Wanderer wrote:
Yes, hardly worth them bothering. How long before they and a few others either throw the towel in or find life in RL unsustainable?
There was talk of London goimg full-time next season but it seems very unlikely that would be sustainable in 2025 when they're back in the Championship.
In truth, it would have been hard for them not to get relegated under the present system but at least they would have had a chance.
We no longer have an on-field competition that determines a team's fate, we have a scramble to get an 'A' grade. Once all 'A' grades have been taken, the rest are permanently left out in the cold.
As Wanderer says, how long before some teams decide to throw in the towel?
I'm not pretending that sorting the game's problems is easy but the IMG proposals will create a cosy closed shop that will benefit the top teams at the expense of the rest.
The Dons relatively high rating of 23 out of 35 suggests that if there is a cull of the bottom 11 teams - to create two leagues of 12 - we should be safe. We've been the tail end Charlies for many a year and without the tolerance of others at that time, we could have been cut adrift and booted out. As an RL community, we need to be supporting each other and building a better future together, not threatening those at the bottom with extinction.
The Dons rating is likely to rise in 2024 as winning the play-off final will replace our achievements in the 'discarded year' as only the last three seasons count for this part of the rating.
There are 91 variables included in a rating. To get an 'A' rating, a team must score 15 points, to get a 'B' rating you need 7.5 points. Under 7.5 is a 'C'. The race to be in the top 12 for 2024 - to get a Super League place in 2025 - is likely to be close.
Present ratings:10 Toulouse 12.97
11 Wakey 12.52
12 Leigh 12.45
13 Cas 12.16
14 Bradford 12.02
15 Fev 10.65
IMG points will not determine places in the Championship and League One. The bottom two are relegated with two coming up from League One. Up to 1.5 points can be awarded based on 'catchment'. Teams that are geographically close together get punished. This could well be the item that makes the different between being in the top 12 or not. A club can't do anything about where it is located, can it? This feels extremely unfair.
I'd like to see a full breakdown of the calculations as it's hard to understand why Bradford score more points than Fev - part of which will probably be due to Fev getting fewer points due to being close to Wakey and Cas.
Did you know, you get 0.125 points if you have LED advertising! Leigh would overtake Wakey on that basis and Bradford would nearly catch Cas. Wakey need to get some LED lighting installed ASAP!
There's so much of this I'm not liking...
