London Skolars

[The Art of Hand and Foot]

1 minute ago, Griff said:

The game's moved on in the last 30 years.

It seems to have passed you by.

Now I don't mind constructive argument either for or against. But nonsense replies don't move the problem on to a resolution!

[Griff]

1 minute ago, The Art of Hand and Foot said:

Now I don't mind constructive argument either for or against. But nonsense replies don't move the problem on to a resolution!

How will you fit 43 games into an eight month season? That's where the nonsense lies.

What we did 30 years ago isn't acceptable today in terms of player welfare.

[EssexRL]

8 hours ago, THE RED ROOSTER said:

Feel sorry for you. You are a genuine fan and hopefully not lost to the sport.

Thank you and no I’m not lost! I loved RL before Skolars existed (watching Halifax on Grandstand in 70s) despite growing up in Berkshire. What drives me mad is the lost opportunity that the team represented. A little more support and funding and we could have grown the sport. 

[EssexRL]

The RFL need to talk to the board and dare I say fans and learn from this. If the sport is serious about growing in London we can provide insights. If there is no attempt to reach out I will seriously question the ambition to grow the grave. 

[The Art of Hand and Foot]

23 minutes ago, Griff said:

How will you fit 43 games into an eight month season? That's where the nonsense lies.

What we did 30 years ago isn't acceptable today in terms of player welfare.

I know, you're right, but you have to start with what we've got. Then work back to an acceptable level. Oldham only had 43 games because they were successful in all competitions. Given that there are no longer county cups and most second and third tier teams won't progress too far in the CC that would bring us down to 30 or so games. So, how do we divide the current 23 teams into a competition of 30 games. One division, not all teams play each other home and away and champions decided by play offs. I know it's not perfect as I don't know how they previously decided who played who. Or one division split into two conferences. Again how? Geography, that won't work because one conference may have ten better teams anly four get to the play offs. Or as is likely keep it as it is and the lower division has looped games and dies a slow death.

[Toby Chopra]

16 minutes ago, The Art of Hand and Foot said:

I know, you're right, but you have to start with what we've got. Then work back to an acceptable level. Oldham only had 43 games because they were successful in all competitions. Given that there are no longer county cups and most second and third tier teams won't progress too far in the CC that would bring us down to 30 or so games. So, how do we divide the current 23 teams into a competition of 30 games. One division, not all teams play each other home and away and champions decided by play offs. I know it's not perfect as I don't know how they previously decided who played who. Or one division split into two conferences. Again how? Geography, that won't work because one conference may have ten better teams anly four get to the play offs. Or as is likely keep it as it is and the lower division has looped games and dies a slow death.

It's perfectly possible to work out an unsymmetrical schedule that balances strength and/or travel distances, plenty of other sports leagues do it. When you follow it with a playoff series it's fine, and I'd support it.

The only issue with re-merging L1 and the Championship is standards. My concern would be the bottom half of L1, which would probably include all the remaining non-heartland teams, would lose almost every game, badly. That wouldn't be good for anyone, so there's a decision to be made: keep a third tier and have loop games, or cut 3 or 4 teams loose from the professional structure.

No easy answers.

[Griff]

13 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

It's perfectly possible to work out an unsymmetrical schedule that balances strength and/or travel distances, plenty of other sports leagues do it. When you follow it with a playoff series it's fine, and I'd support it.

The only issue with re-merging L1 and the Championship is standards. My concern would be the bottom half of L1, which would probably include all the remaining non-heartland teams, would lose almost every game, badly. That wouldn't be good for anyone, so there's a decision to be made: keep a third tier and have loop games, or cut 3 or 4 teams loose from the professional structure.

No easy answers.

Absolutely right. What seems like promotion could end up being death.

[The Art of Hand and Foot]

15 minutes ago, Griff said:

Absolutely right. What seems like promotion could end up being death.

Unless, with a 23-4 team division, at the end of the season you have top 8 play off for champion of div/tier 1. The next 8 have a play off for the champion of div/tier2 and a bottom 7-8 play off for champion of tier/div 3??

[Smudger06]

23 minutes ago, The Art of Hand and Foot said:

I know, you're right, but you have to start with what we've got. Then work back to an acceptable level. Oldham only had 43 games because they were successful in all competitions. Given that there are no longer county cups and most second and third tier teams won't progress too far in the CC that would bring us down to 30 or so games. So, how do we divide the current 23 teams into a competition of 30 games. One division, not all teams play each other home and away and champions decided by play offs. I know it's not perfect as I don't know how they previously decided who played who. Or one division split into two conferences. Again how? Geography, that won't work because one conference may have ten better teams anly four get to the play offs. Or as is likely keep it as it is and the lower division has looped games and dies a slow death.

If you have one large Division and it's not possible to face all opposition H&A you do the fixture list by placing teams into pools, so 30 teams like in the 60s and early 70s you would have 5 pools of 6......play 2 of the other pools for 24 games and + your own pool for 10 games gives each team 34 games (17 home / 17 away) you don't play 12 of the teams in the Division that season.....pools change every year based off last seasons standings and aren't set in stone permanently and no need for geographical conferences etc......simples.

[Griff]

9 minutes ago, The Art of Hand and Foot said:

Unlevss, with a 23-4 team division, at the end of the season you have top 8 play off for champion of div/tier 1. The next 8 have a play off for the champion of div/tier2 and a bottom 7-8 play off for champion of tier/div 3??

When I said death, I meant the end of the club. Not just a few meaningless games at the end of the season.

It's going to be difficult to maintain interest for a team getting 40 or 50 points out past them every week. As Skolars have found.

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

7 hours ago, OriginalMrC said:

Not sure you understand how much it costs. For Coventry Bears it was a minimum £1500 per trip and the Bears were much closer than Cornwall. 

Cornwall's closest game in Birmingham is 5-6hrs away and they have trips to Cumbria in the season. Taking all players, staff, equipment and all other associated costs builds up. On a lot of trips they'll need to hire two drivers and will also need overnight stays and food etc to book for some fixtures. 

I'm not saying coaches at cheap but it will not cost 50k MORE than other clubs for 10 trips 

That is £5000 more per trip than other clubs 

£5000 MORE.....not £5000 in total but £5000 MORE than a normal league 1 coach trip 

That just isn't true 

[Griff]

12 minutes ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

I'm not saying coaches at cheap but it will not cost 50k MORE than other clubs for 10 trips 

That is £5000 more per trip than other clubs 

£5000 MORE.....not £5000 in total but £5000 MORE than a normal league 1 coach trip 

That just isn't true 

What about the overnight stays?

[OriginalMrC]

28 minutes ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

I'm not saying coaches at cheap but it will not cost 50k MORE than other clubs for 10 trips 

That is £5000 more per trip than other clubs 

£5000 MORE.....not £5000 in total but £5000 MORE than a normal league 1 coach trip 

That just isn't true 

I never said £50k more. Read my original post. I said their travel expenses must be around £50k. For other clubs it obviously depends where they are located but probably averages £20k. That's a significant expenditure for Cornwall that most other clubs don't have. If you don't think that's relevant then that's fine 

[IM2]

15 hours ago, lucky 7 said:

Another knock on effect of the Skolars is that the rest of the league 1 clubs will have one less home game, and no club will fill the void left by the Skolars. Very worrying times for league 1 clubs and the game as a whole

given the amount of complaining they used to do for having to come to London once a year (versus Skolars did it every other week the other way) maybe they wont worrly. maybe its a case of you didnt know what you had until you lost it

[IM2]

1 hour ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

I'm not saying coaches at cheap but it will not cost 50k MORE than other clubs for 10 trips 

That is £5000 more per trip than other clubs 

£5000 MORE.....not £5000 in total but £5000 MORE than a normal league 1 coach trip 

That just isn't true 

its hotels and the 4 stay overs that hurt. also remember if you have a stay over you have 2 days of the coach and probably have to have 2 drivers plus hotel for them and the full squads. meals as well.

Thats your central funding gone in 2 games

Edited September 16, 2023 by IM2

[IM2]

2 hours ago, EssexRL said:

The RFL need to talk to the board and dare I say fans and learn from this. If the sport is serious about growing in London we can provide insights. If there is no attempt to reach out I will seriously question the ambition to grow the grave. 

the RFL have been very passive in this. no help or anything other than sympathetic words. no urgency and no Taskforce or support to fix things.

broncos have a huge amount of blame to take for this. their relationship with Skolars has been one way traffic over the 28 years and poaching the clubs coach and half the squad just after covid was shocking and disgusting and impossible to recover from.

[Tre Cool]

1 hour ago, IM2 said:

the RFL have been very passive in this. no help or anything other than sympathetic words. no urgency and no Taskforce or support to fix things.

broncos have a huge amount of blame to take for this. their relationship with Skolars has been one way traffic over the 28 years and poaching the clubs coach and half the squad just after covid was shocking and disgusting and impossible to recover from.

Always the Broncos fault that Hemel and Skolars couldn't make it as pro clubs. Skolars have been languishing at the very bottom of the 3rd tier for years and years playing in front of a couple of hundred people. Their failure has nothing to do with the Broncos. 

[Henson Park Old Firm]

For some reason I get the feeling that Skolars will be back.

[Hello]

Very sad. RL - going strongly against the grain. Other sports around the world expanding into new countries and areas. RL, contracting rapidly and increasingly disappearing from sight. 

[Tre Cool]

2 minutes ago, Hello said:

Very sad. RL - going strongly against the grain. Other sports around the world expanding into new countries and areas. RL, contracting rapidly and increasingly disappearing from sight. 

Biggest pro sports club in NZ is an RL club. French club in SL top 3. Tonga,Fiji and Samoa reaching test quality. Toulouse, Broncos doing well. Cornwall getting good crowds and winning matches. Hardly contracting rapidly. A couple of very weak 'pro' clubs dropping out of the pro leagues is hardly RL 'contracting rapidly'.  

[del capo]

10 hours ago, Griff said:

The counter argument is that the away games would be getting some money out.

I'm not even convinced that home games are profitable in League 1, let alone away games.

And there in a nutshell you have it.

League 1 is simply unsustainable in its present format and without central funding.  What to do about it is the conundrum.

 Derwent - Playing the same team FOUR times a season  - ' double ' looping - will rake the money in ? Really ? The law of diminishing  returns springs to mind....

 Art of Hand -Just merging with the Championship will kill off half of them within a couple of seasons following murderous score lines. Fans tend not to  want to pay for known whitewash matches.

So what's left? Promoting top Community clubs to expand the Division until SCL sides can step up ? Won't happen unless RFL subsidise at least the travel costs. And that won't happen as they've no money.

Or scrapping L1 ,  promoting some clubs who might be able to cut the mustard into the Championship and letting the rest take the Community route ?  Skolars have  already made their choice and good luck to them.

 The RFL  ( who hopefully have their own ) said  in their press release they are asking L1 clubs for their views. Anyone on here know the outcome of that ' consultation ' ?

 

 

 

[Griff]

4 hours ago, del capo said:

The RFL  ( who hopefully have their own ) said  in their press release they are asking L1 clubs for their views. Anyone on here know the outcome of that ' consultation ' ?

Outcome?

Doubt if much has happened since Friday. A bit of patience, please.

[gingerjon]

Presumably if League 1 and Championship is merged then the two divisions funding would be similarly merged?

[Griff]

5 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Presumably if League 1 and Championship is merged then the two divisions funding would be similarly merged?

IMG will have all that under control.

[del capo]

3 hours ago, gingerjon said:

Presumably if League 1 and Championship is merged then the two divisions funding would be similarly merged?

Has the latest cake been cut yet ?