Re: Mergers : Tue Aug 28, 2018 9:00 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

What is the point in investing in the likes of Hunslet, Batley & Dewsbury when you have SL teams who have acadamys that produce most the players for these teams - the crowds are pathetic. I am cannot see a viable reason for increasing the funding directly to these clubs - just because a club was formed 100 years ago doesn't mean it has to survive for ever - that's a bonkers way of dividing up the money.

These clubs are just parasites.

Spot on mate.

Re: Mergers : Tue Aug 28, 2018 11:55 am  

wrencat1873 wrote:

Do you really think that players, apart from very, very rare exceptions, can go from playing for Wath brow one week to playing for a SL side the next, it's just a ridiculous idea.

Your plan would leave us with 6 or 7 SL clubs and then a drop to amateur rugby ??
Which TV company would want to invest in that ?

Football, the biggest and wealthiest sport in the UK, seems able to embrace clubs from Man United to Burnley without any difficulties and whilst their investment is on a substantially different level, they seem able to embrace the diversity within the sport and "sells" the fixtures.
Some RL fans seem to want 6 or 7 SL clubs and feck the rest.
I'm sorry but that will kill the sport far more quickly than having Wakefield, Salford and Widnes in the top flight.

Again, football has a pyramid that allows players to work their way up and allow the players that develop later (or more slowly) to find their way to the top.

I believe that you are old enough to remember RL before the Lindsay revolution and nobody at that point gave a stuff about attendances or, how many plastic seats were at each ground, this only came about when "franchising" was the order of the day.
A number of clubs have managed to improve their facilities and attendances, Hull FC, Warrington, Saints etc but, ultimately this has done nothing and will do nothing to help increase investment within the sport and even if/when we have a SL with all clubs achieving the mystical 10,000 fans at each game, something actually made more difficult by ever changing fixture dates to accommodate Sky, investment wont increase because of that.
The clubs want bums on seats, Sky want screen filler and the armchair viewer just wants a decent game to watch end of story.
But, knock yourself out with the American dream and destroy half of the remaining SL clubs and all of the other semi pro clubs and then enjoy Leeds v Wigan and Wire v Saints

Let's deal with your points:
The game needs to increase participation that can be done in two main ways: An elite competition that inspires kids to want to play the game e.g. Premier League soccer or through grass roots clubs that give kids an outlet to try the game under appropriate supervision/coaching. Both of these areas of the game need investment. One brings the money in and the other provides the players to ultimately bring the money in.

What I am saying is very few players go to SL from Wath Brow via the Championship - the lack of numbers means there are a miniscule amount of late developers who actually make it at elite level and exceptions should never be the basis for your strategy.

My view is we need a 14 team SL each supporting a championship/feeder club - the 14 teams need to be strategically selected and have a 10 year franchise - no promotion/relegation but strict guidelines around the interaction with the feeder clubs and the amateur/grass roots clubs in their area.

I fail to see how taking funds from the SL clubs and giving it to Dewsbury/Keighley/Hunslet/Swinton/Oldham etc is going to enhance either participation or profile. Their core fans aren't interested in going along to watch them - what's the point?

All everyone wants is high quality entertainment - that will not happen by squandering money so the championship clubs can pay over-the-hill players more money because that is all that will happen with any additional funding.

Re: Mergers : Tue Aug 28, 2018 1:14 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

Let's deal with your points:
The game needs to increase participation that can be done in two main ways: An elite competition that inspires kids to want to play the game e.g. Premier League soccer or through grass roots clubs that give kids an outlet to try the game under appropriate supervision/coaching. Both of these areas of the game need investment. One brings the money in and the other provides the players to ultimately bring the money in.

What I am saying is very few players go to SL from Wath Brow via the Championship - the lack of numbers means there are a miniscule amount of late developers who actually make it at elite level and exceptions should never be the basis for your strategy.

My view is we need a 14 team SL each supporting a championship/feeder club - the 14 teams need to be strategically selected and have a 10 year franchise - no promotion/relegation but strict guidelines around the interaction with the feeder clubs and the amateur/grass roots clubs in their area.

I fail to see how taking funds from the SL clubs and giving it to Dewsbury/Keighley/Hunslet/Swinton/Oldham etc is going to enhance either participation or profile. Their core fans aren't interested in going along to watch them - what's the point?

All everyone wants is high quality entertainment - that will not happen by squandering money so the championship clubs can pay over-the-hill players more money because that is all that will happen with any additional funding.

I fully understand the sentiment in your post, however, if you cut out the 2nd and 3rd tier of the sport and rely on club academies to prepare players for SL, you will kill the sport, you would also massively alienate the fans who do attend those games and whilst some may drift towards their nearest SL club, the majority of them would be lost to the game and probably their kids and grand kids as well.

We need the whole RL pyramid to be as strong as possible, all the way through the amateur game, right up to SL and International level.
If you take out one or 2 levels you would kill the game.
Yes, there are ageing players in The Championship and League 1 BUT, there are also young kids learning their trade.
Many SL sides have players on dual reg at Championship and League 1 sides. Should they sit in the stands and vegetate or maybe just chuck them on the scrapheap if they haven't made the grade at a particular point in time.

Re: Mergers : Tue Aug 28, 2018 1:31 pm  

Joff wrote:

Workington and Whitehaven surely?

Castleford and Wakefield surely?

Leigh and Warrington surely?

Castleford and Wakefield even as a Wakefield fan, has always made sense to me. Along with Fev thrown in there, crowds would increase and the three would be better off financially. I could only consider them being called Wakefield though.

Re: Mergers : Tue Aug 28, 2018 1:48 pm  

WakeyTrin1873 wrote:

Castleford and Wakefield even as a Wakefield fan, has always made sense to me. Along with Fev thrown in there, crowds would increase and the three would be better off financially. I could only consider them being called Wakefield though.

What's the point in merging only to keep the name wakey?

Re: Mergers : Tue Aug 28, 2018 1:51 pm  

EastHullUTR wrote:

What's the point in merging only to keep the name wakey?

Bigger crowds and to be better off financially, I don't see how it's so hard to get your head round considering both Castleford and Featherstone are towns within Wakefield?

Re: Mergers : Tue Aug 28, 2018 2:27 pm  

EastHullUTR wrote:

What's the point in merging only to keep the name wakey?

All three in the Metropolitan District of Wakefield.
Three = a Trinity
= Wakefield Trinity.

Re: Mergers : Tue Aug 28, 2018 2:44 pm  

Miro wrote:

All three in the Metropolitan District of Wakefield.
Three = a Trinity
= Wakefield Trinity.

Wakefordstone.

Re: Mergers : Tue Aug 28, 2018 3:18 pm  

WakeyTrin1873 wrote:

Bigger crowds and to be better off financially, I don't see how it's so hard to get your head round considering both Castleford and Featherstone are towns within Wakefield?

What would be in it for Cas?

Re: Mergers : Tue Aug 28, 2018 3:25 pm  

Kippaxer wrote:

What would be in it for Cas?

The same thing that would be in it for Wakefield and Featherstone. Bigger crowds and to be better off financially.