Quote Adam_Harrison9="Adam_Harrison9"How are Wakefield struggling? I'm confused. As a fan, if you are continuing t live in the past then yes we can always be deemed as perennial strugglers. But, it isn't the past. It is now. And the club is doing better than it has at any other time in Super League.'"
Struggling financially, the stadium drama rolls on and on, and the crowds were still bottom 3 in the comp last year, as in the years before. They're doing better on the pitch, but that doesn't matter, bluntly. Nobody cares what happens on the pitch except our existing fans, and we don't have enough of them. If Wakefield's stadium ever actually happened, and they filled it weekly with 10,000 fans, then I would be clamouring for their justified place in the top flight, whether or not they were winning or losing more. But they aren't. Obviously not in such a dire position as Salford, but it's arguable that Widnes are in less trouble because at least they have a stadium.
Quote Adam_Harrison9="wrencat1873"Good post but, why the f*** did we drop "franchising" and reduce SL, when the model was already in place to allow new clubs to come in.'"
Because, with the influence of Big Nigel (ex of Halifax), the RFL decided that their top priority was the possibility of Featherstone, Halifax or Leigh gaining promotion for a year in the top flight. The price for P&R, which was clearly only likely to benefit those three clubs, was a reduction in numbers in the top flight to spread the money thicker amongst the remaining clubs, plus a play-off system which I think everyone expected to so heavily favour the fully professional SL sides that actual P&R was seen as only a theoretical possibility, not a real one.
When the decision was taken in 2013 to reduce from 14 to 12, with P&R to follow, I suspect the SL clubs thought that the clubs to be cut would be London, who were in financial collapse at the time, and one of Salford, Widnes, Castleford or Wakefield, based on normal results. They didn't really want London to go, but were willing to pay that price for the extra cash and London seemed a basket case at the time anyway. Everyone was horrified when Bradford, one of the few genuinely big clubs, then collapsed and disappeared along with London, which suddenly made the league look much smaller and more parochial than expected.
We've since had the worst of all worlds. Hull KR and Leigh have demonstrated through their Yo-Yoing that even when it happens, P&R does nothing for the SL competition apart from swap two poorly-supported no-hoper teams in already-saturated markets. However, the near-disappearance of Catalans shook up the bigger clubs, because they can see that if the French follow London and Bradford, SL looks even more parochial and even less attractive to the broadcasters and sponsors. Meanwhile, the relegation of Hull KR and Leigh, who as fully pro sides weren't supposed to fall through the trapdoor, made the lower-half SL clubs terrified, because it could be them, while the possibility of losing a big, rich club like Warrington was just unacceptable to the other clubs. Hence the P&R had to go, for all the reasons which were given, and ignored, for not introducing it in the first place.
The clubs thought they'd been clever in introducing P&R to pacify the top championship clubs and more traditional-minded fans, without the risk of any big clubs falling foul of it because of the play-off system. In many ways, it was supposed to be much more of a closed shop than licensing ever was, because there was now no way for a new club to threaten the place of one of the poor performers other than the supposedly impossible play-off route. What they ended up with is the loss of one of the biggest clubs - Bradford - along with the loss of London, and the too-near-for-comfort potential loss of Warrington and Catalans. Yet while the system seems to allow for the disappearance of some of our few genuine asset clubs, it has become very apparent that the Leigh/Hull KR/Halifax clubs, while unlikely to add much to SL as a competition, are always likely to act as an effective barrier to entry (or re-entry) for new asset clubs clubs with greater commercial/developmental potential like Bradford, Toulouse and Toronto.
The system is a disaster - a genuine risk to the continuity and maybe survival of major clubs in a sport not overflowing with major clubs, but one which ensures that it's extremely difficult, if not impossible, for any new potential to enter the top flight. It has to change.
The defenestration of Nigel Wood was partly the lower-half clubs acting to ensure their own survival, to try and bring the system to an end. But it was also the upper half clubs trying to find a way of recreating a way into SL for clubs beyond the Leigh/Halifax/Fev group in an attempt to improve the marketability and spread of a sport which they know is stagnant and declining. I have heard that they were furious to discover, after Nigel's departure, that the play-offs were enshrined in the TV contract, which explains why no new system has yet been announced, because there'll have to be serious negotiations with Sky first.
We're in uncharted waters, and I would love to have a mole on the inside of the RFL to fill in the gaps in what I've heard/read/gleaned from various places. But on balance, even if for selfish reasons, I think the bigger clubs are trying to take the sport in the right direction. Lenagan, Moran, Pearson, Davy, and McManus are not stupid men. They want a bigger, more attractive competition, and they recognise that all the current structure has achieved is to foster the game's stagnation.
