Re: Jamie Peacock article : Thu Apr 18, 2013 9:18 pm  

jbuzza wrote:

Are we really at a financial disadvantage ? We have the largest catchment areas for potential fans and probably better access to sponsors. The fact that we are an shambles on and off the pitch is not the fault of other clubs.

I think that given the current circumstances we're not at a financial disadvantage (I appreciate the question was rhetorical). We've only just got to spending up to the cap. If there is the capacity within the club to spend the extra amount required to make it a level playing field, fair enough, but I've seen nothing to suggest that is the case.

If someone who was unfamiliar with our sport saw a game between two clubs at the top end of SL and another game between two teams at the bottom end, he/she would be forgiven for thinking there were two different sports, such is the disparity. If we are ever to have a chance to beat the Aussies, and thus give the game a profile it has not had since the days of Hanley, Offiah etc, we need greater intensity, and having a 14 team Super League won't make this happen.

Re: Jamie Peacock article : Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:54 pm  

jbuzza wrote:

Are we really at a financial disadvantage ? We have the largest catchment areas for potential fans and probably better access to sponsors. The fact that we are an shambles on and off the pitch is not the fault of other clubs.

Regardless of the clubs well documented failings in the areas you highlight, we are still at a financial disadvantage, because a player with 2 offers for 80k a year will nearly always go north....his 80K will go a lot further in Wigan than it will in London.....a lot further.

I still say we are being prepared for life in a lower division...I can't think of any other explanation for the massive cost cutting that is going on at present....

Re: Jamie Peacock article : Fri Apr 19, 2013 7:14 am  

I'm not sure I agree with the logic in equating less SL teams to having a higher standard of play. Sure, you'd concentrate the better players into a smaller group of teams, so initially there'd be a win, but over time there's bound to be less players exposed to SL because the player pathway is narrowed and less options to achieve a sporting career. Eventually you'd end up with a smaller pool of available players anyway.

One of the better things about a 14 team competition is that players can be recognised in a lesser team and move to a bigger team, hopefully improving them as players along the line - a comp within a comp almost - but this is only possible because of the money in SL. Second tier rugby is not going to be funded enough to allow that. We've had several players move on with varying degrees of success, none of whom would likely be in the game at all if the Broncos weren't a Super League side and had access to the money that brings - and that donated by David Hughes.

Realistically the only way I can see a smaller competition improving players for internation competition is to have less foreign players in the teams.

I'd also suggest that the last time we won an Ashes series, there were about 16 teams in the First Division, and when we were possibly the strongest GB team in my watching memory there were 16 (1995).

Re: Jamie Peacock article : Fri Apr 19, 2013 8:57 am  

The last time we won an Ashes series it was still the old one division set-up - yep, it's that long ago!

Re: Jamie Peacock article : Fri Apr 19, 2013 9:47 am  

Jamie Peacock is so like many northern club chairman PAROCHIAL! as long as we are okay Jack!

Change first has to come with those who run the game, we need a new CEO, not one like Nigel Woods who has been in charge over these last few years of total failure at Red Hall and his head is still in the sand stating to the media that this will be the best season ever and then they come up with Brut as a top associate sponsor, there also seems little chance the World Cup will have a sponsor.

We have to accept the game is in a mess, the number of clubs that are successful is so few and far between perhaps Leeds is the only real top club! Wigan without it's own ground is close followed by Warrington, St Helens are not run well, they have just obtained the finance to finish their ground, but still blame it on construction problems, they no longer seem to be able to compete with top salaries. So how many clubs would be able to be able to raise their salary cap.

I think the game of RFL needs to first accept that it needs to cut its cloth for some time ensure that the game finds stability and build up once again, plans that will help just a few clubs are not the current answer. I blame no young talented rugby player looking to Union first.

[brian2]

Re: Jamie Peacock article : Fri Apr 19, 2013 11:04 am  

A drop down and the ensuing potential for a winning team, maybe even one challenging for minor honours, even if the standard of rugby on show is worse, surely represents a more exciting prospect and a better way of reforging the club and its supporters' (admittedly vague) identity than our current condemnation to RL purgatory, aka places 10-14 in the table every season?

The question of whether we could survive a drop financially is a whole different kettle however.

Agree with most of the comments - but this final point is key. Two divisions will onl;y work if Sky is prepared to fund SL2/Chasmpionship to a reasonable level? if not then LB certainly wouldnt survive and i doubt many others would?

Lets win Saturday - go on a win the cup and then i dont care what happens!

Re: Jamie Peacock article : Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:02 pm  

jbuzza wrote:

Are we really at a financial disadvantage ?

You only have to refer to Brian Mac`s recent comments........but then again he only ran our team for 3 or 4 years so what would he know.

Re: Jamie Peacock article : Fri Apr 19, 2013 1:06 pm  

Under the sticks wrote:

You only have to refer to Brian Mac`s recent comments........but then again he only ran our team for 3 or 4 years so what would he know.

Agree 100%. If a potential investor looks at all the facts and says "all i want is a level playing field - even if i have to pay the extra for London weighting" he won't get it. Not only does this mean we can't entice the better players from up north but also has the same impact on any southern hemisphere players who might be looking at a move over here - he will go North. 'If' DH was considering applying for a franchise, he must be wondering what he will be able to do about recruitment as some of our Ozzies may be considering offers to go back when their contracts run out. Who will replace them?
I don't disagree that this team has underperformed, but the fact that we are unable to recruit the quality of players we need to compete in SL on what is a salary cap that is inappropriate for London means we are never going to be able to compete in the top half of SL and our true place on our salaries is about mid bottom half. Crowds are always going to reflect this as the continued losses outweighs the wins. The fact that there seems no end to this just depresses the remaining fans and makes recruiting new fans almost impossible. What happens on the park affects everything and how far that money goes as against up north will be reflected in the quality on the park. DH may not be able to pay the difference even if it was available to him but if we ever found our own DR Koukash i think he would walk away pretty quickly. It isn't a level playing field and it does matter as no club can keep getting hammered week after week with no way of changing the fundamentals of what is holding us back.

Re: Jamie Peacock article : Fri Apr 19, 2013 1:21 pm  

But if Dr Koukash gets his way the salary cap will rise for everyone and if we could find another Dr Koukash a London SL team could work. If we got the crowds, sponsorship and marketing right we would be in a position to dictate terms. A successful London team ( I know that sounds daft) would be more attractive to sponsors and advertisers than smaller towns like Leeds or Wigan. We can only dream!

Re: Jamie Peacock article : Fri Apr 19, 2013 2:56 pm  

poplar panther wrote:

But if Dr Koukash gets his way the salary cap will rise for everyone and if we could find another Dr Koukash a London SL team could work. If we got the crowds, sponsorship and marketing right we would be in a position to dictate terms. A successful London team ( I know that sounds daft) would be more attractive to sponsors and advertisers than smaller towns like Leeds or Wigan. We can only dream!

If the salary cap rises by the same amount for everyone then the status quo remains the same. To get a level playing field we need a seperate London Weighting so players signing for us are not disadvantaged..

The only thing that raising the SC across the board does is help keep our own stars here and encourage the aussie ones to come here - which according to what is being paid in the other code and the NRL could not be paid by any SL clubs except maybe someone with a rich owner read to throw his money away to buy success