aspirations of promotion will already have a lot of that in place as part of their "promotion" push.

The way the grading seems to work is that it will be EXTREMELY unlikely that a club will jump from middle/lower Championship into Super League but much more likely that the top Championship club will get promoted unless the bottom (or perhaps second bottom) SL club has a very high grading on other areas. It's also very unlikely that a Super League team will finish 5th/6th and be relegated because they'll be picking up a high amount of Performance points. Because it's a three year cycle for Performance, it will also reward consistency - so winning the Championship a second time looks like it would give you MORE Performance bonus points than just winning it once, which might push you over the edge for promotion.

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

On 10/03/2023 at 09:55, David Shepherd said:

On field performance is only a maximum of 5 of the 20 available points. There's still more detail to come, but it's been hinted that winning a competition (league, cup, sundeck cup) gets you bonus points. 

I'd imagine that to score the maximum of 5, you'd need to at a minimum get to the SL playoffs and/or win the cup. If there's a bonus point for winning the championship, it's not inconceivable that the team that does could score more than the bottom team in SL.

 

On 10/03/2023 at 10:17, gingerjon said:

The link to the document (apologies on phone so can’t do it but it is on here) has the bonus points. It’s fractions but they are there.

0.25pts for the CC and 0.1 for the SDC

[sam4731]

Thought I'd bump this with the final criteria being unveiled. How many points do you think your club will get?

[Vambo]

15 minutes ago, sam4731 said:

Thought I'd bump this with the final criteria being unveiled. How many points do you think your club will get?

Enough.

[M j M]

I've run the figures on Leeds and they are coming out at 17.610 using present league position/attendances to date and some informed assumptions.

There are lots of things that strike me from running through this absurd process in a bit of detail but for now I'll stick to just two things from the document:

1. Leeds would get another 0.5 points if Paul Caddick wrote a cheque out for them for £500,000 as a long-term loan. Now this might actually have happened as the club is believed to have made another large loss in 2022 (accounts yet to be published) as the corporate events industry was slow to recover from Covid so he might actually have needed to put some cash in. But it makes no sense whatsoever that a club should be rewarded for taking on debt it doesn't need.

2. I think the document has an error in it. On page 9 it says website visits are worth 0.8 and social engagements 0.5 whilst on page 13 these scores are reversed.

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

20 minutes ago, M j M said:

I've run the figures on Leeds and they are coming out at 17.610 using present league position/attendances to date and some informed assumptions.

There are lots of things that strike me from running through this absurd process in a bit of detail but for now I'll stick to just two things from the document:

1. Leeds would get another 0.5 points if Paul Caddick wrote a cheque out for them for £500,000 as a long-term loan. Now this might actually have happened as the club is believed to have made another large loss in 2022 (accounts yet to be published) as the corporate events industry was slow to recover from Covid so he might actually have needed to put some cash in. But it makes no sense whatsoever that a club should be rewarded for taking on debt it doesn't need.

2. I think the document has an error in it. On page 9 it says website visits are worth 0.8 and social engagements 0.5 whilst on page 13 these scores are reversed.

I've been perplexed by that since the proposed scoring details were first published. I'm not sure I'd class the requirement of one year's notice for repayment of any such loan as indicating 'long term' investment either

[The Blues Ox]

17 hours ago, sam4731 said:

Thought I'd bump this with the final criteria being unveiled. How many points do you think your club will get?

10.325

[Cheadle Leyther]

On 10/03/2023 at 13:26, Agbrigg said:

well 24hrs gone by, loads of discussion and yet no one has a clue how all this will pan out. We don't even know for sure how many teams will be in the top league.

Soccer is by far the most successful team sport, followed by cricket and Rugby Union. I bet their supporters would not accept all this garbage. 

Can you imagine newbies, or fringe supporters being bemused when the league year ends and trying to work out who goes up and down. 

Dad takes his lad to introduce him to rugby League and he asks " why are we getting relegated because we have finished above that other team"

Dad repliers "Because they have LED floodlights son, we don't"

Or union Wasps/Worcester/ London Irish supporting dad says we can’t go cos we’ve gone bust!!

[idrewthehaggis]

And there was myself imaging IMG was about increasing revenue and media exposure, not another restructure or securing various clubs into SL from  their various "stades de crasse"?

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

8.0085, sorry Sophie.....

[Kirmonds pouch]

On 09/03/2023 at 19:24, Jughead said:

A’s - Saints, Wigan, Leeds, Catalans, FC, KR, Warrington. 

Maybe Huddersfield, too. 

Salford, Cas, Wakefield, Leigh, Toulouse (and possibly Hudds) to be B’s. 

Everyone else C ya later*. 
 

* This is a joke before someone moans about killing little clubs or whatever. 

Cas a grade B, you sure?

[Saint Toppy]

19 hours ago, M j M said:

I've run the figures on Leeds and they are coming out at 17.610 using present league position/attendances to date and some informed assumptions.

There are lots of things that strike me from running through this absurd process in a bit of detail but for now I'll stick to just two things from the document:

1. Leeds would get another 0.5 points if Paul Caddick wrote a cheque out for them for £500,000 as a long-term loan. Now this might actually have happened as the club is believed to have made another large loss in 2022 (accounts yet to be published) as the corporate events industry was slow to recover from Covid so he might actually have needed to put some cash in. But it makes no sense whatsoever that a club should be rewarded for taking on debt it doesn't need.

2. I think the document has an error in it. On page 9 it says website visits are worth 0.8 and social engagements 0.5 whilst on page 13 these scores are reversed.

Care to share your breakdown on how you arrived at 17.61

[Tommygilf]

1 hour ago, idrewthehaggis said:

And there was myself imaging IMG was about increasing revenue and media exposure, not another restructure or securing various clubs into SL from  their various "stades de crasse"?

You need the best clubs, by metrics not entirely based on who wins a rugby match, in the top league to increase revenue and media exposure.

[The Lad]

23 hours ago, sam4731 said:

Thought I'd bump this with the final criteria being unveiled. How many points do you think your club will get?

Even less than i expect lol.

[GUBRATS]

52 minutes ago, The Lad said:

Even less than i expect lol.

Hardly surprising , it's like trying to figure what the penalty was given for in a Union match , nobody knows , including the ref