: Thu Apr 23, 2009 11:53 pm  

Starbug wrote:

So you admit that the removal of relegation and promotion is to protect expansion clubs

No, I haven't mentioned expansion clubs once

The players Widnes signed when they were promoted were not the ones that got them relegated , it was an almost totally different team

Yes, but the fact that they based their team on those journeymen meant that they had no structure to fall back on once they had left/retired, and they ended up signing players like Troy Wozniak and Sala Fa'alongo to try and replace them. Hence they got relegated after 3 years and not one, but the cause was still the same. It was similar at Salford when they got relegated in 2006.

Once again you are falling into the trap of assuming that every club can avoid finishing bottom in a sporting competition , we hae a thread on the VT about it at the moment

For every winner there is a loser , dont forget that

This did not make any sense to me. Someone obviously has to finish bottom, what does that have to do with this?

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 11:57 pm  

classycas2009 wrote:

yeah and by rights then you should step up

Not necessarily. The National Conference champions aren't promoted to the Championship 1, crickets minor league champions aren't promoted to the the county championship, there's no P&R in British Ice Hockey.

: Fri Apr 24, 2009 12:01 am  

Starbug wrote:

Ok , Why should being on the TV at some point in the season help with sponsorship to the championship clubs ?

The deals for sponsors are done before you know wether you are on the telly

Ah right, OK.

In the long run though - regular televised seasons should attract more sponsorship.

I accept - it is harder to attract the better class of sponsor and to put bums on seats given that the glamour clubs are in that "other place" but with clever marketing and perhaps a better TV deal (terrestrial) Championship clubs could benefit, in comparison to it's forebears. Fanciful stuff? Maybe, but there are still opportunities in this league if Chairmen AND the RFL put in the hard work.

: Fri Apr 24, 2009 12:01 am  

Wes Hooligan wrote:

No, I haven't mentioned expansion clubs once
Yes, but the fact that they based their team on those journeymen meant that they had no structure to fall back on once they had left/retired, and they ended up signing players like Troy Wozniak and Sala Fa'alongo to try and replace them. Hence they got relegated after 3 years and not one, but the cause was still the same.
This did not make any sense to me. Someone obviously has to finish bottom, what does that have to do with this?

Wether you mentioned them or not , they are the problem with relegation , they might not survive relegation , most if not all heartland clubs would

They had no structure ? , go on give us a clue , do you mean that they had not managed to produce their own juniors ? like Huddersfield

The cause was not the same , eventually somebody HAS to finish bottom , you finish bottom you are punished for that ie relegated

It seems to me that in the new SL world without relegation we will have different teams winning and finishing bottom every year but no coaches will be sacked and no fans will moan and everyhting will be wonderful

Well guess what , that is bollox

: Fri Apr 24, 2009 12:06 am  

littlerich wrote:

Ah right, OK.

In the long run though - regular televised seasons should attract more sponsorship.

I accept - it is harder to attract the better class of sponsor and to put bums on seats given that the glamour clubs are in that "other place" but with clever marketing and perhaps a better TV deal (terrestrial) Championship clubs could benefit, in comparison to it's forebears. Fanciful stuff? Maybe, but there are still opportunities in this league if Chairmen AND the RFL put in the hard work.

NO

Vitually impossible without a clear path to promotion

Never happen , the BBC/ITV will not waste money on second class sport with nothing to play for in their eyes

A lot of hard work and a total different outlook to what we presently have , also they have to work outside the control of the RFL , unfortunatley they are too stupid to realise that and the RFL know it

: Fri Apr 24, 2009 12:07 am  

Starbug wrote:

Wether you mentioned them or not , they are the problem with relegation , they might not survive relegation , most if not all heartland clubs would

Why the heck does this need to happen?

: Fri Apr 24, 2009 12:11 am  

Wes Hooligan wrote:

Why the heck does this need to happen?

It doesn't need to happen

Because it is just the way it is , unless of course you have several hundred millions to invest then it doesn't have to be that way

: Fri Apr 24, 2009 12:13 am  

Starbug wrote:

It doesn't need to happen

Because it is just the way it is , unless of course you have several hundred millions to invest then it doesn't have to be that way

Why do we need to force one of our best teams to effectively give everything up and, in your own words, 'struggle to survive'? What are we achieving from that?

: Fri Apr 24, 2009 12:21 am  

[quote="Wes Hooligan"]Why do we need to force one of our best teams to effectively give everything up and, in your own words, 'struggle to survive'? What are we achieving from that?[/quote]

Absolutely nothing , they will eventually prosper , or maybe they wont

In the meantime a few other clubs of less value will struggle , and what will that achieve ? nothing , or maybe it will

Not my words by the way , I never posted them

: Fri Apr 24, 2009 7:01 am  

Wellsy13 wrote:

True. But no one wants to finish bottom. Youre 100% right.

Thanks