IMG Grading System (Many Merged Threads)

[Exiled Wiganer]

18 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

In both the sports world, and the consultancy world, it's button money, especially when divided up amongst all the things (and clubs) they are working with the RFL and RL Commerical on.

But to our performative professional northerners it's, "Owwww much?!" as if they're being shown the price of a pint at Lord's.

I live in Surrey, and have lived in the south far longer than I have the north, in case you are lumping me in your professional northerner patronisation. 

[Worzel]

31 minutes ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

Do you work for IMG? 
Have you ever had any contact with IMG? 

I don’t see where your slavish loyalty to them comes from. Having seen them first hand, they have a decent address book but next to zero to add “strategically” that Old Faithful and Padge couldn’t come up with in the pub. 

Where did you see them first hand? 

[Archie Gordon]

7 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I think it certainly shows the cognitive dissonance between how much IMG are actually been paid and how much some people are expecting them to do.

"I could have told them that for bloody free!" is another classic of the genre.

There's also a cognitive dissonance between "£500k is peanuts" and "we've not even got enough brass to open the West Stand at Wigan for an England Test match".

[sweaty craiq]

2 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I think it certainly shows the cognitive dissonance between how much IMG are actually been paid and how much some people are expecting them to do.

"I could have told them that for bloody free!" is another classic of the genre.

My belief was that IMG were a results based partner with a relatively big carrot to aim for, backing their abilities to reach it. 
£500k is not a huge amount to many but ours is a small, under achieving pot that is getting smaller - hence the big opportunity. As a fag packet £500k would get you a leader and 4 FT execs of good quality - we do not seem to get either the control or results from IMG so at present the investment is not producing.

Its too early to pull the plug but I hope some serious questions are being answered where it matters

[Exiled Wiganer]

2 minutes ago, Worzel said:

Where did you see them first hand? 

On multiple occasions in my day job over the last 9 years. 

[Worzel]

23 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

In both the sports world, and the consultancy world, it's button money, especially when divided up amongst all the things (and clubs) they are working with the RFL and RL Commerical on.

But to our performative professional northerners it's, "Owwww much?!" as if they're being shown the price of a pint at Lord's.

£42k per Super League club. 

There are bang average squad players on that. It’s less than Hull KRs fireworks budget for 3 home matches. So let’s not pretend the sport is making some sort of huge investment here. IMG will be under water on this deal by millions already, the business case is on the back end. Probably 2 media rights deals away.

The fact that some people here think they’re milking the sport shows us how far detached from reality our game is in many ways. 

[Tommygilf]

6 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

There's also a cognitive dissonance between "£500k is peanuts" and "we've not even got enough brass to open the West Stand at Wigan for an England Test match".

We do have enough brass, we don't have enough interest, clearly.

[Tommygilf]

6 minutes ago, sweaty craiq said:

My belief was that IMG were a results based partner with a relatively big carrot to aim for, backing their abilities to reach it. 
£500k is not a huge amount to many but ours is a small, under achieving pot that is getting smaller - hence the big opportunity. As a fag packet £500k would get you a leader and 4 FT execs of good quality - we do not seem to get either the control or results from IMG so at present the investment is not producing.

Its too early to pull the plug but I hope some serious questions are being answered where it matters

How does that fit in with building and producing SL+? Creating new content templates for every club to use along with advice and support on a platform? Providing an overarching plan for what we want top clubs to look like? 

£500k (it is less than that iirc anyway) to a company doesn't get you what some are seemingly expecting? 

[RP London]

1 minute ago, Tommygilf said:

How does that fit in with building and producing SL+? Creating new content templates for every club to use along with advice and support on a platform? Providing an overarching plan for what we want top clubs to look like? 

£500k (it is less than that iirc anyway) to a company doesn't get you what some are seemingly expecting? 

yep and while that money could get us a leader and 4 execs it doesnt then also get us the web developers and platform builders (who could be on some serious money anyway) and then when we need the next set of specialists they will be able to be provided by IMG too... thats why you pay for a company like them. 

[north yorks trinity]

1 hour ago, gingerjon said:

It's worth saying that, from memory, this board wasn't 100% clear on whether IMG would even recommend a continuation of the internationals given the state they are now in.

I should also add that if I were simply interested in making money in the short term I'd not recommend them either - even though, as a fan, and with an eye to the longer term, I think they're essential.

I could be wrong but believe that IMG's remit is to grow the game, rather than to make money in the short term. So thankfully they haven't recommended discontinuing internationals.

Whether they have recommended doing internationals better and whether, given that IMG don't run the game, the RFL haven't listened or feel that their hands are tied (e.g. by the NRL) nothing appears to have changed. 

It may be that expectations of IMG were unrealistically high but it doesn't stop it being very frustrating.

[north yorks trinity]

1 hour ago, gingerjon said:

 

Double post

Edited October 15 by north yorks trinity

[LeeF]

10 hours ago, 17 stone giant said:

Obviously I wouldn't say "everything" as I'm certain IMG have expertise and experience that wasn't already present in the sport, but I do think that some of what IMG is doing isn't really that sophisticated and could have been done by the sport. Unfortunately, it wasn't, and now you're paying IMG a decent chunk of money to do some fairly basic things, along with the more difficult stuff.

Just as an example, and I appreciate that it's only a summary, but when the IMG re-imagining recommendations says things like:

A calendar aligned with the global game to facilitate an international window in October and incorporate a mid-season international. (Reimagining Rugby League – IMG presents recommendations (rugby-league.com))

I do think to myself, surely rugby league didn't need to pay someone to tell it that? These sorts of ideas and conversations have taken place on this forum for years. I doubt anyone here is sitting there thinking "wow, that's a great idea from IMG. I never thought of that."

As a sort of outsider here (in that I don't have a club team with a stake in proceedings), I do look and think that some of the IMG critics (such as Harry) should turn some of their criticism back on to the people who failed to implement these things already. IMG are now, in my view, taking your money partly to tell you how to suck eggs.

I just hope that overall they are able to improve things by such an extent that everyone forgets that probably rugby league should have done some of this before deciding it needed outside help.

A simple answer is that you sometimes need an “outsider” to be the catalyst for change and whilst some of the proposed steps are relatively small the overall package isn’t and definitely needs external support and skills. The “talent pool” at the RFL has been poor for long time.

You also need an “outsider” to reduce the impact of vested interest which has held the game back for many years and has been discussed regularly on this forum. 

The idea that IMG are using an intern is frankly a joke and says more about the poster (& any supporters) than IMG

[LeeF]

14 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Simple answer those running the RL have not been up to the task, they have continually promoted from the inside effectively giving 'jobs to the boys' who then become the decision makers who are left with nowhere else to turn only to outsource help, employing IMG substantiates just how inadequate they are.

So we haven’t even had an intern level or similar as that is all it takes to make these changes. 

[Archie Gordon]

24 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

We do have enough brass, we don't have enough interest, clearly.

It's a bit circular though.

There is limited interest in England games partly because we put no money into staging them as events.

Can we get the venue free/cheap? Do we need to open every stand? Can we fly everyone economy and then keep travel and lodgings to a minimum once they arrive? If we put the England women on as a double-header, that would be a saving! And on it goes.

We're not selling tickets, you say? I guess there's just no interest in international RL. <Shrug>

[gingerjon]

22 minutes ago, north yorks trinity said:

It may be that expectations of IMG were unrealistically high but it doesn't stop it being very frustrating.

Yes, I should be clear here, I remain exceptionally frustrated at the state of the game and its ongoing contraction.

There are many people to blame - virtually all of them would still be the decision makers if IMG walked out today.

[gingerjon]

32 minutes ago, RP London said:

yep and while that money could get us a leader and 4 execs it doesnt then also get us the web developers and platform builders (who could be on some serious money anyway) and then when we need the next set of specialists they will be able to be provided by IMG too... thats why you pay for a company like them. 

It should also be said that, when given the chance, the RFL still recruit Marketing Directors on 45k.

[Chrispmartha]

2 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

It should also be said that, when given the chance, the RFL still recruit Marketing Directors on 45k.

Maybe that’s the issue, you aren’t getting a good marketing director for £45k a year.

[Harry Stottle]

11 hours ago, 17 stone giant said:

Obviously I wouldn't say "everything" as I'm certain IMG have expertise and experience that wasn't already present in the sport, but I do think that some of what IMG is doing isn't really that sophisticated and could have been done by the sport. Unfortunately, it wasn't, and now you're paying IMG a decent chunk of money to do some fairly basic things, along with the more difficult stuff.

Just as an example, and I appreciate that it's only a summary, but when the IMG re-imagining recommendations says things like:

A calendar aligned with the global game to facilitate an international window in October and incorporate a mid-season international. (Reimagining Rugby League – IMG presents recommendations (rugby-league.com))

I do think to myself, surely rugby league didn't need to pay someone to tell it that? These sorts of ideas and conversations have taken place on this forum for years. I doubt anyone here is sitting there thinking "wow, that's a great idea from IMG. I never thought of that."

As a sort of outsider here (in that I don't have a club team with a stake in proceedings), I do look and think that some of the IMG critics (such as Harry) should turn some of their criticism back on to the people who failed to implement these things already. IMG are now, in my view, taking your money partly to tell you how to suck eggs.

I just hope that overall they are able to improve things by such an extent that everyone forgets that probably rugby league should have done some of this before deciding it needed outside help.

Excellent and very logical post Giant, but I thought in all honesty I did what you suggest of me in my post prior to you delivering this which was a few hours before yours.

15 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Simple answer those running the RL have not been up to the task, they have continually promoted from the inside effectively giving 'jobs to the boys' who then become the decision makers who are left with nowhere else to turn only to outsource help, employing IMG substantiates just how inadequate they are.

 

[Harry Stottle]

2 hours ago, gingerjon said:

They sort of did need to be told because they keep putting on half baked internationals in over saturated places and then running two test series in those same places at the season's end.

Our most recent mid season international was a curtain raiser for a tier 2 game.

So, it's going badly.

Which is what happens when you ignore sound recommendations.

But these things were addressed on here at the last WC, with blanket coverage of particular areas expecting yge same people to keep on attending the games, the outcome was reduced attendances, so why does the governing body have to pay to listen to some organisation, when their very own clientele are telling them the very same things with their actions.

[JohnM]

On Monday, I bumped into an old mate from years ago. “How are you ”, I asked, like you do. That’ll teach me, because he told me…and as a result, I missed the bus to my bowls ( no, not bowels) session. “Well, I’ve had quite a few bad years, some worse than others but you know, as you get older, your health declines irreversibly. Lots of people have claimed to be experts and have been saying ‘do this, do that, try this herb, that supplement, try the war-time diet because we were healthier then and so on’. I tried but none of it worked and things just got steadily worse. I really thought there’s nothing I can do about it but now, it looks like I was wrong. My GP referred me to one of those Healthy Living clinics. They were really thorough. They looked at my entire medical history, they talked to my friends, looked at what medicines there were that I could take, and how to change my lifestyle to reverse my decline.  They came up with a strategy, a staged plan for me to follow and they showed me how their approach had worked well for others. They explained it all to me at a high level, laid it all out in front of me step by step, even telling me that it would take a good few years to see it through and see real results, not to get obsessed by every little detail and not to give up”. I saw him again this morning, Tuesday, and asked him how it had worked, how many pills, what dose, which pharmacy, which manufacturer, take with food or water, why not this other drug, etc.  Which is why I'm writing this whilst waiting for treatment at the local UTC for a broken nose and  a black eye.

Edited October 15 by JohnM

[Exiled Wiganer]

1 hour ago, LeeF said:

A simple answer is that you sometimes need an “outsider” to be the catalyst for change and whilst some of the proposed steps are relatively small the overall package isn’t and definitely needs external support and skills. The “talent pool” at the RFL has been poor for long time.

You also need an “outsider” to reduce the impact of vested interest which has held the game back for many years and has been discussed regularly on this forum. 

The idea that IMG are using an intern is frankly a joke and says more about the poster (& any supporters) than IMG

That was my comment. It really isn’t a joke, and if you can’t understand or haven’t seen at first hand what you get for a “strategic review” then perhaps you should commission one yourself from your own pocket. 
 

If the problem is a lack of quality decision makers in league’s organisation, the answer will never be “out source it”. I hope that you are never in a position to spend other people’s money if you deride anyone who questions what the ultimate purpose of it all is. 
 

We need better leaguie decision makers. That is what our game needs. 

Edited October 15 by Exiled Wiganer

[binosh]

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

How does that fit in with building and producing SL+? Creating new content templates for every club to use along with advice and support on a platform? Providing an overarching plan for what we want top clubs to look like? 

£500k (it is less than that iirc anyway) to a company doesn't get you what some are seemingly expecting? 

How much is SL+ bringing in via subscriptions and advertising? Surely the point of it is to make incremental revenue seeing as all games are televised anyway?

Great concept but how is it actually doing? 

[Chrispmartha]

26 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

But these things were addressed on here at the last WC, with blanket coverage of particular areas expecting yge same people to keep on attending the games, the outcome was reduced attendances, so why does the governing body have to pay to listen to some organisation, when their very own clientele are telling them the very same things with their actions.

Because that's just a part of what they are saying, and they're not wrong are they as you are admitting.

[Tommygilf]

2 minutes ago, binosh said:

How much is SL+ bringing in via subscriptions and advertising? Surely the point of it is to make incremental revenue seeing as all games are televised anyway?

Great concept but how is it actually doing? 

I've no idea tbh. I'd expect it to grow in the UK more now though as we see the limitations of Sky Sports +.

Likewise it seems to be a vehicle for Clubs to sell premium media content. The Rhinos have a 4 part fly on the wall series based on this year coming out on SL+ for example. I'd expect more clubs to be doing similar going forwards.

[RP London]

38 minutes ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

That was my comment. It really isn’t a joke, and if you can’t understand or haven’t seen at first hand what you get for a “strategic review” then perhaps you should commission one yourself from your own pocket. 
 

If the problem is a lack of quality decision makers in league’s organisation, the answer will never be “out source it”. I hope that you are never in a position to spend other people’s money if you deride anyone who questions what the ultimate purpose of it all is. 
 

We need better leaguie decision makers. That is what our game needs. 

I dont think anyone is saying that we have the right people at the helm at the RFL.. in fact quite the opposite.. 

However, unless they all resign its not easy just replacing people (as anyone employing anyone will know).. while i get what you are saying about outsourcing, as someone who owns and runs my own business, there is something in getting outsiders in to look at things from a strategic level and, maybe to tell you what you already know but to tell you how to also get out of it, tell you why, add data which you may not know etc.. while we think the RFL do/should know all this in reality they are a small business (staffing wise) and wont have expertise throughout therefore outsourcing is 100% a legitimate way to do this... I can think of plenty of examples in my own business where that has been the best decision.

 

Edit: I would, of course, caveat that by saying "the right people" when you outsource and whether IMG are the right people we will find out. I am still on the fence a bit but I am positive in terms of we need to do something and they are doing something (no matter what some doom mongerers on here say)

Edited October 15 by RP London