Then re route it to Leigh if Crusaders can move.........................................

A pound shoudl do it.

Actually, thinking about it...why havent BSkyB-RFL started offering franchises for purchase (a la American football).
Instead of paying to keep dead duck teams going, it should be the other way around.

I'll give 2 bob & a fluffy toffee

Very generous - you get to pick up the liabilities for your trouble as well don't forget.

//p.

i guess this is what happens when you over spend year on year in an attempt to stay in a franchised league.

Noooooo!

Don't you know they were brought in to help illiminate things like this??!!



After so many years Sky money, and 3 years grace they should have got themselves much more sustainable and followed the business model of every other SL club by developing the youth players through at the expense of the overpaid journeymen. Like erm....

Paul you have hit the nail on the head there, if that had happened at the start of SL with a franchised league playing in summer and 'back up' leagues plaing in winter and financially supported by the franchised teams (instead of financially supporting 2nd rate and has been aussies and kiwis -and tongans now it would seem) then a lot of people would have been satisfied and it would probably have worked better with the money fairly spread out through the game as a whole.

is there a club that has or does benefit from franchising ?.
can someone explain how the game has benefited from the first three years of franchising ?.

Celtic Crusaders

Agreed, but the SL clubs won't give up the money.

I can't see that being the case , surely for the good of the ' game '

did they benefit from franchising or just because they were a pet project ?.

they shouldn't have been given the choice Joe, certain clubs had a fit because they thought the championship clubs were getting a 'cut' of the SKY money until it was pointed out to them that it wouldn't affect the SLE clubs 'pot' thats how selfish it is.

Like Leeds, Wigan, St Helens and Warrington.

There's the rub, though.... the RFL gives the SL clubs more money than they've ever had, and the stability to run a 3-year business plan, and the clubs still screw it up. Maybe its just being inside the tent p1551ng out, but I genuinely don't understand why the RFL gets the blame for the clubs' mismanagement.

I know we've had the rough end, as usual... stuck in the championship, no prospect of SL before 2016, not that we'd have been promoted anyway these last seasons (lucky not to be relegated, in fact). Is our board, our squad, our coaching staff, and our financial position better than it was in 2007? I think so, from an outsider's perspective. Certainly Widnes, Halifax and Barrow have grown stronger. So too, probably, have Batley and Keighley. Perhaps, even in the Championship, we've benefitted from the restructured SL/Championship programme.

Wakey have only themselves to blame for their predicament. If they lose their licence, if they do fall down a division, if that means they end up bankrupt, it will be despite the RFL giving them a strong and secure platform of a 3 year licence, not because of it.

You sound like a man who is very close to an organisation that benefits from RFL monies and therefore cannot see the decline happening DESPITE all this extra money. We mustn't bag the RFL, the organisation that changes rules but keeps the changes quiet till somebody breaks the old rules and say "they haven't broken any rules". Makes rules up to suit just one club. Forces clubs themselves to take the pee out of these rules with false crowd figures. Gets themselves in an impossible position where they are literally bribed by SKY to keep expansion clubs going. Oh and what happened to decreasing quota rules? HKR(10!!) and Wire(6) have both increased their quota spots using the rule "anyone here before 2008 is class as a fed trained player". Lets also just mention the salary cap loophole used by Wire in the 'retirement' of Chris Hicks (now signed for Catalan I think) to allow the dog botherer to join them. In short they paid up Mr Hicks 2011 contract or a portion of it, but it doesn't count on the salary cap. He did not have to leave as he was under contract but they clearly found a way to persuade him

Those 4 clubs still have their fair share of imports, off the top of my head around 20 in total (and many in key positions which stunts the development of our own in the same spots) - but as you've chosen them lets look at the common denominator.

[iNone are likely to be ever booted out of SL[/i.

Now lets go back to the original issue of Wakefield. Why have they done what they have done? Is it because they are they badly run or is it becuase they working in 3 year periods like half a dozen other clubs in SL? The franchises brought a lot of promises, a lot of changes to be had. Really?

Are we seeing clubs send the buggers back and play their own? Have we seen a huge wave of new young talent burst through the scenes? Have we seen any new stadia? Are clubs finincially healthier? Are we attracting any more luctrative sponshorship deals? Is the game outside SL stronger? Are we any nearer to beating the Aussies? No. No, to every single question.

People will say we've only given it 3 years. No. That is a lie. The foundations for all this were lay 15 years ago. Aside from Catalans, Celtic, and HKR the current make up of the SL clubs has not changed much. Some have had ups and downs (Hudds, Cas, Salford) but by and large the majority of SL has had the benefit of big money for a generation now.

Personally, I don't think the 'work in progress' is any further ahead than it was a couple of years ago, and there is plenty proof in the pudding to back this up too.

This franchise farce has done nowt but move a once a year issue to a three yealy thing, generating very little benefit but a whole host of problems. Is that the fault of the RFL or Wakefield?

Top post.....

All done under the 'rules' one must say though Derek, and there is the problem, the rules seem to be made to fit the circumstances as and when.

Just because you say its a lie, doesn't make it so. You know very well we are 3 years in. The majority of clubs, prior to franchises have not been in SL with a 3 year licence like they have now. So the foundations where never there as you put it for 15 years.
I refuse to be drawn into this debate again because its the same subjective nonsense posted - but failed on this occasion. In fact it now bores me so much I can't be @rsed with this forum much nowadays, because of the amount of threads going over the same subject - basically the governing body is trying to kill the game outside SL and destroy Leigh - with the flames fanned by the usual posters.

adios.

Leeigh Leeigh, it was a joke this thread about us buying Wakey and moving it to Leigh and renaming it Leigh Centurions


However, why oh why do you not see what harm the |RFL are doing by trying to change something that worked as it was, by all means bring in new teams, but be honest about what excemptions their getting and tell fans the truth, stop treating us all like idiots and feeding us a few crumbs.
As for the Wakey situation the RFL should help them as much as theyve helped London and Crusaders, but they wont, as they unfortunately dont come from a area they want to expand into.

Ok, fair enough, lets have a look...

Current Clubs In Super League XIV (with number of years 'service' out of 15)

Bulls (15)
Cas (12)
Catalans (5)
Crusaders (3)
Harlequins (15)
Huddersfield (12)
Hull (11)
HKR (5)
Leeds (15)
Salford (12)
Saints (15)
Wakey (13)
Wire (15)
Wigan (15)

We have 6 clubs with 100% participation, another 5 with 10 years or more, and 3 more clubs with between 3 and 5 years.

So, 40% of the clubs have a 100% 15 year record, and 80% of them have been there for more than 10 years.

Personally I reckon this shows that <quote> [i'by and large the majority of SL has had the benefit of big money for a generation now'[/i and the foundations for it/them were indeed laid 15 years ago, but if you have anything to prove otherwise, feel free.

AD - What are you saying here. I mean you criticize that franchises haven't worked, which I assume you include the main reason of franchises and that is having 3 years to build etc etc. But considering its only 3 years in, you now for seemingly convenience sake mention clubs have somehow been guaranteed SL afterall before franchises without risk of relegation.
This is one of many reasons I can't be doing with this forum anymore.

.......sadly missed already........

Lighten up mate. When we all start thinking and posting the same thing it will be a sorry day.

Fight your corner oh and congrats 2 City on sneakin a draw today.