I think Barrow would HAVE to be included in the 2nd tier. Our stadium is no worse than Cas, Wakey, Salford and Fev. Plus, we actually won the league and GF in 2009 (something the RFL don't seem to care about) and we knocked Cas out of the Cup.

Out of curiosity, why are Sheffield in that list ??

I said on the last page that I forgot to inlcude Barrow I was doing it by memory.

They are on of the first on the list after the super league clubs.

Sheffield are playing in a big, quality stadium in a big city, they used to be in super league, they have been getting some decent crowds. Huge potential.

Sheffield are on the up...very slowly but there trying

we do need fewer teams in the top division, more teams overall
the increase to a fourteen team league was a mistake, there are 14+ viable clubs who can play in the division, what there are not are 14 squads of European players with sufficient quality, moving to franchises would have been more problematic if they had kept the division at 12 beecasue they would be cutting off more viable clubs for three years or more from one of the two biggest sources of income and reducing the other
it also maintained the high numbers of fixtures which is bad for the players but better for the clubs
the RFL needs to look towards "super league 2" a division of clubs that could be in superleague but are not and split the income from television accordingly, a return to smei automatic P+R would be great too

I notice that no one put forward these ideas last year when Bradford and Hull were near the bottom



Just because Warrington have some mug throwing money at them all of sudden doesnt mean that they should get all smug. It was only a couple of years ago that Warrington were a mid table team at best!

If this had been done last season and we'd got rid of the last four it would have mean't Wire being 10th were bottom club.
At Smith previous bottom club Huddersfield, which he relegated, he kept quiet about his proposal then.

I don't think it's about the number of teams rather about the number of games. Therefore i'd suggest the league is split into two. An Eastern & Western conference containing 8 teams in each.

East
Bradford
Castleford
Harlequins
Huddersfield
Hull FC
Hull KR
Leeds
Wakefield

West
Catalans
Crusaders
Salford
St Helens
Warrington
Widnes
Wigan
Another (Leigh/Barrow/etc)

Team play those in their conference twice and those in the other conference once rotating H & A each season. It would reduce the games from 27 to 22 (23 if you include Murrayfield). Which would allow geniune space for mid season internationals or even East v West. It should help reduce travelling costs and could even increase crowds as the majority of games within the conference are either derbies or will hugely determine if a side makes the play-offs. Top 3/4 from each conference qualify for Play-Offs.

For me, surely we need to increase games not reduce them? If we increase them there's more likely to be more revenues made from individual games, which in turn is likely to stimulate higher incomes and revenues for seasons, which in turn is going to increase players' pay packets and incomes, which will in turn make the game more attractive to those with aspirations to be sports stars, which in turns will stimulate more players in the game and bigger squads and lighten the load on squads.

Or am I clutching at straws?

Fully.

It's a salary cap sport, there is only a max of £1.6 million to spend no matter what.

I wonder how the NRL manage to have a 16 club league and 3 SoO games?

They must be super men or something. Or maybe the NRL and SoO just aren’t as tough and competitive as Super League?

I mean, we can see how poor they are internationally…

So what we are saying is let's restructure the whole game for the benefit of about two dozen players!
What happened to the days of holding down a day job, playing league games and then the Challenge Cup, JP Trophy, Yorks & Lancs Cup and Premiership etc?
WE DO NOT PLAY ENOUGH GAMES TO SUSTAIN THE CLUBS WE HAVE!
Where is the money supposed to come from?

No, this would benefit all players. Less games could lead to fewer injuries and players being able to play on for longer.

We play too many games at the moment. That is without question. 30+ club games a year is not the way forward at all.

20 league games in CC1 this year.
Not enough!

Quins dont play 30+ games per year. I question whether they play in half the games they turn out for- and still manage to get stacks of injuries!

With respect, this isn't about CC1.

How do the Aussies cope with 26 rounds?

Then:

Qualifying Finals

Semi Finals

And Grand Final?

The two top teams will play 29 – 30 games.

Then there’s the SoO games for the very best players and international games.

If they can do it, why can’t we?

Maybe not, but if we are talking about restructuring into two Super Leagues, what happens to the unfashionable teams who are left out of the party ?

There are two bye weeks for each club. They only play 24 league games in total. So for a top 2 club player appearing in every game they are looking at 27 max.


For Origin the selected players don't play for their clubs the weekend before.

They have one mid-season international. played in May before Origin starts and most players tend to back up at the weekend as well.

Still less games than over here

Historically we basically have:

Tier 1
St's
Leeds

Tier 2
HFC
Warrington
Bradford
Wigan

Tier 3
HKR
Hudds
Wakey
Cats

Tier4
Crus
Quins
Salford


Whilst teams may move up or down one tier, at the moment there still isn't the spread of talent for teams to jump/drop 2 or 3 tiers each season like in the NRL. A lot comes down to financial capacity of clubs. When all clubs can afford the full salary cap and provide the coaching and training facilities equally we may see a more equal spread of talent and more intensity week in and week out.

One of the problems at the moment is not all clubs are operating on a full cap.

Sure Tony. I assume you are volunteering Warrington to move into the Championship to help this happen?

Thought not. C0ck.

Two conferences of 10 teams.

Play each other home and away = 18 games

Top four from each conference qualify to play off for SL title.

GAME 1 1ST CONF A v 4TH CONF B

GAME 2 1ST CONF B v 4TH CONF A

GAME 3 2ND CONF A v 3TH CONF B

GAME 4 2ND CONF B v 3TH CONF A

SEMI-FINAL

GAME 5 WINNER GAME 1 v WINNER GAME 3 (highest placed winner has home advantage)

GAME 6 WINNER GAME 2 V WINNER GAME 4 (highest placed winner has home advantage)

FINAL

GAME 7 WINNER GAME 5 v WINNER GAME 6

No second chances producing half hearted matches, perform or you’re out regardless of who you are or where you finished. In time this should breed the intensity to match the NRL.

I’m sure Peacock et al will be more than accommodating with reduced pay due to playing less matches, easing the strain of having more SL teams on the SKY TV purse.

I've mentioned this a couple of times on here already, but view is that SL should be split into two divisions, which operate side by side, not one on top of the other. The divisions would be loosely based on the heartland regions, one for Lancs and one for Yorks with expansion clubs in each. The divisions would have 10-12 teams in each. Teams in each division would play each other home and away in the league and would come together for the CC and the top three-four teams in each division would play each other in a play off series.

This way you increase the talent pool and numbers of pro players, you increase the numbers of both heartland and expansion clubs, you reduce the number of matches in a season, but the majority of SL matches would be local derbies (better for away support).

Also by doing this the likes of Paris, Barca and Toulouse could be included with Catalans. The RFL could establish a date when these four teams have to leave the two SL divisions and create their own SL division covering Spain and France with the possibility of Italy. Again these teams compete in CC and play off.

A further development could be set up after this whereby Welsh, Irish and Scottish teams are included in the first two divisions and eventually have to leave to create another SL division.

From there Germany and Holland?

Well there you go.

SL just needs re-organising, with a bye week or two thrown in. Scrap the “Magic Weekend” and we could be playing a similar amount of games as the NRL TP, if not even less. We could even possibly go to 16 clubs in the future.

There is the Challenge cup to think about, but the early rounds are often used to rest high profile players anyway. So the amount of games we play needn’t be that much more than what the NRL TP play.

No need for an unsustainable two tier SL or conferences

And that figure CAN be changed you know?