WiganWarriorsFans.com

http://www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... tlead.html

The Rugby Football League are anticipating 18 applications for Super League licences when a franchise system is introduced next year.

The league has shed more light on their proposals to move to a 14-club division based on three-yearly licences in 2009 but without completely abandoning promotion and relegation.

This bit is interesting:

"There will be no promotion and relegation in 2008 but a National League team will be guaranteed a Super League licence for 2012, which would either be at the expense of a relegated team or as a result of further expansion."

So come 2012 they will promote an NL1 club regardless of everything? They could still be way off meeting the facilities, supporter base, financial and player development achievements of all the SL clubs - and those things are (along with competitiveness) what will be used to rank SL clubs.

Come the 2012 season it will again be short term thinking to avoid relegation if a SL side is guaranteed to go down.

Dave

Which teams are actually in the franchise???

And there will be nothing to play for for lower league clubs, its stupid i think

Bear posted:
Which teams are actually in the franchise???

And there will be nothing to play for for lower league clubs, its stupid i think

18 clubs will apply for 14 places. Which 14 get the nod will be announced when they have assessed all the applications.

As to being nothing to play for for lower clubs, did you read the article? Increased prize money will be on offer and if they want to apply for a franchise place after three years (i.e. in 2012) they will have to had played in at least one NL1 GF during that time. So there is plenty to play for in the intervening three years.

My problem with the system is that there is this notion that in 2012 an Nl1 club is guaranteed to get in. If you are going to do this franchise thing properly then there should be no automatic right of entry into SL for the NL1 clubs in 2012.

If there is, then you have a competition that is no different than today's. P&R returns for one season in 2012. Since franchising is supposed to fix the problems P&R bring today and ensure the sides in SL are up to a certain standard both on and off the field this seems very strange to me.

Dave

There is a more detailed article here

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/Gr ... 3484092.jp

This allays my fears about an SL club being relegated when the Nl1 club is not up to snuff. It seems that in 2012 if no SL club was a grade "C" club then they would just expand the league to include another side from NL1.

The above article also publishes the points scoring system as to how clubs are assessed and it goes like this:

The RFL will assess the clubs using a points system based on 10 criteria to create Grade A (eight points or more), Grade B (5 to 8) and Grade C clubs (5 or less).

The criteria are as follows:


* Facilities - 2 points
* Finance and solvency - 2 points
* Player production and competitiveness - 2 points
* Attendances - 2 points
* Geographical location - 1 point
* Complying with the rules - 1 point.

In 2010 the assessment process will be repeated with the weakest Grade C club considered for relegation.

So I'd say we are nailed on for a franchise even though we had salary cap breaches (I reckon we'd get 7 points now as a worst case scenario).

Saints on the other hand could at this moment in time be on 5 points despite being a top side competitively.

I also think if we assume Lenagan makes sure we never break the cap then Wigan will never be a grade "C" club but it isn't beyond the realms of possibility Saints could be if they don't get their ground sorted out.

As I said worst case scenario for Saints this season is 5 points by my reckoning and for us 7. I'd expect us to go up to 9 by 2010 but without a new ground Saints could be on 6 so if they are not competitive in a few years they could drop to 5 again.

Dave

* Facilities - 2 points
* Finance and solvency - 2 points
* Player production and competitiveness - 2 points
* Attendances - 2 points
* Geographical location - 1 point
* Complying with the rules - 1 point.

Widnes has all of these bar the recent administration problems (thankfully they are on the mend) but i fear the RFL will take in Toulouse instead.

My fear for Salford is their attendances which are poor. If this new stadium cant help them, it is bye-bye until 2012 posibly.


What about the odds of Wakefield missing out? Their facilities are poor at best, dont have enough fans to bring in rewardable income, player production, well? none. competitiveness with Kear at the helm will always be a side that reaches 8th/9th/10th or 11th spot at best.

ancientnloyal posted:
* Facilities - 2 points
* Finance and solvency - 2 points
* Player production and competitiveness - 2 points
* Attendances - 2 points
* Geographical location - 1 point
* Complying with the rules - 1 point.

Widnes has all of these bar the recent administration problems (thankfully they are on the mend) but i fear the RFL will take in Toulouse instead.

My fear for Salford is their attendances which are poor. If this new stadium cant help them, it is bye-bye until 2012 posibly.


What about the odds of Wakefield missing out? Their facilities are poor at best, dont have enough fans to bring in rewardable income, player production, well? none. competitiveness with Kear at the helm will always be a side that reaches 8th/9th/10th or 11th spot at best.

The geographical location thing makes me laugh. Considering the RFL want to expand SL outside of the M62 corridor is this point only awarded to London and Catalans? If this was the case I'd be surprised if it was only 1 point lol. Harlequins would be screwed on the majority of the criteria listed here - there should be a section 'Adored by the RFL - 6 points' just be be sure they get a place

ancientnloyal posted:
* Facilities - 2 points
* Finance and solvency - 2 points
* Player production and competitiveness - 2 points
* Attendances - 2 points
* Geographical location - 1 point
* Complying with the rules - 1 point.

If these are for Wigan I think you are being too generous. I think the RFL will apply these quite harshly. If they don't there is no point doing it as all the sides bar about two of the 18 applicants will qualify and we are not after a 16 team league yet.

Here is where I think you are being too generous:

Fiance and solvency - 1 point. We can't add wages up (but are solvent)!

Location - 0 point. I am convinced this category relates to location in the sense that being close to other clubs is a bad thing and being in an expansion areas (such as South Wales) is a good thing. So no point for us on that one (or Saints or Wire etc) but one point for Celtic Crusaders etc.

Complying with the rules - 0 points for us on that one.

I appreciate the above means we effectively loose two points for the salary cap breach and the assessment is as of spring next year but I have a feeling the RFL won't be wiping the slate clean. Even if I am right I do not think it would jeopardise our position in SL.

Widnes has all of these bar the recent administration problems (thankfully they are on the mend) but i fear the RFL will take in Toulouse instead.

I don't think Widnes are as good as us on several of those criteria. They are better than some. For example I'd hazard a guess they produce more players than Wakey but not as many as we do. So we get 2 points, Widnes 1 point and Wakey 0 points.

I also get the impression the RFL are keener on Celtic Crusaders than Toulouse. It will depend on how those two compare to each other IMO with the best one but not both getting in unless the pair of them beat the pants off all the other candidates.

My fear for Salford is their attendances which are poor. If this new stadium cant help them, it is bye-bye until 2012 posibly.

I think Wakey are in danger of being booted out of SL which may leave a door open to Salford. You never know the location thing may work for Salford being a "Manchester" team.

What about the odds of Wakefield missing out? Their facilities are poor at best, dont have enough fans to bring in rewardable income, player production, well? none. competitiveness with Kear at the helm will always be a side that reaches 8th/9th/10th or 11th spot at best.

I agree. Wakey are most at risk of the current SL sides but if you are logical about applying the criteria Saints are quite close to being a grade C side. This is down to poor facilities and poor attendance as well as being fellow salary cap rule breakers.

Dave

gpartin posted:
The geographical location thing makes me laugh. Considering the RFL want to expand SL outside of the M62 corridor is this point only awarded to London and Catalans?

London, Les Cats, Celtic Crusaders and Toulouse is my guess. All those have applied for a franchise.

Perhaps Salford may get it for being close to Manchester. Other than that I would not expect any of the other existing SL sides to get that point.

If this was the case I'd be surprised if it was only 1 point lol. Harlequins would be screwed on the majority of the criteria listed here - there should be a section 'Adored by the RFL - 6 points' just be be sure they get a place

I think the only ones that screw Quins are "Player production and competitiveness" and "attendance". At most four points lost.

So they will get at least 6 out of 10 with that location 1 point ensuring they are not a category C side.

Dave

DaveO posted:


I think the only ones that screw Quins are "Player production and competitiveness" and "attendance". At most four points lost.

So they will get at least 6 out of 10 with that location 1 point ensuring they are not a category C side.

Dave

Is the finance thing about the club making money or just having money?