Post subject: Re: What can we do to stop the 10 + 10
Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2021 5:16 am
TheWarringtonWolve69
First Team Player
Joined: Aug 25 2021 Posts: 1219
DallasMead2 wrote:I agree…..we’d walk the league without the cap wouldn’t we.
Nah. The wolfs would still stick to the same business plan. Spend a stupid amount of money on half backs and fill the rest of the team with utter dross
Post subject: Re: What can we do to stop the 10 + 10
Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2021 6:17 am
The Ghost of '99
Player Coach
Joined: Feb 26 2006 Posts: 3092
TheWarringtonWolve69 wrote:Nah. The wolfs would still stick to the same business plan. Spend a stupid amount of money on half backs and fill the rest of the team with utter dross
Psssst... I think you've forgotten that in your latest guise you're supposed to be pretending to be a Wolfs fan yourself.
"Brian McDermott, with a wry smile, nods when asked if he remembers a specific incident which made him realise he was a prick. 'I do', he murmurs."
Post subject: Re: What can we do to stop the 10 + 10
Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2021 8:24 am
Donnyman
Club Captain
Joined: Nov 16 2019 Posts: 2534
Snowy wrote: Yes, 10 clubs is not enough in my opinion, and it seems a desperate plight to expand to 20 clubs by default. It would have been far Easier just to have 14 clubs, 26 fixtures, 1 up and 1 down. In all, a good post by Wrencat !
Expanding to 20 SL clubs gives the SL bosses control over the game, it leaves only 16 other clubs able to vote against them and so they lose the power they had in numbers when they last voted against SL's idea of 2x10. How many of those clubs will survive in a third tier we don't know?
Nothing easy about going to a 14 club top tier given this means the disaster of reduced funding would be compounded by having to share a vastly reduced money pot share with two more SL1 club mouths to feed.
Then there is the issue of the quality of the games at the bottom of the league, and not enough quality players to stock 14 clubs, we have seen several clubs implode in past years. People point to how well London last did in SL (and forget the time before they could not win a game except against Leeds reserves). My Mate Wrenners may remember Wakefield's terrible season when they were hammered in sixteen consecutive games.
I don't think SL pluck these ideas out of thin air and expect them to work unless Eric Perez..... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgXa4Pn_x9Y is going to be the next Superleague CEO
You two would do well to think on what exactly SKY's beef may be, and that is the reducing quality of the product. How do we know that? Because of the reducing level of the SKY TV deal is based on that.
We only exist as a professional game because SKY pay for quality professional RL matches. Those who fund and run the SL clubs and their staff who organise and train the playing pools know full well that they are doing this to fulfill the games life giving SKY contract, and this is not done by watering down the quality across a 14 club Superleague in which the worst 4 clubs would not be even allowed on TV,
Thing is those who provide the TV product deserve to be paid the TV money.
And those who baulk at Saints,v,Wigan or Leeds.v.Hull for the third time may wish to consider how in the past we could have given SKY Warrington 80 Wakefield 0, or Widnes 64 London 10. We need to think of what the game needs to do best for survival, and two tens is clearly that.....
Snowy wrote: Yes, 10 clubs is not enough in my opinion, and it seems a desperate plight to expand to 20 clubs by default. It would have been far Easier just to have 14 clubs, 26 fixtures, 1 up and 1 down. In all, a good post by Wrencat !
Expanding to 20 SL clubs gives the SL bosses control over the game, it leaves only 16 other clubs able to vote against them and so they lose the power they had in numbers when they last voted against SL's idea of 2x10. How many of those clubs will survive in a third tier we don't know?
Nothing easy about going to a 14 club top tier given this means the disaster of reduced funding would be compounded by having to share a vastly reduced money pot share with two more SL1 club mouths to feed.
Then there is the issue of the quality of the games at the bottom of the league, and not enough quality players to stock 14 clubs, we have seen several clubs implode in past years. People point to how well London last did in SL (and forget the time before they could not win a game except against Leeds reserves). My Mate Wrenners may remember Wakefield's terrible season when they were hammered in sixteen consecutive games.
I don't think SL pluck these ideas out of thin air and expect them to work unless Eric Perez..... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgXa4Pn_x9Y is going to be the next Superleague CEO
You two would do well to think on what exactly SKY's beef may be, and that is the reducing quality of the product. How do we know that? Because of the reducing level of the SKY TV deal is based on that.
We only exist as a professional game because SKY pay for quality professional RL matches. Those who fund and run the SL clubs and their staff who organise and train the playing pools know full well that they are doing this to fulfill the games life giving SKY contract, and this is not done by watering down the quality across a 14 club Superleague in which the worst 4 clubs would not be even allowed on TV,
Thing is those who provide the TV product deserve to be paid the TV money.
And those who baulk at Saints,v,Wigan or Leeds.v.Hull for the third time may wish to consider how in the past we could have given SKY Warrington 80 Wakefield 0, or Widnes 64 London 10. We need to think of what the game needs to do best for survival, and two tens is clearly that.....
Post subject: Re: What can we do to stop the 10 + 10
Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2021 1:40 pm
atomic
International Star
Joined: Feb 22 2015 Posts: 6903
Donnyman wrote:Expanding to 20 SL clubs gives the SL bosses control over the game, it leaves only 16 other clubs able to vote against them and so they lose the power they had in numbers when they last voted against SL's idea of 2x10. How many of those clubs will survive in a third tier we don't know?
Nothing easy about going to a 14 club top tier given this means the disaster of reduced funding would be compounded by having to share a vastly reduced money pot share with two more SL1 club mouths to feed.
Then there is the issue of the quality of the games at the bottom of the league, and not enough quality players to stock 14 clubs, we have seen several clubs implode in past years. People point to how well London last did in SL (and forget the time before they could not win a game except against Leeds reserves). My Mate Wrenners may remember Wakefield's terrible season when they were hammered in sixteen consecutive games.
I don't think SL pluck these ideas out of thin air and expect them to work unless Eric Perez..... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgXa4Pn_x9Y is going to be the next Superleague CEO
You two would do well to think on what exactly SKY's beef may be, and that is the reducing quality of the product. How do we know that? Because of the reducing level of the SKY TV deal is based on that.
We only exist as a professional game because SKY pay for quality professional RL matches. Those who fund and run the SL clubs and their staff who organise and train the playing pools know full well that they are doing this to fulfill the games life giving SKY contract, and this is not done by watering down the quality across a 14 club Superleague in which the worst 4 clubs would not be even allowed on TV,
Thing is those who provide the TV product deserve to be paid the TV money.
And those who baulk at Saints,v,Wigan or Leeds.v.Hull for the third time may wish to consider how in the past we could have given SKY Warrington 80 Wakefield 0, or Widnes 64 London 10. We need to think of what the game needs to do best for survival, and two tens is clearly that.....
Indeed SKY require quality. What do SL require? Possibly the means to support what SKY want! I apologise I keep using the abbreviation SL as in Super League. Then again we could call it “Doomer League”as it would still retain the same menacing individuals of why the sport is where it’s at.
The sport requires TV broadcasting! Simple. Not at all why,the game still has the same head hunters in it.
Why does the sport take so long to make a decision? That’s because they can’t think for themselves. They have to pass it on to someone they employ. They then get told by that employee or independent person how much it will cost their own club to make change.
That’s the downfall that is killing the game. Not one Chairman can make a decision without consulting with others first.
Donnyman wrote:Expanding to 20 SL clubs gives the SL bosses control over the game, it leaves only 16 other clubs able to vote against them and so they lose the power they had in numbers when they last voted against SL's idea of 2x10. How many of those clubs will survive in a third tier we don't know?
Nothing easy about going to a 14 club top tier given this means the disaster of reduced funding would be compounded by having to share a vastly reduced money pot share with two more SL1 club mouths to feed.
Then there is the issue of the quality of the games at the bottom of the league, and not enough quality players to stock 14 clubs, we have seen several clubs implode in past years. People point to how well London last did in SL (and forget the time before they could not win a game except against Leeds reserves). My Mate Wrenners may remember Wakefield's terrible season when they were hammered in sixteen consecutive games.
I don't think SL pluck these ideas out of thin air and expect them to work unless Eric Perez..... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgXa4Pn_x9Y is going to be the next Superleague CEO
You two would do well to think on what exactly SKY's beef may be, and that is the reducing quality of the product. How do we know that? Because of the reducing level of the SKY TV deal is based on that.
We only exist as a professional game because SKY pay for quality professional RL matches. Those who fund and run the SL clubs and their staff who organise and train the playing pools know full well that they are doing this to fulfill the games life giving SKY contract, and this is not done by watering down the quality across a 14 club Superleague in which the worst 4 clubs would not be even allowed on TV,
Thing is those who provide the TV product deserve to be paid the TV money.
And those who baulk at Saints,v,Wigan or Leeds.v.Hull for the third time may wish to consider how in the past we could have given SKY Warrington 80 Wakefield 0, or Widnes 64 London 10. We need to think of what the game needs to do best for survival, and two tens is clearly that.....
Indeed SKY require quality. What do SL require? Possibly the means to support what SKY want! I apologise I keep using the abbreviation SL as in Super League. Then again we could call it “Doomer League”as it would still retain the same menacing individuals of why the sport is where it’s at.
The sport requires TV broadcasting! Simple. Not at all why,the game still has the same head hunters in it.
Why does the sport take so long to make a decision? That’s because they can’t think for themselves. They have to pass it on to someone they employ. They then get told by that employee or independent person how much it will cost their own club to make change.
That’s the downfall that is killing the game. Not one Chairman can make a decision without consulting with others first.
Post subject: Re: What can we do to stop the 10 + 10
Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2021 1:54 pm
maurice
International Board Member
Joined: Aug 16 2002 Posts: 16601 Location: A rose between 2 thorns
See the Luddites are out in force - it's no wonder RL is run by fools for fools. Two tens works on all fronts with one proviso - that it is funded and SL2 are all FT clubs with minimum squad spends circa £1.2m, and to do that a min of £600k will be needed but more appreciated. The jump to SL 1 is less formidable and the drop to SL2 manageable - this then works in providing Sky with the quality, the jeopardy and the spread of interest. I would like to see it expand in 3 years or so to 10/12 then 12/12 as clubs become viable, and especially to help France grow the pro game.
Post subject: Re: What can we do to stop the 10 + 10
Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2021 2:38 pm
wrencat1873
Club Coach
Joined: Apr 24 2011 Posts: 17980
maurice wrote:See the Luddites are out in force - it's no wonder RL is run by fools for fools. Two tens works on all fronts with one proviso - that it is funded and SL2 are all FT clubs with minimum squad spends circa £1.2m, and to do that a min of £600k will be needed but more appreciated. The jump to SL 1 is less formidable and the drop to SL2 manageable - this then works in providing Sky with the quality, the jeopardy and the spread of interest. I would like to see it expand in 3 years or so to 10/12 then 12/12 as clubs become viable, and especially to help France grow the pro game.
That's great Maurice but, where on earth is the extra cash coming from.
The ONLY reason for a drop to 10 clubs in the top flight is to allow fewer clubs to share a reduced pot.
There certainly wont be any significant cash for SL2 SL 2 is only created to try to soften the impact of 2 additional clubs getting relegated but, although it may, as you suggest, be run by SL, it would be in name only. there will be nothing "super" about it. Just the Championship by another name.
Interestingly, if the line was drawn on this seasons final standings, we would lose York, Dewsbury, Newcastle, Sheffield, Oldham and Swinton from the 2nd tier.
Lets also take into account the likely reduced numbers of juniors coming through, in the short term. Contact sports will be hit hard in schools which will reduce the numbers at local clubs etc.
RL as a sport needs to think really hard about what damage the next move could do to the game and it will be irrevocable.
I do admire your optimism but, we certainly see a different future for the sport.
Post subject: Re: What can we do to stop the 10 + 10
Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2021 3:43 pm
The Ghost of '99
Player Coach
Joined: Feb 26 2006 Posts: 3092
maurice wrote:See the Luddites are out in force - it's no wonder RL is run by fools for fools. Two tens works on all fronts with one proviso - that it is funded and SL2 are all FT clubs with minimum squad spends circa £1.2m, and to do that a min of £600k will be needed but more appreciated. The jump to SL 1 is less formidable and the drop to SL2 manageable - this then works in providing Sky with the quality, the jeopardy and the spread of interest. I would like to see it expand in 3 years or so to 10/12 then 12/12 as clubs become viable, and especially to help France grow the pro game.
Two tens works for nobody. Killing off two SL clubs to become part timers and increasing the number of loop fixtures is insanity. Crowds will fall further if we really reduce to just eight top flight english clubs.
"Brian McDermott, with a wry smile, nods when asked if he remembers a specific incident which made him realise he was a prick. 'I do', he murmurs."
Post subject: Re: What can we do to stop the 10 + 10
Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2021 8:45 am
Donnyman
Club Captain
Joined: Nov 16 2019 Posts: 2534
atomic wrote: Why does the sport take so long to make a decision? That’s because they can’t think for themselves. They have to pass it on to someone they employ. They then get told by that employee or independent person how much it will cost their own club to make change.
That’s the downfall that is killing the game. Not one Chairman can make a decision without consulting with others first.
If you recall about two years ago Superleague made noises about moving to 2 x 10 then a third league under that. That actually went to a vote and Superleague lost that vote. They were downed by a large number of Championship clubs led by the bosses of Dewsbury and Batley -Mark Sawyer and Kevin Nicholas.
So the fact is this 2x10 has been in the pipeline for two years. Recently Superleague negotiated the new SKY deal with the RFL nowhere to be seen. This is the sea change that now brings back the 2 x 10 to the table.
If Superleague want to share the deal out they could stay at 12 and keep it all to themselves. Instead they are inviting other clubs to join them.
Remember when Toronto Wolfpack collapsed and Championship clubs were invited to apply to be a Superleague clubs?? Leigh got the gig but London, York, Bradford, Featherstone Toulouse & Newcastle all wanted in. It doesn't take much to work out that Superleague now have the majority of clubs on their side. OK Superleague rejected a number of championship clubs last year, but Superleague now have 20 Superleague places open for 2022 and London. York, Featherstone, Bradford and Toulouse and Newcastle can all join Superleage.
Believe me the decision to stuff the RFL was taken a long time ago.
The RFL have been royally stuffed but SL will not make any move until the season is over, which makes sense. Then they will out 2 x 10 to the vote again and they will win it by offering places in SL2 complete with some decent funding.
The decision on this was made a long time ago, the key was always SL getting control of the SKY money
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 52 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
