Good point, not many meaningless matches before August/September like we have now

So 4 it is then, you should learn to count

Ten team divisions would make the second tier more attractive, promotion makes the second tier more attractive.
Even with the existing total income for the top tier alone each top tier club could keep 100% of it's current TV income and each tier 2 would get 40% if the RFL split it that way. A small cut would make the second tier even better as would a separate deal or an integrated deal granting second tier more money.
The second tier would require smaller outgoings as the best paid players would be in the NRL/tier 1 anyway.

Four franchises failing in four years is how I would describe it too (unless the Bradford business plan included begging buckets)

Of course they will survive! This is why it is ridiculous anybody giving them any donations! They won't reach the amount needed in the, and will have to go into administration. What will they then do with the
Money raised? Give it back!? They will get bailed out by the rfl, or somebody under the influence of the corrupt crooks.

We have all been saying it a while, but our game is in a right mess. They can hide behind 'improved crowds' and 'new stadia' all they like, if a club like Bradford with all the success they have had in the last 10 years can end Up like this then ask yourself what state the other clubs are in!

Until heads roll at the top we stand no chance.

They lie, twist stories, and change the goalposts nearly weekly!

If they come out and save Bradford, resulting in no punishment for the bulls (ie drooping a league or loosing their licence) which I am fairly confident will be the way this pans out, I am done with the game.

No it isnt four. Clearly it is three but ones lasted more than a year so you decided to count it twice to fit with your vague nonsense.

Though why you have chosen to include the first Crusaders and Bradford, and not London, Salford, HKR who have all had financial difficulties i dont know.

We could count all the clubs who had financial difficulties under P+R but that would be boring for everyone, We could look at clubs who had sever financial difficulties directly attributed to P+R, like Leigh. But that would also be boring.

Or we could skip ahead of you dancing round the obvious for two days, and just admit financial difficulties are inherent and endemic in our game because some clubs are poorly managed and any system, any at all will still leave us in a position where some clubs will be mismanaged and some will have financial difficulties, our only responsibility is to have a system which allows the space and time for well run clubs to succeed.

Fact is regardless of whether we use P+R or franchising, or a new system where every five years each chairman is let loose in an enclosed woodland and has to catch as many bears as they can and teach them a passable version of Michael Jackson's thriller using only a hula hoop and a tin of John West Tuna with the judging being based on how many bears are caught and the quality of their dancing with the 14 highest scores getting a place in SL for the next five years, it wouldnt have made the slightest bit of difference to Bradfords position which has been caused by nothing more than managerial incompetence.

So what happens now? start again in SL and await the next cock up?

For Bradford?

At this point, who can even speculate? A million different things could happen in the near future.

Good to see the well educated, non producers of Lewisland coming to defend the flawed system - what a suprise.
Finances - 4 clubs drop from the current deal, remaining ten receive same. I believe 500k from the deal would allow SL2 to be a viable FT league. 27 games by playing 3 times - as now Play offs decide promotion, bottom SL1 relegated - £1m min salary expenditure in SL2. Max 2 overseas in any team for SL2.
SL1 gets substantial increase in average gates, we grow players better equipped to handle international intensity, SL1 increases salary cap to protect against RU.

Smokey ta, you seem to enjoy shooting other posters suggestions down, while not really coming up with any constructive ideas yourself.

Come on, the sport is obviously in a mess, what's your suggestion?

Stop it maurice your talking sense but the franchise fairies will tell you its not the rfl fault no,its not the franchise failing no.Its some chairman who is cocking it all up.But can they explain how this super franchise system allows it?????

They would sooner see some 37 year old aussie being paid a fortune to plod round the field than use that money to make our game stronger

Time to go tricky dicky take your tennis racket with you

I have given my suggestions plenty of times. For your benefit, and just as an overview.

I would increase the league to 16 sides and give each club a place in perpetuity and only add to it as and when necessary.

Split it into two conferences of 8. You play the 7 teams in your conference twice, and the 8 teams in the other conference once, 4 home, 4 away. Top four in each league into play-offs, 1st conference A plays 4th conference B and so on in straight knock-out comp. Which would give us 22 rounds, plus 3 rounds in the play offs.

I would use the spare rounds to put in an international competition between the 4 home nations and france mid season. With GB competing in 4 nations competitions and tours.

I would scrap the cap completely and look at the make up of squads. Insist that clubs register a 20 man squad at the start of a season, either they leave a space spare or any transfers must replace a registered player, the only other players who could represent the club would need to be academy registered players below the age of 21. Clubs must have at least 10 players in their 20man squad who were registered to the club on their 19th birthday, and no more than 5 players who werent registered to a european club on their 19th birthday.

I would (and i did suggest this before the NRL) split the game into quarters, to increase ad revenue and as such the value of the product, I also believe this would result in closer games. I would also look to sell everything under the sun to sponsors ala IPL cricket to increase funds.

I think doing these things would put the game in position where it can build, and give the space needed for clubs to grow.

The two tier simply wont work. The SL two will just be the championship by another name.

Thank you TA.

I could pull holes in it all day, but its your vision and without 10000 words you have supported it.

Two tens is far better and ticks more boxes for the future though.

two tens does nothing but put 4 SL sides in the championship and 4 championship sides in championship 1. Takes money Sky has paid for SL, gives it to a competition they dont screen and forces SL to either play an extra round or lose the millennium weekend and makes the SL season uneven with some clubs getting 1 more home game than others.

If the magic weekend is included in the 3 games that teams play against each other then the home/away games will be equal. 13 home 13 away 1 magic weekend. 27 games just as there are now.

The 2 tier system creates a stronger second tier which would hopefully reduce the gap in quality between the 2 divisions allowing the reintroduction of P+R.

A lot of this all depends if more money can be generated through sponsorship/TV for SL2 but I think that ESPN/Premier Sports/Terrestrial Channels would invest more heavily in the second tier if it was strengthened.

TA is talking SL2 as the new PT championship, I am selling it as SL2 - a vibrant competitive FT comp containing clubs with realistic SL1 ambition showcasing British talent in front of good attendances in quality stadiums. I am assuming Sky will want a game a week

You are assuming Sky would want a second tier sport, they really only show 2nd tier football, not any other sports but only football.

You are assuming that a fully pro competition in the 2nd tier could be run on £500k a year.

You are assuming, for some reason, that demoting 4 clubs would drag up the standard of the other 6, rather than bring down the standard of those 4.

You are also assuming that Sky would be happy to pay the same for a 10 team comp as they are a 14 team comp, and that they would be happy to see their investment in SL spread to a sport the currently dont have the rights to and didnt really want before.

Fairly sure they are showing Championship RU, although the RFU might be paying them to cover it rather than the RL equvilant

You might be selling it as a vibrant competitive FT comp but I am not sure anybody sensible would be buying it

As far as I can tell, your solution to Bradford’s woes (and similar teams) would be to place them into a division lower than their current status and tell them to run a full time professional club on the income they generate despite the clear impact this relegation of status would have on attendance and sponsorship revenue

And £500k across a 20 man squad is a average of £25k a year per player – I think that value speaks for itself when you want to build a full time league out of it

I thought the 500k was the sky money and suggested that clubs should run £1m salary cap, which is plenty to run a full time squad.
2nd division RU is shown as is 2nd division football, bowls was on earlier tonight ffs and dominoes is on at 11pm.

As sex on legs states, the 500K would be the left over sky money that would be divvied up between the "SL2" clubs (As Maurice described it)
So as already mentioned the top 10 would receive the same amount and the SL2 could still operate full time on a £1M 'cap' (maybe a little less) This in turn would mean less of a gap when/if a club achieves promotion so a yo-yo effect is lessened.
The injection of this amount of money to former championship clubs should not be underestimated, it WILL bring up those clubs, however to say that those former SL1 clubs (lets refer to it in this instance for the sake of arguement) will be brought down a level isn't neceesarily a bad thing. they aren't getting hammered each week, they have less pressure to manage bigger wage demands and the financial risks overall are less also. They have to learn to trim back & be more efficient, rather than looking at it from the POV of less SKY revenue, look at it from a POV of controlled improvement with greater competetiveness which IS attractive to fans.
So for instance Bradford V Wakey or Cas v Fev in a theoretical SL2 wouldn't get more a than a few thousand? I think you underestimate how much a modicum of success & stability can turn people to want to support their club.
I believe a two tier full time system protects those clubs that are always on the edge financially & results wise yet it would allow former championship clubs to develop further, make substantial improvements with the additional money and all that it brings with it.
I'm sold already

I can't even be ar-sed reading this thread, it wasn't until I got halfway through that i realised it was yet more of Maurices paranoid rants about licencing.


On behalf of other Leigh fans, I'd like to apologise for the stuck record.

Without licensing, RL would have vanished about 10 years ago. The money that isn't in the gamee now would have been spread even thinner, leading to a complete collapse.

Simple as that.

My apologies for skoot he rarely gets to games these days since studying 'How to Run Sport with little knowledge' at Scunnie tec, he sits next to Lewis and opposite Woody

I am impressed that licensing saved the game several years before it was even introduced

It was thrown in with the RFU contract, they screen a whole 11 games of a 22 round season + play-offs.

So these clubs who we move down, are on the edge financially now, so we give them lower crowds, lower exposure, £700k less TV money all for the opportunity to cut their wage bill by £650k?