[Bulliac]

Re: Leigh : Tue Sep 20, 2016 9:55 am  

I'd suggest both [if two come down] of the SL sides would have stronger, on paper, squads than us. With the latest incarnation of the cap rules and sugar daddies in place, they would have no need to shed players when relegated [some, of course may want to leave anyway and it's always nearly impossible to keep 'pressed' men],and to be honest I'd say both Salford and HKR have better squads than Leigh and certainly far more expensively put together than us.

All that obviously assumes that both keep their respective fonts of money, though clearly that's not a given. I think London will also be ahead of us with the bookies given their form this year. I'm not dissing our squad. I suspect we'll do far better than many [especially outside the club] expect, but I very much doubt we'll be favourites to be top or go up. As I said before, whilst it's going to be a very interesting winter break, I'm pretty cool with the idea of Salford and/or HKR taking our mantle as the, "big bad SL Giants" in the division. As for us, Knowing they have to play above themselves occasionally, rather than thinking, 'we should win anyway', may help to focus minds at Odsal.

Re: Leigh : Tue Sep 20, 2016 1:06 pm  

Aren't you a bit rash in assuming that relegated clubs will just keep their existing squads? Is that realistic? May be more or less unrealistic to some extent depending who it is, but many claim if a team gets relegated all SL contracts cease. I should think at bare minimum the "best" players of a relegated club are in serious danger of being cherry picked and of the rest, any who can get a much bigger wage and offer to play in SL will surely be offski?

Then, the relegated club needs to factor in much reduced income, and finally the chances of financiers and sponsors reducing or even walking away.

[Pumpetypump]

Re: Leigh : Tue Sep 20, 2016 1:24 pm  

I could see Rovers mirroring what happened to us very closely. They would have next year to try and get back up based on keeping a strong core of their squad. I wouldn't fancy their chances, and thereafter they stay down with us until the system changes. They don't have genuine wealth behind them just the same as us.

[Bulliac]

Re: Leigh : Wed Sep 21, 2016 2:12 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Aren't you a bit rash in assuming that relegated clubs will just keep their existing squads? Is that realistic? May be more or less unrealistic to some extent depending who it is, but many claim if a team gets relegated all SL contracts cease. I should think at bare minimum the "best" players of a relegated club are in serious danger of being cherry picked and of the rest, any who can get a much bigger wage and offer to play in SL will surely be offski?

Then, the relegated club needs to factor in much reduced income, and finally the chances of financiers and sponsors reducing or even walking away.

Hard to say, FA.

I'm not by any means certain as to what will happen, [how can I be? how can anyone be?] but as I said previously, the cap rules have changed and if the moneybags in control is prepared to continue with their current [SL] contracts, then there is no imperative for any player to leave their current club. Clearly some will, of course, but there is no need for any great exodus [© Ross Heppenstall]. In any case most, and probably all, of the SL clubs would have arranged their ins and outs by now - and I'd be pretty sure that the idea that one of them would actually fall out of SL will have shocked them as much as it did us us - so I very much doubt any of left any spare cash, 'just in case'.

I guess the relegated club[s], with Sugar Daddy, needs to factor in, 'reduced income', in exactly the same way that the guy at Hudds factors in getting very little from gate receipts. In other words if he's prepared to fork out to cover it, then it makes no odds. So, whilst I'm far from, certain about anything, I think it's a good chance of working out that way.

Re: Leigh : Thu Sep 22, 2016 8:18 am  

So basically, at the whim of the guy with the chequebook, with the proviso he'll need to start writing bigger cheques. How it is that we can't ever find one of these guys is a mystery to me, even if Mr. Green undoubtedly is pumping in some measure of sugar, whatever he may publicly say.

[Bulliac]

Re: Leigh : Thu Sep 22, 2016 8:58 am  

Indeed.

You'd imagine a city the size of Bradford would have someone - but then you check out the demographics and realise it's a very small number of available people with the sort of money needed.

Re: Leigh : Thu Sep 22, 2016 9:00 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

So basically, at the whim of the guy with the chequebook, with the proviso he'll need to start writing bigger cheques. How it is that we can't ever find one of these guys is a mystery to me, even if Mr. Green undoubtedly is pumping in some measure of sugar, whatever he may publicly say.

Yep. It's a £1m shortfall in central funding for the relegated club. So either a big pair of scissors for some serious cloth cutting, a bigger cheque from the chairman, or a mix of the 2.

Re: Leigh : Sun Sep 25, 2016 7:57 pm  

how about this, If Leigh are found next season to have broken this seasons salary cap what happens then?

Re: Leigh : Sun Sep 25, 2016 8:20 pm  

zapperbull wrote:

how about this, If Leigh are found next season to have broken this seasons salary cap what happens then?

Same thing that happens to every team in this country found guilty. A tiny fine that makes no difference to a minted chairman and a points penalty that might help them into the Middle 8s next season where they'll start on 0 points again.

Re: Leigh : Mon Sep 26, 2016 8:43 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

So basically, at the whim of the guy with the chequebook, with the proviso he'll need to start writing bigger cheques. How it is that we can't ever find one of these guys is a mystery to me, even if Mr. Green undoubtedly is pumping in some measure of sugar, whatever he may publicly say.

Players want to play in the top division. And, preferably, at the club which gives them the best chance of winning something.

Money's an issue but not the only consideration.