Halifax skint

[Wakefield Ram]

1 hour ago, donald said:

Sad thing is whitehaven have by far the smallest budget in the championship 

Given Dewsbury's squad which is weaker than our L1 squad last season, expect our budget must be similar if not less. 

Edited September 5 by Wakefield Ram

[Gooleboy]

2 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

This isn't some IMG new fangled thing either, it's literally why the likes of Leeds, Saints and Wigan have now and have almost always had some of the best facilities in the sport.

Didn't Wigan need Tesco to save them from going bust, and weren't Leeds in a financial state before Caddick and Hetherington rode into town in the not too distant past?

[Wakefield Ram]

1 hour ago, Gav Wilson said:

Oldham have a far better chance of making it to Super League under IMG than the old system.

And crucially, it wouldn't ruin them. 

The only club with any chance of SL is Bradford. The idea that Oldham, York or any other club has a prayer of SL is dream world. 

SL gain a lot of points by being in SL, not by being any good in SL but merely by being in SL. 

And as the score is a comparative one, for a club outside SL to score higher than clubs in SL will be a near impossible task. The only way in would be to find a Derek Beaumont willing to spend large amounts for at least 3 years but unlike with Leigh with no guarantee of promotion. 

[Jill Halfpenny fan]

35 minutes ago, The Blues Ox said:

I never trusted the people who took over, I thought they were in it for the wrong reasons and yes they got their glory going to Wembley but they will be remembered as the people who ruined the club. Broken promises, lies, cover ups, and now begging for people to put money in without revealing the full facts.

Just wish you well mate.

[Griff]

1 hour ago, KiwiRL said:

Thats a great idea. 

No, it isn't.

Why do folk think that?

[Griff]

1 hour ago, Gooleboy said:

Didn't Wigan need Tesco to save them from going bust, and weren't Leeds in a financial state before Caddick and Hetherington rode into town in the not too distant past?

I believe those events were both pre-Tommy.

[Sports Prophet]

And here I was expecting a name change to the Panthers was the golden ticket.

[eal]

I really don't know what the answer is. The money and support isn't there for more than 14 professional clubs but what to do with the rest? Reducing everyone else to amateur status is likely a death knell for those clubs but the no-mans land many clubs are inhabiting between professional and amateur setups seems to be nothing more than a terminal decline.

[Sports Prophet]

It’s increasingly obvious that there is only room for two professional divisions in England.

A strategy need be drawn to ensure the survival of the Championship

[RigbyLuger]

1 hour ago, Griff said:

No, it isn't.

Why do folk think that?

Non-existent TV deals and a delusion of how big the sport really is, especially outside Super League.

[Tommygilf]

3 hours ago, Gooleboy said:

Didn't Wigan need Tesco to save them from going bust, and weren't Leeds in a financial state before Caddick and Hetherington rode into town in the not too distant past?

The point being made wasn't that Leeds, Wigan or indeed any club was immune from financial troubles, but that the corinthians value of sport on the pitch has never been the sole determining factor in what happened.

Indeed you prove that point most clearly, as when those issues off field came about at  Leeds for example the on field aspect declined in competitiveness too. The era of Hetherington and Caddick since then has been one where the focus on non direct 1st team squad matters has increased to the benefit of the 1st team squad. Stadium, training facilities, community growth, academy, corporate, etc. All these aspects to which Leeds have put considerable resources towards have benefitted the team on field. 

Likewise Wigan, despite losing Central Park still command relatively vast resources and facilities like Robin Park and Orrell. 

Compare that to lots of clubs and it's really no wonder why those 2 are amongst the most successful clubs because they have consistently been able to draw on those resources. Is it a surprise that the teams with the highest turnovers are amongst the most competitive? Wasn't that the case at Widnes when they were bringing in Jonathan Davies etc and now they aren't because they don't have those resources to pull on?

Professional sport (which RL is the essence of in many ways) is not, and in anyone on here's lifetime has never been, just about what is on the pitch. 

[KiwiRL]

5 hours ago, Griff said:

No, it isn't.

Why do folk think that?

Because you can't have your cake and eat it too with the amount of TV money you generate. 

You either have a ring fenced pro comp with 12-14 teams and a salary cap.

Or you have a semi pro promotion/relegation comp with the current 30+ teams.

You can't have a structure that's a combination of both with ever decreasing TV deals. 

[Dave T]

8 hours ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

So growth without sustainability? I believe that was the first incarnation of the Bulls' recipe for success.

Of course you'd hope sustainability would be an outcome of growth, but IMG have never come in to gatekeep clubs finances and make them sustainable. 

I'm loathe to use RU again as they've been isd a lot here, but they really are a good comparison here, they've delivered the type of growth we'd love, but they've have struggled with sustainability.

[Dave T]

Anybody thinking that clubs' recent struggles are anything to do with IMG or the changes to structure want their bumps feeling. 

The whole reason we have a partner is because we are skint, under perform financially, have reducing TV deals and little commercial value. The game by and large has had the old traditional model that people are championing for over a century and we've seen clubs come and go throughout that period.

Clubs usually go bust because they focus too much on spending money on players that uktimately they can't afford.

[Toby Chopra]

8 hours ago, sentoffagain2 said:

   Fax have been skint before Oxy on their knees in the early seventies when my mates played for them.As i have said before 3 of them have heritage numbers.Les Pearce scoured the amateur game for players and they did ok.You know more than me that the amateur game is not the strength it was 30 or 40 years ago so we must start at grass roots.I would love it if the Championship and League one broke away and started afresh.But if they do The Rugby League Challenge Cup goes with them.The SL clkubs can play for the Super League Challenge Cup .

Leaving aside the CC for a minute, what would the championship and L1 be able to do by breaking away that they can't do now? 

[Neutralfan7]

Have fax stated how much they need to make? 

[Normy_Rover]

21 minutes ago, Neutralfan7 said:

Have fax stated how much they need to make? 

They’ve set up a Go Fund Me for £30k

Edited September 6 by Normy_Rover
Added link

[Fevrover]

9 hours ago, RigbyLuger said:

Anyone who calls it "Super Duper League" or "Super Greed" should be banned from watching it. 

It's boring most weeks anyway . 

[Neutralfan7]

2 minutes ago, Normy_Rover said:

They’ve set up a Go Fund Me for £30k

Thanks mate, hope that's not what they owe early next week as that's a big ask!

[Griff]

1 hour ago, KiwiRL said:

Because you can't have your cake and eat it too with the amount of TV money you generate. 

You either have a ring fenced pro comp with 12-14 teams and a salary cap.

Or you have a semi pro promotion/relegation comp with the current 30+ teams.

You can't have a structure that's a combination of both with ever decreasing TV deals. 

So why would a breakaway league be better?

[Archie Gordon]

5 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

...

A strategy need be drawn to ensure the survival of the Championship

I fear that there is no strategy or plan. Obviously, there ought to be - and it ought to be published. L1 has had a review but I don't think the outcome was made public. As usual, the game will be reactive rather than setting the agenda.

Even SL lacks a plan, really. 

[MattSantos]

39 minutes ago, Neutralfan7 said:

Thanks mate, hope that's not what they owe early next week as that's a big ask!

30k is not a lot of money.

Therefore, It really shouldn't be a big ask and that's what's sad and depressing.

Edited September 6 by MattSantos

[Tommygilf]

9 minutes ago, MattSantos said:

30k is not a lot of money.

Therefore, It really shouldn't be a big ask and that's what's sad and depressing.

This is the core issue throughout the sport frankly. 

Players playing at every level for peanuts, clubs going under for relative peanuts, organisations ran on relative peanuts. It's an endemic throughout the sport.

[Neutralfan7]

12 minutes ago, MattSantos said:

30k is not a lot of money.

Therefore, It really shouldn't be a big ask and that's what's sad and depressing.

It's a big ask if they're relying on getting it just from fan donations in a matter of days. Seen a post from oxy saying the bill is larger than they're letting on so 30K might not even be the target which is worrying. 

[Gooleboy]

5 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

The point being made wasn't that Leeds, Wigan or indeed any club was immune from financial troubles, but that the corinthians value of sport on the pitch has never been the sole determining factor in what happened.

Indeed you prove that point most clearly, as when those issues off field came about at  Leeds for example the on field aspect declined in competitiveness too. The era of Hetherington and Caddick since then has been one where the focus on non direct 1st team squad matters has increased to the benefit of the 1st team squad. Stadium, training facilities, community growth, academy, corporate, etc. All these aspects to which Leeds have put considerable resources towards have benefitted the team on field. 

Likewise Wigan, despite losing Central Park still command relatively vast resources and facilities like Robin Park and Orrell. 

Compare that to lots of clubs and it's really no wonder why those 2 are amongst the most successful clubs because they have consistently been able to draw on those resources. Is it a surprise that the teams with the highest turnovers are amongst the most competitive? Wasn't that the case at Widnes when they were bringing in Jonathan Davies etc and now they aren't because they don't have those resources to pull on?

Professional sport (which RL is the essence of in many ways) is not, and in anyone on here's lifetime has never been, just about what is on the pitch. 

Wigan don't own Orrell's old ground and wasn't Robin Park given to them by the council? Regarding the soulless ground where they play, I believe they lease it from the football club.