IMG Grading System (Many Merged Threads)

[Worzel]

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Would you please remind me what Mr Lakin said a couple of months ago re the clubs input into how they have got where they are.

The club have driven their own outcomes. Nobody has done it for them. The future isn't about IMG doing it for clubs, the clubs still need to take the action themselves. Hull HR was demonstrably improving before IMG, and there's no contradiction there. My point is a very specific one: Hull KR got the additional investment we needed to move from being an improving, progressive, ambitious SL club to a strong, top 4, potential-trophy-winning SL club rapidly as a result of the RFL's IMG partnership. 

That's more than just playing budgets too. The money has funded marketing, which has brought larger crowds and bigger memberships. It's funded additional temporary seating. It's funded a massive expansion of our Academy pathways. It's enabled us to build a £1.8m 3G pitch next to the stadium, to lock Rovers into the local sports community for a generation or more. Those things were not possible without more money, and the investors committed because they bought into the new era. 

Rugby league is short on revenues to reinvest. It needs outside investment in order to get back into growth. That outside investment is always less likely to come when it could all go up in smoke after one bad run of injuries, one bad season, and relegation into a lower league where you immediately lose at least £2m in revenues overnight. That's just how decisions get made by people with money. 

[The Blues Ox]

1 hour ago, Worzel said:

Rovers had the facilities and had already reactivated the fanbase in the championship, with larger home crowds than several Super League clubs. We'd have dislodged one of the existing clubs and got into the 12. It might have taken another year or two maybe, but that's kind of the point. 

 

First couple of years average attendances were around 2.5K or so according to RLP. Would they have increased in the 3rd year if money had been spent off the field rather than on it? Also if had taken another year or two you would have lost the benefit of previous scores in SL making it really difficult to oust any current SL team.  Rovers could have walked the Championship the year after relegation if they had the money to do so especially as that year there was no full time teams to compete with.

[Worzel]

1 hour ago, The Blues Ox said:

First couple of years average attendances were around 2.5K or so according to RLP. Would they have increased in the 3rd year if money had been spent off the field rather than on it? Also if had taken another year or two you would have lost the benefit of previous scores in SL making it really difficult to oust any current SL team.  Rovers could have walked the Championship the year after relegation if they had the money to do so especially as that year there was no full time teams to compete with.

Nope, incorrect: Hull KR's average crowd in 2005 in the Championship was over 4,000, so you're miles off. The 2,500 you quote was the year before, which was before Hudgell started to properly invest. 2006 would obviously have been bigger even if we'd still been in the Championship, we'd just made the Challenge Cup semi final in the lower leagues and (in your alternate universe) only just missed out on promotion. In the SL in 2007 we averaged 7,000 off the bat, so you can see the latent demand. 

Our Championship attendance was already higher than Salford and London got that year in Super League, and within spitting distance of Huddersfield and Wakefield.

I know you believe you're right, but the data clearly shows you're not. 

[Jill Halfpenny fan]

1 hour ago, Worzel said:

Nope, incorrect: Hull KR's average crowd in 2005 in the Championship was over 4,000, so you're miles off. The 2,500 you quote was the year before, which was before Hudgell started to properly invest. 2006 would obviously have been bigger even if we'd still been in the Championship, we'd just made the Challenge Cup semi final in the lower leagues and (in your alternate universe) only just missed out on promotion. In the SL in 2007 we averaged 7,000 off the bat, so you can see the latent demand. 

Our Championship attendance was already higher than Salford and London got that year in Super League, and within spitting distance of Huddersfield and Wakefield.

I know you believe you're right, but the data clearly shows you're not. 

 

Hull KR's average championship crowd in 2005 was 2,802 but I suspect you mean 2006.

Hull KR's average championship home crowd in 2006 was NOT over 4,000.  The figure of 4,049 shown by rl project includes all games played at Craven Park and for good measure, the Grand Final crowd at the Halliwell Jones and the NR cup final at Bloomfield Rd.  Pulling out the championship crowds gives an average of 3,402.  

Salford's average Superleague crowd in 2006 was 4,820.  London's (Harlequins) was 5,296 which includes that double header game with the Union side, removing that gives us an average of 4,349. Huddersfield's average was 6,550, again there's a game against Catalans that stands out at 14,017, not sure how they managed that.  However removing that still gives them an average of 5,976. Regarding Wakefield, their average Superleague attendance in 2006 was 5,320.  Now by my calculations in 2006 you didn't better any of the above clubs.

And for good measure Widnes average championship attendance in 2006 was 3,518.

 

Edited December 11, 2024 by Jill Halfpenny fan

[The Blues Ox]

9 hours ago, Worzel said:

I know you believe you're right, but the data clearly shows you're not. 

Im just using what I can find online. 2004 Average of 2179, 2005 Average of 2587. The real jump didnt come till the following year when they won the league pretty easily. Maybe your memory is clouded to fit the narrative that you are pushing but the reality is a little different backed up by facts rather than a dream.

[gingerjon]

11 hours ago, Jill Halfpenny fan said:

 

Hull KR's average championship crowd in 2005 was 2,802 but I suspect you mean 2006.

Hull KR's average championship home crowd in 2006 was NOT over 4,000.  The figure of 4,049 shown by rl project includes all games played at Craven Park and for good measure, the Grand Final crowd at the Halliwell Jones and the NR cup final at Bloomfield Rd.  Pulling out the championship crowds gives an average of 3,402.  

Salford's average Superleague crowd in 2006 was 4,820.  London's (Harlequins) was 5,296 which includes that double header game with the Union side, removing that gives us an average of 4,349. Huddersfield's average was 6,550, again there's a game against Catalans that stands out at 14,017, not sure how they managed that.  However removing that still gives them an average of 5,976. Regarding Wakefield, their average Superleague attendance in 2006 was 5,320.  Now by my calculations in 2006 you didn't better any of the above clubs.

And for good measure Widnes average championship attendance in 2006 was 3,518.

 

That London number is a fiction. No idea how they got some of the figures that year but, let’s just say, they were creative.

[Worzel]

3 hours ago, The Blues Ox said:

Im just using what I can find online. 2004 Average of 2179, 2005 Average of 2587. The real jump didnt come till the following year when they won the league pretty easily. Maybe your memory is clouded to fit the narrative that you are pushing but the reality is a little different backed up by facts rather than a dream.

I'm happy to accept the JHF's correction to 3,500 from 4,000 in the Championship, that's fair. It doesn't change the argument though does it? That's comparable to Salford and London. Those are the facts. You're talking as if I was miles off, like your 2,500 claim... 

Given we had 7,000 to the home semi final against Widnes the demand was demonstrably there, had been building and would have grown the following year even if we'd lost the final and not got promoted. Under the current model we'd have been rewarded for doing those sort of long-term things to build the club. Under P&R we'd have been perpetually at risk of "doing a Featherstone", as we had before.

The question was "would Hull KR have ever been promoted under the IMG model?". I think the KR audience data, Neil Hudgell's proactive approach at the time (so we know he would have invested in the other areas needed for points), and what Matt Ellis has done at Wakefield, shows that pretty conclusively.

If P&R was the best way to grow the sport and our league, why have TV revenues gone down, hardly any club been promoted and succeeded, and only 3 teams ever won the comp? Everything that's a challenge in rugby league now was a challenge in the P&R era... that's why we need to fix it

 

 

Edited December 12, 2024 by Worzel
Typo

[Worzel]

10 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

That London number is a fiction. No idea how they got some of the figures that year but, let’s just say, they were creative.

Yes, I was a Broncos/Quins season ticket holder that year and was always amazed by the attendances claimed 

 

Edited December 12, 2024 by Worzel
Typo

[The Blues Ox]

3 hours ago, Worzel said:

I'm happy to accept the JHF's correction to 3,500 from 4,000 in the Championship, that's fair. It doesn't change the argument though does it? That's comparable to Salford and London. Those are the facts. You're talking as if I was miles off, like your 2,500 claim... 

I'm not sure what you are arguing about here? The stats are online, its really not debatable just in the same way the average for the league games in 2006 was 3402. You are making things up to fit your narrative.

[Worzel]

6 hours ago, The Blues Ox said:

I'm not sure what you are arguing about here? The stats are online, its really not debatable just in the same way the average for the league games in 2006 was 3402. You are making things up to fit your narrative.

What are you on about? I said it was 4,000. It turned out to be 3,500 and I accepted the correction. That's how discussion works. 

I don't think 500 people materially changes my point - is that what you're arguing? I've seen stronger propositions, but each to their own eh. 

On the IMG model, the Hull KR of 2006 backed by Neil Hudgell's investment would absolutely have got into Super League within one or two seasons. No doubt at about that at all. Just as Wakefield just have.

Are you still saying they wouldn't? I'd love to hear your rationale, rather than your ad hominem  

 

EDIT: I take it from that response that our favourite Ox doesn't have a rationale. Glad that's settled then

Edited December 12, 2024 by Worzel
Lack of cogent counterpoint

[The Blues Ox]

22 minutes ago, Worzel said:

What are you on about? I said it was 4,000. It turned out to be 3,500 and I accepted the correction. That's how discussion works. 

I don't think 500 people materially changes my point - is that what you're arguing? I've seen stronger propositions, but each to their own eh. 

On the IMG model, the Hull KR of 2006 backed by Neil Hudgell's investment would absolutely have got into Super League within one or two seasons. No doubt at about that at all. Just as Wakefield just have.

Are you still saying they wouldn't? I'd love to hear your rationale, rather than your ad hominem  

Ignoring the fact you have been corrected twice about KR's 2005 attendance, 500 people kind of changes your point when it comes to the gradings and the 3 year average. Im interested to hear which teams you think Hull KR would have beaten out for a spot in SL around the 2004-2006 period? Even the 2 obvious ones in Cas and Wakey would seem to have too much of an incumbency bias in their favor but im intrigued as to what areas KR may have beaten them.

[Worzel]

Just now, The Blues Ox said:

Ignoring the fact you have been corrected twice about KR's 2005 attendance, 500 people kind of changes your point when it comes to the gradings and the 3 year average. Im interested to hear which teams you think Hull KR would have beaten out for a spot in SL around the 2004-2006 period? Even the 2 obvious ones in Cas and Wakey would seem to have too much of an incumbency bias in their favor but im intrigued as to what areas KR may have beaten them.

You know as well as I do I was talking about 2006, the year of our promotion

To your question: Salford and London, in time. I have never said that would have happened in 2006, only that it would have happened in a reasonable time frame in that period with Hudgell investing in the things required. Just as other teams with aspirations can now (not that, let's be honest, there are any other teams currently outside Super League who represent what Hull KR did as an outsider  )

[DEANO]

I think a lot of people are missing the point re wakey. Yes they did incredibly well last season and have finally upgraded their ground after they were told to do so nearly 30 years ago. But a big share of their img points are from previous seasons something a team from the championship can’t achieve 

[The Blues Ox]

9 hours ago, Worzel said:

You know as well as I do I was talking about 2006, the year of our promotion

To your question: Salford and London, in time. I have never said that would have happened in 2006, only that it would have happened in a reasonable time frame in that period with Hudgell investing in the things required. Just as other teams with aspirations can now (not that, let's be honest, there are any other teams currently outside Super League who represent what Hull KR did as an outsider  )

Honestly though in the gradings where would KR have gained enough points to get more than Salford or London at that time? I think KR would have been stuck in the same situation that the current Championship clubs this coming season find themselves. Their only way to get in to SL would be for a SL club to fail badly. 

As an alternative you put someone in a current Championship club (lets use Oldham) with a ton of money and they could buy promotion in 1 or 2 seasons and then once in SL would still have enough money to do all the off field things but with the potential to shake up the league, a little like Leigh have done. That is more exciting than having a stagnant league and any team maybe waiting 3-5 years or so for an opportunity that may never come. Yeah it could go wrong if anything happens to the money man but arent most teams in SL already pretty much insolvent on the balance sheets?

9 hours ago, DEANO said:

I think a lot of people are missing the point re wakey. Yes they did incredibly well last season and have finally upgraded their ground after they were told to do so nearly 30 years ago. But a big share of their img points are from previous seasons something a team from the championship can’t achieve 

A big point that Worzel seems to be missing hence me trying to point out that KR were in the Championship for 3 seasons. 3 being the key. They can't really use Wakey as an example, they would be better using a club like Fev or Bradford as a better comparison.

[Worzel]

9 hours ago, DEANO said:

I think a lot of people are missing the point re wakey. Yes they did incredibly well last season and have finally upgraded their ground after they were told to do so nearly 30 years ago. But a big share of their img points are from previous seasons something a team from the championship can’t achieve 

 

15 minutes ago, The Blues Ox said:

A big point that Worzel seems to be missing hence me trying to point out that KR were in the Championship for 3 seasons. 3 being the key. They can't really use Wakey as an example, they would be better using a club like Fev or Bradford as a better comparison.

I'm not missing that point. I think it doesn't have the weight you think it does.

• Toulouse were a very small way off making the cut this time. They don't have 2 years of Super League "points" counting towards their score. 
• London have missed the cut twice, despite having Super League years in their 3 year period. 
• Super League expanded to 14 clubs during 'licensing', after Hull KR's 2006 promotion season, so we'd have got in during that era even if we never made the Top 12. That can happen again. 

Hull KR would have, and other teams still can, joined the league in a reasonable time frame if the club had invested in the right areas under an IMG model. Hudgell has demonstrated across many decades that he is capable of doing that. Some clubs I agree may not be able to qualify now, but that's because they don't yet offer anything additional to the comp... and frankly they weren't able to qualify through P&R before either!

[Harry Stottle]

I have always maintained and said previously that we could very well see a transition of clubs from SL to the Championship and visa versa in the first couple or 3 years under this system, but it will become increasingly harder when this system 'beds' in for Championship clubs to elevate themselves to SL and total stupidity for any SL club to fall from that division such are the metrics of the points system which totally favour the incumbent SL clubs.

Now it comes down to a personal preference, I am in a position where I believe my club can be a member of the elite division for as long as they wish to in this system, but I would swop it tomorrow to bring back on-field jeopardy into play for SL for the worst performing SL club on the League Ladder and reward for the best Championship club and that would be irrespective of 'A' grades and 'B' grades. As I say personal preference I would not wish to attend games for my club if the result had no meaning in the sense of no relegation, I go to games to get all the senses flowing from joy to heartache and everyhing else inbetween that to me is what sport is all about and I have been in this up and down position with my team more than most fans of other clubs have and turned up the next year, which I suppose I am very lucky in that our owner backed his team and formulated his 5 year plan before this system took effect, I feel very sorry that other Championship will not get the opportunity to do what we had the opportunity to do accomplish and reap the rewards.

[up the robins]

Sorry @Worzel ive got to disagree with you!  had promotion/relegation being replaced before we made super league we would never of being in a position to get anywhere near a b+ grading never mind a A.

Firstly the people up top would never have wanted two teams from Hull in the top league. how many times did we hear both clubs should merge? Hull can't sustain two teams, we need to focus on expanding the game not keeping it in one area.

We would never of been in a position to upgrade our stadium with out our stint in the top flight, Neil had being trying unsuccessfully for years to get outside investment in the club not achievable till we was in the top flight. 

Let's not kid ourselves Neil had being actively looking at pulling out of rovers for a few years till this investment come along (I'm so pleased he did stick around and immensely grateful to him, but wouldn't of blamed him for pulling out in those tough days.)

I'm not anti IMG and think kicking teams up the bum with a carrot dangling in front of them to improve on and off the field is great but taking the dream away from teams by not allowing them to build the way we did is just not fair.

We have proven the naysayers wrong and proven Hull can support two top flight teams and we aren't the only ones look at what Leigh have achieved for a small borough of Wigan, clubs like KR and Leigh were not supposed to be able to get the big crowds and look how a successful run in the championship has revitalised the fan base in Wakefield.

I think the distribution of funding should have being the carrot that encouraged clubs to improve on and off the field via the grading system with potential for more central funding going to a championship club than a super league club if there grade was higher and seen to be a proactive club in development on and off the field, I would also have put in a minimum standards clause for promotion to encourage teams to develop.

[PREPOSTEROUS]

14 hours ago, DEANO said:

I think a lot of people are missing the point re wakey. Yes they did incredibly well last season and have finally upgraded their ground after they were told to do so nearly 30 years ago. But a big share of their img points are from previous seasons something a team from the championship can’t achieve 

AFAIK i's only league position points a champ club can not achieve, however there are 0.35 bonus points that aren't  available to SL clubs as well.

Trinty we're barely on TV to get any significant points to rely upon. 

Edited December 13, 2024 by PREPOSTEROUS

[Archie Gordon]

52 minutes ago, up the robins said:

...

I think the distribution of funding should have being the carrot that encouraged clubs to improve on and off the field via the grading system with potential for more central funding going to a championship club than a super league club if there grade was higher and seen to be a proactive club in development on and off the field, I would also have put in a minimum standards clause for promotion to encourage teams to develop.

Exactly where I now stand. An obvious solution that stares the game in the face.

Reward those clubs doing the right thing. Maintain P&R - and with it a vibrant Champo.

[gingerjon]

1 hour ago, Archie Gordon said:

Exactly where I now stand. An obvious solution that stares the game in the face.

Reward those clubs doing the right thing. Maintain P&R - and with it a vibrant Champo.

We had unbalanced Championship funding for a long time. It didn’t work. 

[RP London]

3 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

I have always maintained and said previously that we could very well see a transition of clubs from SL to the Championship and visa versa in the first couple or 3 years under this system, but it will become increasingly harder when this system 'beds' in for Championship clubs to elevate themselves to SL and total stupidity for any SL club to fall from that division such are the metrics of the points system which totally favour the incumbent SL clubs.

Now it comes down to a personal preference, I am in a position where I believe my club can be a member of the elite division for as long as they wish to in this system, but I would swop it tomorrow to bring back on-field jeopardy into play for SL for the worst performing SL club on the League Ladder and reward for the best Championship club and that would be irrespective of 'A' grades and 'B' grades. As I say personal preference I would not wish to attend games for my club if the result had no meaning in the sense of no relegation, I go to games to get all the senses flowing from joy to heartache and everyhing else inbetween that to me is what sport is all about and I have been in this up and down position with my team more than most fans of other clubs have and turned up the next year, which I suppose I am very lucky in that our owner backed his team and formulated his 5 year plan before this system took effect, I feel very sorry that other Championship will not get the opportunity to do what we had the opportunity to do accomplish and reap the rewards.

Personal preference I would have kept some form of p&r with B grades. 

I think what is being shown at the moment is that this is not a one time set of criteria. There can be change and as the teams and leagues evolve there seems to be some "show" currently that we could see new criteria or changes to the criteria to help champ clubs get away from the incumbent issue. It could also alter the weighting back towards the field of play bringing back p&r once they are happy that those at the top and those that could replace them are of a standard that still allows for the game to be shown in the right light and to increase its exposure.

There seems to be some (not necessarily you Harry) who feel that what we have now will not change and will not evolve, yet we are seeing it happen and a willingness to listen coming from those looking after this project.

[JohnM]

[Barley Mow]

2 hours ago, gingerjon said:

We had unbalanced Championship funding for a long time. It didn’t work. 

We still have it - from next season Championship and L1 funding is based on a club's position in the IMG league table.

[gingerjon]

1 minute ago, Barley Mow said:

We still have it - from next season Championship and L1 funding is based on a club's position in the IMG league table.

As I understand it - and I'm happy to be corrected - it's not quite as severe as during some of the previous iterations of unbalanced funding.

I'm not a particular fan of it, TBH. Central distribution should be equal and rewards for placing/Cup progression should be distinct from it. I do, however, know we don't even have a brass farthing, as revealed by how little clubs were getting in Challenge Cup prize money.

[Barley Mow]

6 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

As I understand it - and I'm happy to be corrected - it's not quite as severe as during some of the previous iterations of unbalanced funding.

I'm not a particular fan of it, TBH. Central distribution should be equal and rewards for placing/Cup progression should be distinct from it. I do, however, know we don't even have a brass farthing, as revealed by how little clubs were getting in Challenge Cup prize money.

I'm not sure how 'severe' the drop between clubs was previously, the figures discussed on some club sections of the forum were between approx £150,000 and £85,000 for the year for Championship clubs depending on IMG ranking and between £33,000 and £18,000 for League 1 clubs.

I imagine all have had funding cuts over the last few years.

Edited December 13, 2024 by Barley Mow