Why has it got anything to do with IMG?
They would have been relegated under the old rules anyway but this is purely down to managing the finances of your own business.

I would love to see a thriving club in London and I'd be happy for the RFL to invest in them if they had any money, but you can't complain after the fact.
We didn't get a parachute payment either.

In terms of nothing to play for they have rectified that.
Under IMG rules, the thing stopping championship clubs getting in to SL is money and investment.
If they win Grand Final they get a significant winners pot from now on, which if invested correctly will help them gain the IMG points.

They finished bottom because they knew that they would be relegated at the end of the season.
Even if they had won the challenge cup, topped the league and won the GF they were going to be relegated.

Yes, they could have improved their grading but, they would still have been relegated.

Their promotion surprised everyone, including them and in hindsight, they'd have been better off not being promoted.
Sorry but this is down to a lack of foresight or a heap of bad luck with the IMG format.

As for not looking at these things earlier, many people spotted the "flaw" just as soon as London gained promotion.

The bottom line here is that the only successful UK "expansion club, has gone from SL to "basket case" in the space of 12 months.
I'm not sure that those in charge of reimagining Pro RL will really want this on there resume.

They wouldn’t necessarily have been relegated anyway, had the IMG system not being in place they would almost certainly have recruited to avoid being relegated

We shall see if that actually translates into a championship club getting into the top flight. I'm all for long term planning but we're dealing with sport here and RL supporters don't think about LED screens and IMG scores - they think about scores on the field. You can't change that culture overnight and the longer it takes the more you risk losing people and clubs on the way.

IMO there are a few clubs in SL that are only in it because they were on the right side of the divide when the rules were written.

It's up to the club to take the fans on the journey.
They have to use what money they have to make the club sustainable. Those that don't will never make it to SL.

I can’t agree with your bottom line. London were never a successful uk expansion club and your exaggerating that to a massive degree to have a pole at the IMG criteria. They have always been a basket case. You’re blaming img but it’s very much a mostly flawed club for many years. Placing that at the foot of IMG is exactly what I’m talking about being in poor taste.

12 months ago they were averaging barely 1k fans. Struggling for sponsors and finishing edge of playoffs. They had no sponsor for shirt early on in pre season sorted and they have been propped up by an owners funds. They have bounced from place to place and struggled to lay foundations.

And hull wouldn’t have played half their academy most of season. You can’t surmise things like that just to try strengthen your point of view. It’s just pie in the sky lacking any substance.

There is no disagreement regarding their nomadic status or, their fanbase, which is largely due to them moving home so frequently.
Their primary strength and the main reason for them being a good option, is their development of players, from a pool that may note exist without their presence down south and from a sporting point of view, being condemned to relegation before a ball has been passed or kicked.
Maybe this is just teething troubles for the new criteria but, it doesn't sit well.
Ofc, we all have to wait for the IMC scores to be published in a couple of weeks but, there will no doubt be some surprises.

As for London, the look to be a busted flush.

Again you are right abouth their wealthy backer but, London are not on their own in this respect, not by some distance.

Leigh have signed winger AJ Towse from York. Good young winger bit of a loss for the Knights

I agree with you to a point. There is still an inherent bias toward existing SL clubs that seem to get more IMG points by virtue of which division they were in when the line was drawn.

Define sustainability. Is it the ability to be maintained at a certain rate or level regardless of how it's done or is it meeting the needs of the present without compromising the future?

One could argue that having a sugar daddy is the only thing keeping the wolf from the door at almost all clubs. Is that sustainability? You could argue that if the bills are all paid then it is but it's not exactly a steady foundation. One wonders what happens to loss making clubs if their rich owners depart. For example without Ken Davy are Hudders a sustainable club?

I don't believe RL is truly sustainable, never has been. It will always rely on people prepared to lose money. I worry that clubs outside of SL may be held to higher standards than those currently in it to preserve the status quo, but we shall see.

The sustainability applies to all sports clubs, even those well down the pecking order.
The difference is that as thy climb the ladder and gain success, inevitably the stakes are higher and the fall from grace much more dramatic, unless there is someone with money to save them.

Okay so this is an arguement frequently banded about that I’ve previously pressed on. Maybe you can assist as it’s your justification for London being a success in some way.

Can you name me from all SL teams a list of full time players from London Broncos set up? Not part time players who play for London this season who out of necessity played and struggled but actual top level talent.

I asked this of other fans and they came back with Loui Scarsbrook who retired a bit back and were scratching their heads otherwise.

I disagree because it’s actually littered with talent and previous youth pathways from clubs in the heartlands or outside of London.

If you can name a good amount then I’ll happily discuss further.

Even trinity have players dotted about at other clubs at top level and an absolute ton at champ and league 1 level. Enough to name a few teams.

Unless you know more then I think you’ve probably just read a few of the grasping articles from Eccles and co to try beg for dispensation or exemption.

As for the point about a pool not existing. That applies to every club and their respective pathways, it’s not something London have stood out or excelled with, in fact are below average at.

Bradford have signed half back James Meadows from London on a two year deal

Not sure if I've misunderstood what you're saying but there are a lot of fairly obvious success stories in terms of playing in SL who have come through the junior ranks at London. As well as Mccarthy-Scarsbrook, there are other internationals such as Tony Clubb, Kai Pearce-Paul, Dan Sarginson, Mike McMeeken, then there's Kieren Dixon who played for England Knights, also Matt Davis, Welsh international Michael Channing, Mason Caton-Brown and there are a handful who will probably rack up more SL appearances next year having switched to full-time teams with Bill Leyland being the obvious one with star potential amongst them.

However I agree with your previous post that the London club has been an absolute basket case in terms of how they have been run for many years, I've been following the Broncos forum on RLFans for a long time and it's been a litany of grim tales of how not to run a RL club and how to alienate the fan base.