On tonights ' Backchat '

Nobody would invest in a club outside SL without P and R

When discussing a potential new Owner/Investor for the Bulls

Good job the system in place does account for movement between divisions then.

You need to tell North Wales Crusaders that! They have had a lot of sponsorship and investment from local businesses in the Wrexham area.

If you mean a millionaire buying the club well that is possibly true, although Andrew Glover said he would continue with his ownership of Wakefield should they have been refused a licence (which amounts to the same thing as relegation).

iT depends on the investment being short term (ie, the usual stuff in RL) or long term. I can see the benefit in a long term strategy for Bradford, even if it means 5 or more years outside the top flight.......

I do laugh when people blame the RFL and franchising for what's happening at Bradford......it is 100% down to cast iron mismanagement at the club.....nothing else.

Has Bullman & Bull boy gone too, or is the administrator planning on appointing them to coach the team this Sunday ? - seriously this is getting beyond a joke

Its more a case of the RFL ( and therefore their ' fan club ' ) stating that the licence process would allow clubs to be run better with less need to overspend, whereas us non believers said that the nature of sport and the pressure of success wouldnt change things, we were right

even if we accept your premise (which i dont), that isnt an argument against either franchising nor for p+r. In fact it is simply acceptance that p+r would have done precisely nothing to help this situation.

I havent suggested it would have been different with P and R, I have suggested that those that suggested licencing would make it better were wrong, it isnt

You are confusing sport, which is amateur in its nature, with BUSINESS, which is anything but.

from the day the first 14 clubs were awarded licences, chairmen and CEO's should have looked at ways of cutting players wages, developing their own kids and attracting increased fans and sponsors......self sufficieny should have been their aim.

I liken the licencing system to letting 14 kids loose in the pick'n'mix section of Wilkinsons and telling them not to stuff their faces, as they have at least 6 years to take what they want and will get free regular dental check ups throughout that time........Bradford are the fat kid in the corner with a tooth ache, throwing up and complaning of stomach pains after 5 minutes.

Just because the fat kid didn't listen, doesn't mean the whole idea was a bad one....

(again if we accept your premise, which i dont)At least Bradford are spending money they dont have trying to win SL with 11k fans watching RL rather than spending money they dont have trying to get promoted with 2k fans watching RL.

Not suggesting it is all bad, just that it wont cure cancer and end world famine as some seemed to suggest in its defence, ultimatly you are dealing with people, and they are essentially in sport to win, and everything else is secondary, and that includes the fans that put excessive pressure on the owners to provide a winning team, its just human nature, as is the desire to always move up

So which clubs are spending money they dont have trying to get promoted? Fax have just posted a profit

My original point though was in response to numerous posts suggesting that clubs wanting to be promoted should find someone to ' bankroll ' them, when in reality, it wont happen, as Stevo pointed out tonight, just confirming how difficult it is outside the top flight to gain corporate support

Also the lack of a single financial backer was part of the RFL s criticism of Fax in their SL application

Doesnt matter,

You said it was the nature of sport that caused Bradford to overspend under pressure for success, that was your premise, not mismanagement, not fortune, but overspending under pressure for success which caused Bradfords problems, that would apply to them wherever they were, the only thing which would change would be the measure of success, i.e promotion if they were in the championships, titles if they were in SL. So regardless of which league they were in, Bradford would have overspent under pressure of success.

And on your point about Halifax, were they regularly making a profit under P+R? Did relegation help them? after their financial meltdown in 2003 and subsequent relegation were their financial troubles sorted? were they financially stable between 2004 and 2008, their time in the championship post relegation pre franchising?
Is it not possible that Fax can post a profit now because the 'pressure for success' is less or at least less immediate, under a franchised SL? This despite the championships apparently not being able to find sponsors or investors?

Isnt the lack of a financial backer what has caused these issues at Bradford? Wouldnt a financial backer be able to cover this, what you would hope would be temporary, issue? Aren't Bradford right now absolutely desperately trying to search for a financial backer to give them the necessary investment to change their fortunes? It seems like having someone to cover the bad times is pretty much absolutely necessary if you are to survive.

I think your wrong there. If P+R were in place, it would be a lot easier to demote any club to the lower divisions who found a team with misdemeaners. Instead we have thousands of posters telling the rest of the RL community why their team must not lose their licence.