I remember when we were in that situation, we had to sell players, let back room staff go and we cancelled warm weather camps in favour of army camps in Wales and North Yorkshire. Salford seem to be in some form of denial

[quote="The Avenger":2i5sdt02]I remember when we were in that situation, we had to sell players, let back room staff go and we cancelled warm weather camps in favour of army camps in Wales and North Yorkshire. Salford seem to be in some form of denial[/quote:2i5sdt02] Looks that way, just seems a reckless, irresponsible way to run a club, but they seem to have got away with it - seems the bubble has burst now.

[quote="1315trinity":zo21h8yb]Looks that way, just seems a reckless, irresponsible way to run a club, but they seem to have got away with it - seems the bubble has burst now.[/quote:zo21h8yb] I guess with the council paying out for the stadium means that fall back isn't an option anymore.

[quote="Khlav Kalash":34kugtki]I guess with the council paying out for the stadium means that fall back isn't an option anymore.[/quote:34kugtki] Think they've been on borrowed time for a while

[quote="1315trinity":1vvncf6n]Think they've been on borrowed time for a while[/quote:1vvncf6n] I know, and I've said as much in the past. It was clear as day this reckoning would come around at some point. It just happens that this year the bail outs have run dry.

[quote="Khlav Kalash":vq0nhlcd]I know, and I've said as much in the past. It was clear as day this reckoning would come around at some point. It just happens that this year the bail outs have run dry.[/quote:vq0nhlcd] Should have kept London in and put Salford into the championship, I bet the RFL new this was happenning so it was announced at the start of the season so Salford kept their place.

I don't agree. There are rules for eligibility and Salford were better than London, by a long way. If Salford drop out it still shouldn't be London.

Definitely. I don’t know precisely how badly it’ll affect Salford’s score for 2026 - you’d assume it’ll affect their finance element, and likely their attendances will drop a bit. If they lose Sneyd, Macdonald, Lafai, Cross, Ormondroyd, Hill et al it would be incredible if they maintain their performance score. So if Toulouse can improve their score a bit it’s not hard to see them replacing Salford. Only other scenario is York have a dream year and Toulouse drop off.

[quote="Big lads mate":evycnemd]Should have kept London in and put Salford into the championship, I bet the RFL new this was happenning so it was announced at the start of the season so Salford kept their place.[/quote:evycnemd] To be fair London are hardly a shining example of a well run club. Hughes financially backed them but did little else and in fact has left a much worse club than when he took over through his negligence.

[quote="PopTart":2ngod1xd]I don't agree. There are rules for eligibility and Salford were better than London, by a long way. If Salford drop out it still shouldn't be London.[/quote:2ngod1xd] Yes they were, but why? Hence the position they are in, that’s why Wakefield ended where we’ve been in the past, easy to overspend. Come back to bite you in the end.

[quote="PopTart":22j015cr]I don't agree. There are rules for eligibility and Salford were better than London, by a long way. If Salford drop out it still shouldn't be London.[/quote:22j015cr] Yeah London lost their backer I think but the RFL can't have looked too closely at salford's finances. I like Salford and admire their coach and onfield performances but it was all done on the back of money That wasn't there- how come that wasn't picked up on?

[quote="1315trinity":2qausvk1]Yeah London lost their backer I think but the RFL can't have looked too closely at salford's finances. I like Salford and admire their coach and onfield performances but it was all done on the back of money That wasn't there- how come that wasn't picked up on?[/quote:2qausvk1] You can’t penalise a team in advance and just guess though can you? The score for Salford on finance will have been very low and that’s exactly why they’ll be 12th and at risk even before the financial issues got even worse. So long as the figures are true then I see no issue Salford being in SL. London are no where near SL level and weren’t last season either. Even a team that parked up mid season playing half a team of academy lads finished above them. As it stands there are a few clubs in the championship who are better run and more deserving than London. The pity parade for London can remain in 2024.

At the moment it’s all speculation but if it came to pass and they lose 6-7 of their top players and end up with loaners and youngsters they will finish bottom and if they don’t get a backer possibly go bust - will sl be any the stronger if they are replaced with Toulouse fev or Bradford - probably not

[quote="Kirmudgeonlyisback":1of64p7s]At the moment it’s all speculation but if it came to pass and they lose 6-7 of their top players and end up with loaners and youngsters they will finish bottom and if they don’t get a backer possibly go bust - will sl be any the stronger if they are replaced with Toulouse fev or Bradford - probably not[/quote:1of64p7s] Good question, and my answer is a massive Yes. Toulouse yes, York maybe, Bradford no, Fev definitely not. That’s what the gradings are good for - you don’t have to guess at which clubs would make the comp stronger, you can actually see it. I don’t want Salford to go bust, but I don’t mind if they drop into the Championship and rebuild sustainably or attract a new owner in the meantime. Especially if that means Toulouse or even York get a shot without the threat of relegation looming over them.

[quote="Trojan Horse":2rpumei3]You can’t penalise a team in advance and just guess though can you? The score for Salford on finance will have been very low and that’s exactly why they’ll be 12th and at risk even before the financial issues got even worse. So long as the figures are true then I see no issue Salford being in SL. London are no where near SL level and weren’t last season either. Even a team that parked up mid season playing half a team of academy lads finished above them. As it stands there are a few clubs in the championship who are better run and more deserving than London. The pity parade for London can remain in 2024.[/quote:2rpumei3] Well I agree they are more deserving than London but if they get out of this mess, a lot of it self inflicted by ignoring their responsibilities, then they can count themselves very lucky.

[quote="Butcher":2mb1gcvy]Good question, and my answer is a massive Yes. Toulouse yes, York maybe, Bradford no, Fev definitely not. [b:2mb1gcvy]That’s what the gradings are good for - you don’t have to guess at which clubs would make the comp stronger, you can actually see it. [/b:2mb1gcvy] [/quote:2mb1gcvy] Surely this has been comprehensively debunked by what we are seeing with Salford - if you could actually judge a club's status by their grading, there's no way they would have been just a point away from a Grade A. The fact that London were able to soar from a basement grade of 8.07 in 2024 to a grade of 12.65 simply on the back of a year in SL with all its IMG-point benefits highlights that the grades hide as much as they show.

[quote="Kirmudgeonlyisback":3vhq2ytu]At the moment it’s all speculation but if it came to pass and they lose 6-7 of their top players and end up with loaners and youngsters they will finish bottom and if they don’t get a backer possibly go bust - will sl be any the stronger if they are replaced with Toulouse fev or Bradford - probably not[/quote:3vhq2ytu] I don’t think it would be weaker either though. You missed imo one of the most likely team to come up next season in York. Wouldn’t be surprised to see them in SL 2026.

[quote="The Phantom Horseman":3sbc7qu2]Surely this has been comprehensively debunked by what we are seeing with Salford - if you could actually judge a club's status by their grading, there's no way they would have been just a point away from a Grade A. The fact that London were able to soar from a basement grade of 8.07 in 2024 to a grade of 12.65 simply on the back of a year in SL with all its IMG-point benefits highlights that the grades hide as much as they show.[/quote:3sbc7qu2] They finished 4th, and have some decent league positions to fall back on, yet they were a grand final win for Toulouse away from losing their spot. They're artificially boosted by the population of Salford, but the gradings have suitably placed the club despite its on field, relative, successes.

[quote="Butcher":3cdgyv62]Good question, and my answer is a massive Yes. Toulouse yes, York maybe, Bradford no, Fev definitely not. That’s what the gradings are good for - you don’t have to guess at which clubs would make the comp stronger, you can actually see it. I don’t want Salford to go bust, but I don’t mind if they drop into the Championship and rebuild sustainably or attract a new owner in the meantime. Especially if that means Toulouse or even York get a shot without the threat of relegation looming over them.[/quote:3cdgyv62] I think it`s pretty subjective on which clubs would make the competition `stronger` so I`m not sure it`s as simple as saying just look the IMG scores, although in practice I know that is how the system works, but this Salford situation just shows the system up really... York might have a screen to the right pixels, have some LED boards around the perimeter of there pitch but do they have the potential to average 15k fans with a decent team like Bradford could?

[quote="The Phantom Horseman":ybnc8b9l]Surely this has been comprehensively debunked by what we are seeing with Salford - if you could actually judge a club's status by their grading, there's no way they would have been just a point away from a Grade A. The fact that London were able to soar from a basement grade of 8.07 in 2024 to a grade of 12.65 simply on the back of a year in SL with all its IMG-point benefits highlights that the grades hide as much as they show.[/quote:ybnc8b9l] I don’t think so, personally. A point is a long way from Grade A. And now their finances have found to be rotten, they’ll get less points. You could argue it’s a few months too late, but you could argue that the obsession with avoiding relegation is what gets clubs in this mess in the first place.

[quote="homme vaste":2q3cw5tu]I think it`s pretty subjective on which clubs would make the competition `stronger` so I`m not sure it`s as simple as saying just look the IMG scores, although in practice I know that is how the system works, but this Salford situation just shows the system up really... York might have a screen to the right pixels, have some LED boards around the perimeter of there pitch but do they have the potential to average 15k fans with a decent team like Bradford could?[/quote:2q3cw5tu] And I think the gradings are the closest thing you can get to objectivity. I think a strong club does have LED boards around the pitch, along with a competitive squad, solid finances, a funded marketing team, a community programme, good attendances, and pretty much everything that’s covered in the gradings. I think a strong club has other things that aren’t covered - like a productive academy - but it’s a good effort. The LED boards (and directors seats) always get brought up as a rhetorical tactic to make the whole system seem trivial, but we all know it’s a tiny part of an overall grade of which attendance and performance - as you mention above - are a bigger part. As for York, yes, I don’t think they have the potential to get bigger crowds than Bradford, but they do have the potential to be a better team, and they arguably greater potential in other areas. Whereas Toulouse, who IMG ‘objectively’ see as the 13th strongest club, have greater potential in every single area.

[quote="Butcher":mwhr8ejw]And I think the gradings are the closest thing you can get to objectivity. I think a strong club does have LED boards around the pitch, along with a competitive squad, solid finances, a funded marketing team, a community programme, good attendances, and pretty much everything that’s covered in the gradings. I think a strong club has other things that aren’t covered - like a productive academy - but it’s a good effort. The LED boards (and directors seats) always get brought up as a rhetorical tactic to make the whole system seem trivial, but we all know it’s a tiny part of an overall grade of which attendance and performance - as you mention above - are a bigger part. As for York, yes, I don’t think they have the potential to get bigger crowds than Bradford, but they do have the potential to be a better team, and they arguably greater potential in other areas. Whereas Toulouse, who IMG ‘objectively’ see as the 13th strongest club, have greater potential in every single area.[/quote:mwhr8ejw] I agree with pretty much all that until the last part. Toulouse certainly don’t have greater potential in every area. Their crowds have been going in reverse, their team while good isn’t to the level of last years trinity or previously Leigh. They would be lucky to last 2 seasons in SL imo with crowds barely above 2k, the costs associated with logistics abs building a competitive team. Catalans manage it with a much higher attendence just about but even they’ve found it challenging in places. Toulouse SL year drops off this year so they will lose points. I expect they’ll miss out and end up packing their bags for 2026.

I agree they haven’t been great on a few fronts this year. But the key word is potential. They’ve occasionally attracted crowds of 6,000 (9,000 against Catalans when their season was dead) and they’d return to that fairly quickly if admitted back in. But moreover it’s France’s fourth biggest city, more than a million people, with all the commercial opportunities that brings, and underpinned by a junior and amateur scene that’s much bigger than Salford or York’s. Apologies for getting way off topic with this, just enjoying the debate.

[quote="Butcher":cbr7hgdc]I agree they haven’t been great on a few fronts this year. But the key word is potential. They’ve occasionally attracted crowds of 6,000 (9,000 against Catalans when their season was dead) and they’d return to that fairly quickly if admitted back in. But moreover it’s France’s fourth biggest city, more than a million people, with all the commercial opportunities that brings, and underpinned by a junior and amateur scene that’s much bigger than Salford or York’s. Apologies for getting way off topic with this, just enjoying the debate.[/quote:cbr7hgdc] Yeah pity that like Catalans they probably wouldn't bring any of their support with them. They should have their own SL - my opinion only.

And a fair opinion, that’s definitely the downside. Though I’m a believer (optimist more like) that clubs shouldn’t be relying on away support to fill their ground or their coffers. How good was the grand final? The fact there weren’t any Toulousains there didn’t spoil it for me.