Toulouse or London

[Chrispmartha]

20 minutes ago, Dovster said:

Teams might not be as desperate if they know it is easier to get straight back.

Clubs will be desperate not to lose the funding from being in SL however 'easy' it is to get back.

[Wiltshire Warrior Dragon]

1 hour ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

Go TO h***

Hull?

[Wiltshire Warrior Dragon]

2 hours ago, Trinity1873 said:

OOPS, sorry folks ,i've gone off the Thread title,i hope you will forgive me, it is my first post. 

No need to apologise, Trinity1873, and welcome!  I am now trying to think of England's three smaller cities.  Without looking it up, my guess would be Ely, Wells and Truro.

[Guest]

31 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

You will probably find 2 teams being relegated and two teams being promoted will lead to a lot more dodgy overseas signings out of desperation.

I don't see why.

It means there is a better pathway up. Two teams a season and one automatically - not a bunfight and then a playoff (see Fev and Toronto before). 

I think that would encourage more sensible planning as less of a cliff edge.

[Chrispmartha]

Just now, Leonard said:

I don't see why.

It means there is a better pathway up. Two teams a season and one automatically - not a bunfight and then a playoff (see Fev and Toronto before). 

I think that would encourage more sensible planning as less of a cliff edge.

Because the two teams who are in the relegation spots will be desperate to stay up at all costs, and the promotion candidates will be desperate to go up so will sign more players to try do that, those teams will not be going youth a go or be long term planning.

The Sport can't really function well enough with one up and down never mind two.

[Rovers13]

3 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Because the two teams who are in the relegation spots will be desperate to stay up at all costs, and the promotion candidates will be desperate to go up so will sign more players to try do that, those teams will not be going youth a go or be long term planning.

The Sport can't really function well enough with one up and down never mind two.

This all comes back to my initial point earlier though. Cutting teams off from the top league or even more so from funding won’t bring in sponsors or powerful owners. Alienates more fans (which at the moment we can ill afford) which leads to less subscribers which leads to less sky money. I don’t have the answers and I actually don’t think anyone does not even IMG. But keep Doing the same things over and over and getting the same results is madness to me. Franchising is similar to this system coming in and I didn’t see millions queuing up for a sky package. 

[Rovers13]

We should be an all inclusive sport whether that’s London, Toulouse, north wales or Batley or swinton, where every club as same opportunities to grow and expand. Not it’s a is or them mentality which we seem to have been running since SL came in. 

[crashmon]

2 hours ago, Michael Bates said:

It's a win / win situation. If London go up they'll suddenly be attracting crowds of 4 million every week due to the size of the city. If Toulouse go up they'll bring in millions from a new TV deal as everyone in France would suddenly want to watch rugby league. Can't wait!

As Long as they also buy tickets to the gold lounge

[Tommygilf]

11 minutes ago, Rovers13 said:

We should be an all inclusive sport whether that’s London, Toulouse, north wales or Batley or swinton, where every club as same opportunities to grow and expand. Not it’s a is or them mentality which we seem to have been running since SL came in. 

The problem is that business isn't all inclusive.

[Rovers13]

Just now, Tommygilf said:

The problem is that business isn't all inclusive.

I get that but we’re not football we can’t afford to lose say 3k fans and not replace them. As daft as it sounds if 3k unsubscribe from sky sports that’s less money we will be offered in a tv deal. We can’t run as a business we’re not in a position of power to pick and choose at this moment in time. 

[Dovster]

47 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

They said before that the game's audience is stagnant (that's why they only offered 17 million £ a year initially), so why does this surprise you?

Not suprised. Just disappointed.

[wiganermike]

2 hours ago, Dovster said:

I agree with your comments regarding being worried for the future with Sky. I think that last friday's SF between Cats and Saints said it all.

Relegated to Sky Mix to give way for womens soccer on "Main Event" and presented on the cheap in a poor studio.

The future doesn't look so bright.

The Catalans v Saints SF was also on Sky Showcase (formerly called Sky One) which like Mix is available to a much larger audience than the subscription sports channels are. RL games are rarely on Main Event anyway (which is just a simulcast channel with a grand sounding name). This was hardly the demotion you make it out to be.

[Tommygilf]

2 minutes ago, Rovers13 said:

I get that but we’re not football we can’t afford to lose say 3k fans and not replace them. As daft as it sounds if 3k unsubscribe from sky sports that’s less money we will be offered in a tv deal. We can’t run as a business we’re not in a position of power to pick and choose at this moment in time. 

3k won't unsubscribe from Sky Sports just because of RL though. And certainly not enough high value audiences for Sky to notice that much.

Pick and choose is exactly what businesses in stressful financial situations do. They divert resources towards areas of existing strength, cutting away from less successful areas where they already have crossover of coverage, and then invest in high potential growth areas. 

[Dovster]

42 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Clubs will be desperate not to lose the funding from being in SL however 'easy' it is to get back.

Our thoughts are miles apart and miles off topic.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Dovster said:

Not suprised. Just disappointed.

Stagnant is the same not falling - so the deal should have least risen with inflation.

 

I assume SL bent over and assumed the crash position and countered with £15m.

[Dovster]

1 minute ago, wiganermike said:

The Catalans v Saints SF was also on Sky Showcase (formerly called Sky One) which like Mix is available to a much larger audience than the subscription sports channels are. RL games are rarely on Main Event anyway (which is just a simulcast channel with a grand sounding name). This was hardly the demotion you make it out to be.

Forgve me for thinking that Main Event meant Main Event.

[Rovers13]

People also keep saying we can’t rely on away following. Which I totally agree we shouldn’t be. But looking at the debts of clubs at this moment in time any penny is better than no penny. 

[Rovers13]

The point im trying to make is we can’t be picky with income were not in a position to be were a badly run financial sport. So little things like people saying away following doesn’t matter it does massively. Teams like swinton etc love the financial away reward of say bulls or fev because they have no other ways of bringing in money with funding cut off etc. yes it’s wrong I totally agree but I’m afraid that’s the position we find ourselves in now. 

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, Rovers13 said:

The point im trying to make is we can’t be picky with income were not in a position to be were a badly run financial sport. So little things like people saying away following doesn’t matter it does massively. Teams like swinton etc love the financial away reward of say bulls or fev because they have no other ways of bringing in money with funding cut off etc. yes it’s wrong I totally agree but I’m afraid that’s the position we find ourselves in now. 

They matter at clubs with relatively low sums of money in their turnover yes. 

The problem here is that we have a top flight with an equivalent to lower championship or League 1/League 2 football clubs, which isn't great but is what we have, and then a drop to levels genuinely closer to levels 7/8/9 in the football pyramid in our Championship and League 1. Its not even just non-League, its regional semi pros.

That gap is, financially, huge. Swinton Lions compared with Wigan for example represents the difference between a market stall vs a supermarket. Yet the difference in positions in the pyramid is barely in double figures, and Swinton (etc) are potentially 1 promotion away from competing against Wigan etc. This isn’t "look at Bournemouth or Luton in the Premier League", this is Ossett United or Guiseley. 

Our small pyramid hasn't driven standards upwards, its just compressed the standards together.

[Rovers13]

19 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

3k won't unsubscribe from Sky Sports just because of RL though. And certainly not enough high value audiences for Sky to notice that much.

Pick and choose is exactly what businesses in stressful financial situations do. They divert resources towards areas of existing strength, cutting away from less successful areas where they already have crossover of coverage, and then invest in high potential growth areas. 

You’re not getting my point though we’ve been here before loads of times by pulling away from heartlands and barring Catalan who imo was a massive gamble that paid off big time. Rest have fallen by the way side and no I’m not saying stop expansion I’m saying be an all inclusive sport give every team the same opportunities to invest grow expand you never know we might one day have a massive club in Oldham.    

[Rovers13]

2 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

They matter at clubs with relatively low sums of money in their turnover yes. 

The problem here is that we have a top flight with an equivalent to lower championship or League 1/League 2 football clubs, which isn't great but is what we have, and then a drop to levels genuinely closer to levels 7/8/9 in the football pyramid in our Championship and League 1. Its not even just non-League, its regional semi pros.

That gap is, financially, huge. Swinton Lions compared with Wigan for example represents the difference between a market stall vs a supermarket. Yet the difference in positions in the pyramid is barely in double figures, and Swinton (etc) are potentially 1 promotion away from competing against Wigan etc. This isn’t "look at Bournemouth or Luton in the Premier League", this is Ossett United or Guiseley. 

Our small pyramid hasn't driven standards upwards, its just compressed the standards together.

So you don’t think I Wigan would prefer an home game to say saints than an home game to say london? 

[Tommygilf]

Just now, Rovers13 said:

So you don’t think I Wigan would prefer an home game to say saints than an home game to say london? 

Its a bonus yeah, although I'm sure any team would prefer a home game against a big team vs a small one so I'm not sure that is really a zinger?

Regardless, it doesn't matter massively like you said for Swinton etc.

[Tommygilf]

3 minutes ago, Rovers13 said:

You’re not getting my point though we’ve been here before loads of times by pulling away from heartlands and barring Catalan who imo was a massive gamble that paid off big time. Rest have fallen by the way side and no I’m not saying stop expansion I’m saying be an all inclusive sport give every team the same opportunities to invest grow expand you never know we might one day have a massive club in Oldham.    

90% of the funding, focus and spending by the game in my lifetime (26 years) has been in the heartlands. It has, from looking, been the same for nearly 130 years.

That this hasn't resulted in massive growth for the sport should provide a self evident conclusion...

[Rovers13]

1 minute ago, Tommygilf said:

Its a bonus yeah, although I'm sure any team would prefer a home game against a big team vs a small one so I'm not sure that is really a zinger?

Regardless, it doesn't matter massively like you said for Swinton etc.

What I’m getting at though is any income is huge as this moment in time with the size of debts clubs have, so to dismiss away following as minimal at this time in our sport is ludicrous imo. If we were a booming sport I agree it would be minimal but we’re not. 

[Rovers13]

1 minute ago, Tommygilf said:

90% of the funding, focus and spending by the game in my lifetime (26 years) has been in the heartlands. It has, from looking, been the same for nearly 130 years.

That this hasn't resulted in massive growth for the sport should provide a self evident conclusion...

I’ve seen no money pumped into the heartlands wisely not even in SL. So don’t get your point tbh. It all goes on over the hill NRL players or a walmsley new contract not where it should go.