Re: Merger : Mon Apr 19, 2010 7:51 pm  

Trinity Tigers @ junc 30

Re: Merger : Mon Apr 19, 2010 8:07 pm  

Disney cat wrote:

Trinity Tigers @ junc 32

There you go the name is decent though then go Wests style and have 4 kits...

Re: Merger : Mon Apr 19, 2010 8:11 pm  

There would have to be incentives from both clubs. The idea of a "joint venture" where both keep there identities in the Championship is a good one.

The bottom line is that a merged team is not likely to be a better team on the field or off. Neither have any money so they would have twice the debt and neither have a good ground. So unless they get offered a stadium and a ton of money then its a none starter.

Re: Merger : Mon Apr 19, 2010 8:23 pm  

MUTLEY CAT wrote:

although it pains me to say this you come across as a level headed kind of guys , do you really think the RFL will let us both in time and time again with empty promises? the way the sport is changing i can not see it . I have said elsewhere that i think both clubs will merge very soon and create a new club at stanley . as for the name that will create some hot debate and i dont think every one will end up happy .
i also think that castleford will retain a club at wheldon rd and play in nl2 to be a feeder for the new club.

i like the idea of retain the clubs colours in kits although a big no no on saying one is home and one is away it would be more fair to rotate on a weekly basis.

and as for the no not in a million years i can not see anyone who like me is sad enough to spend so much time on rl boards to just turn your backs on the sport forever and lets face it fev n Leeds don't quite cut the mustard.

its gonna happen i think

This is pretty much what I was getting at. For the poster(s) who think the original post was a troll, it defnitely wasn't. I'm not for a minute suggesting you should merge; it's not my place to say one way or the other. TBH I'm not even sure there is a right or wrong as such. I am, however interested to see if attitudes have changed since the idea was first proposed. When SL was first formed everyone had the right to think things would work out well for their club. It was a new venture and no-one had any real idea how it would pan out. 15 years on and I don't think the same can be said. There is a history to draw on and that shows us that traditionally teams like Wakefield and Castleford (or Salford, Leigh and others for that matter) haven't really challenged for honours. Now, as fans, you may be satisfied with this state of affairs. Maybe 'hanging on in there hoping for a day in the sun' is enough for some. It seems from the posts so far that it isn't for others though and there is a greater sense of wanting, even expecting, more. There's nothing wrong with either attitude. Some would be satisfied playing NL1 as long as it was 'their club'. Others want to be competitive at the highest level. I realise this is horses for courses but, with many suggesting fans will not be renewing season tickets etc. it's obvious that some are already showing that 'more of the same' is not for them.

For the posters who seem unhappy with the thread, as Mutley Cat has intimated, this is more than likely going to raise it's head sometime soon. St George-Illawarra and Wests-Tigers have shown that mergers (or joint ventures if you prefer) can work. Someone is going to be the first in this country sooner or later. Cas/Wakey, looking from the outside, looks the most likely. That's just a personal view of course and I accept I could well be wrong. Nevertheless I was just interested in the fans perspective on it. I wonder if Wests and Balmain fans, for example, were universally for the merger or not? Either way it happened and has worked extremely well to the point of Grand Finals and them curently being among the competition leaders again this time round.

Re: Merger : Mon Apr 19, 2010 8:24 pm  

Based on the last 2 mergers teams get £1m to do it, so that money + the money from the sale of BV and The Jungle + Surfworld (and other places if needed) is enough for a stadium at J32 and in an ideal place in terms of making revenue next to one of the UK's top visitor attractions and an outlet village. Keep the "original" team names for the juniors, have 4 kits so everyone's happy with colour choices etc.

And based on this years squads (full strength) who would turn their noses up to:

1. Richard Owen (Cas)
2. Aaron Murphy (Wakey)
3. Michael Shenton (Cas)
4. Daryl Millard (Wakey)
5. Damien Blanch (Wakey)
6. Rangi Chase (Cas)
7. Ben Jeffries (Wakey)
8. Craig Huby (Cas)
9. Sam Obst (Wakey)
10. Richard Moore (Wakey)
11. Dale Ferguson (Wakey)
12. Brett Ferres (Cas)
13. Joe Westerman (Cas)

14. Steve Snitch (Cas)
15. Ryan Hudson (Cas)
16. Jason Demitriou (Wakey)
17. Kevin Henderson (Wakey)

8 Cas 9 Wakey + a large squad
For example

Re: Merger : Mon Apr 19, 2010 8:30 pm  

Gaslight wrote:

Based on the last 2 mergers teams get £1m to do it, so that money + the money from the sale of BV and The Jungle + Surfworld (and other places if needed) is enough for a stadium at J32 and in an ideal place in terms of making revenue next to one of the UK's top visitor attractions and an outlet village. Keep the "original" team names for the juniors, have 4 kits so everyone's happy with colour choices etc.

And based on this years squads (full strength) who would turn their noses up to:

1. Richard Owen (Cas)
2. Aaron Murphy (Wakey)
3. Michael Shenton (Cas)
4. Daryl Millard (Wakey)
5. Damien Blanch (Wakey)
6. Rangi Chase (Cas)
7. Ben Jeffries (Wakey)
8. Craig Huby (Cas)
9. Sam Obst (Wakey)
10. Richard Moore (Wakey)
11. Dale Ferguson (Wakey)
12. Brett Ferres (Cas)
13. Joe Westerman (Cas)

14. Steve Snitch (Cas)
15. Ryan Hudson (Cas)
16. Jason Demitriou (Wakey)
17. Kevin Henderson (Wakey)

8 Cas 9 Wakey + a large squad
For example

And, I think it's safe to say, a more competitive one. There are further benefits too in that a more competitive side is more able to attract better quality players and, perhaps more importantly, able to fend off the approaches of 'bigger' clubs for the players coming through their ranks. I think this shouldn't be underestimated for clubs able to produce good quality juniors.

Re: Merger : Mon Apr 19, 2010 8:43 pm  

Phuzzy wrote:

And, I think it's safe to say, a more competitive one. There are further benefits too in that a more competitive side is more able to attract better quality players and, perhaps more importantly, able to fend off the approaches of 'bigger' clubs for the players coming through their ranks. I think this shouldn't be underestimated for clubs able to produce good quality juniors.

the wakefield district as a mass influx of talented and gifted juniors already . the challenge cup final is always preceded by a junior match 12s 14s or what ever and it normally contains 1 and some times 2 teams from our district. the few who end up playing at sl level normally get snapped up by the leeds academy which is a shame.

and that's my main point , the future is the kids and from cas panthers to crigg and Stanley to lock lane these youngsters will not have a bigotry attitude and will try their up most to get an opportunity to play with a merged club.

Re: Merger : Mon Apr 19, 2010 8:49 pm  

MUTLEY CAT wrote:

these youngsters will not have a bigotry attitude and will try their up most to get an opportunity to play with a merged club.

I honestly don't see why current fans would be opposed to such an idea, yes it will be different at first but the older fans who are set in there ways will have to accept that a merged club will be far better on AND off the pitch and with both clubs pooling together their best resource - the youth systems then it's a super power in the making and at either J30 or 32 I'd expect to be seeing 10k+ crowds, the name doesn't need to mention CASTLEFORD or WAKEFIELD so fans can't say "well I'm not going to watch *insert city/town name*".

But my opinions on why I think a merger would work might be unrepresentative because I've probably been to just as many Wakey games as Cas ones and don't have a particulaly "strong" attachment to say no way in hell should there be a merger.

Re: Merger : Mon Apr 19, 2010 8:50 pm  

MUTLEY CAT wrote:

the wakefield district as a mass influx of talented and gifted juniors already . the challenge cup final is always preceded by a junior match 12s 14s or what ever and it normally contains 1 and some times 2 teams from our district. the few who end up playing at sl level normally get snapped up by the leeds academy which is a shame.

and that's my main point , the future is the kids and from cas panthers to crigg and Stanley to lock lane these youngsters will not have a bigotry attitude and will try their up most to get an opportunity to play with a merged club.

Absolutely. This is what I was alluding to as keeping your youngsters is absolutely the most vital part of keeping a competitive SL side. Moreso as quota levels come down. This could place a combined Cas/Wakefield side among the best served in this area IMO. As it stands, Leeds tend to pick up many of the best and, even when when the individual teams are able to sign the players, they often move on for the chance of success. Westerman, Shenton and Owen are all examples of good young players currently being linked with moves to other clubs.

Re: Merger : Mon Apr 19, 2010 8:57 pm  

Gaslight wrote:

I honestly don't see why current fans would be opposed to such an idea, yes it will be different at first but the older fans who are set in there ways will have to accept that a merged club will be far better on AND off the pitch and with both clubs pooling together their best resource - the youth systems then it's a super power in the making and at either J30 or 32 I'd expect to be seeing 10k+ crowds, the name doesn't need to mention CASTLEFORD or WAKEFIELD so fans can't say "well I'm not going to watch *insert city/town name*".

But my opinions on why I think a merger would work might be unrepresentative because I've probably been to just as many Wakey games as Cas ones and don't have a particulaly "strong" attachment to say no way in hell should there be a merger.

I think this is interesting. How many more people would this apply to? Take Crusaders for example. In terms of new fans alone they have been able to attract approaching 8,000 new fans to the relocated club. There's no reason why a merged club placed in the correct location wouldn't do the same. Add to that the numbers who would prefer a successful club and would continue support from the 2 existing clubs and, as you say, there is the potential for a really vibrant club with a large fanbase. Exactly what is required to guarantee a franchise in the first instance and, more importantly to maximise the chance of competing at the highest level.