: Thu Mar 12, 2009 9:18 am  

Damo-Leeds wrote:

Harlequins - I really can’t see this team doing much apart from the odd win over Leeds. Will be one of the worse teams in the next three years IMO!

Is this based on fact or feeling?
As it is, we field as many (if not more) english talent than other SL teams. Our reserve grade were 1 bad ref away from the semi's last year and we now have kids in the England age group squads.
Whilst we don't have the "big name" stars in our side, we do have 3 England Internationals and were the only team outside of the top tier who had someone on the plane to Australia. I'll add, that pudro was one of a handfull of players who came out of the WC with his rep in tact.
What we have lacked for 3 years is consistency, but as for just "occasionally beating leeds", we will give any team a game and I doubt any coach looks forward to playing us.
As for 3 years time, the only worries we have are off the pitch.
If you are going to post drivel, can I suggest that in future, you research the topic before posting.

: Thu Mar 12, 2009 9:21 am  

You are then back to the very obvious 2 divisions of 10, with 1 up 1 down and 27 fixtures plus a weekender.

: Thu Mar 12, 2009 9:57 am  

sex on legs wrote:

You are then back to the very obvious 2 divisions of 10, with 1 up 1 down and 27 fixtures plus a weekender.

The stupid thing is there is an odd number in the Championship (11) and only 10 teams in Championship 1. Perhaps on ability that is the right format but really there ought to be a better way to split the 35 clubs especially so the lower teams get more games (more expansion at the bottom maybe the way to go but then again do any of the RL Conference clubs want to take that extra step which will require more finance with perhaps not the reward of perticularly bigger gates).

: Thu Mar 12, 2009 10:35 am  

gutterfax wrote:

Is this based on fact or feeling?

Feeling.

Can I just add that I don’t watch all the other SL teams obsessively and therefore for some I’ve given a dire prediction. This thread was created for your opinions and other peoples opinions rather than myself causing mild controversy.

gutterfax wrote:

As it is, we field as many (if not more) english talent than other SL teams. Our reserve grade were 1 bad ref away from the semi's last year and we now have kids in the England age group squads.
Whilst we don't have the "big name" stars in our side, we do have 3 England Internationals and were the only team outside of the top tier who had someone on the plane to Australia. I'll add, that pudro was one of a handfull of players who came out of the WC with his rep in tact.

I’m a big fan of Purdham no doubt and he is as good as their get in super league. You’ve got a good youth system coming on at Harlequins but it is debatable that it’s (waits for echo’s about Leeds Academy lost to Celtic Crusaders Academy) a good few years behind the likes of Leeds and Wigan. However I don’t think it’s the academy that is your problem!

gutterfax wrote:

What we have lacked for 3 years is consistency, but as for just "occasionally beating leeds", we will give any team a game and I doubt any coach looks forward to playing us.

That’s probably the reason why I think your going to do poor and I’m sure you’ll accept my opinion on that.

gutterfax wrote:

If you are going to post drivel, can I suggest that in future, you research the topic before posting.

A few people have criticised my original post that has created debate. In future I’ll make sure I spend hours and hours putting this together so that we can have a marathon of thumbs up..

But yeah for real I’ll put more effort and research in next time..

: Thu Mar 12, 2009 11:42 am  

Disco wrote:

I'm all for expansion and always have been, but kicking one team out to make way for another isn't expansion, it's replacement. The geography might shift, but the game wouldn't 'expand' by any measure.

the game would expand by plenty of measures, in fact, the only way it wouldnt expand is the number of clubs in SL

what a strange thing to say

: Thu Mar 12, 2009 12:33 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

the game would expand by plenty of measures, in fact, the only way it wouldnt expand is the number of clubs in SL

what a strange thing to say

Go on then... What are these 'plenty of measures'?

Re: So by the end of the third year of this franchising : Thu Mar 12, 2009 12:40 pm  

Damo-Leeds wrote:

So by the end of the third year of this franchising

Where can you see your team and other teams be?

Leeds Rhinos - The team at the moment is going through a purple patch that the likes of Wigan and St Helens have been through the previous two decades. I just think with the youngsters Leeds have with big game experience by then will prove pretty much unstoppable in both the Super League and Challenge Cup with Wigan as our closest contenders.

Wigan Warriors - Wigan have finally got some real quality coming through the ranks and this is going to always be matched by world class superstars. It wouldn’t surprise me if this Wigan team beats Leeds in every department by 2012 but because its Leeds I’m bias.


St Helens - A team that at the back of my mind I would of put further down the table but up front that’s disrespect as Leeds have been beaten by the saints in the table for the last four years. I feel that saints will be at a little baron period as Sean Long & KC are probably gone by then either literally or they class has gone. I can’t see anyone replacing them two at the saints club and I feel this will leave them fourth by the end of 2012. Even bringing Jamie Lyon back can’t save the S falling from the top.
.

What have you based this on precisely?

It seems you have watched a couple of games on SKY to come to the conclusion for Wigan.

I like Tomkins, I think he will be a real talent, but then it is hard to understand the contradicition in your remarks between Saints and Wigan depth.

I seem to recall Saints winning last years reserve final, and being finalists in the academy final. I think it was pretty much the same the year before.

With the likes of Eastmond, Frodsham, Foster, Wheeler, Dixon and Macgennis already breaking through with bolters such as Armstrong then I think we will be ok thanks very much. This to be complemented by Scott Moore who seems to be progressing well at Huddersfield.

I would stake money that at least 3 of these will go on to gain international honours.

: Thu Mar 12, 2009 12:44 pm  

Disco wrote:

Go on then... What are these 'plenty of measures'?

geographical, representative numbers, potential player pool, elite player pathways, these things would be done automatically simply by admitting a club from a new area, regardless of its success,

and you would choose certain areas in hope of expanding audience, sponsorship portfolio, audience within targetted demographics, participation, revenue,

in fact, pretty much everything you would measure it by bar the size of the league

Re: So by the end of the third year of this franchising : Thu Mar 12, 2009 12:50 pm  

eddiewaringsflatcap wrote:

What have you based this on precisely?

It seems you have watched a couple of games on SKY to come to the conclusion for Wigan.

I like Tomkins, I think he will be a real talent, but then it is hard to understand the contradicition in your remarks between Saints and Wigan depth.

I seem to recall Saints winning last years reserve final, and being finalists in the academy final. I think it was pretty much the same the year before.

With the likes of Eastmond, Frodsham, Foster, Wheeler, Dixon and Macgennis already breaking through with bolters such as Armstrong then I think we will be ok thanks very much. This to be complemented by Scott Moore who seems to be progressing well at Huddersfield.

I would stake money that at least 3 of these will go on to gain international honours.

Other way round

We (Wigan) won the reserve final and St Helens beat us the U18's.

: Thu Mar 12, 2009 1:03 pm  

geographical

Cosmetic change only - already dismissed.

representative numbers, potential player pool, elite player pathways

Really? Explain how a club in an area with limited roots in RL is so much better equipped to produce players than one which has been doing it for years.

and you would choose certain areas in hope of

Hope? You're not getting desperate after just four are you?

expanding audience, audience within targetted demographics, participation

Apparently you are. 'Audience within targetted demographic' is frankly just bullsh*t speak for 'expanding audience', while 'participation' (presumably playing the game?) is in effect a more active form of audience engagement than just 'being a fan'. So let's save time and address these together....

It makes no commercial sense to disillusion the audience (passive or active) you already have in the vague and unproven hope that you'll attract a new, presumably bigger, one somewhere else. It's far, far better to keep the one within the family while at the same time pushing the boundaries outwards. Expansion, not replacement - any fool can see that.

sponsorship portfolio, revenue,

I don't buy this argument. Things like 'history', 'continuity', 'tradition', are just as effective selling points as 'new', 'fresh', etc. It's all down to the marketing. Even if it weren't the case, you still haven't explained why getting rid of one club to make way for another is apparently better than keeping the one club AND including another.

So come on, you haven't got all day. You've got a marathon to train for.