As part of a fundamental change in the relationship between the clubs, and between the clubs and governing body, Yes.

As a stand-alone measure, no.

I think we should definitely explore a move towards an NFL style set up, with more distribution and more co-operation between clubs, as well as giving them the power to act as one, and empower them take responsibility and drive the game forward in the directions they want.

It is a coin with two pretty distinct sides though. There would be savings to be made by pooling resources in terms of things like ticketing, programmes, marketing etc, and there could be more distribution in league-wide kit maker deals, possibly sponsorship deals etc which would spread money more evenly throughout the game, narrowing the gap between the have’s and have-nots.

BUT


The only way that would work is by convincing the ‘haves’ that they would benefit from this in the long run, where an improved SL earns them more because it is bigger, even though, in some respects they are effectively subsidising some of the ‘have-nots’. That would likely involve having some pretty clear strategic aims within which some clubs, and some clubs actions and wishes, may not fit.

For instance, the league may, in the majority, agree that London does have a strategic importance, and they are happy to give additional investment to build the game there. They may not feel the same about other areas.

Not until they both (RFL & SL) decide and then agree who the stongest, well supported and best run clubs in the game are. Then this could happen. Say goodbye to P & R though.

When Super League first started it DID run itself - Super League Europe was fundamentally an autonomous body and Maurice Lindsay resigned fro the RFL to take over leadership of Super League. If I remember rightly they even opened an office in London for two weeks with Colin Myler in place there.
The RFL was left somewhat adrift , and the excellent and much maligned Neil Tunnicliffe tried to make a good fist of things. I think that Roger Lewis taking over pushed the two parties back together.
Rudderless is rudderless and I don't think whether the people reside in the RFL or a resurrected SLE would be much different. Let's see how the World Cup team operating from Salford get on before we throw the baby out with the bath water.

In a word, NO!

The FA/BPL rely on TV rights just as much - if not more - than the RFL/SL do.

I reckon superleague will break away in about 5 years as the RFL implodes on itself. The RFl are inept in almost every facit of the game and just don,t have any professional people capable of giving the game the profile it richly deserves.

We might see an 8 team superleague, this will depend on the commercial and marketing strengths of these clubs and how quickly they can surpass the efforts from the RFL.

Superleague has been undervalued since 2007 and hence needs a fresh approach and structure, something that some club chairmen have already mentioned through the media. The RfL don,t really have a clue how to adddress the problem and come up with a new model solution.

Intensity needs to come back in every game, a watered down 14 team superleague does not provide this. So who would be the 8 teams who could showcase our sport in the best possible way to attract quality sponsers, increased media exposure and give the game the profile it deserves.

In a nutshell this is what I proposed for the Championships pre the current expansion, I spoke to some club owners and administrators about it, their responces where generally " Why would we help other clubs " eventually I gave up, completely clueless

The problems would come when the clubs decide they don't want to lose players to international fixtures. We need to grow our sport via the national team but the clubs will undoubtedly block this because they want to be playing games themselves.

[url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2013/jan/17/football-ticket-prices-premier-league-europe#dataDATA[/url


With 40%of their season remaining, 8,220,000 punters have paid on average of between 30 and 60 notes each. The exact average is hard to calculate because the EPL dn't publish all their ticketing info together, but even if all tickets were 45 quid each, then that's close to 40% of a Bilion in ticket revenue alone....or 1.2billion over 3 years.....

The Current TV deal is worth 2.5 billion over 3 years......so no, 50% isn't aS reliant as the RFL.........

Individually, many of the bigger clubs do have additional income streams from Global TV rights, but like for like in the UK, League is far more reliant on TV than wendyball.

Also, Licenced products such as England wendyball replica shirts will sell 5000+ times more than England RL shirts.....and the soccer ones are never on offer directly for a tenner.....the RFL rely heavily on the TV money from SKY...The only other major income stream they have is about 3million from the play-offs,which when you take rental for the grounds and the prize pool away is 2 10ths of SFA.


I digress. The point of the OP was that SL, IMO, would stand a better chance of becoming more popular and profitable, without the RFL at the helm.....and I believe the game at Grass roots level would be better run if the RFL weren't so distracted with looking after the likes of Bradford....

Well that is certainly much better put!

Its an interesting idea and it isn't as outlandish as the OP first made out to be.

Just how viable could/would it be though?

It is a fairly obvious question. Especially considering the fairly saturated market they are operating in. They have to be clear they are making more as a whole rather than just giving help to their competitors.

The only Championship Clubs directly in competition for fans and sponsorship are Batley and Dewsbury, the rest are far enough apart for it not to be an issue, SL clubs on the other hand are generally competing against each other much more off pitch as well as on

Id think the net is much wider, certainly for sponsorship, there arent many companies who can support sponsorship of a championship side who would operate in Leigh but not swinton, Batley but not featherstone. There are 5 clubs in west yorkshire, 2 in south yorkshire, 3 in cumbria and 2 in greater manchester. There is always going to be a level of competition between those clubs off the field.

Thats not to say they shouldnt do it, as i say, the question is can they make more as 1/14th of a the whole, than 100% of their own income.

You are wrong, the majority of Championship Clubs pull in very localised sponsors, at our level its love, not business sense , Leigh havent been able to get a main stand alone shirt sponsor for 3 years, instead taking a grand each from 18 individual organisations and ' raffling off ' for the main shirt sponsor

Also its 23 clubs, not 14

Would you not think that the saturation of RL clubs in that area could be a cause for this.

If you were keeping P+R certainly. But would the bigger championship clubs be happy seeing what is effectively, initially at least, a transference from them, to the clubs at the lower reaches of championship one.

Considering the attitude of some rugby league fans, can you imagine the uproar from Fev, Fax, Leigh fans etc, seeing their club effectively subsidising oxford and Gloucestershire?

No, Championship Clubs are in direct competition with SL clubs, not other Championship clubs, as I said, its love of the club, not financial return

If the geographical spread of the competition helped to bring in better, bigger, more reliable sponsorship then any club owner would be stupid to not want it, ditto the fans if it isnt properly explained to them

An open mind and communication is the key, both sadly lacking by club owners and administrators

Growth through internationals may have to go on the "back burner" for a few years.

There are 3 credible teams globally with PNG/Wales/France making up the 4 intermitently, the Aussies and Kiwis don't give a flying one now they are wedged up (SoO has got too big already,regardless of the best intentions of the new ARL statements) so better to create a TRUE SUPER league, with profitable clubs able to raise their cap, keep/attract quality players and then stand toe to toe with the other 2?

Currently, 44,000 people filling Wembley to see the the top 4 teams in the world isn't going to either inspire a generation or fund their development....but a SUPER LEAGUE comp in 10 years boasting the best players in 14 teams all with a chance of winning something has to be better than what we have now......which is essentially a 2 tier league with the bottom 8 fighting over the chance of one extra away game at the end of the season?

From a business standpoint, I would expect all Franchises to be averaging 10,000 crowds with a minimum of 2 million a year from ticketed revenue by the end of year 5 or 6 at the latest, with any club not making it cut free or the Franchise moved/sold...

2 million in tickets, 2 million in residuals, 1 million from SKY....everyone becomes self sufficient, with a 5 million Turn over, a competition atendance audience of about 100,000 a week and a far more attractive proposition to National sponsors, partners and broadcasters with an even greater opportunity for growth.

Agree with all, particularly the part in bold

The SL clubs know that they generate the revenue, and won't part with it. They told the RFL they would not fund development, hence when Sport England cut the RFL development budget, there was nothing to fill the gap. The RFU, on the other hand, now pays all its development staff in-house.

But, the RFU fills Twickers, which it owns, a dozen times a year at £60 - £200 per ticket, plus corporate/city hospitality, between internationals and finals, independent of the clubs. Despite their ineptitude, they are awash with cash. The RFL just about fills Wembley and Old Trafford, which it hires, and makes sod all on internationals cos we can't be d even to fill the LSV to watch England. In other words, we have no money save that which keeps Bratfut and Salford on the brink, and they aint parting with it.

The RFL does its level best, and at least we have a single unified governing body with the best intentions and some very committed, talneted people. Put it this way: if the RFL board ran the RFU, there would be no RL within 5 yeas. If the RFU board ran the RFL, there would be no RFL within 2 years.. We have the best bunch we can hope for while the clubs put next week's wages ahead of long term planning.

Either the RFL is the governing body of Rugby League in the UK, or Superleague teams are not under the durestiction of the RFL? Which is it?
The RFL patently receive the SKY cash (they drip fed it to Bradford last year IIRC), so in reality, the RFL either need to "man up" or at least show the clubs who's boss, or admit they have lost control and negotiate the scenario I have suggested.


Who cares..their recent "development" has been trawling through the ranks of League....


Ineptitude? Are you struggling to admit that the other code in the UK is light years ahead of League afteronly 20 years?




Under the "split" scenario, SL would fund the RFL to the tune of about 5 million a year under the current TV deal and the RFL would maintain control of the general running of the game....it's just the people responsible for handing out and monitoring the licences would be 100% removed from the game, but 100% the LAW when it comes to petulant club owners....


Please.......talented at what? The RFL should be run like a business...it currently resembles a who's who of people who interviewed well but have delivered nothing...




What?





Double what?







No...you'rejust prepared to accept second best...the RFL needs to either grab the bull by the horns or risk becoming the governing body of an amateur sport along the M62 within 10 years.....there are 10 English based Union clubs that currently generate more sponsorship money than the RFL do in a season....it's all about perspective and business sense!

If I had a $ for every numpty who predicted RL would be dead in ten years I could sponsor Sl myself!

Where did I predict they WOULD be dead?

I said that if they don't evolve and become more business savy, then English RL,as in the RFL in it's current guise, would be running an amateur sport......2nd year of SL without a paying naming rights sponsor......you need to get out of perth and have a pint of reality JB......the Championship in soccer is struggling to replace their outgoing naming rights sponsor...it's not all milk and honey in the UK...

I predict Superleague will not be directly run by the RFL within 5 years. Clubs like Leeds, Hull, Wigan, Catalan, St Helens, Warrington will break away and invite 2 other clubs to create a SUPERLEAGUE SELECT independantly run.
The RFL just don't have the processes to re-structure the game to a higher sports business model. This will have to come from a working group from the breakaway six.

Good point OP I'd say I agree that Sky Sports should run the top flight, cut out the middleman.

Ideally, no ... But the RFL is currently run by clowns who should have had the self respect to resign by now.

It principle, I'd prefer they stayed together, but presently there appears to be no prospect whatsoever of clearing out the clowns from the RFL ( they even have defenders on here .. the mind boggles at what they'd actually have to do before these people agreed that we might deserve better) so unfortunately, a split is probably the least bad option compared with years more of this lot.