IMG Grading System (Many Merged Threads)

[Worzel]

4 hours ago, JohnM said:

In a word, "class".  The coach has it, the players have it, but not everyone else has it.

I’ll give you that. But I guess in Leigh’s case I don’t think the other stuff comes without that character, so it is what it is really. 

[bobbruce]

1 hour ago, Hopie said:

... or the bar to reach grade A/the way the scores are calculated isn't doing what people expected. 

If the grading scores are to encourage long term growth and aspiration they will fail unless the are changed. If clubs could "fix" themselves up in a year that shows that there was no need to properly change things as they all already had what they needed, or it shows the grading scores aren't doing enough to show the differences between great, good, ok, and poor performance.

If the grading scores are meant to reward incumbency then they are a spectacular success.

I’m not sure why everyone thinks grade A is going to stay the same forever. This one was achievable and we now have potentially 10-12 clubs reaching it. For me grade A should now be ramped up each time it is reached by 12 clubs. There is no point starting it off at an unachievable level. 

[OMEGA]

3 hours ago, Griff said:

Some points are quite easy to get.  For example, you can get LED advertising boards round the ground in a few days, provided you're prepared to pay the money.

That money though is approximately £300,000 so not quite as easy to get as you say

[Hopie]

15 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

I’m not sure why everyone thinks grade A is going to stay the same forever. This one was achievable and we now have potentially 10-12 clubs reaching it. For me grade A should now be ramped up each time it is reached by 12 clubs. There is no point starting it off at an unachievable level. 

I have been consistently advocating for changes to this system, that is one I have suggested, but there is no evidence that changes are going to be made, if you have seen some then do share it.

Your reference to "unachievable" is obviously vague enough to be interpreted differently, but the A grade should not be achieved by 2/3rds + of the Super League, because there is no way that the clubs in this country are that healthy.

[bobbruce]

6 minutes ago, Hopie said:

I have been consistently advocating for changes to this system, that is one I have suggested, but there is no evidence that changes are going to be made, if you have seen some then do share it.

Your reference to "unachievable" is obviously vague enough to be interpreted differently, but the A grade should not be achieved by 2/3rds + of the Super League, because there is no way that the clubs in this country are that healthy.

I haven’t seen anything but then I didn’t say I had. 

[Hopie]

1 hour ago, bobbruce said:

I’m not sure why everyone thinks grade A is going to stay the same forever. 

33 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

I haven’t seen anything but then I didn’t say I had. 

Maybe that's why?

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

4 hours ago, bobbruce said:

I’m not sure why everyone thinks grade A is going to stay the same forever. This one was achievable and we now have potentially 10-12 clubs reaching it. For me grade A should now be ramped up each time it is reached by 12 clubs. There is no point starting it off at an unachievable level. 

Of course unachievable targets shouldn't be set but neither should those that can be met by clubs simply changing the way they count their beans. Given the state of the game (and many clubs) there really aren't more than (at best) a half dozen true Grade A clubs.

It really is a case of

 

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

4 hours ago, bobbruce said:

I haven’t seen anything but then I didn’t say I had. 

Turkeys aren't going to vote for Christmas...

[bobbruce]

58 minutes ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

Turkeys aren't going to vote for Christmas...

They have already. 

[bobbruce]

4 hours ago, Hopie said:

Maybe that's why?

Well technically they don’t actually have to change anything. Once you get 12 A grades it then becomes about carrying on improving so you stay in the top 12. It isn’t a massive stretch to then think they may tweak or add a grading here or there.  

[RP London]

This may be an old/odd way to think but maybe it would be best to see what the grades are or how many get an A before we start re slagging off the process/IMG potentially for something that doesn't happen?

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

30 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

Well technically they don’t actually have to change anything. Once you get 12 A grades it then becomes about carrying on improving so you stay in the top 12. It isn’t a massive stretch to then think they may tweak or add a grading here or there.  

Why do you need to improve once you achieve an A grade? 

[bobbruce]

Just now, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

Why do you need to improve once you achieve an A grade? 

To stay in the top 12. 

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

34 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

They have already. 

No, they voted in a system they knew they could exploit. Clubs are not going to vote to downgrade themselves. 

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

2 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

To stay in the top 12. 

JFC.....

 

[bobbruce]

9 hours ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

No, they voted in a system they knew they could exploit. Clubs are not going to vote to downgrade themselves. 

That’s just not true if it was only the 10 A grades that voted for it it wouldn’t have got through. 

Edited September 22 by bobbruce

[Griff]

7 hours ago, OMEGA said:

That money though is approximately £300,000 so not quite as easy to get as you say

I was thinking of how quickly they could be installed.

But....

You only have to look at the number of clubs who have them to realise that yours is a short sighted view. It's not money down the drain. It's a revenue earning asset.

Edited September 21 by Griff

[gingerjon]

8 hours ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

Why do you need to improve once you achieve an A grade? 

If, for no other reason, because otherwise your club will end up costing more money and bringing less money in?

[JohnM]

10 hours ago, RP London said:

This may be an old/odd way to think but maybe it would be best to see what the grades are or how many get an A before we start re slagging off the process/IMG potentially for something that doesn't happen?

You just don't get it, do you. The whole Re-imagining project and IMG in particular  are rubbish because they use double spacing after the sentence-end full stop.

Edited September 22 by JohnM

[Ainley Top]

12 hours ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

Turkeys aren't going to vote for Christmas...

...but they have, quite clearly️

[OMEGA]

9 hours ago, Griff said:

I was thinking of how quickly they could be installed.

But....

You only have to look at the number of clubs who have them to realise that yours is a short sighted view. It's not money down the drain. It's a revenue earning asset.

Where did I say or even suggest that it was “money down the drain” so how is mine “a short sighted view”?

If you can genuinely afford to put them in then they are indeed a potential revenue generator but £300,000 is a lot of money to find if you haven’t got it. 

[Archie Gordon]

Just to clarify:

IMG are clear that on reaching 13 grade As, SL expands. There is no mention of reaching 13 grade As and then adjusting the grading to make it tougher to achieve an A. But this myth is becoming popular ...

IMG are clear that grade A guarantees a SL spot. It is not simply the top 12 that make SL. But this myth is becoming popular ...

Some of us see obvious practical difficulties here and would like a formal clarification. Another set of posters prefers to regard IMG as not really meaning what they say but it'll be alright on the night. I'm not sure why the latter group wouldn't also be happier with a formal clarification.

[Click]

28 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

Just to clarify:

IMG are clear that on reaching 13 grade As, SL expands. There is no mention of reaching 13 grade As and then adjusting the grading to make it tougher to achieve an A. But this myth is becoming popular ...

IMG are clear that grade A guarantees a SL spot. It is not simply the top 12 that make SL. But this myth is becoming popular ...

Some of us see obvious practical difficulties here and would like a formal clarification. Another set of posters prefers to regard IMG as not really meaning what they say but it'll be alright on the night. I'm not sure why the latter group wouldn't also be happier with a formal clarification.

Neither of these points are correct.

 

[Wakefield Ram]

40 minutes ago, OMEGA said:

Where did I say or even suggest that it was “money down the drain” so how is mine “a short sighted view”?

If you can genuinely afford to put them in then they are indeed a potential revenue generator but £300,000 is a lot of money to find if you haven’t got it. 

Add in maintenance costs, replacement costs, as they won't last forever....so say 10 clubs have LED screens IMG have to guarantee £3 million in additional revenue for the clubs and given its some form of profit share then maybe that's £4-5m million extra advertising revenue IMG will need to generate to benefit the clubs. 

The clubs bear the cost of installation and maintenance and hopefully these costs will be fully covered before IMG get any share of extra "new" advertising revenue. 

Of course if you're a Championship club without Sky money and SL level income, it's a big cost and with no TV coverage makes no economic sense.

Would it not make more sense to remove this barrier and just make it a condition of promotion to SL that LED screens will be installed if promoted?

 

 

Edited September 22 by Wakefield Ram

[Archie Gordon]

4 minutes ago, Click said:

Neither of these points are correct.

 

Then p. 5 of the latest IMG handbook is wrong. Not much I can do about that.