How to restore the magic of the Challenge Cup (Merged Threads)

[Damien]

1 minute ago, Dunbar said:

Can you explain how that would happen.

I don't need to. It is obvious the game is failing in that area, we all know that, leading to where we are now. That doesn't change the debate.

[RigbyLuger]

13 minutes ago, sam4731 said:

But if you would like an example of how important cup prize money is to teams lower down the pyramid...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68854418

The problem with the current discussion over FA Cup replays "saving" clubs is that it takes a lot of luck in the first place to get a tie against a "big" side, and your business shouldn't be relying on that.

[Dunbar]

4 minutes ago, Damien said:

I don't need to. It is obvious the game is failing in that area, we all know that, leading to where we are now. That doesn't change the debate.

Again, let's not expand the conversation into areas of commercial investment in the game as a whole.

The point you made is that more prize money would help the Cup restore its prestige and I want to know how it would.

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

On 26/04/2024 at 17:54, graveyard johnny said:

the magic hasnt just evaporated from the CC its steadily drained out of modern society as a whole as the internet and 7895 TV channels pin people to their couches and throw sport at them like fish to penguins  - its xmas everyday for those who want to be entertained nowadays

Every day? 

Every minute based on most people's attention span 

[graveyard johnny]

the magic of a day trip to London in the late 70s is now a modern day ordeal

the magic of been in a stadium like Wembley  in the late 70s is now a modern day norm 

 

[Damien]

26 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

Again, let's not expand the conversation into areas of commercial investment in the game as a whole.

The point you made is that more prize money would help the Cup restore its prestige and I want to know how it would.

Weird to ask me to elaborate on how that would happen then.

[Dunbar]

1 minute ago, Damien said:

Weird to ask me to elaborate on how that would happen then.

We are discussing the Challenge Cup.  You made the point that increased prize money would help restore its prestige and I am asking how that would happen.

Just explain to me what would be different with the Challenge Cup if more prize money was on offer.

[Damien]

20 minutes ago, graveyard johnny said:

the magic of a day trip to London in the late 70s is now a modern day ordeal

the magic of been in a stadium like Wembley  in the late 70s is now a modern day norm 

There is certainly something in this. Part of the trouble as well is that a two thirds full Wembley doesn't help either, it doesn't entice people like a packed, atmospheric old Wembley would.

A lot of this discussion centres on issues that are very much linked and either fixing one in isolation doesn't work or requires a great deal of investment to do it properly.

[bobbruce]

1 hour ago, sam4731 said:

I've included some other sporting knockout competitions prize money for winning just 1 match of the competition proper, (excluding qualifying) which could be compared to the £500 2nd round losers get or the £1500 that teams get if they go out at the stage when SL teams enter.

Wimbledon £55,000

FA Cup £41,000

PDC World Darts Championships £15,000

World Snooker Championships: £30,000

Womens FA Cup: £6000

Most of them hold no relevance whatsoever. The only two that do the men’s and women’s FA cup are a fairly pointless comparison because it’s the behemoth that is football. Does any other sport bar us and football run a knock out competition that includes pro,semi pro and amateur in it that we can compare. 

[Damien]

1 hour ago, gingerjon said:

It's a professional sport. One of the most demanding there is. But there's no magic when clubs are losing money on what should be prestigious ties - and that losing money then reflects what happens across the game.

Yep, the whole magic of the cup story and appeal needs a carrot and something magical about it. It used to be a money spinner for clubs at every stage, now it is far from that.

[bobbruce]

1 hour ago, gingerjon said:

The runner up of the FA Vase - that's the competition for Division 9 and 10 clubs - will make £31,600 in prize money. Our top tier, elite knock out competition, gives it runner up £35,000.

There's a reason why clubs in the non leagues of football make a big deal of the Vase - it has magic and money.

Bristol street motors trophy gives £50k to its runners up. That’s div 1 and 2 plus u21/reserves from higher up. So a similar size clubs to SL. That doesn’t seem massively out there. 

[gingerjon]

2 hours ago, bobbruce said:

Bristol street motors trophy gives £50k to its runners up. That’s div 1 and 2 plus u21/reserves from higher up. So a similar size clubs to SL. That doesn’t seem massively out there. 

I double checked this. The prize money has gone down but it's still paid out more often. You get a £20,000 participation fee, plus £8,000 for every group game you win, plus a payout for winning each round before the final. It looks like, via press reporting, a beaten finalist would expect to have made around £125,000 plus there is a Sky TV payment for any games they show.

[gingerjon]

2 hours ago, Damien said:

Yep, the whole magic of the cup story and appeal needs a carrot and something magical about it. It used to be a money spinner for clubs at every stage, now it is far from that.

Of course for fans, and probably players, it isn't about money as such but if you want to get clubs to take it seriously, to stage it properly, and to make a big deal about it, such that it excites again, then they can't be losing money on it. That's not sustainable in any sense.

[Sports Prophet]

3 hours ago, bobbruce said:

Does any other sport bar us and football run a knock out competition that includes pro,semi pro and amateur in it that we can compare. 

And this is a key point, as the sport of RL has advanced in the fully professional era, the entire theme and romanticism of the Challenge Cup is lost. There is no way a Champ 1 team will beat a SL team and apart from the Broncos, I would say no Champ team would beat a SL team. Even if they did, it’s not like there would be 20,000 actually giving a $#!+ because the clubs don’t have that kind of pull, so inter-division cup ties are really a non-event.

In which case the whole narrative of the cup at the latter stages no longer fits the sport and it’s FT professional standing.

[Sports Prophet]

5 hours ago, gingerjon said:

We're a professional sport. Our golden age should be worth a bit more than these truly awful figures:#

What is the prize money on offer?

Depending on how far you get in the cup, you receive a losing prize money fund for each round, according to documentation seen by Love Rugby League which is sent to clubs. That figure is as follows:

• 1st round losers: £0
• 2nd round losers: £500
• 3rd round losers: £750
• 4th round losers: £1,000
• 5th round losers: £1,250
• 6th round losers: £1,500
• QF losers: £8,000
• SF losers: £18,000
• Runners-up: £35,000
• Winners: £100,000

Whilst the prize money is pretty pathetic, I am similarly in the camp with @Dunbar, even if the CC prize money was £100 for the winner, would that make any difference to the clubs and teams entering and their eagerness to make it through to the final match at Wembley?

Unfortunately I have little faith in the RFL, otherwise I would suggest removing all prize money for SL clubs and for all clubs from QF stage onwards for those funds to be pooled into getting the attendance > 75k. I don’t think the RFL could be trusted to make well with approx £209k saved as an investment into the final.

[The Lad]

The Challenge cup is the oldest and most respected comp in Rugby league. The trouble is it isn't the most sought after prize (that being the grand final). So the most respected cup isn't the most valued so it will never have the glitz and glamour that you hope for.

[gingerjon]

8 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

I would suggest removing all prize money for SL clubs and for all clubs from QF stage onwards for those funds to be pooled into getting the attendance > 75k. 

Magnificent. Your reward for winning a match and incurring expenses? Vibes.

[Sports Prophet]

2 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Magnificent. Your reward for winning a match and incurring expenses? Vibes.

What are you, a bloody shareholder?

Sport is sport. It is there for the sake of itself and I should expect no club in the professional game to be dependent on prize money for sustainability. 

Yes, vibes are what sport is foremost about.

[gingerjon]

2 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:

What are you, a bloody shareholder?

Sport is sport. It is there for the sake of itself and I should expect no club in the professional game to be dependent on prize money for sustainability. 

Yes, vibes are what sport is foremost about.

Clubs shouldn't lose money for winning games. That's what happens under your plan. I reckon, and I could be wrong, that that would not necessarily make the cup more magical.

[Sports Prophet]

46 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Clubs shouldn't lose money for winning games. That's what happens under your plan. I reckon, and I could be wrong, that that would not necessarily make the cup more magical.

As far as I am concerned, only a defeatist or non-visionary administrator of a FT professional club would consider the opportunity of their matches being broadcast on the national broadcaster and played in front of tens of thousands of attendees as a loss making one.

[Chris22]

I don't think prize money is the issue. Clubs take the competition very seriously. There is never any talk of players being rested for Super League matches (quite the opposite). You can see what victory means to the players.

The biggest issue is the huge drop off in crowds. And that is because of season ticket culture. Fans pay a one-off amount or direct debit to see their teams league fixtures and the extra outlay for the Challenge Cup is significant.

If your side gets to the final and you were to go to the four matches a Super League side would play in the cup, that would cost say between £100 - £150 for an adult, doing it on the cheap. Then add in friends of family members joining, travel, parking, food and drink. It's expensive and, even though it isn't by comparison to the wider entertaining market, it seems like poor value and a big outlay.

How we solve that issue is the tricky point.

Edited April 28, 2024 by Chris22

[Adelaide Tiger]

For me the big question is whether the Final continues at Wembley after the current contract expires.  Is a two-thirds full Wembley an attractor to the ‘floating’ viewer we need to attract to fill the stadium?  Is it an attractor for increased sponsorship? Does it give the impression of a healthy sport? 

Since 2011 - not counting two years post Covid - actual attendance has been between 55-65k after deducting the 14k or so of Club Wembley patrons.  A Freedom of Information request to Brent Council showed that only 54,324 attended the 2017 Final between powerhouses Wigan and Hull.  Not the 68,525 listed.

Is it possible to fill Wembley stadium?  Does it really matter as long as the final is there?

Is there an Alternative.   Could the Final be taken around the country?  Taking out Wembley, Twickenham, Old Trafford (because of GF) and St James Park (if MW stays there) there are 10 stadiums in the UK with a 50k - 73k capacity.  Could the game seek bids to host the Final?  Is a full/fuller house more attractive to the potential ‘floating’ supporter?  The game may attract newbies to the final from various locations where the final is held?  Is it more attractive to increased sponsorship?  Does it give a better impression of a thriving sport?

Such a move may lead to a scarcity of tickets - give each club 15k tickets each - leading to a price increase which benefits the game.

Or is the game wedded to Wembley solely because we need a game in London.  Tradition doesn’t pay bills.

Right, tin hat on …….

 

 

Edited April 28, 2024 by Adelaide Tiger

[Sports Prophet]

I think you pose an important question @Adelaide Tiger. Does history alone require the CC final to appear at Wembley? I am happy to consider that Wembley should no longer be the mandatory host of the CC Final.

In saying that, which stadiums would be a worthy alternative with the capability of 50k+? I propose any English stadium of the respective size. Could Murrayfield, Millenium Stadium and/or Croke Park be filled? Could it be taken to Marseille or Paris?

[Hopie]

1 hour ago, Adelaide Tiger said:

 

Since 2011 - not counting two years post Covid - actual attendance has been between 55-65k after deducting the 14k or so of Club Wembley patrons.  A Freedom of Information request to Brent Council showed that only 54,324 attended the 2017 Final between powerhouses Wigan and Hull.  Not the 68,525 listed.

 

 

 

I think you are incorrect in your calculations here, I'm not a member of any club and the last cup final I went to I sat in the "Club Wembley" seats. They are for sale in the same way the other seats are for sale now. The initial club Wembley ticket that they sold to help pay for the stadium building is long expired.

[Adelaide Tiger]

6 minutes ago, Hopie said:

I think you are incorrect in your calculations here, I'm not a member of any club and the last cup final I went to I sat in the "Club Wembley" seats. They are for sale in the same way the other seats are for sale now. The initial club Wembley ticket that they sold to help pay for the stadium building is long expired.

Hopie, if you go online and type ‘2017 Challenge Cup Final attendance  freedom of interest’ under the web site Whatdotheyknow.com you see both the request from William Holian for the actual attendance figure and the response from Brent Council.  This clearly shows a roughly 14k difference in the recorded and actual attendance.