Coming from someone who lives and grew up in Blackpool your wrong.

Its a declining dirty, crime ridden town full of dregs, druggies and alcoholics mixed in with some decent folk.

I really cant stress how bad it is now. If you want an idea what 999 whats your emergency on 4on demand.

As a rule 3/4 of the town is like what is shown on that show.

Anyone saying they would rather be here than Aus must be mad.

I agree, that's the reason i said it should be 'the aim'.

I know sky owe us nothing and are a business like any other but if the RFL went with the two 10 team leagues and Sky were prepared to invest in both leagues i think it would benefit the game massively in the long run.

The sport has to know what it is trying to achieve by having 2 x 10 team leagues.
It appears that they wish to create a top flight where all teams are capable of beating each other and they each game has a higher level of intensity than at present.
IMO the second tier is just sugaring the pill for the teams that would be axed and far from improving the situation, very quickly the second tier will become like the CC is today aside from the fact that we may have promotion and relegation between the divisions.
Will sky stump up extra cash to fund this system and if it does, will the greedy teams in the new super, super league allow this to be shared in a sensible manner.
The answer to this question is, probably not.
Lets face it, one of the main reasons that the big boys want a 10 team top flight, is to allow them a larger slice of the sponsorship revenue and if there was an additional league to fund, this extra cash would not be available.

Back to Peacocks comments, he really should be looking after all of the players interests and not just working towards the top few getting more.
There are other ways of doing this and a change to the salary cap seems to be a more sensible option.

The big negative for me, unless JP knows different, is that there is no reason to think Sky have any intention of funding any extension of SL; why would they? The last time SL increased it was done by each of the original clubs accepting less money, IIRC.

Sky have not shown any great interest in showing Championship games [which is pretty much what any SL2 would be, so, I think to suggest that they would suddenly pay sufficient extra cash to enable them to go full time is fanciful, to say the least. What there is little doubt about, is that without some 'extra' funding, the idea of a [ifull time[/i div2 is just pie in the sky.

I'm not that aware of most sports competitions, but are there actually any competitions that have the NRL-style equality of playing strength, big variance of finishing positions year on year; and also has a promotion&relegation structure?

The two don't seem intuitively reconcilable to me.

Just a pity it took him so long then........... a year left maybe ?

The idea of 20 full time teams is also ridicuolous unless RL in Britain can produce two to three times as many quality players as it currently does. You can't pad teams out with imports any more.

20 would be 17, 3 French .
The objectives are to expand the pool and beat the Aussies. Greater intensity at the top will help, allowing the late developer to remain FT will help, increased gates will help but giving hope will strengthen the sport and reverse the decline

This seriously has to be considered IMO. For me it is the first step of many that need to be taken with regards to completely revamping rugby league in this country.

I think it should work on a hybrid franchise/P+R system. Allocate initially 24 teams to have a "SuperLeague" licence, and then further allocate the top 10 teams in to SL1. The remaining 14 teams are made up of the 4 that didn't make the cut for SL1, plus the best performing teams from the current championship as well as expansion sides and another French team. Work on 3 year franchises with P+R between SL divisions but no relegation from SL2. The current system has let teams stagnate and not improve on areas where they have promised, this one would not.

The broadcast deal is obviously going to play a big part in whether this is actually a viable option or not. I think Sky would continue to show two SL1 matches on Friday and Saturday/Monday nights. I'd love a third, Sunday afternoon fixture to be introduced on to FTA TV also. Premier Sports could use the current Thursday night slot to show a SL2 match, a Saturday afternoon fixture could also be added to PS.

As has been mentioned many times before the format of a 10 team league is up for debate. I personally would have each side playing each other 3 times to keep the current 27 games, and then have a 5 team playoff series at the end. At the bottom I think bottom of SL1 is relegated with top of SL2 promoted. It could also be an idea to have a playoff series between 2nd and 3rd of SL2 with the winner playing 9th of SL1 in an elimination final for a place in SL1.

There are many other issues that need looking at, most notably cup and PO attendances. I think the above system would go some way to sorting out PO attendances. WRT the cup, I'd like to see all the rounds shifted forward, get rid of the ridiculous gap between 5R and QF that now exists and get the final back to May. There is too much going on at the back end of the season to realistically get every fan to shell out for Cup semis and finals and POs and GF all in August and September. I think the 4th round should be played the week before the first week of regular rounds and the Magic Weekend should be used as 2 double headers for the QFs.

The youth teams need addressing quickly also. It is ridiculous that there is no way for an overage player to get game time without going on loan or for an oversees player to get any game time other than first team! One of the main focuses of any licence criteria should be the youth systems in place. IMO, every team should have an u16s, u18s and u21s with overage allowances in 21s.

It's alright for people to sit back and say "it'll never work" etc etc. and rubbish suggestions people like JP may have but the fact of the matter is what we've got now isn't working. We're sitting back letting lower teams try to catch up and in the meantime we're losing players to leagues that can afford to pay them what they are worth. Losing top class talent to RU is a disaster and while having a decent English contingent in the NRL may benefit the international team, if all our best players are on the other side of the world there's going to be a dwindling set of supporters over here to actually appreciate it, who are getting fed up with the steady decline in playing standards.

I don't see how changing to that system would stop players being signed by Union or NRL clubs.
IIRC under the current system we've lost 2? players to Union. Tomkins & Eastmond. Under the previous system we lost Myler, Ashton, Walker, Hape, Vainikolo (& probably more).
Under the current system we've lost Graham, The Burgii and Scott Moore to the NRL. Under the previous system we lost Ellis, Tansey, Mathers. (Again probably others I've missed.) Whilst these players are obviously a loss to SL are they anymore of a loss than the players under the previous system?
Also, since we were losing players to the NRL and Union before the current system was in place, it would make sense to think that the system isn't the reason players left SL for Union or NRL. I would suggest players leave SL now for exactly the same reasons they have always done. Either for more money or more recognition, or a different challenge.
Now all these new league systems people keep dreaming up are very nice, but none of them, not one, does anything about the reasons why players leave SL.
We can't do anything (short term anyway) about recognition or different challenge issues and we can't just magic money out of thin air.
The 2-tier SL is a fantasy. It's not a 2-tier SL, it's a 1st & 2nd division. Simply calling it something else isn't going to suddenly make Sky (or other sponsors) pay more in to a 2nd division. Because its still a 2nd division.
Whilst there are issues re u21's or the salary cap, they are exactly that. U21's and salary cap issues. It's not necessary nor viable to change the entire leagues structures simply to address those issues.
We're going to have to accept and deal with the fact RU and the NRL's wealth and buying power has increased significantly in recent years, so we are likely to lose some players. Some salary cap exemptions would seem justified, but changing the league structure will do nothing to increase the buying power of League clubs, most of whom can't currently afford to spend the current cap along with the necessary backroom staff/facilities.
This is the time for RL clubs to stop blaming their ills on someone/thing else and reduce their own shortcomings through a more progressive and more professional approach to running their clubs. Attending best practice seminars would be a good start.

How do you market the fact that however good you are you may never get promoted to a potential customer or investor?

The same way current SL sides do.

If we had loads of clubs in the championship which were 'good' then the question would be a lot more valid.

Explains why things are so rosey then, thanks

Did you just have a stroke? WTF are you talking about?

Players will go to the NRL or union because there's more money there, in the same way they'd go play football if they had the skills to. That's not a failing of the sport, or the system we have, it's just life.

When union players switched to League in the past, was it the 'challenge' or big money? They still had a much more high profile international game then of course.

If we can't compete with the finances elsewhere, that's more an indication of where our sport lies in the sporting spectrum. Unless billions of pounds appear from thin air, that won't change.

Premier league football appears to have everything the SL has not- vast sums of money, international interest and it attracts players from all corners of the globe rather than losing players to other countries or different sports. And yet like SL its the same half a dozen teams at the top of the table every year, the gap between top and bottom arguably as wide as that in SL and the national team continues to disappoint.
The Scottish Premier league doesn't have the finances of English teams and the better players tend to move to England and it has a smaller 12 teams rather than the 20, so a bit like JP's proposal -yet like SL its the same teams at the top of the table every year, the gap between top and bottom arguably as wide as that in SL and the national team continues to disappoint.
Think again JP, if you actually thought at all. Cutting the size of the SL will not bring the results you imagine.

You don't market that, because its not a fact and it would be stupid to do that. You have to first become more professional off the field, work harder and smarter at getting people both involved with the club and with RL in general, develop proper links with the local community. Then you market that to potential investors/sponsors. I don't pretend it's easy, but boy some clubs are pretty bloody pathetic at it.
There has to be a bigger incentive to winning the Champ GF, even if its just a big financial payout, which I would prefer to see not spent on player wages.
But I believe the gap between SL and the Championship is (and has been for some time) far too big for P&R to work properly. P&R should be the ultimate aim in the future, as P&R between 2 strong leagues is the ideal way for sport to work IMO, but that is based upon there being 2 strong leagues. And we don't currently have that. So we have to have licensing of some form to try and build 2 strong leagues. This takes time, perseverance, patience and possibly a dip in on-field standards as resources are re-distributed from mainly spent on-field to mainly spent off-field.

Very succinctly put - I concur.

Seconded !

Actually, I'd argue that when Union was losing talent to League, it was indeed a failing of their sport. They fixed it by making an extremely radical overhaul of their game and it worked.

Is that an endorsement of two Ft tens

A lovely fantasy, but back in the real-world its called a death-spiral. People are less interested in watching a poorer product. Companies are less interested in sponsoring it. Fewer people turn up to meaningless games. So this off-field spending you want to see comes from a smaller pot. Good luck 'marketing that potential' to investors and sponsors.

Peacock can bang on all he likes...reducing the league won't improve the standards on the field and we won't get any closer to beating the Australians in a meaniful international series.

Has anybody said Sky would support S.L 2 and would they even show any of the games live?

The sport has more pressing problems than tweaking the league formats.

Agree with this.
Excuse the football comparison but, just as people in general are not to interested in watching second tier football (the Championship), they will not be interested in watching second tier RL.
It doesn't matter if we call it Super League 2, Not Quite Super League or Second Division.
There will be no getting away from it being a lower grade product.
It may be that the RFL could negotiate an improved contract from Sky, which could help fund a total of 20 full time clubs and this may allow some form of automatic promotion and relegation but, let's not kid anyone that people will tune their TV's in significant number or, turn up to watch live, in the same numbers as the current SL clubs.
The whole concept is about sharing the wealth among fewer clubs and when this is done, there will still be a percentage of clubs in the All New Super Duper League that cant compete every week and finish in the lower portion of the league.

Are you suggesting clubs are doing all they can to get people not only to attend games but also involved in the club and RL? If you aren't then you would have to agree clubs can work harder and smarter. If you are then I'd suggest its you living a fantasy.