: Tue Oct 27, 2009 5:49 pm  

Is this the club that is /was the Oldham Bears??

: Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:09 pm  

Barry_McKenzie wrote:

Is this the club that is /was the Oldham Bears??

No. Totally different club. Despite the fact they cling onto the records of the old club.

Oldham Bears went bust in 1997.

The new club, Oldham RLFC 1997 Ltd, was formed afterwards and entered into the lowest tier of the RFL. They almost made it to Super League a few years back, losing in the Grand Final to Widnes.

: Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:10 pm  

Marsdengiant wrote:

Perhaps these are RL fans who know that Championship clubs DO get some Sky money. Perhaps these are RL fans who know about the mandatory friendlies with SL clubs where the lower club gets 100% of revenue. Perhaps these are RL fans who know that a greater proportion of players coming through SL academies end up at championship clubs. Perhaps these are RL fans who understand how dual registration will help the finances of championship sides.

The Oldham players in the England team came through the Leeds and Saints youth structures. Previously 2 top players in Scully and Harris came through Warrington (when Oldham was a SL club!). There are are some very good Oldham kids on the books of several SL teams.

I hope Oldham survive and thrive. Attributing their problems to Sky / SL is nonsense. An understanding of the earlier Quin ownership may be a better starting point.

They dont get sky money though, not in the same way that sl clubs do they are given money to spend on certain things but not money to spend however they want (on playing sqaud or youth structures), even then it is a pitifully small amount compared to the money sl clubs are given, without which most sl clubs would struggle, more still would struggle without a sugar daddy(something alot easier to attract in sl, take huddersfield for example without a rich benefactor and help from the rfl they would be languishing in the lower leagues now instead of having one of the brightest futures of any british rl club), how many rl clubs in britain are actually self sufficient ?

If rl is actually going to move forward we are going to need more clubs, whilst we seem to be heading towards less, if rl cant support the teams in the heartlands enough for them to survive then we might as well forget expansion altogether, if we support expansion clubs over the heartlands or vice versa we will be doomed to failure.

Yes many players from lower league clubs areas will come through sl academies mainly because the sl academies can offer far more money as they are given over a million a year by sky, have far greater sponsership opportunities, find it easier to attract sugar daddies, and get better travelling support. sl clubs will then let go all but the best of these youngsters, who end up playing in the nl's, maybe even for there local club who would have loved to have the chance to develop these youngsters but were outbid by sl rivals.

As for dual registration well we will have to see how it affects rl because no one on here can claim they know the effects of something that hasnt happened yet.

: Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:14 pm  

pyeman wrote:

Well said, unfortunatley there are to many rl 'fans' on here that are quick to be critical of a situation they know nothing about either through ignorance or stupidity.

Its actually more than a million in sky money now, its terrible i think that the top level of our game is so selfish that no money can be 'spared' for nl clubs. In 10 years people are going to be complaining about the england team and not realising that letting lower league clubs suffer will result in less english players coming through.

Its sad how short sighted our sport is at times.

Too true .

It's gone to overseas crocks and pension seekers instead of the development of the game at whatever level.

Sadly Cas are indicted as well, and even the Cougars have 2 overseas players which for the life of me I can't understand why.

Are we finally admitting that the WHOLE development system in the entire country is rubbish?

: Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:15 pm  

Marsdengiant wrote:

Perhaps these are RL fans who know that Championship clubs DO get some Sky money. .

How much money do CC and CC1 clubs get from Sky?

: Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:51 pm  

Marsdengiant wrote:

Perhaps these are RL fans who know that Championship clubs DO get some Sky money. Perhaps these are RL fans who know about the mandatory friendlies with SL clubs where the lower club gets 100% of revenue. Perhaps these are RL fans who know that a greater proportion of players coming through SL academies end up at championship clubs. Perhaps these are RL fans who understand how dual registration will help the finances of championship sides.

The Oldham players in the England team came through the Leeds and Saints youth structures. Previously 2 top players in Scully and Harris came through Warrington (when Oldham was a SL club!). There are are some very good Oldham kids on the books of several SL teams.

I hope Oldham survive and thrive. Attributing their problems to Sky / SL is nonsense. An understanding of the earlier Quin ownership may be a better starting point.

Championship clubs get No SKY money , they do have access to funds to provide certain non playing staff positions at clubs [ Full time CEO's which many clubs dont need , and ' marketing ' people with a brief to bring in investmet from businesses preferably ' sugar daddy ' type investment ]

Clubs also only recieve Co-op sponsorship money if they have a home televised game

They do recieve some ' central ' funding , around 20 K if I remember correctly

The ' mandatory ' friendlies went out the window ages back [ not well thought out as having 11 british SL clubs and 20 is NL clubs meant that each SL club would have had to play 2 matches to give every club a home game ] , the SL clubs also just started sending under 18's teams and the fans of the NL clubs and the SL fans soon got bored with that

Yes the bulk of NL/Championship players are ex SL academies , hardly surprising that the SL clubs pick up the best juniors is it sherlock

The whole RFL attitude to the lower tiers needs to change or we wont have much of a lower tier in a few years

: Tue Oct 27, 2009 7:11 pm  

I wonder who got Town's mandatory game against SL opposition? Last season from the end of May until mid-September Town had 4 home games and during the same period Blackpool went 5 WEEKS without a game of any sort due to the incompetent nature of the fixture lists!!!! How do you suppose clubs get behind with tax bills, etc, when they have wages to pay to players and staff???

The money that comes down from the RFL to Championship clubs is only for administration and development purposes and teams in the Championship 1 below the top 4 are very unlikely to get on TV to get any extra money.

As it happens a few weeks ago Craig Spence of the RFL made a comment that Town were probably the only Championship in the black, but at what price to us fans? We got rid of all our travelling players halfway through the season and played local lads from the amateur ranks and finished the season with only London Skolars below us, but bills got paid. If SL had any scruples they would be ensuring that the lower league clubs were receiving cash paymenst from the Sky money but sadly it would mean a bit less for them.

: Tue Oct 27, 2009 7:16 pm  

Geekay wrote:

I wonder who got Town's mandatory game against SL opposition? Last season from the end of May until mid-September Town had 4 home games and during the same period Blackpool went 5 WEEKS without a game of any sort due to the incompetent nature of the fixture lists!!!! How do you suppose clubs get behind with tax bills, etc, when they have wages to pay to players and staff???

The money that comes down from the RFL to Championship clubs is only for administration and development purposes and teams in the Championship 1 below the top 4 are very unlikely to get on TV to get any extra money.

As it happens a few weeks ago Craig Spence of the RFL made a comment that Town were probably the only Championship in the black, but at what price to us fans? We got rid of all our travelling players halfway through the season and played local lads from the amateur ranks and finished the season with only London Skolars below us, but bills got paid. If SL had any scruples they would be ensuring that the lower league clubs were receiving cash paymenst from the Sky money but sadly it would mean a bit less for them.

Dont be silly the game below SL is that awash with money it can be given to Easyjet/Ryanair and hotel chains to finance Toulouse in the Championship

In our ' vibrant , worth winning in their own right ' competitions

: Tue Oct 27, 2009 7:33 pm  

spooneryork wrote:

:( Lose the clubs at the bottom and the whole game will die, the RFL MUST at least try and make things more viable for both the two lower pro divisions, there are simply not enough home games in a 10 or 11 team league, either bring new teams in ( doughtfull at present ) or merge the two divisions into one with a 6 team play off. My own club has 9 home league games, 2 or 3 NRC games and maybe 2 CC games. How can any club run well on that low level of income from Gate reciepts?

Something definitely needs to be done about the number of games being played.

Between June 1st and August 8th Cougars only played 5 games.

I'd bring the 6 decent teams up from Championship 1 into Championship and then put the remaining 4 in Conference National and have promotion from there to championship.

: Tue Oct 27, 2009 7:37 pm  

Starbug wrote:

Championship clubs get No SKY money , they do have access to funds to provide certain non playing staff positions at clubs [ Full time CEO's which many clubs dont need , and ' marketing ' people with a brief to bring in investmet from businesses preferably ' sugar daddy ' type investment ]

Clubs also only recieve Co-op sponsorship money if they have a home televised game

They do recieve some ' central ' funding , around 20 K if I remember correctly

The ' mandatory ' friendlies went out the window ages back [ not well thought out as having 11 british SL clubs and 20 is NL clubs meant that each SL club would have had to play 2 matches to give every club a home game ] , the SL clubs also just started sending under 18's teams and the fans of the NL clubs and the SL fans soon got bored with that

Yes the bulk of NL/Championship players are ex SL academies , hardly surprising that the SL clubs pick up the best juniors is it sherlock

The whole RFL attitude to the lower tiers needs to change or we wont have much of a lower tier in a few years

A large proportion of Sky money goes to SL clubs. As it should. The remaining sky money goes into RL as a whole. It goes into a pot that provides funds for non SL clubs. So non SL clubs get sky money...live with it

Many of the clubs are badly managed and marketed so it is no surprise that the RFL want money it spent on 'professional managers'.

The 'mandatory games' continue. And of course SL clubs pick up the best young players and they spend more on developing them (the RFL insisting on Sky money being spent this way - so Sky £ produces players that fill many C1&2 teams)). Its elementary.

With greater mobility and greater tv coverage many people are unwilling to pay comparatively high entrance prices for 2nd and 3rd tier rugby. That is there choice.