Hull KR • Re: General off season Rovers chat thread

There's a big difference between making up to 5 players available when able, and committing to fielding 17 for regular or even occasional fixtures.

To make it worthwhile, IMO, we'd need to carry an extra 10 or 12 full-time (mostly young and inexpensive, admittedly) players. Even assuming other costs would be offset by people willing to pay a small amount to watch (optimistic IMO), we're still easily looking at a 6 figure sum for wages.

Now, it's often pointed out that this could be funded by doing without one or two high-end SL players. Usually underperforming or oft-injured players are cited as examples, but who they'll be isn't known in advance, and many high-end players offer immediate and tangible benefits. And if we're worried about players drifting away cutting long-term earnings potential has a cost too.

The large majority of academy players don't step up to have long professional careers, they never could - there isn't enough room in the senior squads. For some, A Team rugby would just be delaying the inevitable and getting a start in another career. For others, I think the Championship is a better path (on dual reg or otherwise).

The main selling point of an A Team is identity, and from a fan POV that is what this is all about. But if you're also the person who'd have to fund it or a player trying to develop a career, I don't think it really stacks up.

Statistics: Posted by Mild Rover — Wed Dec 13, 2017 9:50 am

---