London Broncos 2024

[Tommygilf]

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

So who's been telling fibs?

Even without a 'pay rise' that will be a cool near £5.5 million over the 12 years, I suppose that will offset the share of the profit this system will nowhere near acheive.

Fibs or people not reading accurately.

[phiggins]

16 hours ago, Dave T said:

When people spend all their time slating small time clubs on the M62, including yours, but then say they can't blame London for stuff like this, it's weird. 

London should absolutely be slated for this. 

We can talk about spreadsheets all we want, but we are in the business of Rugby, and that includes developing players. 

I want my club to have an academy, always have. It's essential to having any chance of sustained success and also a big part in getting clubs through tougher times as well. But, if we were to be told that we had next to no chance of having a sustained period in the top flight, I probably wouldn't be too bothered about whether we had an 'elite' academy versus keeping the new development academy and reserve team going. To be honest, that is partly because I don't know enough about the systems to understand what the extra 250k and elite status provides in reality.

For London, given how far they are off being a SL club in this system, and the crowds and funding they get in the Championship, this might not even have been a decision they made. Could be that they simply cannot afford to keep the academy going 

[Dave T]

14 minutes ago, phiggins said:

I want my club to have an academy, always have. It's essential to having any chance of sustained success and also a big part in getting clubs through tougher times as well. But, if we were to be told that we had next to no chance of having a sustained period in the top flight, I probably wouldn't be too bothered about whether we had an 'elite' academy versus keeping the new development academy and reserve team going. To be honest, that is partly because I don't know enough about the systems to understand what the extra 250k and elite status provides in reality.

For London, given how far they are off being a SL club in this system, and the crowds and funding they get in the Championship, this might not even have been a decision they made. Could be that they simply cannot afford to keep the academy going 

Yes, I'm fine with your last para, clubs can only afford what they can afford. No issues with that. I should maybe have clarified they deserve criticism if they are 'gaming' the system or culling pathways in a strop. 

[Harry Stottle]

41 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Fibs or people not reading accurately.

Please link to where it informs all and subdry that IMG are to recieve an annual fee of £450K. Until Atlantisman disclosed it and you answerered with "Thats what I have been told" which gives no indication that you have read it nor is it your style on this subject, you would have been telling us to read the document.

[Tommygilf]

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Please link to where it informs all and subdry that IMG are to recieve an annual fee of £450K. Until Atlantisman disclosed it and you answerered with "Thats what I have been told" which gives no indication that you have read it nor is it your style on this subject, you would have been telling us to read the document.

It has been told to the clubs months ago, H.

[binosh]

Well now we have gone from having not enough Academy licences to go around to having 2 available. 

If the RFL have paid IMG £450k so far then I will be astounded, it appears that previous press releases about the involvement of IMG have been worded in such a way that clubs may have voted for something they were led to believe and not what it actually is.

Whilst I believe in Grading, the current IMG criteria, thresholds and points scoring appear to me to me to manufactured. 

I could have advised the RFL for free that that key headline areas of growth and focus need to be-

Performance

Stadium

Attendance

Academy

Fans

Social Media

Business 
 

 

Edited November 16, 2023 by binosh

[Gomersall]

4 hours ago, Barley Mow said:

Is it not percentage of the increase in future income?

The TV deal is less than last time.

Can someone do a quick calculation of how much IMG owe the RFL please.

[binosh]

1 minute ago, Gomersall said:

Can someone do a quick calculation of how much IMG owe the RFL please.

Exactly this. IMG have been involved 18 months and used their huge worldwide network of partners, specialists and consultants to negotiate the worst TV deal in Super League history. 

[Griff]

4 minutes ago, binosh said:

Well now we have gone from having not enough Academy licences to go around to having 2 available. 

If the RFL have paid IMG £450k so far then I will be astounded, it appears that previous press releases about the involvement of IMG have been worded in such a way that clubs may have voted for something they were led to believe and not what it actually is.

Whilst I believe in Grading, the current IMG criteria, thresholds and points scoring appear to me to me to manufactured. 

I could have advised the RFL for free that that key headline areas of growth and focus need to be-

Performance

Stadium

Attendance

Academy

Fans

Social Media

Business 
 

 

Can we all have an Academy then ?

Because that's quite a sensitive issue in some areas.

[binosh]

5 minutes ago, Griff said:

Can we all have an Academy then ?

Because that's quite a sensitive issue in some areas.

Yes why not? They can be as expensive or as low cost to run as they are made to be.

Only a governing body as inept as the RFL would put a cap on the future of the game.

Edited November 16, 2023 by binosh

[Griff]

1 minute ago, binosh said:

Yes why not? 

That's what everyone thought until a few years ago.

RFL disagreed.

[binosh]

1 minute ago, Griff said:

That's what everyone thought until a few years ago.

RFL disagreed.

They used to allow smoking on aeroplanes things move on and change. It’s about time the RFL changed.

[Griff]

3 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

Fibs or people not reading accurately.

People can only read what's been written, Tommy.

[Archie Gordon]

7 minutes ago, binosh said:

Exactly this. IMG have been involved 18 months and used their huge worldwide network of partners, specialists and consultants to negotiate the worst TV deal in Super League history. 

Cynically, I did wonder whether their baseline was this deal. It's what I would have done, if I were them.

[binosh]

1 minute ago, Archie Gordon said:

Cynically, I did wonder whether their baseline was this deal. It's what I would have done, if I were them.

Exactly, any future increase on this is money in the bank for them.

Lets just hope they aren’t in bed with Sky aswell.

[gingerjon]

20 minutes ago, binosh said:

Exactly this. IMG have been involved 18 months and used their huge worldwide network of partners, specialists and consultants to negotiate the worst TV deal in Super League history. 

It is a stroke of genius by the RFL and its clubs signing with them.

Immediately they, the ones who caused rugby league's wholesale contraction and diminishing, are absolved of all blame.

[Harry Stottle]

33 minutes ago, Griff said:

Can we all have an Academy then ?

Because that's quite a sensitive issue in some areas.

If a club can prove to be able to afford it why not?

 

[Dave T]

If reversing trends and addressing all the games ills was as simple as hiring professionals for 2 years, surely we'd have done it years ago? And why sign a 12 year deal if it can be fixed so quickly?

Or maybe people are being silly.

[Lowdesert]

4 hours ago, Barley Mow said:

That was when we didn't have the experts in house.

I would be disappointed if RL Commercial (with IMG as a share holder) were paying IMG to negotiate TV rights.

That really should be part of what IMG are doing for their percentage of the increase in future income - otherwise, they either get paid twice or (as with this TV deal) get paid even if they fail in their main objective (increasing the sport's income).

Ed Mallaburn, IMG head of sport is already on the Board of RL commercial so I would imagine he (and IMG) is in the box seat - for negotiations and income.

Got to say (and I have a downer on consultants anyway btw) the RL Commercial Board don’t thrill me.

Skevin - RL Comm Chair and already a Chair for British Cycling and Chair on UK committee on China

Simon Johnson - RLF chair and also on the Board of IRL

Mallaburn - as above.

Chanduvi - ‘lead’ at Meta 

Hutton - experienced sports media specialist 

Murphy - ceo of Assura, Chair of North West business group (grasping for CV content with that one)

 

 

 

 

 

[gingerjon]

Just now, Dave T said:

If reversing trends and addressing all the games ills was as simple as hiring professionals for 2 years, surely we'd have done it years ago? And why sign a 12 year deal if it can be fixed so quickly?

Or maybe people are being silly.

What you need to do is put in place the, usually quite contradictory, approaches advocated on here as being common sense, whilst ignoring that most of them have been tried, sometimes multiple times.

I blame the loss of the five metre rule to be honest.

[del capo]

29 minutes ago, Griff said:

Can we all have an Academy then ?

Because that's quite a sensitive issue in some areas.

Very true.

There are very few within the Community game , especially at Youth and junior clubs , who favour Academy  and even more so Scholarship. They would argue that they have ravaged the grassroots over the years  and that the wastage both in terms of cost and player numbers has been enormous.

[Harry Stottle]

5 minutes ago, Dave T said:

If reversing trends and addressing all the games ills was as simple as hiring professionals for 2 years, surely we'd have done it years ago? And why sign a 12 year deal if it can be fixed so quickly?

Or maybe people are being silly.

Have you ever employed professionals to do work for you, then in reflection have had cause to question the standard of work they have delivered. 

Or maybe some people are just unlucky. 

[Lowdesert]

8 minutes ago, del capo said:

Very true.

There are very few within the Community game , especially at Youth and junior clubs , who favour Academy  and even more so Scholarship. They would argue that they have ravaged the grassroots over the years  and that the wastage both in terms of cost and player numbers has been enormous.

Have you got and evidence of that widespread view?  Would be genuinely interested.

[Harry Stottle]

14 minutes ago, Lowdesert said:

Have you got and evidence of that widespread view?  Would be genuinely interested.

Did not in the last review and awarding of licences by the RFL talk about saturation of areas, and in part reading between the lines suggested that Cas and Fev being close to Wakefield, Hull KR next to Hull FC, Bradford inbetween Leeds and Huddersfield, they had their licences revoked (all but Fev who didn't have one) only for pressure that forced Rimmer to reinstate them, and also Leigh being surrounded by Wigan, Saints and Wire had the same problem.

The thing is there is a reward for bringing lads through the system, not to mention in house player availability, cherry picking should not be allowed there should not be one law for some, it should be available to all.

Edited November 16, 2023 by Harry Stottle

[Dave T]

20 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Have you ever employed professionals to do work for you, then in reflection have had cause to question the standard of work they have delivered. 

Or maybe some people are just unlucky. 

Harry, I'd suggest that the vast majority who don't like what IMG are doing were always gonna be against IMG.