SUPER LEAGUE FRANCHISE

[cpwigan]

Or by your reckoning TDave

Melbourne should have huge attendances compared to Sydney or Brisbane clubs and Western Reds should have flourished.

Likrwise Liverpool/Everton; Man U/Man C; Rangers/Celtic makes no sense whatsoever

[cpwigan]

Your right Geoff but the point which you and I make is that population density is far more important than geographical distance.

I agree re your 40% view. It encourages negativity

[warrior till i die]

DaveO posted:
It means in simple terms if Leigh and Celic Crusaders (the Welsh team who have said they are interested in applying for a franchise) end up on the same points total due to their facilities, finances etc then Celtic would get in and Leigh would not.

Yes I agree that support is obviously important but without the support point Celtic could match leigh on things such as home grown talent and ground quality therefore matching their points accumulation without support being viewed. I understand where you are coming from Dave but I dont think a team should be considered if they have such a weak support base. Maybe as I stated in a previous post free tickets should be handed out for millenium magic and also the RFL and Celtic should possibly work together in community schemes to build the fan base. Would you like to watch a game with an empty ground? Would that be a good spectacle for our sport?

Support is part of the franchise criteria as well so in order for Celtic to beat Leigh by virtue of getting the one point for location, they would have to at least match Leigh's total on all the other criteria including support.

But Celtic could score on other points apart from support where maybe leigh will fall down. For example solvency. Im sure celtic will be more solvent than leigh with the signings they have made. Surley the RFL will look at the fan base and the possibility of attracting more fans before deciding to grant them a licence?

It wasn't fair Les Cats were immune form relegation for three years but if you want to promote the game outside the heartlands by having teams in SL in those regions, fairness isn't high on the criteria. In fact it isn't on there at all.

I disagree here. Catalans had potential to build a fan base as the game was booming in the south of france. I dont think it is the same in the south wales. My main reason for this is the attendences at Millenium Magic last year. There was not a very good proportion of welsh there and the majority of the fans where the hardcore northern fans. If the welsh couldnt grasp a concept like this could they grasp the concept of a club in the super league?

For them to get the same total (before Celtic get the extra point for location) Celtic would have had to match Leith's total which means by definition they can match the support. So given two teams on the same total it's a simple question of where you want the new team. In Wigan borough or down in South Wales?

To have a team in south wales I think the RFL need to consider more than just going by the franchise criteria. I think they will need to research the amount of fans that they can attract to the club. Shouldnt certain criteria get a more detailed look at? Shouldn't fan base be top of the agenda along with finance? Salford are currently working on a new stadium which will be finished for the second season as a franchise. Are teams like Celtic putting this effort in to try and guarantee a franchise? Celtic in my opinion should be doing more to keep hold of the welsh talent and also establishing themselves in the south of wales. As I stated earlier the RFL is not going to want a team with a weak fan base in the competition because this will not provide to competition with the support it needs? Will a club with such a small fan base attract the sponsorship required?

It certainly makes sense from the geography point of view. Whether if a team was refused a franchise their current support would migrate to another club is doubtful but over time (and I am talking at least a generation here) kids would see a big SL club in the next town cand in the same way people I know who are members at Chester RUFC support Sale so maybe the same would come to pass in RL.

But would it be the same with RL? Would family loyalties come in? If a family has grew up with one team I cant see any generation leaving. At the end of the day each club has its morales and fans have their morales. Maybe its easier for fans to do that in RU because they havent had the rivalries like we have in league. Also the franchise is coming in at the wrong time in my opinion because the competition is beginning to thrive.

Mo tried to tackle this when SL first came about by suggesting merged teams but that didn't work because no one supported "Calder". If you look to RU hanging the franchise on a real club even if it is not everyone's own local club seems to work better. People who remember Orrell being a great side may never support Sale but there are lots of new fans from all over the North West who do.

I think that is the way it will be again. Fans of a traditional club will definately not want to do such a thing. I mean they tried to do that in cumbria for this application forming barrow, whitehaven and workington but no. Could you see that happening? The clubs all stated that they were too proud of their history and rivalries. I can see that being the same as our franchise system. Fans of traditional clubs will not leave their clubs and discard their loyalties for another "nearby club"

[butt monkey]

DaveO posted:

butt monkey posted:
More to the point, what if the "new" club fails to attract the necessary support/sponsorships/merchandise, then we will be left with another defunct club and yet more dwindling funds from Super League deposited into the realms of fantasy ideas!

First of all the club would have to satisfy the franchise criteria which includes all that before it was given the franchise in the first place but if what you say happened, the club would lose its franchise after three years.

Dave

This could be a very expensive way, in both monetary terms as well as credibility, to find out if this is the way forward for "new" clubs to start life in Super League.

[DaveO]

butt monkey posted:

DaveO posted:

butt monkey posted:
More to the point, what if the "new" club fails to attract the necessary support/sponsorships/merchandise, then we will be left with another defunct club and yet more dwindling funds from Super League deposited into the realms of fantasy ideas!

First of all the club would have to satisfy the franchise criteria which includes all that before it was given the franchise in the first place but if what you say happened, the club would lose its franchise after three years.

Dave

This could be a very expensive way, in both monetary terms as well as credibility, to find out if this is the way forward for "new" clubs to start life in Super League.

What is the alternative? P&R where a team loses its "franchise" every year? That has proved pretty disastrous in monetary terms for those involved and has all the side effects (buying overseas players to avoid the drop etc) that the franchise system is supposed to prevent.

You have to hope that the clubs that are successful in getting a franchise do so based on a plausible business case. The RFL has a responsibility toward the franchisees to do a proper due diligence exercise on the bids.

At the end of the day the extra point for location isn't going to get a club which can't satisfy the other criteria a franchise. All it will do is get a remote club into SL if they are capable of supporting a franchise over a local club who can also support a franchise.

There is no guarantee either Leigh (or similar) or Celtic will make a go of it and if they don't, then they can't complain they were not given a chance with three years grace the system gives.

Dave

[butt monkey]

DaveO posted:

butt monkey posted:

DaveO posted: First of all the club would have to satisfy the franchise criteria which includes all that before it was given the franchise in the first place but if what you say happened, the club would lose its franchise after three years.

Dave

This could be a very expensive way, in both monetary terms as well as credibility, to find out if this is the way forward for "new" clubs to start life in Super League.

What is the alternative? P&R where a team loses its "franchise" every year? That has proved pretty disastrous in monetary terms for those involved and has all the side effects (buying overseas players to avoid the drop etc) that the franchise system is supposed to prevent.

You have to hope that the clubs that are successful in getting a franchise do so based on a plausible business case. The RFL has a responsibility toward the franchisees to do a proper due diligence exercise on the bids.

At the end of the day the extra point for location isn't going to get a club which can't satisfy the other criteria a franchise. All it will do is get a remote club into SL if they are capable of supporting a franchise over a local club who can also support a franchise.

There is no guarantee either Leigh (or similar) or Celtic will make a go of it and if they don't, then they can't complain they were not given a chance with three years grace the system gives.

Dave

If the RFL had applied stringent rules to ALL the clubs in the first place regarding overseas recruits, minimum ground standards etc, with NO exemptions or "empty promises" allowed we wouldn't have needed to "progress" to franchises in the first place.

So surely it stands to reason, these very same clubs will expect to abdicate their responsibilities when the Franchise system comes into effect, if it saves them money/chance to "cut corners".

[DaveO]

cpwigan posted:
Or by your reckoning TDave

Melbourne should have huge attendances compared to Sydney or Brisbane clubs and Western Reds should have flourished.

Why should Melbourne have a huge support? No one says you have to watch RL because there is a team there. Victoria is an Aussie rules state. What the NRL would not do is stick another team in Victoria while Melbourne get the crowds they do which is the point.

As to Perth (and Adelaide who also had a team for the same period) it is too simplistic to say those teams should have flourished. They are quite small places (despite what the Aussie tourist adverts may have you think - I have been to both places) and they are thousands of miles from all the other teams in the competition. It was logistics that put paid to those teams.

Likrwise Liverpool/Everton; Man U/Man C; Rangers/Celtic makes no sense whatsoever

They make a lot more sense than Wigan & Leigh. No one would set up another soccer club in a place like Derby for example with the intention of getting it into the Premier league alongside Derby County. It would be laughed out of court for obvious reasons yet we seem to think its OK to have SL clubs a few miles apart in places that are not cities?

Dave

[DaveO]

butt monkey posted:

If the RFL had applied stringent rules to ALL the clubs in the first place regarding overseas recruits, minimum ground standards etc, with NO exemptions or "empty promises" allowed we wouldn't have needed to "progress" to franchises in the first place.

So if the RFL did that what would happen to a club that met all these standards regarding the ground and things like proper junior development and so on, all of which cost a lot of money, when they got relegated and ceased to be a professional club overnight?

You can't expect clubs to invest in the sort of infrastructure you suggest if they are going to have the financial rug pulled from under them should they be relegated.

So surely it stands to reason, these very same clubs will expect to abdicate their responsibilities when the Franchise system comes into effect, if it saves them money/chance to "cut corners".

They can't abdicate their responsibilities when the franchise system comes into effect. If they do they are breaking the terms of the franchise.

Dave

[butt monkey]

DaveO posted:

butt monkey posted:

If the RFL had applied stringent rules to ALL the clubs in the first place regarding overseas recruits, minimum ground standards etc, with NO exemptions or "empty promises" allowed we wouldn't have needed to "progress" to franchises in the first place.

So if the RFL did that what would happen to a club that met all these standards regarding the ground and things like proper junior development and so on, all of which cost a lot of money, when they got relegated and ceased to be a professional club overnight?

You can't expect clubs to invest in the sort of infrastructure you suggest if they are going to have the financial rug pulled from under them should they be relegated.

I wouldn't have expected ground improvements "over-night", but over a period of years, and to which ALL clubs would have been expected to reach. Minimum standards would have to be entered into, even in lower league clubs eg Disabled facilities/seats etc. Now, the situation will be that No improvements will be needed to be made, and the possibility that the 14(?) original franchise "winners" may not survive long into their tenure ship

As for the overseas players, clubs for a long time have been allowed to "flout" rules as regards who actually counted. To the point, Bradford signed Henry Paul and Tevita Vaikona when their residency qualified them as exempt from the overseas quota! Yet they still filled that quota up with more non-British players. Look at the success Bradford achieved as a result, I for one moment do not believe that all the clubs will play "fair". Look at the Salary Cap arguments even now, with certain teams, not including off-shore accounts.

They can't abdicate their responsibilities when the franchise system comes into effect. If they do they are breaking the terms of the franchise

Can they not? We shall see. As you say, if any under performing club does not keep the standards expected of the Franchise, will they have their

"financial rug pulled from under them"

, that may finish them? Especially with the likes of Nigel Woods etc running things. I (as I have said before) will not be holding my breath.[/quote]

[DaveO]

butt monkey posted:

DaveO posted:

butt monkey posted:
If the RFL had applied stringent rules to ALL the clubs in the first place regarding overseas recruits, minimum ground standards etc, with NO exemptions or "empty promises" allowed we wouldn't have needed to "progress" to franchises in the first place.

So if the RFL did that what would happen to a club that met all these standards regarding the ground and things like proper junior development and so on, all of which cost a lot of money, when they got relegated and ceased to be a professional club overnight?

You can't expect clubs to invest in the sort of infrastructure you suggest if they are going to have the financial rug pulled from under them should they be relegated.

I wouldn't have expected ground improvements "over-night", but over a period of years, and to which ALL clubs would have been expected to reach. Minimum standards would have to be entered into, even in lower league clubs eg Disabled facilities/seats etc. Now, the situation will be that No improvements will be needed to be made, and the possibility that the 14(?) original franchise "winners" may not survive long into their tenure ship

It is just not correct to say with the franchise system no improvements need to be made. In order to get a franchise clubs have to improve many aspects to qualify, for example junior development. It also does not make any difference if the clubs achieve these things over a longer time as you suggest or not because at the end of the day if a club reaches franchise standard it costs money to maintain itself at that level. As soon as they are relegated the club would become unsustainable. Clubs know this and this is why we have clubs like Wakey who in the past have had no junior set up worth a jot and would field 13 overseas players all so they could ensure SL survival because they knew what the alternative was.

I also have no idea what you are on about when you say "and the possibility that the 14(?) original franchise "winners" may not survive long into their tenure ship"

As for the overseas players, clubs for a long time have been allowed to "flout" rules as regards who actually counted. To the point, Bradford signed Henry Paul and Tevita Vaikona when their residency qualified them as exempt from the overseas quota! Yet they still filled that quota up with more non-British players. Look at the success Bradford achieved as a result, I for one moment do not believe that all the clubs will play "fair". Look at the Salary Cap arguments even now, with certain teams, not including off-shore accounts.

I am well aware of the overseas player situation. It has been one of my major gripes for years. The fact remains however that the current system encourages teams to sign experienced players to avoid the drop rather that invest in their own juniors. It just so happens the cheapest experienced players are from overseas and the law allows clubs to get round the quota to sign them.

The reason they are signed is not because they are foreign but because they are ready made experienced players and cost less. Wakefield did this year on year (and admitted it). The fact Bradford who are at the other end of the table signed lots of overseas players as well does not alter that fact.

They can't abdicate their responsibilities when the franchise system comes into effect. If they do they are breaking the terms of the franchise

Can they not? We shall see. As you say, if any under performing club does not keep the standards expected of the Franchise, will they have their

"financial rug pulled from under them"

, that may finish them?

Well given they have three years grace what else do you suggest? Completely pulling the rug up like the NRL? I'd prefer it myself but in any case I am sure the RFL do not expect to be relegating a team and promoting another every three years as a matter of course.

Especially with the likes of Nigel Woods etc running things. I (as I have said before) will not be holding my breath.

I have no doubt the RFL will get this wrong in some ways. As Geoff pointed out the crowd size thing is rather stupid. However I support the principle of the franchise system because what we have now simply does not work and IMO actually harms the game.

Dave