The Gap

[sam4731]

I've always thought that a good way of judging the health of a sport (professional only) is where a gap starts opening up from the top.

Obviously when everyone was semi pro, things were a lot more competitive going a fair way down the ladder and full time rugby league has pushed that gap further up but in my opinion, that gap,which I would now say, is higher than it's ever been, which is below the top 8 of SL.

At it's most competitive in recent years, I think that the top 4/6 in the Championship were able to beat a fair amount of SL sides, which was around 2017 (which coincided with and was maybe aided by the middle 8s).

Would anyone agree with my assessment and if so what's gone wrong and how do we fix it?

[Archie Gordon]

I think the gap has long existed but it has really been exaggerated this season because Cas and London have absolutely nothing to play for and Hull have imploded. That's a quarter of the comp written off - it's really very poor. SL is carrying too many passengers.

Next season will at least include Wakefield but I'm not seeing anybody else pressing their case.

[Cerulean]

23 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

I think the gap has long existed but it has really been exaggerated this season because Cas and London have absolutely nothing to play for and Hull have imploded. That's a quarter of the comp written off - it's really very poor. SL is carrying too many passengers.

Next season will at least include Wakefield but I'm not seeing anybody else pressing their case.

"... and how do we fix it?"

A 9 team Super League, it seems.

And if a further gap opens up, move to a 6 or 7 team Super League.

Any other ideas? Suggesting bringing the lesser teams up to the standard of the top ones is not an answer to the question. Perhaps if we call the lesser teams "passengers" loud enough and often enough, that will do it.

[sam4731]

17 minutes ago, Cerulean said:

"... and how do we fix it?"

A 9 team Super League, it seems.

And if a further gap opens up, move to a 6 or 7 team Super League.

Any other ideas? Suggesting bringing the lesser teams up to the standard of the top ones is not an answer to the question. Perhaps if we call the lesser teams "passengers" loud enough and often enough, that will do it.

Well my fix would be to be firstly to reinstate P&R and personally I'd bring back the middle 8's. I know it was controversial for a few reasons but I do think it was a big motivator for the Championship clubs, getting to play SL teams not just a one off. It also provided more jeopardy at the end of the SL season.

[The Blues Ox]

Unfortunatley with onfield not really mattering anymore to the majority of the competition it will make it hard to have a really competitive league. Take Hull for instance, total disaster this season on the pitch but in no danger of losing SL status off it, they really should start cutting back where they can to save money and come up with a plan where in 2 or 3 seasons they can have a good crack at making the playoffs for a season or two. 

[Archie Gordon]

1 hour ago, Cerulean said:

"... and how do we fix it?"

A 9 team Super League, it seems.

And if a further gap opens up, move to a 6 or 7 team Super League.

Any other ideas? Suggesting bringing the lesser teams up to the standard of the top ones is not an answer to the question. Perhaps if we call the lesser teams "passengers" loud enough and often enough, that will do it.

For now, yes, a 10-team SL would be a good first step. If, in your scenario, 2 or 3 of those then fail you've obviously got a much much bigger problem than the structure of the top division to worry about.

More widely, I think the health of the second division is a useful proxy indicator for the health of the game. I would have kept P&R for that reason.

 

[OriginalMrC]

The middle 8s closed the gap I thought. We have been headed the same way as RU though where eventually clubs below the top division will have no hope of promotion. 

[Gomersall]

2 hours ago, The Blues Ox said:

Unfortunatley with onfield not really mattering anymore to the majority of the competition it will make it hard to have a really competitive league. Take Hull for instance, total disaster this season on the pitch but in no danger of losing SL status off it, they really should start cutting back where they can to save money and come up with a plan where in 2 or 3 seasons they can have a good crack at making the playoffs for a season or two. 

Hull should be in the playoffs more often than not. Being there for a couple of seasons won’t pacify their fans.

[gingerjon]

59 minutes ago, OriginalMrC said:

The middle 8s closed the gap I thought. 

Yes. They helped lower the standards at the foot of Super League.

[N2022]

I am an occasional spectator, no expert, but I feel like league should be able to run a 12 team SL with the  3 x 8 model at the end of the season a decent opportunity for the bottom SL sides to pick up some wins and the top championship sides to spring a surprise and go up. This or 2 team P&R adds some interest, otherwise you likely have a lot of games with little riding on them a couple of months into the season. I get the desire and IMG mission to have a more professional look / feel and reward corporate clout but LB essentially being relegated regardless of how they play this season is starting to look like a bad thing for the sport.

Repetitive calendar is another reason I'd oppose dropping to 10. 8s gives a bit of that to the top teams, but spares a further one-sided St H v LB.

[bobbruce]

4 hours ago, sam4731 said:

I've always thought that a good way of judging the health of a sport (professional only) is where a gap starts opening up from the top.

Obviously when everyone was semi pro, things were a lot more competitive going a fair way down the ladder and full time rugby league has pushed that gap further up but in my opinion, that gap,which I would now say, is higher than it's ever been, which is below the top 8 of SL.

At it's most competitive in recent years, I think that the top 4/6 in the Championship were able to beat a fair amount of SL sides, which was around 2017 (which coincided with and was maybe aided by the middle 8s).

Would anyone agree with my assessment and if so what's gone wrong and how do we fix it?

The gap in football is the top 3 to the rest and that seems fairly healthy. 

[sam4731]

22 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Yes. They helped lower the standards at the foot of Super League.

So if the standard of those games were worse, surely the teams playing in them didn't deserve places in SL or at the very least shouldn't be just given places in SL rather than fight for them.

[sam4731]

1 minute ago, bobbruce said:

The gap in football is the top 3 to the rest and that seems fairly healthy. 

You are completely right of course but I do feel like the premier league naturally forms it's own mini leagues with what they play for. 

For example you could feasibly argue that down to 12th still have hopes of a European place at the moment with everything up to 15th is still in a relegation battle.

A game between 2nd and 16th may on paper look like a foregone conclusion (which of course isn't true anyway) but it's the ramifications that that game has on other teams in and around those teams.

[bobbruce]

7 minutes ago, sam4731 said:

You are completely right of course but I do feel like the premier league naturally forms it's own mini leagues with what they play for. 

For example you could feasibly argue that down to 12th still have hopes of a European place at the moment with everything up to 15th is still in a relegation battle.

A game between 2nd and 16th may on paper look like a foregone conclusion (which of course isn't true anyway) but it's the ramifications that that game has on other teams in and around those teams.

The point is these gaps always exist in all sports. I would agree that the pro to semi pro area of RL is too high up the pyramid and that is RLs main problem. Added to that some of the teams acting as pro clubs are just clinging on and could easily be inter changed with some of the semi pro clubs in the championship. As a game we either introduce new clubs like Catalan (unlikely) or hope  more clubs can do what Leigh have done. Or as is more likely what Hull KR are doing by slowly growing their club on and off the field. 

[The Blues Ox]

I certainly feel like the gap on the field at this point is as wide as it has ever been between the SL and Championship (Allowing for swapping London and Wakey like will happen), there has been a noticeable drop off in standards in the championship over the last couple of seasons and those standards will likely drop over the coming seasons as well at least until we change the format again in 2 or 3 years.

[Eddie]

To be fair the gap in football is almost as big now, with the three promoted teams likely going down again and that’s happened many times, even with the cash, infinitely bigger player pool and ease of transfers in the close season. It’s boring but it’s the way professional sport has gone. 

[Damien]

Interestingly and correlated somewhat to the gap between teams:

Sky Sports have published what they believe to be the estimated spend of all 12 Super League clubs this year – with reigning champions Wigan Warriors alleged to have spent the most – £3.1million – in 2024 on player salaries.

In the run-up to Friday night’s game between Leeds Rhinos and Warrington Wolves, Sky Sports host Brian Carney revealed just how much all 12 clubs are spending in the competition this season according to research conducted by the broadcaster.

And Sky’s league table places the Warriors on top, with the highest spend on player wages this year, the only club to be spending in excess of £3million.

Two more clubs, Catalans Dragons and Warrington Wolves, are estimated to be spending £3million with another three clubs – Leeds Rhinos, Huddersfield Giants and St Helens – spending £2.7million.

Super League salary spend in 2024 according to Sky Sports

1. Wigan Warriors – £3.1million
=2. Catalans Dragons – £3million
=2. Warrington Wolves – £3million
=4. Huddersfield Giants – £2.7million
=4. Leeds Rhinos – £2.7million
=4. St Helens – £2.7million
7. Hull KR – £2.4million
8. Leigh Leopards – £2.2million
9. Hull FC – £1.8million
=10. Salford Red Devils – £1.7million
=10. Castleford Tigers – £1.7million
12. London Broncos – £1.4million

https://www.loverugbyleague.com/post/sky-sports-publish-salary-spend-of-all-super-league-teams-salford-second-lowest-wigan-highest

[Cerulean]

4 hours ago, Archie Gordon said:

For now, yes, a 10-team SL would be a good first step. If, in your scenario, 2 or 3 of those then fail you've obviously got a much much bigger problem than the structure of the top division to worry about.

More widely, I think the health of the second division is a useful proxy indicator for the health of the game. I would have kept P&R for that reason.

 

Sorry: I was being flippant, and I apologise. There are some sensibly thought out responses here, and mine doesn’t deserve to be amongst them. I like your possible sugestion of a 10 team Super League as a way forward: 5 games each round, closely matched, hard fought, with a 1 team promotion and relegation to a competitive and high profile second division: it could raise the look of the sport, and encourage ambition.

[glossop saint]

30 minutes ago, Cerulean said:

Sorry: I was being flippant, and I apologise. There are some sensibly thought out responses here, and mine doesn’t deserve to be amongst them. I like your possible sugestion of a 10 team Super League as a way forward: 5 games each round, closely matched, hard fought, with a 1 team promotion and relegation to a competitive and high profile second division: it could raise the look of the sport, and encourage ambition.

I don't disagree that it is probably more likely to be closer match ups with 10 teams, though I do think it risks being repetitive. I don't understand how this would make the 2nd division competitive or high profile. What is your logic for this?

[Cerulean]

3 minutes ago, glossop saint said:

I don't disagree that it is probably more likely to be closer match ups with 10 teams, though I do think it risks being repetitive. I don't understand how this would make the 2nd division competitive or high profile. What is your logic for this?

Thank you for the response. The competitivity and profile of a second division should be enhanced by the annual opportunity of 1 of the 10 being promoted, but this alone would be nowhere near enough. It's an issue that needs examination: but starting with a belief that teams 11 to 20 in the Northern Hemisphere are of some value to the sport, might help.

[ATLANTISMAN]

Fix it by the NRL taking over and draining the swamp

[Whippet13]

Fix it by putting ambitious clubs into SL.

 

[glossop saint]

1 minute ago, Cerulean said:

Thank you for the response. The competitivity and profile of a second division should be enhanced by the annual opportunity of 1 of the 10 being promoted, but this alone would be nowhere near enough. It's an issue that needs examination: but starting with a belief that teams 11 to 20 in the Northern Hemisphere are of some value to the sport, might help.

There is a huge question over the structure of the game and how we manage the semi professional ranks of the sport and any transistion to pro or meetings between the two. As has been said part of that problem is that that change from Pro to semi pro is so relatively high up the league structure and thus visible. I honestly don't think this can be resolved with the current finances, or player pool.

In the past I have been a believer in the 2x10 but with cross division matches but only if both are fully pro. However sadly I don't think that is feasible. 

As you say, it needs examination and I'm sure both of us as well as a great many people on here could right a full essay on the problems and our proposed solutions. Unfortunately it would just be a massive waste of time.

[bratman]

2 hours ago, Damien said:

Huddersfield Giants – £2.7million

Hull FC – £1.8million

Surprised Hudds so high and how low Hulls is.

[Tommygilf]

3 hours ago, Damien said:

Interestingly and correlated somewhat to the gap between teams:

Sky Sports have published what they believe to be the estimated spend of all 12 Super League clubs this year – with reigning champions Wigan Warriors alleged to have spent the most – £3.1million – in 2024 on player salaries.

In the run-up to Friday night’s game between Leeds Rhinos and Warrington Wolves, Sky Sports host Brian Carney revealed just how much all 12 clubs are spending in the competition this season according to research conducted by the broadcaster.

And Sky’s league table places the Warriors on top, with the highest spend on player wages this year, the only club to be spending in excess of £3million.

Two more clubs, Catalans Dragons and Warrington Wolves, are estimated to be spending £3million with another three clubs – Leeds Rhinos, Huddersfield Giants and St Helens – spending £2.7million.

Super League salary spend in 2024 according to Sky Sports

1. Wigan Warriors – £3.1million
=2. Catalans Dragons – £3million
=2. Warrington Wolves – £3million
=4. Huddersfield Giants – £2.7million
=4. Leeds Rhinos – £2.7million
=4. St Helens – £2.7million
7. Hull KR – £2.4million
8. Leigh Leopards – £2.2million
9. Hull FC – £1.8million
=10. Salford Red Devils – £1.7million
=10. Castleford Tigers – £1.7million
12. London Broncos – £1.4million

https://www.loverugbyleague.com/post/sky-sports-publish-salary-spend-of-all-super-league-teams-salford-second-lowest-wigan-highest

Speaks for itself doesn't it. 

Salford punching way above their weight, but as the Cas example shows (and I'd bet the disparity was relatively similar during their recent heyday), that can only last so long before it falters.