Has SuperLeague improved rugby league?

[Briedis]

With all of the fallout of the Bulldogs scandal some amazing facts about that club have come to light. The one that really has grabbed my attention is their impending financial woes.

Two years ago the Bulldogs had $6.5Million in the bank. At the end of this year they will have an overdraft of $300K. That means they have lost almost $7Million in two years, which is staggering. And with their current plight that figure of $300K may be worse than that. With the massive debt and maintenance costs of Belmore it isn't going to get any better. You can guarentee some big names moving from teh Dogs at the end of the year too. The 'informed' prediction is for a dark few years for the Dogs, which is very sad news for rugby league.

And the Bulldogs aren't the only club now fighting to survive financially.

My question is - Do we feel that SuperLeague has improved our clubs on and off the field and the competition as a whole?

Is the quality of rugby league better?
In my opinion, no.

Is the coverage better?
If you have FOX it is for sure.

Are the clubs better off?
As a whole, I think not.

What do you think?

 

[clucas91]

Please refrain from calling them 'The Bulldogs'.

They are Canterbury-Bankstown Bulldogs.

 

[fabulousphil]

I think league cant help but shoot themselves not only in the foot but everywhere else as well.

I think youll find the latest scandal suprises no one really.

 

[Player]

Struth, you traditionalists got your precious Souths back, what more do you want?

Quality of the game:
As I have said before I don't think rugby league has deteriorated, rather other sports (Aka Rugby Union) has caught up.

Easy for Rugby going from amateur to professional to improve,
but the law of diminishing returns will slow growth and level the playing field, taking some of the gloss off the Super12 in Australia.

Anyway the ARU can not justify contracting anymore league player on inflated salaries.

Coverage:
SuperLeague didn't hurt free-to-air television in New Zealand as much as the networks discovered Infomericals. Both ended up having the same time slot.

Clubs better off:
The salary cap is still too high. Cutting the salary cap would improve the financial viability of the clubs, although I doubt it would improve the quality of the game.

Nobody forced the ARL and the loyal clubs to fight back, if you had just meekly surrendered then who knows where the game would be today.

 

[dr nick]

Originally posted by clucas91
Please refrain from calling them 'The Bulldogs'.

They are Canterbury-Bankstown Bulldogs.

that is the clubs decision, they do not want to be referred to as canterbury.

secondly, it is no surprise that the bulldogs are in financial disarray. you simply cant afford to pay players so much with virtually no money coming in. the crowds are woeful, and club memberships are minimal. for a club leading the comp all year, they regularly got 4 figure crowds.

someone argued that union has caught up because it has now become professional, well that happened to league a few years ago, and the gap has closed immensely. if you think that paying the players alone 3.25 mill per year, along with ground rentals, maintenece, staff etc will be covered by the 10,000 that rock up week in week out, and the 800 club members... well i guess superleague has done the game good.

 

[MoffOnTou]

Bit of both to be honest.

The standard of the game has picked up, more TV coverage etc etc

Hurt the image of the game tho, turned a lot of the traditionalists away. The worst thing SL did was give RU and AFL a boost. If SL never happened, AFL and RU would still be 3rd class sports in Sydney. RU and AFL only ever got a foothold in Sydney after SL started.

I voted for each way

Moffo.

 

[Ian]

Wake up mate !!!!

"Manchester United FC

The English Premier League, the big clubs get bigger and the small clubs don't have a chance.

Here it is, the only clubs capable of winning the EPL title within the next 20 years:

Manchester Utd, Liverpool, Newcastle, Arsenal, Leeds , Chelsea and FULHAM.

Want To See Why Sport Is Dying?"
WAKE UP SLEEPY HEAD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.angelfire.com/super2/fulhamfc/index.html

 

[clucas91]

If flooding the game with corporate sponsorship, axing clubs and destroying tradition are good things, then yes, Super League has been good for the game.

 

[Ms.Storm]

Briedis

I guess I am not TOO qualified to give an answer on this because I have only followed rugby league for about 12 years.

But I voted like Moff.

I am more pessimistic about the future of rugby league than most of you on this board......I feel a great game like this will never die (unlike most stupid afl fans wish )......it will never happen.
And too many people involved in rugby league, like to rubbish the code.....they are not as assertive and positive about its future as the afl administrators are.....

The AFL commission will not tolerate too much criticism of the game by people who matter (for e.g. Ray Hadley and the Telegraph in Sydney.....I feel are very detrimental to the game)

The NRL must unite the two bodies that govern the game and move on from there.....they have a great leader now....and hopefully...things will only get better.


TV coverage of the game is now sensational......but there are many of us (hint...hint....hint....*me*) WHO would just like to change the coverage a bit of the games...e.g. from Sat. a/noon to various other timeslots

No more doom and gloom on this Board please

 

[dr nick]

firstly, if you have been following the game for 12 years, surely you would have some opinion on superleague... and who did u follow before the storm came in??

secondly, not pessimistic... OPTIMISTIC i think is the appropriate word.

 

[Briedis]

Originally posted by nicko18
and who did u follow before the storm came in??

Now there's a good question!

C'mon Ms.Storm, we want to know....

 

[Ell-d5]

Doesn't SL still exist in the UK?

What a dumb question.

Was the meeting at the George good for the game?

1947 was a bad year!