The RFU Championship playoffs - a paucity of thinking

Why play 242 games to determine a regular season
1 Bristol 22 17 0 5 615 386 229 9 4 81
2 Bedford Blues 22 14 1 7 640 476 164 13 3 74
3 Cornish Pirates 22 14 3 5 606 464 142 10 2 74
4 London Welsh 22 13 2 7 528 432 96 8 3 67
5 Nottingham 22 12 2 8 599 465 134 6 4 62
6 Leeds Carnegie 22 13 1 8 470 505 -35 3 3 60
7 Rotherham 22 11 1 10 469 431 38 5 6 57
8 Doncaster 22 9 2 11 467 524 -57 7 3 50
9 London Scottish 22 6 0 16 422 543 -121 2 8 34
10 Moseley 22 6 1 15 445 634 -189 5 2 33
11 Plymouth Albion 22 6 0 16 362 528 -166 1 5 30
12 Esher 22 4 1 17 376 611 -235 3 2 23

and then shove the top eight through a playoff system from which some don't have a hope in hell of gaining promotion?

If playing qualifiers is reasonable, then:

The club should have a hope of actually gaining promotion via the PRL requirements.

The PRL should:
1. Reduce initial ground size requirements to (say) 5000 - but with an outline scheduled development plan to increase it to 10000 within 4-5 years residency in the Jeff. Minimum spectator requirements however should (e.g. toilet facilities) should be maintained
2. Ring fence newly-promoted for at least one year (more if they exceed exceptionally their development plans).

The top half of your post will not be valid next season, the bottom half is valid but simplistic.

What about the floodlight requirements for grounds, that are required for TV coverage?
What about the requirement for a defrib to be kept on site 24/7, not just on matchdays?
What about stands being covered (Bath, ahem)?
What about the primacy of tenure that enables TV to schedule games when they want?
What about the equalisation of distribution of collective EPL income?
What about the relegated teams parachute payment which distorts the competitiveness of aspirant teams?
What about......

For continuation, google RFU Championship forum, but be prepared to have a few weeks free.

I agree something needs to be done about the promotion process from the Championship to the Premeirship. This strage playoff process is, well, strange. To say the least.

But regarding the organisational/business requirements for promotion, many current rules do make financial sense. It is important for any promoted team to have the monetary underpinning to stay up. This includes being able to draw sufficient crowds (with attendent mechandise and other sales) to be somewhat viable. I am not sure drawing only 5,000 is enough, and a plan for 5 years out might not work either as there is no guarantee the team will be there in 5.

Additionally, having a ground with only 5,000 capacity will give that club a marked small-time appearance. When atteacting fans, appearances can be important, as much as that goes against the grain.

I do agree the promoted team should get an extra season at the top level to become more viable. I also believe Championship teams which have sound financial backing should be able to petition for loans to improve facilitites and squad.

Portnoy, delighted to see you tackling the thorny issue of promotion criteria for Championship teams - I believe that the 8-team playoff battle will reduce to a 4-team alternative from next season. As Dubbelyew L Overate notes, there are many thorny issues to be wrestled with, but my biggest beef would be where the same standards are not applied to the teams that they are trying to join (ie Premiership clubs)

I have contributed before on this issue As.

Maybe the there is room for a challenge by Championship sides to compare their situation with existing Jeff clubs.

p.s. I admit that my contemporarious post about Jeff NEQ player caps is not accidental.

Why can't the highest place team either by the Playoff or league get promotion. It is stupid to think if Bristol loose the final with a dodgy try to pirates they Newcastle stay up even though Bristol would desreve to go up.

There are many restrictions made on promotion for sensible reasons - minimum safety standards and spectator facilities etc. But there are some ground capacity demands for instance which preclude entry which would not be satisfied by existing competitors.

Portnoy wrote:I have contributed before on this issue As.

Maybe the there is room for a challenge by Championship sides to compare their situation with existing Jeff clubs.

p.s. I admit that my contemporarious post about Jeff NEQ player caps is not accidental.

Didn't say you hadn't? Think you might need to step off the persecuted-express!

Just elaborate the A & P issue As.

And why is it a seemingly increasing bugbear with you?

Go on. Lob in a link to reference it and explain your concerns.

Portnoy, sorry not going to bore everyone with the 'P' share issue again - it was adequately covered on your other thread from last week for those that are interested: https://www.606v2.com/t28451p50-playoffs-in-the-jeff (on p.2). We can debate one issue at a time if you like, but in the end I personally believe that it makes more sense to consider the package in its entirety - after all that's what would happen in any negotiation between clubs, RFU and PRL

Could they do a play-off between the winners of the Champ playoffs if they don't meet the requirements and the bottom placed team in the Aviva that doesn't meet them either. That way there would still be the same number of teams that don't meet them

Brendan wrote:Could they do a play-off between the winners of the Champ playoffs if they don't meet the requirements and the bottom placed team in the Aviva that doesn't meet them either. That way there would still be the same number of teams that don't meet them

The problem with that concept Brendan is the gulf in finance between Jeff and Championship sides. That concept would put an almost impossible bridge between the two.

It would all but make the Jeff a conference.

The eight team play off for the Championship is just messed up. I have no real idea how it really works to be honest. The two pool groups and then a two legged final is just messed up.

I think the Championship play offs should reflect the Top14 play offs. They have a top 6 play off.
3-6 have semis then play the top two teams in more semis then the final.

Brendan wrote:Could they do a play-off between the winners of the Champ playoffs if they don't meet the requirements and the bottom placed team in the Aviva that doesn't meet them either. That way there would still be the same number of teams that don't meet them

I believe that such a provision already exists, but only if it's the "relegated" team that doesn't fulfil the entry criteria. However, the entry criteria are graded - some are compulsory, some allow improvement immediately, some allow improvement over a season or two - and inevitably are couched in terms to favour the existing PRL team. This is from memory, I'd have to dig out the 60 page document again to check.

Portnoy has it right - PRL virtually ringfence the Prem not only with the entry criteria, but by ensuring a financial discrepancy between the two leagues. Currently, the top salary bill amongst the Championship clubs, excluding Bris and Leeds, is about £1million, (Exe were on about £1.5million in their promotion season), each team receiving about £300k from RFU depending on EQ player representation. The relegated team receives about £750k on top from PRL and hence has a much bigger salary budget than its opponents - hasn't done much for Leeds this season, though, but I expect that they're using the dosh to pay off debts. Compare to Prem salary cap of about £4.2million (not all clubs are able to spend that much, though), and the gulf is apparent.

From espnscrum.com:

Ever wondered about the 'minimum standards' that hold the key to promotion to the Aviva Premiership? OK, well just humour us for a moment. A quick Google search can provide all the answers with Saracens' recent application to move to the Copthall Stadium providing all the answers. The 57-page tome is a real page-turner and details the endless hoops that Premiership hopefuls must jump through in order to take their place among the elite. These requirements include such gems as: "1 urinal per 70 males (trough urinals calculated on basis of not less than 600mm per person)" and the presence of "an emergency drug box" containing - among other things - "Diazepam 5mg rectal tube x 1".

Can't have too many rectal tubes

Leeds shed a load of it's premiership players when they went down and are about to lose another chunk of good players as a result of not gaining promotion this year. The attitude has been that following the shambolic experiment with Neil Back finances needed to be re-organised. The declared intention is to rely on home nurtured talent but that will be a tough ask if we keep losing the youngsters when they show they have ability.

However, back to the OP. There is no way that the clear league winners should have to play risky play offs where anything can happen. If Bristol don't get promotion I will be very miffed. You could argue for a 4 team playoff but only, I think, if you have a 2 team relegation with one automatic promotion and a second via play offs.

The Championship is not valued by the RFU and this should be addressed urgently. There needs to be sponsorship and more exposure for the league. The parachute payment skews the competition in favour of the relegated team and the rest have to be very good to compete. In recent years Saints and Chiefs have been standout successes on promotion and Chiefs have done it by hard work, maximum exploitation of the available talent and an exceptional ethos. These are not typical success stories. Where teams like Pirates and Bedford show consistently they are there or there-abouts some form of financial package should be made available to give them a chance of transitioning to the Premiership should they qualify. The RFU should be doing everything possible to make the Championship stronger as I forsee more and more teams of quality languishing for lack of opportunity.

Whether you go for the relegation model or a franchise system the strength of the lower league will always be important and have an impact on the quality of the prem, whether through direct competition for a place or in schooling players with potential. By all accounts the present 8 team play off is being dropped, I only hope it's replacement is not equally stupid.