we didnt move into the halton stadium we never left it was just redeveloped,and it was relegation that buggerd us up plus a shister called s vaughn we are slowly building our academy is starting to bear fruit and this propasal is only going to pull the rug out just as it is starting P & R does not work this holy grail and the championship teams talk about never used to exist when league was in its hay day it is relivtly new we have enough money to run 16 teams max at the highest standard its a cruel world BUT that is the way it is 16 teams in one league with feeder teams below them is the only way this game is going to grow

Yes it was developed , but not by Widnes RLFC , it was developed by Halton Council , and the rental was based on playing in SL , that rental agreement was changed when Mr O Connor took over , as it was crippling you previously

Yes that nice Mr Vaughan was most definatly a bad idea , but he only managed to get in a position to take over due to your already at that point financial problems

What your academy does is irrelivant , and I personally think any change of structure right now will just make things worse , it is once again both club management and the RFL desperate to find a ' silver bullet ' to save the game

When what is needed is hard work , investement in marketing and stability

Bingo, got it in one.

All the proposals are about downsizing, and moving the game back to a part time status. With fewer clubs retaining full time squads.

Nigel Wood talked about number one priority making clubs sustainable, which for most SL clubs means ditching full time professionalism, and operating part time squads probably on budgets of a few hundred thousand pounds a year. At the same time though these clubs want to retain access to £1million+ sky funding.

You will note also that there is no mention of championship one in these proposals. This league is full of teams from new areas.
Strange how the championship clubs demand a gateway to the promised land of SL but shy away from a trap door being opened to championship1.
Surely what's good for the goose is good for the gander?

I dont actually see any mention of the pathway between Championship 1 and whatever crazy idea is adopted , however most if not all current Championship fans just assume it will be a ' normal ' promotion with a minimum criteria based on stadia , because thats how we think

I cant do a Smokey style dissection of your post but, you appear to be looking at option 3 through very strong rose tinted spectacles.
Although the system appears to give more clubs an opportunity of a shot at the big time, the reality is that it will be great for the top 8 clubs and an utter disaster for those outside the 8.
For the fans of current SL clubs that don't qualify for the 8, the season is like being in a plate competition and although clubs between 9 and 14 don't have a realistic chance of being crowned champions, the remote possibility disappear before it gets going.
If everything goes with the form book, all this system does, is to relegate 6 teams (who currently enjoy life in the top flight) into the second tier and leave them with nothing worthwhile to play for.
For a game that bangs on about being strapped for cash, this will turn supporters away en mass.
Equally, how can the teams outside the current SL, hope to compete with their more affluent rivals.
It is utter nonsense.
What we are undoubtedly moving towards is a 10 or 12 team top flight with another cull of between 2 and 5 current SL teams.
When SL was formed in 1995/6 many fans of the relegated clubs lost faith in the game and found other things to do with their weekends (myself included) and the same thing is going to happen again.

Our sport does not know where it wants to be in 5 years or 10 years time.

We need clear objectives and then work on a strategy to achieve these goals.
Do we want p/r, how do we expand the game (assuming that we want to), funding (which is the current major stumbling block across the sport), competing on the international stage etc, etc.

I would say if we adopt option 3 we have a clear objective .
Make it a success.
It offers more incentives to more clubs.
Gives more clubs something tangible to work towards.
The licensing system is so bad that a club can be cut adrift and easily go out of existence quickly or suffer a slow lingering demise.
Simple prom / relegation will simply encourage the yo yo system.

I am not so sure that it would. Certainly it did in the past, when a full time team dropped into a part time division.

But if the rules around the salary cap were followed this would not be the case.
Also
If let's say featherstone were promoted is it unthinkable that they could manage to get above just one SL team? Because I am not so sure that they wouldn't .

Take widnes last season, admittedly they finished bottom but were within a whisker of Cas and London.

I think it could encourage more investors in the lower leagues as there are more chances to gain promotion to the next level.

Those that are in the the SL and dropping to the middle 8 won't drop too much in crowds as they'll have season ticket holders. If you're hanging around that end of the SL your crowds aren't exactly going to be huge anyways! Flip that around with the top four Championship clubs who will be playing bigger clubs in more important games. Their crowds are going to go up. Then look at the top 8. Bigger teams playing each other in more competitive matches. Crowd pleaser.

It's just the last 8 I'm concerned don't have much to play for.

Option 3 is a very interesting proposition and one that opens up a vey competitive scenario.
First 11 games should be very intense to finish in the Top 8, then you will have to do it all over again to finish in the Top 4 (guess)
Top 4 in the second 8 gives the likes of Featherstone a great chance to be in the first 12 following season instead of being exiled into the lower league.
I reckon the RFL will have to reduce the gap of monies between the 2 starting leagues which might encourge a few players in the lower sides to go full time.

I've given up caring anymore, they never give the game long enough to stabilise without fannying about with it. The BBC aren't interested, SKY treat it with contempt, it now appears to be dying a death with the RFL holding it underwater.

We seem to be heading back to the 90s with all of these proposals and add in getting rid of the salary cap and this sport will go into freefall. No one wants to see one sided games with maybe three teams in the mix for all the honours and the rest making the numbers up.

I wonder if anyone has asked Sky what they want, because without there wad of cash this sport is bankrupt. The proposals will drive away people investing at a crucial time, what is the point in anyone investing in clubs with possibly no future in SL long term. How many clubs are actually running at a profit again and how many are close to going under.

This sport needs stability the thought of yo yo clubs, parachute payments is a recipe for disaster. History has shown us the promotion to the SL can be the poison chalice and it has nearly been the death of more then one club. The simple truth is the sport can not support more the around 10 - 12 clubs at the top level. We have neither the finances or the players and these proposals do nothing to tackling either. Its the RFL knee jerk reaction instead of facing that the sport is a minority sport with limited appeal.

The current system is not perfect, but it started to a take us all forward and some people are living in the past. The world as moved on and franchising happens in most sports now, the NRL should be a model for us to follow.

I'd agree with most of that, except to say that it is the clubs driving this not the RFL. The clubs voted that the current system couldn't stay and it'll be clubs that vote on which new system they want.
The fact that most clubs couldn't organise a p|ss up in a brewery should be a worry to all of us.

If we are going daft ideas why not just pick the 20 strongest clubs
Divide them into East and West divisions 10 each
play each team once.

Top 4 in each play each other in go into another league system to decide champions.

12 lower teams get more games to get their receipts up, play for a cup similar to Northern Rail, bottom 1 of 2nd league go down.

small clubs play with the big boys, have a chance to get big sponsors in, more of a chance of eventually competing with the big boys, less travelling beginning of the season keeps costs down.

Any flaws with that system

The same flaw they all have, money, and how to divide it up

Money shared out equally for first season, then given out incrementally dependant on league position the following years.

I am seriously starting to worry that my 3 year old son wont ever get to play RL.

i wouldnt worry to much about that rl will always be played

Spot on.

The proposal does allow for 1 promotion place from C1 to the 3rd tier each season, it jsut hasn't been given any publicity because SL is the main focus.

The proposal is that C1 as we know it will disappear and 2 new clubs (Coventry and ???) will be added to give 16 clubs in the 4th tier. The suggestion is that these will play in 2 conference-style leagues of 8 clubs each and the winners of each conference will play off for the promotion place.

The more I look at this, the more I dislike it. There are lots of detailed objections, but to kep it short, I'd go with two :

1) It's far, far too complex. Any system which can't be understood very quickly by the uninformed is losing the whole philosophy of sport.

2) There is an unmistakable sense here of the tail wagging the dog. These proposals seem to have, at their centre, the desire to find a way of giving a handful of Championship clubs a chance to access more of the money generated by the bigger clubs. That's a bloody stupid motivation.

A simple question

What has the RFL actually done to make licencing work for all concerned? , be it SL or the Championships?

I do understand the same question should be asked of the clubs

Not to mention the "top 8" coining it in when the 3 "new leagues" are formed plus, funding ????
If I worked for a company that had come up with this set of ideas, I would change jobs.

This is a fair question. The licensing system has flaws - as does any system - but it's important to note that there were signs that it was partially responsible for some significant improvements :

- There are several new stadia in RL which certainly would not have come about (at least at this time), had it not been for the licensing system.

- Similarly, the renewed focus on youth development which is producing a good number of increasingly well-trained and prepared players can, I think, be traced in part to licensing.

- One could even argue that the system has succeeded in protecting championship clubs from the sort of optimistic suicide expenditure which used to be commonplace, even if it hasn't wholly prevented SL clubs from losing control of their own budgets.

As in any walk of life, organisations and individuals will only comply with a set of rules if they think those rules are here to stay. If there's a chance they might be changed or disapplied, then there will be widespread avoidance. That, I think, is why there's no real progress on new stadia in Castleford and Wakefield, for example.

I'm not averse to addressing issues which crop up - there's a good case in point for a change to the youth age-group system which seems to have been rather royally screwed up in the last year or two - but the licensing system was designed to provide all clubs with a very clear understanding of what was required to participate as a minimum, while protecting overly-excitable boards from rolling a dice with the existence of their club. That sort of stability provides the ability for ambitious and well-managed clubs to plan and build, rather than guess and gamble.

This set of new proposals would throw that stability out of the water, and reintroduce the gambling, self-destruction and wishful-thinking of the previous era, without any real gains in terms of facilities or player development. It's crackers. I genuinely think the person who thought this up should be denied access to any decision-making position within the game.

I don't think "a handful of Championship clubs" have had any great influence on this.

More the lack of competition top to bottom and the financial position of the SL.

I haven't seen it asked (Sorry if I missed it) so here goes.
Does the new ideas (especially option 3) mean the club tie ups have to be thrown in the bin.
How can a comp that will suddenly involve all 24 teams allow for 2/3 of those teams to share a playing pool?[