Re: 10 TEAM SUPERLEAGUE? : Thu Feb 22, 2018 8:20 pm  

It has been reported that there are talks about making C1 an amateur competition. .......if so then we have the possibility of the top current 19 + NYC with the rest being cast into the abyss.......What of Bradford, a club with clearly as much potential as many Championship clubs?

Re: 10 TEAM SUPERLEAGUE? : Fri Feb 23, 2018 12:23 am  

Whilst it may feel unfair to some, the RFL needs to understand that not all clubs are equal. We're not like football, with a huge number of clubs outside the top flight with the potential to bring big crowds and interest into the game in their region. Even the much vaunted RU has effectively rigged P&R to try to make sure the bigger clubs in the top flight don't get relegated and replaced by minnow (IIRC London Welsh had to sue to be let into the top flight after the RU tried to block them getting in).

Re: 10 TEAM SUPERLEAGUE? : Fri Feb 23, 2018 10:42 am  

Call Me God wrote:

How to spectacularly miss the point......but let's look at what you've just posted, regardless of "crowds" not being why the SL chairmen are looking at their options, but rather TV cash and exposure.

Anywhoooo..... Dewsbury v Batley, 2 sides less than 3 miles apart, was a match-up first played 109 years ago and last year attracted a gate of 963 and was not available to watch LIVE on TV or via stream......London v Toronto (209 miles apart....sorry, that's Manchester....3,500 miles apart) met for the first time last season in the Challenge Cup and was attended by 758 fans, whilst being available on TV to watch LIVE in both the UK and in Canada.

So using your flawed logic, those 205 extra fans at Dewsbury are more important than taking the game to new frontiers? And we wonder why the Media treat us like a northern hobby with a few blokes in flat caps with whippets watching

I am not Toronto's #1 fan, but I'd take them over Dewsbury or Batley any day of the week if we are going to survive, let alone flourish as a viable option in the sports/media marketplace.

Hope your sl club is not relegated in place for Toronto or Toulouse and the door slammed shut as you will change your tune. C1 is on the verge of becoming amateur dew to the greed of the top flight

Re: 10 TEAM SUPERLEAGUE? : Fri Feb 23, 2018 11:55 am  

hooligan27 wrote:

Hope your sl club is not relegated in place for Toronto or Toulouse and the door slammed shut as you will change your tune. C1 is on the verge of becoming amateur dew to the greed of the top flight

The response to that is simply "what's the alternative, other than seeing this sport continue its decline?"

The game is stagnating, it's falling behind it's competitors and it needs to seriously reinvent itself to deliver what fans, broadcasters and commercial partners want.

In all honest truth, it shouldn't matter whether those clubs are in Thatto Heath or Toronto, Parkside or Perpignan, Wakefield or Winnipeg, Bradford or Boston - what matters is whether they can attract the audiences that broadcasters and sponsors care about, that they can deliver the right matchday experience to grow crowds and open our demographic reach, and that they can generate the revenue that helps this sport to attract, retain and look after the welfare of the best possible talent.

But the heartland clubs have had 120 years to demonstrate that they can deliver that, most have failed, and I haven't seen any workable idea to reverse that trend from anyone yelling "let's focus on the heartlands!".

That entire attitude of "we're being kicked out by the big clubs and we demand a shot at Super League because look at our away fans..." just smacks of "we don't care that professional RL in the UK is dying, just as long as we get to be part of that death".

Re: 10 TEAM SUPERLEAGUE? : Fri Feb 23, 2018 1:14 pm  

Roy Haggerty wrote:

Struggling financially, the stadium drama rolls on and on, and the crowds were still bottom 3 in the comp last year, as in the years before. They're doing better on the pitch, but that doesn't matter, bluntly. Nobody cares what happens on the pitch except our existing fans, and we don't have enough of them. If Wakefield's stadium ever actually happened, and they filled it weekly with 10,000 fans, then I would be clamouring for their justified place in the top flight, whether or not they were winning or losing more. But they aren't. Obviously not in such a dire position as Salford, but it's arguable that Widnes are in less trouble because at least they have a stadium.

Because, with the influence of Big Nigel (ex of Halifax), the RFL decided that their top priority was the possibility of Featherstone, Halifax or Leigh gaining promotion for a year in the top flight. The price for P&R, which was clearly only likely to benefit those three clubs, was a reduction in numbers in the top flight to spread the money thicker amongst the remaining clubs, plus a play-off system which I think everyone expected to so heavily favour the fully professional SL sides that actual P&R was seen as only a theoretical possibility, not a real one.

When the decision was taken in 2013 to reduce from 14 to 12, with P&R to follow, I suspect the SL clubs thought that the clubs to be cut would be London, who were in financial collapse at the time, and one of Salford, Widnes, Castleford or Wakefield, based on normal results. They didn't really want London to go, but were willing to pay that price for the extra cash and London seemed a basket case at the time anyway. Everyone was horrified when Bradford, one of the few genuinely big clubs, then collapsed and disappeared along with London, which suddenly made the league look much smaller and more parochial than expected.

We've since had the worst of all worlds. Hull KR and Leigh have demonstrated through their Yo-Yoing that even when it happens, P&R does nothing for the SL competition apart from swap two poorly-supported no-hoper teams in already-saturated markets. However, the near-disappearance of Catalans shook up the bigger clubs, because they can see that if the French follow London and Bradford, SL looks even more parochial and even less attractive to the broadcasters and sponsors. Meanwhile, the relegation of Hull KR and Leigh, who as fully pro sides weren't supposed to fall through the trapdoor, made the lower-half SL clubs terrified, because it could be them, while the possibility of losing a big, rich club like Warrington was just unacceptable to the other clubs. Hence the P&R had to go, for all the reasons which were given, and ignored, for not introducing it in the first place.

The clubs thought they'd been clever in introducing P&R to pacify the top championship clubs and more traditional-minded fans, without the risk of any big clubs falling foul of it because of the play-off system. In many ways, it was supposed to be much more of a closed shop than licensing ever was, because there was now no way for a new club to threaten the place of one of the poor performers other than the supposedly impossible play-off route. What they ended up with is the loss of one of the biggest clubs - Bradford - along with the loss of London, and the too-near-for-comfort potential loss of Warrington and Catalans. Yet while the system seems to allow for the disappearance of some of our few genuine asset clubs, it has become very apparent that the Leigh/Hull KR/Halifax clubs, while unlikely to add much to SL as a competition, are always likely to act as an effective barrier to entry (or re-entry) for new asset clubs clubs with greater commercial/developmental potential like Bradford, Toulouse and Toronto.

The system is a disaster - a genuine risk to the continuity and maybe survival of major clubs in a sport not overflowing with major clubs, but one which ensures that it's extremely difficult, if not impossible, for any new potential to enter the top flight. It has to change.

The defenestration of Nigel Wood was partly the lower-half clubs acting to ensure their own survival, to try and bring the system to an end. But it was also the upper half clubs trying to find a way of recreating a way into SL for clubs beyond the Leigh/Halifax/Fev group in an attempt to improve the marketability and spread of a sport which they know is stagnant and declining. I have heard that they were furious to discover, after Nigel's departure, that the play-offs were enshrined in the TV contract, which explains why no new system has yet been announced, because there'll have to be serious negotiations with Sky first.

We're in uncharted waters, and I would love to have a mole on the inside of the RFL to fill in the gaps in what I've heard/read/gleaned from various places. But on balance, even if for selfish reasons, I think the bigger clubs are trying to take the sport in the right direction. Lenagan, Moran, Pearson, Davy, and McManus are not stupid men. They want a bigger, more attractive competition, and they recognise that all the current structure has achieved is to foster the game's stagnation.

I've resisted turning this into a discussion about individual teams but let's look at this a minute, and talk about HKR. Yes my team, but will try and avoid bias.

in 10 years previous to relegation the club had an average crowd within the top 6 of the league, participates in games that create news across the full country and has regular 18k plus crowds, has developed stadium quicker then any other club promising same things, been in the top 5 clubs for ticket sales at every magic weekend going, created a relationship with an emerging country in PNG, become the number 1 sports club in the UK for social media engagement, and competed ( I use the term loosely ) in a challenge cup final ( which only 50-60% of the SL have in the same period) Away support is another point to make, but clubs shouldn't rely on that so I will leave that point for now.

To label the club as no hopers and yo-yoing because of one relegation and promotion is a stretch, HKR bring a lot more to SL then many other teams and opportunity for further growth with a catchment area that is a strong RL area can be one of the strongest teams.

Toronto can be a benchmark, however are currently an exception. Every other expansion team has fallen flat on their face and had no interest. Toulouse for all there might and glamour ( sarcasm) can not even fulfill challenge cup games this season. How enthralling. Bradford did well under the Bullmania, but what have they achieved since? A steady decline. What makes you think they have massive opportunities, shall we relive Bullmania again and I know, music after tries will really attract the big sponsors.

The product is excellent, but the marketing element of our full game is pishe poor. We accept second best from sky and need some real leadership and visionary. If we started at the top and promoted the game as a whole, interest in individual teams would follow. Then it's the job of teams marketing plans to follow up on the momentum, momentum of which the game currently has zero.

Re: 10 TEAM SUPERLEAGUE? : Fri Feb 23, 2018 1:18 pm  

Toronto can be a benchmark, however are currently an exception. Every other expansion team has fallen flat on their face and had no interest.

I'm not sure Catalans has fallen flat on its face. Outside of this country expansion has worked in Melbourne, Gold Coast etc so it can work.

Its needs a centralised strategy rather than a money man deciding where he wants to put a team.

Re: 10 TEAM SUPERLEAGUE? : Fri Feb 23, 2018 3:35 pm  

Looking at this from a team that's not mine, and in league 1.

York, are based in a city that's known around the world. And is a great city to spend the day in.
The RL club has in the last season and a bit got 2, 2000+ crowds. 1 for a cup game v York Acorn which let's face it is a game they were always going to win. 1 after an excellent marketing campaign provoked intrest. This season they got a 4,000 + crowd for there season opener (admittedly Bradford probably took alot). They are eventually looking at moving into an 8000 all seater stadium. There's a fairly good a amature scene, and they are reaching into the community to promote RL.
It's been shown that there is potential there, and that the club could do great things. They are good at marketing, can attract decent crowds. Everything that people complain is wrong with SL.

And what are we going to do. Throw them out, leave them to rot. To not reach potential.
And all because they are club based in the north of England.
This in my opinion is not right.

If Australia is looking for new clubs because of staleness and lack of crowds. Us reducing our league and relying on franchises that may or may not work. Just rocks of desperation.

On a side note,
Given that the BBC'S sport headquarters is based in Salford. Which itself is next to the 3rd biggest city in England.
Dose that Mean Salford should be exempt from relegation. As the potential for everything people want from the American franchise's is there as well.

Re: 10 TEAM SUPERLEAGUE? : Fri Feb 23, 2018 3:57 pm  

luke ShipleyRed wrote:

Looking at this from a team that's not mine, and in league 1.

York, are based in a city that's known around the world. And is a great city to spend the day in.
The RL club has in the last season and a bit got 2, 2000+ crowds. 1 for a cup game v York Acorn which let's face it is a game they were always going to win. 1 after an excellent marketing campaign provoked intrest. This season they got a 4,000 + crowd for there season opener (admittedly Bradford probably took alot). They are eventually looking at moving into an 8000 all seater stadium. There's a fairly good a amature scene, and they are reaching into the community to promote RL.
It's been shown that there is potential there, and that the club could do great things. They are good at marketing, can attract decent crowds. Everything that people complain is wrong with SL.

And what are we going to do. Throw them out, leave them to rot. To not reach potential.
And all because they are club based in the north of England.
This in my opinion is not right.

If Australia is looking for new clubs because of staleness and lack of crowds. Us reducing our league and relying on franchises that may or may not work. Just rocks of desperation.

On a side note,
Given that the BBC'S sport headquarters is based in Salford. Which itself is next to the 3rd biggest city in England.
Dose that Mean Salford should be exempt from relegation. As the potential for everything people want from the American franchise's is there as well.

Manchester Rangers want SL eventually too

Re: 10 TEAM SUPERLEAGUE? : Fri Feb 23, 2018 5:40 pm  

Psychedelic Casual wrote:

Manchester Rangers want SL eventually too

is that still being looked into? I now there was some talk about before, I wasn't sure 8f they were still looking at it .

Makes this proposal even harder. As at the moment a minimum of 2 SL clubs will be going down (if you include Toronto & Toulouse that's 4). So 4 or 6 current championship clubs would be told to go amateur (or league 1).

Now if you add in Manchester, Newcastle, Coventry (backed by Wasps) & Dublin who were all reported to be intrested in a SL Franchise. That 4 more clubs being told to go amateur (or league 1)
Then add in New York, Hamilton, Boston and others.

Your basically relegating every team that's in the Championship down. Also demoting at least 4 to 7 more current SL clubs.

And people are arguing that that's alright?

Re: 10 TEAM SUPERLEAGUE? : Fri Feb 23, 2018 6:20 pm  

hooligan27 wrote:

Hope your sl club is not relegated in place for Toronto or Toulouse and the door slammed shut as you will change your tune.

No I won't...commerce is commerce and if we aren't in then it's because we don't deserve to be in........sad as it is, sport is no longer about sport when it comes to the top level.

wire-quin wrote:

I'm not sure Catalans has fallen flat on its face. Outside of this country expansion has worked in Melbourne, Gold Coast etc so it can work.

Its needs a centralised strategy rather than a money man deciding where he wants to put a team.

GOLD STAR POST!

Hughes has single-handedly saved and buggered RL in London in equal measure. What should have happened was the 10 heartland clubs in 1996 should have accepted their new found windfall with a 20% payback each to fund London and Paris......... letting someone pick up that tab doesn't work....the severe restraint on expenditure in Toronto this season points to this realisation setting in......Melbourne works because melbourne was funded by the people who bankrolled the NRL.......the NRL collectively assists troubled clubs......they work together. SL is a collective of 12 egos at present.....that's not going to end well.