What needs to be done differently?

[KiwiRL]

Pro sports leagues live and die on their TV money.

Once the TV money dries right up, you're up the creek without a paddle. Don't know why anyone is laughing at the semi pro idea when 2/3rds of the teams in the pyramid already are semi pro, and of the genuine pro teams half of them can't even spend up to the cap.

You're running a pro league on life support without real TV money. And a reckoning is coming with the next Sky deal.

 

[RP London]

2 hours ago, 17 stone giant said:

Merging the two rugby codes. It's Egghead's regular suggestion.

Ah fair enough, I've been off the forum for a bit so hadn't seen that

[Tommygilf]

49 minutes ago, KiwiRL said:

Pro sports leagues live and die on their TV money.

Once the TV money dries right up, you're up the creek without a paddle. Don't know why anyone is laughing at the semi pro idea when 2/3rds of the teams in the pyramid already are semi pro, and of the genuine pro teams half of them can't even spend up to the cap.

You're running a pro league on life support without real TV money. And a reckoning is coming with the next Sky deal.

 

Because a semi pro league would get zero tv money and thus destroy the sport entirely

[KiwiRL]

27 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Because a semi pro league would get zero tv money and thus destroy the sport entirely

That's where you're heading. 

You're current TV deal doesn't even cover the salary cap. And the next one will likely plummet again. Your TV audience is small, old, and on the way out. And the sport makes zero effort to appeal to anyone under 50. 

Once you're relying on club attendances and pie sales, game over. 

Bit like the Championship and League 1 now, you generate zero TV money = dead duck. 

[Liverpool Rover]

5 hours ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

The most powerful people in UK RL are the chairs of the top clubs.

We could appoint a really brilliant administrator but unless the actual seats of power are willing to cede their authority to them then not a lot will change.

Also as these different power points are ultimately competing with each other theres a real contradiction in any attempts at working collectively.

They need to think that their main competitors are other sports rather than each other. It is in every Super League clubs interest for them all to be as strong as possible so IMO they should be working on the premise that Super League is only as strong as it's weakest team. 

[Liverpool Rover]

The game needs to engage with the next generation of fans and that will have to be done on their terms, so we need to reach out online through social media and pushing the likes of Bevan French, Jai Field, Jake Connor, Mikey Lewis etc. and showcasing what they can do as they're the players that produce the tiktok highlights. 

[Adelaide Tiger]

11 hours ago, graveyard johnny said:

bring back the biff

take the pea out of the refs whistle 

get the Sunday afternoon strippers back on in the pub before the game 

let all the kids run on the pitch at the end of the game

wire the video ref to an electric shock machine that's timed to go off after 30 seconds of not making a decision 

sack the entire sky team apart from Dave Woods and appoint Adam Hills as boss of RL  on sky 

LET THE GAME FLOW END TO END  like it used to do 

make special dispensation money wise to sign top RU  talent 

 

 

What about the Bovril?

[Adelaide Tiger]

8 hours ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

The most powerful people in UK RL are the chairs of the top clubs.

We could appoint a really brilliant administrator but unless the actual seats of power are willing to cede their authority to them then not a lot will change.

Also as these different power points are ultimately competing with each other theres a real contradiction in any attempts at working collectively.

I totally agree.

The first action needs to be the Chair of each club agreeing to an Independent Board that builds the vision and strategy for the game.  Without that commitment from the Chair of each club then I fear for the long term health of the game.

[Eddie]

8 hours ago, Big Picture said:

Not sons of current players, sons (or more accurately grandsons) of past players.  Not just of past players, but past fans too.

We know that the fan base is aging, and stagnant for some clubs and shrinking for others.  We know the player pool is shrinking too.

If the sons and grandsons of the RL players and fans of yesteryear were all still interested in the game that would not be the case.  If they were all still interested, they would easily be enough to replenish the fan base and player pool by themselves wouldn't they. But that evidently isn't happening, as the stagnant and slowly shrinking fan base shows.

Therefore it's reasonable to conclude that their interest has waned, and it makes sense to inquire why.  And I think it very likely that when they compare what RL has to offer them to what other sports offer they see RL's offering as poor and uninteresting.

 

To be fair other than the behemoth that is football (though even then kids aren’t watching full games on tv as they don’t have the concentration), kids now are interested in completely different things, they’re not watching cricket or rugby union either, it’s not just rugby league. Sadly games consoles and apps have taken over many of their lives, those whose parents are letting it happen anyway. Some of my son’s mates will sit for hours watching videos of people playing fifa on YouTube, but they won’t watch a football match on tv - it’s bizarre  

I read about some Australian politician yesterday suggesting that social media should be banned until 16 to get kids playing sport again, which would be fantastic. 

[Eddie]

43 minutes ago, Adelaide Tiger said:

I totally agree.

The first action needs to be the Chair of each club agreeing to an Independent Board that builds the vision and strategy for the game.  Without that commitment from the Chair of each club then I fear for the long term health of the game.

Isn’t that what they brought IMG in to do? 

[Eddie]

9 hours ago, Toby Chopra said:

Indeed. For people in the south, rugby league's perceived narrow geography is directly intertwined with perceptions of it being for a narrow social group.

It just doubles the reason that - regardless of what people might think of the skills and physicality on show - most don't see it as a sport people for people like them to invest time and emotion in.

As an earlier poster said, there's no easy fix for this, but I do think the first decade or so the Broncos were in Superleague and doing ok did make a difference to the sport's national perception. And to reference another thread - yes, them being called 'London' Broncos is the crucial bit - the L-word does a lot of heavy lifting in terms of making the sport nationally relevant.

To expand on this very erudite point, in the East of England (which I assume is the same as the south in terms of its general view of rugby league, or lack of), when I mention rugby league people often immediately say they don’t mind watching it or that it’s better than rugby union, but there isn’t a national team or anywhere near local club for them to watch or get behind, which massively hinders interest. If there was a better geographic spread of clubs it would help, as few people in Norwich for example, or Bristol or Plymouth or wherever are going to think to watch Leeds v Wigan, despite the quality of it, as they have no link with either of those places.  Union’s club game is the same but of course they have a proper international game and a huge media presence. 

[Archie Gordon]

11 hours ago, MattSantos said:

We absolutely need stronger and more diverse leadership. I had to google who was in charge...

In summary, it's a bloke from within the sport and previously with companies with no further reach than Yorkshire. Makes loads of sense that.

--

For poos and giggles, i asked ChatGPT to suggest 5 potential leaders from outside the RFL:

Here are five suggested leaders to run the Rugby Football League (RFL) from outside the organization, along with reasons why they could be a good fit:

1. Sue Campbell

2. Liz Nicholl

3. David Grevemberg

4. Maggie Alphonsi

5. John Steele

Three women suggested. AI still has a lot to learn.

[Yorky]

7 hours ago, KiwiRL said:

That's where you're heading. 

You're current TV deal doesn't even cover the salary cap. And the next one will likely plummet again. Your TV audience is small, old, and on the way out. And the sport makes zero effort to appeal to anyone under 50. 

Once you're relying on club attendances and pie sales, game over. 

Bit like the Championship and League 1 now, you generate zero TV money = dead duck. 

Serious question, not criticising here. Why do you think the next TV deal will plummet? 

I haven't seen any average viewing figures for this season and those will be the big indicator, but this season we have Sky TV, BBC & Superleague plus so more options than ever before. If, and its a big if, it has increased viewership then that will drive up the value of future TV deals.

lots of valid points in this thread, and it needs a big combination of solutions to grow the game but if someone said to me you can only implement one, then I would say the terrestrial TV deal needs to include 1 game per round, be held at a fixed time each week and not be on the red button so people know when it's on. Currently the bbc deal is so one foot in, one foot out it doesn't help

[JM2010]

1 hour ago, Eddie said:

To expand on this very erudite point, in the East of England (which I assume is the same as the south in terms of its general view of rugby league, or lack of), when I mention rugby league people often immediately say they don’t mind watching it or that it’s better than rugby union, but there isn’t a national team or anywhere near local club for them to watch or get behind, which massively hinders interest. If there was a better geographic spread of clubs it would help, as few people in Norwich for example, or Bristol or Plymouth or wherever are going to think to watch Leeds v Wigan, despite the quality of it, as they have no link with either of those places.  Union’s club game is the same but of course they have a proper international game and a huge media presence. 

The club game on its own in England isn’t big enough to carry all of NH RL like the NRL does. Over here there needs to be a big push for Internationals to grow the game in England and Europe. That’s what Union does. Even football which is massive at club level still puts a big focus on Internationals

[Gooleboy]

2 hours ago, Eddie said:

Isn’t that what they brought IMG in to do? 

Don't forget their inspirational appointment of Robert Elstone!

[gingerjon]

2 hours ago, Eddie said:

I read about some Australian politician yesterday suggesting that social media should be banned until 16

 

6 hours ago, Liverpool Rover said:

The game needs to engage with the next generation of fans and that will have to be done on their terms, so we need to reach out online through social media

I'm only drawing out these two to show that "we need to do something different" encompasses so many contradictory ways of thinking.

[JonM]

3 hours ago, Adelaide Tiger said:

The first action needs to be the Chair of each club agreeing to an Independent Board that builds the vision and strategy for the game.  Without that commitment from the Chair of each club then I fear for the long term health of the game.

Yes, there is absolutely no sense from anyone that there is any kind of plan. It's just muddle along week by week, trying to cling to existence. Any normal organisation has some kind of strategy - this is where we hope to be in 5 years' time kind of thing. If the RFL has a strategy to expand geographically, to get more children playing, or just about anything else that might be a reasonable target for a sports governing body, it's well hidden.

[gingerjon]

2 minutes ago, JonM said:

Yes, there is absolutely no sense from anyone that there is any kind of plan. It's just muddle along week by week, trying to cling to existence. Any normal organisation has some kind of strategy - this is where we hope to be in 5 years' time kind of thing. If the RFL has a strategy to expand geographically, to get more children playing, or just about anything else that might be a reasonable target for a sports governing body, it's well hidden.

Google "RFL Strategy".

Here is your reward: https://www.rugby-league.com/uploads/docs/RFL Strategic Report 2021 Final.pdf

[MattSantos]

11 hours ago, KiwiRL said:

Pro sports leagues live and die on their TV money.

Once the TV money dries right up, you're up the creek without a paddle. Don't know why anyone is laughing at the semi pro idea when 2/3rds of the teams in the pyramid already are semi pro, and of the genuine pro teams half of them can't even spend up to the cap.

You're running a pro league on life support without real TV money. And a reckoning is coming with the next Sky deal.

 

Absolbloodylutely.

I listened to a podcast recently that was talking about the start of the Premier League. A phrase jumped out, "it became a TV sport rather than a turnstile sport overnight". Everything else followed with respect to facilities

Really resonated with me with respect to RL. We're still a turnstile sport. How we make the TV money more is the key. It has to be surplus to the salary cap.

[JonM]

4 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Google "RFL Strategy".

Here is your reward: https://www.rugby-league.com/uploads/docs/RFL Strategic Report 2021 Final.pdf

That's exactly what I was hoping for, although it seems remarkably light on how many of these things will be achieved.

So, why, as someone who watches 50+ games per year, hundreds of hours per year watching the game on tv, hours per week consuming RL news and media, sponsor of a girls RL team, have I never seen or heard anything about it  ?

 

[17 stone giant]

12 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Google "RFL Strategy".

Here is your reward: https://www.rugby-league.com/uploads/docs/RFL Strategic Report 2021 Final.pdf

It seems as though they know what they want. As always, how to achieve it is the issue.

As we're now about a third of a way through the period until 2030, I wonder how the figures are looking in relation to those aims.

[JonM]

3 hours ago, Eddie said:

To be fair other than the behemoth that is football (though even then kids aren’t watching full games on tv as they don’t have the concentration), kids now are interested in completely different things, they’re not watching cricket or rugby union either, it’s not just rugby league.

Cricket has tried (badly IMO, but the jury is still out) to do something about that with the Hundred. They have a different set of problems though. The IPL is one of the world's highest paid sports leagues, and there are plenty of English players in the multi-millionaire category.

Rugby Union has an even worse demographic problem than we do - tv pictures of any superleague ground are going to show you loads of kids in attendance, that's not the case at most clubs in their premiership. 

The reality is that other forms of entertainment are not going away, we need to find a large enough niche to occupy.

[Tommygilf]

Nobody in the sport has, individually, enough power to change things.

Nigel Wood built a coalition of interests that was essentially a house of cards and collapsed accordingly.

IMG have tried with RL Commercial to take some control in house.

 

[KiwiRL]

1 hour ago, Yorky said:

 

I haven't seen any average viewing figures for this season and those will be the big indicator, but this season we have Sky TV, BBC & Superleague plus so more options than ever before. If, and its a big if, it has increased viewership then that will drive up the value of future TV deals.

 

I genuinely hope it does increase or at least stays where it is, the English game is such an important part of the games eco-system.

But every thing I've read about the demographics of the viewing audience, the trend of recent deals, the increasingly niche nature of non EPL sport, the lack of star power in RL, and general "cord-cutting" when it comes to pay TV suggests otherwise to me.

Though all this begs the question what the hell was the money being spent on when you were getting 40 million pound a year?

[up the robins]

I would like to see a dedicated task force looking for development areas out side our m62 bubble and given the resources to promote at grass routes level things like equipment and coaches getting into local schools, creating mini tournaments and helping clubs in the area with promoting the game. They could maybe concentrate on one area for example Nottinghamshire spend two years engaging with the schools and local clubs and develop from bottom up. 

I know this is unlikely due to funding but if someone could put a package together and maybe even a sponsor on board. It would be a long process but develop the game in new areas.

Could maybe get some of our big name players to make appearances at the schools. 

Start the ball rolling in Nottinghamshire after the two years move to Leicestershire or another bordering authority creating a competitive environment between them.