The IMG Gradings Thread - Post all your IMG Gradings related questions or comments here

[Archie Gordon]

We now have our gradings.

They show that 11 of the 12 top clubs were in SL last year, 11 this year and 10 next year. All 7 A graders were in every year.

Remind me what the problem being fixed here is?

EDIT: Sentence added, typo fixed.

Edited October 27, 2023 by Archie Gordon

[gingerjon]

1 minute ago, Archie Gordon said:

Remind what the problem being fixed here is?

Internet messageboards had nothing to discuss in December and January.

[Chrispmartha]

14 minutes ago, MattSantos said:

I've mentioned this before, but it's never been really addressed, particularly by the folk who are massive advocates of the grading.

Championship club X win a Grand Final. When will they know whether they've been promoted or not? Is this the way we should be treating the sports fans? Additionally, you don't need to win a GF, you could finish 4th and because of some wonderful business acumen, be promoted. How will that work from a fans perspective. Conversely, and even worse, imagine being relegated after the season's end... and being notified through a press conference you've read about on holiday.

Thoughts?

It has been addresses they will know once the GF has been played, if the club aren’t aware of that and their possible gradings they aren’t a very well run club

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

We now have our gradings.

They show that 11 of the 12 top clubs were in SL last year, 11 this year and 10 next year. All 7 A graders were in every year.

Remind me what the problem being fixed here is?

EDIT: Sentence added, typo fixed.

The off chance a big side gets relegated - which is why the last system they all agreed on was booted when a few ended up in the Super 8s and Toronto were knocking.

This fixes that with the veneer of something else tagged on - selling more sponsorship with the same teams and same audience apparently.

Edited October 27, 2023 by Leonard

[Chrispmartha]

10 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

We now have our gradings.

They show that 11 of the 12 top clubs were in SL last year, 11 this year and 10 next year. All 7 A graders were in every year.

Remind me what the problem being fixed here is?

EDIT: Sentence added, typo fixed.

Again your looking short term, but if you do want to look at it short term we have a club in the elite league next year who are not run well enough to be there, that’s what its fixing

Edited October 27, 2023 by Chrispmartha

[Damien]

7 minutes ago, Leonard said:

The off chance a big side gets relegated - which is why the last system they all agreed on was booted when a few ended up in the Super 8s and Toronto were knocking.

This fixes that with the veneer of something else tagged on - selling more sponsorship with the same teams and same audience apparently.

I don't think this is the reason for this system at all. Do you really think the big sides start the season concerned about being relegated?

This system is to try and get other clubs up to the level of those big clubs and enhance Super League.

[Rambo]

14 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

We now have our gradings.

They show that 11 of the 12 top clubs were in SL last year, 11 this year and 10 next year. All 7 A graders were in every year.

Remind me what the problem being fixed here is?

EDIT: Sentence added, typo fixed.

IMG have used a sledgehammer to crack a nut. A simple reaffirmation of minimum standards for entry to SL would have done the trick.

The time they have spent fannying around with this should have been spent on marketing of the game which is where the games biggest problem lies.

[Dave T]

I must admit, this insistence on keeping P&R has led to a worse solution than we tried 15 years ago imo. And I think the old system was fine, we just didn't stick to it and do it properly. 

It's all well and good people being gung ho about it, but I personally find it problematic how they are going to do P&R. I think standards based selections is fine, but this is so fluid and will fluctuate so much I think it is challenging. 

For a while, people have raised these extremes to illustrate the point, but ignoring the huge outlier that is London, I do worry that it's the likes of Leigh that will get hard done to as an edge case. You could scrape it at 12th, have a year like they did this year, maybe finish 5th in the ladder, make the semis, maybe lose a close Cup Final, and then be relegated. 

I do think we have over complicated the P&R element. Now we can see how close the scores are, I think we are more likely to deliver poor outcomes. 

Apparently one of the problems with P&R is the shock of it and the uncertainty it brings. I don't see that this has improved that situation, at all, and in fact means we could have more turnover each year. 

In an attempt to keep everyone happy I think we've fudged it too much. 

[Chrispmartha]

1 minute ago, Rambo said:

IMG have used a sledgehammer to crack a nut. A simple reaffirmation of minimum standards for entry to SL would have done the trick.

The time they have spent fannying around with this should have been spent on marketing of the game which is where the games biggest problem lies.

That will be the next thing they tackle, IMG always said the structure was the first thing to tackle.

Weve had minimum standards (in fact we still do) they didn’t work and you would have the same people that are moaning now moaning when teams got kicked out or didn’t get promoted because of minimum standards.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Damien said:

I don't think this is the reason for this system at all. Do you really think the big sides start the season concerned about being relegated?

This system is to try and get other clubs up to the level of those big clubs and enhance Super League.

Absolutely I believe that incumbency is a large part of it.

Hull KR have been down, and Wire and Leeds have both flirted.

It might not be a huge issue - but if not then no need to make A Category grading relatively low and also guarantee no relegation as a result.

Edited October 27, 2023 by Leonard

[Chrispmartha]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I must admit, this insistence on keeping P&R has led to a worse solution than we tried 15 years ago imo. And I think the old system was fine, we just didn't stick to it and do it properly. 

It's all well and good people being gung ho about it, but I personally find it problematic how they are going to do P&R. I think standards based selections is fine, but this is so fluid and will fluctuate so much I think it is challenging. 

For a while, people have raised these extremes to illustrate the point, but ignoring the huge outlier that is London, I do worry that it's the likes of Leigh that will get hard done to as an edge case. You could scrape it at 12th, have a year like they did this year, maybe finish 5th in the ladder, make the semis, maybe lose a close Cup Final, and then be relegated. 

I do think we have over complicated the P&R element. Now we can see how close the scores are, I think we are more likely to deliver poor outcomes. 

Apparently one of the problems with P&R is the shock of it and the uncertainty it brings. I don't see that this has improved that situation, at all, and in fact means we could have more turnover each year. 

In an attempt to keep everyone happy I think we've fudged it too much. 

That’s why i think it will go to 14 teams in 2025.

[phiggins]

14 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

It has been addresses they will know once the GF has been played, if the club aren’t aware of that and their possible gradings they aren’t a very well run club

Clubs will be aware of their own likely scores, but probably not the scores of other clubs. There should probably be an interim score made public after the end of the regular rounds, when (I think) all data bar performance bonus points have been submitted.

[Dave T]

Just now, Chrispmartha said:

That’s why i think it will go to 14 teams in 2025.

The last round of licensing (grading, whatever we want to call it) was undermined by the way P&R was implemented. I worry this will undermine this version. 

[Chrispmartha]

Just now, phiggins said:

Clubs will be aware of their own likely scores, but probably not the scores of other clubs. There should probably be an interim score made public after the end of the regular rounds, when (I think) all data bar performance bonus points have been submitted.

They may do this and it would make sense

[Chrispmartha]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

The last round of licensing (grading, whatever we want to call it) was undermined by the way P&R was implemented. I worry this will undermine this version. 

I do agree with you, personally i think they should have said 2025 standings are locked in for a set amount of time (lets say 3 years) but i think they have had to compromise to appease the clubs

[Damien]

3 minutes ago, Leonard said:

Absolutely I believe that incumbency is a large part of it.

Hull KR have been down, and Wire and Leeds have both flirted.

It might not be a huge issue - but if not then no need to make A Category grading relatively low and also guarantee no relegation as a result.

Hull KR definitely weren't the club they are now when they went down and no one would have described them as a big club.

No big club has been relegated since SL started. I just don't think the big clubs see this as you do and don't think they feel the need to protect themselves. 

[Chrispmartha]

3 minutes ago, phiggins said:

Clubs will be aware of their own likely scores, but probably not the scores of other clubs. There should probably be an interim score made public after the end of the regular rounds, when (I think) all data bar performance bonus points have been submitted.

Sorry just to add, i don’t think it needs to be made public but the clubs should be aware

[phiggins]

Just now, Chrispmartha said:

Sorry just to add, i don’t think it needs to be made public but the clubs should be aware

Letting fans know would be good. I think they deserve to know where things stand, as they buy tickets for the play offs. But letting clubs know should be the bare minimum.

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Damien said:

Hull KR definitely weren't the club they are now when they went down and no one would have described them as a big club.

No big club has been relegated since SL started. I just don't think the big clubs see this as you do and don't think they feel the need to protect themselves. 

I follow their actions.

Which is fine - but of course incumbency is a decent benefit to them.

If they really wanted to push the boat - a Grade A could well be far harder to achieve.

As it is, there is a fair chance all the usual suspects will be Grade A or as close as makes no difference by the end of the season.

Edited October 27, 2023 by Leonard

[Chrispmartha]

Just now, Leonard said:

I follow their actions.

Every team in SL voted for the grading system 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Every team in SL voted for the grading system 

QED

[MattSantos]

29 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

It has been addresses they will know once the GF has been played, if the club aren’t aware of that and their possible gradings they aren’t a very well run club

Once the GF has played? 5 minutes after? 5 days? 5 weeks?

A club may know it's own grade, but not the grading of others, thus again... how will the fans know? 

VAR on steroids. 

 

[Chrispmartha]

Just now, Leonard said:

QED

Not really he singled out the big clubs, many champ clubs also voted for it

[Chrispmartha]

1 minute ago, MattSantos said:

Once the GF has played? 5 minutes after? 5 days? 5 weeks?

A club may know it's own grade, but not the grading of others, thus again... how will the fans know? 

VAR on steroids. 

 

I don’t know how many days after it will be announced.

I suspect it will be fairly soon after though. Not sure what your point is, Lindon or Toulouse didn’t know where they would be playing until after the GF was finished this year either

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Not really he singled out the big clubs, many champ clubs also voted for it

Not sure the two are mutually exclusive.

Incumbency is equally as attractive to the bottom end of SL - especially with Toulouse and Leigh sniffing about.

I don't see how that also precludes the top end of SL including that as a factor in considerations.

If the idea was real jeopardy - they would not have voted for it.

Edit - and people who actively sought to actively handicap Toronto and Toulouse as well.

Edited October 27, 2023 by Leonard