|
Jul 2021
9:23am, 26 Jul 2021
23,640 posts
|
TROSaracen
The franchise/salary band system works well in the NFL and has the potential to do so here.
It stops 2/3 rich teams hoovering up all the best players and any spell of dominance is based around skill/selection in the draft and coaching players well.
Teams that finish low down still get access to top players and can build. Makes things very competitive and dynamic.
If any franchise wants local players they can focus their picks on those players, but the sensible thing is to get the best available pick.
|
|
Jul 2021
10:52am, 26 Jul 2021
14,944 posts
|
rf_fozzy
And lose all connection to the local community.
If counties/teams produce the best players through their systems, then they should be able to play them.
Franchises are rubbish. It's just who the richest backer is that gets the best team.
If test cricket and the T20 blast etc were on TV (sky isn't TV as you have to fork out exorbitant sums for it), then there would be greater audiences.
When our best players are playing for Glamorgan and Notts, rather than Yorkshire, it's a shit system.
Especially when the counties are having to field second string teams in the now totally devalued one day competition. And we've ended up with a half-arsed County Championship
|
|
Jul 2021
11:06am, 26 Jul 2021
3,322 posts
|
Oscar the Grouch
I do agree on the local connection. That is the biggest gripe here. That and players heading to the four winds but in theory that exposure should be good for them/their 'home' team.
|
|
Jul 2021
11:55am, 26 Jul 2021
4,470 posts
|
Pothunter
Playing Devil’s Advocate here: if <your county> is producing great talent and consistently winning is it likely that <other county> could stagnate without your talent being spread around? Is it not beneficial to the game across the whole country to give “inferior” teams the chance to have a superstar or two?
I do agree that having “normal” cricket on free to air TV would be a really good thing.
|
|
Jul 2021
12:08pm, 26 Jul 2021
23,642 posts
|
TROSaracen
Exactly. The idea of quaint little English counties playing local cricketers is as antiquated as Celtic winning the European Cup with 11 Glasgow born players. We should be more internationalist, not ‘tied to where you come from’. Things change and move on, even in cricket!
Connection to the local community will come from 18-20,000 pitching up to watch exciting cricket, exotic and interesting players from all over and knowing ‘their’ team has a realistic chance of competing each season. Do that, and far more will be inclined to pick up a bat/ball and give it a try.
|
|
Jul 2021
12:10pm, 26 Jul 2021
6,936 posts
|
FenlandRunner
Spot on, TRO. Encourage more local cricket to be played can't be a bad thing.
|
|
Jul 2021
12:15pm, 26 Jul 2021
14,945 posts
|
rf_fozzy
Imagine a situation where Man Utd were told they had to give Marcus Rashford to Brentford for a season
And Foden goes to West Ham and Van Djik to Everton.
All to "even" things out.
That's the hundred.
|
|
Jul 2021
12:22pm, 26 Jul 2021
6,937 posts
|
FenlandRunner
It's not a season though?
|
|
Jul 2021
12:26pm, 26 Jul 2021
3,324 posts
|
Oscar the Grouch
It actually punishes sides like Somerset who have developed a remarkable Academy without the obvious financial advantages of one of the Test playing grounds.
|
|
Jul 2021
12:27pm, 26 Jul 2021
14,946 posts
|
rf_fozzy
No, it's ruined the season.
Ok, imagine those players going to play for other clubs to play in the League cup.
You can't have a franchise system on top of the existing clubs. It doesn't work.
The way US sports work is that none of the clubs produce their own players - they get them all in the draft. That's not the case here - we don't have a single centralised "academy" - all the counties produce their own players. With a limited but growing, transfer market.
|
The Ashes 2009
Jun 2022