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

[dboy]

33 minutes ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

Yes that's correct, but it's still 1 rather than 0.5 isn't it? And in the case of the specific point I was making they should surely be finding massively bigger sponsors than the supposed smalltown, crowded-together clubs fishing in a small pond such as Wakefield, cas and Fev.

But Wfd, Cas and Fev don't just "fish" in those areas. All draw fans from South Yorks in particular.

Also, Wfd's main sponsors are Asus, a globally significant IT hardware brand, and DIY Kitchens which has a turnover of  £100m.

Of course, Fev are sponsored by the grubbiest nightclub in Pontefract, and Cas a hydraulics retailer/fitter so I get your point...  

[Click]

10 minutes ago, Hopie said:

"Soon it was commonplace for entire teams to change cities in search of greater profits. The Minneapolis Lakers moved to Los Angeles where there are no lakes. The Oilers moved to Tennessee where there is no oil. The Jazz moved to Salt Lake City where they don't allow music.

The Raiders moved from Oakland to LA back to Oakland, no-one seemed to notice."

The first one you mentioned is now a brand that is known globally, worked well for them. (In spite of there being no lakes nearby)

[Taffy Tiger]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Grading is an assessment of you as a club. Where you are based is a factor in that. 

Hi Dave T, yeah , that's fair enough , but by that very nature you should be able to improve in each particualr criteria by your own positive actions . How can any club improve on their catchment area score . It's never (or very rarely) going to change . 

That said , I do think that we are now at the stage of exhausting this particular topic (Catchment) on here . I think that for all their faults , IMG/RFL have got the idea of an indicative grading absolutely right . If this grading had counted for final entry into SL , then it would have been chaotic to say the least . 

Releasing these indicative gradings a year before means that any anomolies can be rectified , and I do feel that the catchment area criteria will be looked at again , if not now then in the near future . How it will be re-assessed is anybodys guess at the moment , but i would be surprised if it exists in its current form for too long.

Yours and Tommy's points are absolutely valid though , but I do still feel that any criteria has to be something that clubs themselves can control to a certain extent . Awarding a point to a new start up team trying to grow the game in an otherwise untapped area is the perfect use of this criteria , giving clubs less than 10 miles apart a different score isn't really achieving this goal.

That's my view , and the beauty of this forum is that we all have our own different opinions . I do agree though that there is always going to be some self interest from those who contribute . Would I be so vociferous if the shoe was on the other foot and Cas were getting the extra point ? I'll let you decide 

[Trinity1873]

45 minutes ago, dboy said:

But Wfd, Cas and Fev don't just "fish" in those areas. All draw fans from South Yorks in particular.

Also, Wfd's main sponsors are Asus, a globally significant IT hardware brand, and DIY Kitchens which has a turnover of  £100m.

Of course, Fev are sponsored by the grubbiest nightclub in Pontefract, and Cas a hydraulics retailer/fitter so I get your point...  

And don't forget Trinity have also just signed within the last week or so, a sponsorship deal with AEG, the global electrics giant and major appliance brand. Things are really looking good now our new owner as taken over 

[Dave T]

46 minutes ago, Taffy Tiger said:

Hi Dave T, yeah , that's fair enough , but by that very nature you should be able to improve in each particualr criteria by your own positive actions . How can any club improve on their catchment area score . It's never (or very rarely) going to change . 

That said , I do think that we are now at the stage of exhausting this particular topic (Catchment) on here . I think that for all their faults , IMG/RFL have got the idea of an indicative grading absolutely right . If this grading had counted for final entry into SL , then it would have been chaotic to say the least . 

Releasing these indicative gradings a year before means that any anomolies can be rectified , and I do feel that the catchment area criteria will be looked at again , if not now then in the near future . How it will be re-assessed is anybodys guess at the moment , but i would be surprised if it exists in its current form for too long.

Yours and Tommy's points are absolutely valid though , but I do still feel that any criteria has to be something that clubs themselves can control to a certain extent . Awarding a point to a new start up team trying to grow the game in an otherwise untapped area is the perfect use of this criteria , giving clubs less than 10 miles apart a different score isn't really achieving this goal.

That's my view , and the beauty of this forum is that we all have our own different opinions . I do agree though that there is always going to be some self interest from those who contribute . Would I be so vociferous if the shoe was on the other foot and Cas were getting the extra point ? I'll let you decide 

I can understand that viewpoint. Personally that part of it doesn't bother me. 

I do think we need to look at the whole piece rather than individual points here and there. They are broadly on the right lines imho. 

[The 4 of Us]

6 hours ago, Dave T said:

A huge proportion of Saints' fans would be WA I expect. Postcodes mean little here. 

And a few Wigan postcodes as well!

Postcode district	Post town	Coverage	Local authority area(s)
WN1	WIGAN	Haigh, Ince, Swinley, Wigan	Wigan
WN2	WIGAN	Abram, Aspull, Bamfurlong, Bickershaw, Haigh, Hindley, Hindley Green, Ince, Platt Bridge	Wigan
WN3	WIGAN	Goose Green, Ince, Winstanley, Worsley Mesnes, Hawkley Hall	Wigan
WN4	WIGAN	Ashton-in-Makerfield, Garswood	Wigan, St Helens
WN5	WIGAN	Billinge, Newtown, Higher End, Orrell, Pemberton, Winstanley, Worsley Hall, Marsh Green.	Wigan, St Helens
WN6	WIGAN	Appley Bridge, Beech Hill, Shevington, Springfield, Standish, Wrightington	Wigan, West Lancashire
WN7	LEIGH	Leigh, Hope Carr, Landside, Low Common, Bedford, Westleigh, Pennington, Higher Folds	Wigan
WN8	WIGAN	Dalton,  Newburgh, Parbold	West Lancashire
	SKELMERSDALE	Chapel House, Holland Moor, Roby Mill, Skelmersdale, Up Holland

 

[Snowys Backside]

9 hours ago, Griff said:

Postcodes aren't the measure. Maybe they should be.

I Agree. You could walk it to WA3 from LSV in 5 mins !!!

A bit further to WN2, but you need some Jabs, including your TB Jab !!

[north yorks trinity]

3 hours ago, gingerjon said:

Bingo.

(It's badly scored but there's a reason for the criteria existing.)

I agree there is a reason for considering catchment and I certainly agree it is badly scored. It's been done far too simplistically. As though the idea of doing it meaningfully got chucked in the too hard basket by someone looking to nip off early on a Friday afternoon. 

[north yorks trinity]

2 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

In other countries and other continents, clubs move to more attractive locales where part of the attraction is often less competition.

Let's hope it doesn't catch on over here.

[gingerjon]

8 minutes ago, north yorks trinity said:

I agree there is a reason for considering catchment and I certainly agree it is badly scored. It's been done far too simplistically. As though the idea of doing it meaningfully got chucked in the too hard basket by someone looking to nip off early on a Friday afternoon. 

I’ve said elsewhere that the whole thing smacks of the RFL not having the money to pay for too much depth in many cases.

[north yorks trinity]

2 hours ago, Dave T said:

Clubs can be poor with a large catchment and good with poor catchment. 

The first part is undoubtedly true but the second part is much trickier. Putting aside what defines a poor catchment, if IMG define you in this category you must score 15/19 available points to be a grade A. That's a 79% pass mark! Agreed it's not impossible but you're up against it. 

[north yorks trinity]

2 hours ago, Click said:

The first one you mentioned is now a brand that is known globally, worked well for them. (In spite of there being no lakes nearby)

How many travel from Minneapolis to support them? Or is that less important than being known globally? 

Who on here would take pride in their club having the same global profile as LA Lakers...if it meant them moving to Athens?

Edited December 5, 2023 by north yorks trinity

[Dave T]

42 minutes ago, north yorks trinity said:

The first part is undoubtedly true but the second part is much trickier. Putting aside what defines a poor catchment, if IMG define you in this category you must score 15/19 available points to be a grade A. That's a 79% pass mark! Agreed it's not impossible but you're up against it. 

The top 6 ranked clubs all surpassed the 15 pts mark by more than the difference between their score and the lowest score on catchment. 

[north yorks trinity]

6 hours ago, Dave T said:

The top 6 ranked clubs all surpassed the 15 pts mark by more than the difference between their score and the lowest score on catchment. 

Is that because they have a good catchment or in spite of having a more challenging one? Having a good catchment feeds into so many other criteria that it is questionable whether it needs its own category. Like I said earlier I think the general idea is reasonable so long as its soundly based but should aim to support expansion clubs rather than pit traditional clubs against each other. For example there could be an extra point for having no more than 1 other club* in a (for example) 20-30 mile radius.

*just an example of an embryonic thought process. The details/distances could be explored ad nauseum - as I'm sure they would be - but I suggested one other club to allow development of healthy competition in a conurbation such as London or Birmingham.

[Big Picture]

10 hours ago, north yorks trinity said:

Let's hope it doesn't catch on over here.

You don't need to worry about that, none of the clubs play in a league with the profile and reach needed for such moves to work so they're all stuck where they are.

10 hours ago, north yorks trinity said:

How many travel from Minneapolis to support them? Or is that less important than being known globally?

None of course, there's a two hour time difference between Minneapolis and Los Angeles.  It's not only less important, it's completely unimportant because Los Angeles is a much bigger city so they needed much less market penetration to sell out their arena there than in Minneapolis.

And becoming known globally gave them even greater reach for things like selling their licensed merchandise.

[sweaty craiq]

Finances and manipulation of such are the key as Derek says - we pick up 3 extra points with no additional money changing hands but simply showing on different lines - thats how we hit 15 even if we dont win anything and lose the CC points. Academy and scholarships are looking good for 2025 also - will be interesting how reserves go in 2024

[sweaty craiq]

14 hours ago, dboy said:

I can understand the notion of looking at catchment areas/potential for growth/avoiding saturation, but on what planet does your catchment end at an arbitrary administrative boundary?

I live in a village near Barnsley - not counted.

The next 3 villages along all used to be in Wakefield Borough - not now counted.

It's bunkum.

I nearly always ended up  chatting with Barnsley folk at CC finals pre new Wembley. All the WMC's seemed to run coaches then

[sweaty craiq]

13 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

In other countries and other continents, clubs move to more attractive locales where part of the attraction is often less competition.

That is a wind up attempt and not a belief - surely. Well done

[DOGFATHER]

23 hours ago, Dave T said:

Catchment as a principle is ok, I can see the sense in not getting the points if you are crammed into an area with plenty of RL clubs and limited population. 

Where I think it is executed poorly is for clubs like London. If London don't get full points for potential catchment, then it doesn't pass the sniff test. 

I don't think the likes of Leigh and Cas have much to grumble about with it. 

I'm not sure the catchment area has much relevance TBH. When you look at the attendances at clubs, has catchment area been a major factor over the last 25-30 years?

Take Sheffield, London, Newcastle, NW Crusaders and Fev as examples. Sheffield, Newcastle, NWC and London have massive catchment areas, but very low attendances. Fev has a very small catchment in comparison, but much higher attendances than any of them.

Salford has a population of circa 270k, St Helens has a population of 180k, Castleford 46k (according to Google) yet the gates at the respective clubs does not correlate to the population sizes. 

There are far more factors that affect attendances other than population/catchment area. Therefore, why is catchment used as a metric, rather than club sustainability/ability to live within its means for example? 

Edited December 6, 2023 by DOGFATHER

[Harry Stottle]

19 hours ago, Dave T said:

A huge proportion of Saints' fans would be WA I expect. Postcodes mean little here. 

The reason I ask is a lot of Lowton people I know who reside in the WA code are Leigh fans, the boundary of WA and WN postcodes is about 1/2 to 3/4 mile from the LSV and 9 to 10 miles from the HJ.

[Harry Stottle]

16 hours ago, dboy said:

Well we aren't creating a comp from scratch, nor does it make sense to weight the score as you suggest.

I'd even argue the opposite - Leeds occupy a MASSIVE catchment, yet only attract a tiny proportion to attend = they should be penalised for not being more effective in a captive market.

Cas do immensely well to get the crowds they do on the catchment they occupy.

Scoring as a % of catchment makes much more sense.

Something I have said for a long time and exaxtly the same comparison with thd two clubs you mention.

[Harry Stottle]

16 hours ago, gingerjon said:

Always my favourite complete pile of nonsense.

Irrespective of this criteria.

If you were the manager of a sales team and knew your catchment area was not realising anywhere near its potential wouldn't you be asking why?

Edited December 6, 2023 by Harry Stottle

[gingerjon]

5 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Irrespective of this criteria.

If you were the manager of a sales team and knew your catchment area was not realising anywhere near its potential wouldn't you be asking why?

There isn’t a single club in rugby league in England operating anywhere near its potential 

[Harry Stottle]

16 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

There isn’t a single club in rugby league in England operating anywhere near its potential 

Quite but 12,000/840,000 is a highlight, as I intimated it would not be looked upon very favourably in the industrial world.

[Tommygilf]

4 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Quite but 12,000/840,000 is a highlight, as I intimated it would not be looked upon very favourably in the industrial world.

It pays far more than 7k out of 40k does...