I love the way the dobbins choose to be selective when it suits them, only counting super league era when comparing tgemselfs to fc . If thats the case the dobbins havent won the challenge or been to a major final or is that me been selective ?

What did Pearson say? Is there a link?

Hudgell, Pearson and McManus all want fewer teams.

I think it might be economically necessary, but it isn't desirable - ideally we'd be growing and spreading the game.

If there isn't enough talent to go around why were so many so keen to cut overseas numbers to give homegrown players a chance?

Where on earth did you drag that load of old fanny up from?

Quote ="Mild Rover"What did Pearson say? Is there a link? Hudgell, Pearson and McManus all want fewer teams. I think it might be economically necessary, but it isn't desirable - ideally we'd be growing and spreading the game. If there isn't enough talent to go around why were so many so keen to cut overseas numbers to give homegrown players a chance?'" It's from a press conference held yesterday, the same one that mentioned that we hadn't managed to get a Visa for Chase and other stuff about recruitment. He basically says that he thinks that for the talent to be 'spread around a bit thicker' Super League might need to be cut down to 12 teams. It's up on FCTV. www.hullfc.com/tv.aspx?v=tZfKdYE ... zmElQlxA==

Quote ="Mild Rover"What did Pearson say? Is there a link? Hudgell, Pearson and McManus all want fewer teams. I think it might be economically necessary, but it isn't desirable - ideally we'd be growing and spreading the game. If there isn't enough talent to go around why were so many so keen to cut overseas numbers to give homegrown players a chance?'" It's from a press conference held yesterday, the same one that mentioned that we hadn't managed to get a Visa for Chase and other stuff about recruitment. He basically says that he thinks that for the talent to be 'spread around a bit thicker' Super League might need to be cut down to 12 teams. It's up on FCTV. www.hullfc.com/tv.aspx?v=tZfKdYE ... zmElQlxA==

Roughly speaking, Rovers have lost about £2m and FC have made £500k profit since 2004. I'll check. Rovers have yet to file for 2011, due to in August, but Mike Smith is on record as saying losses are reducing year on year, so who knows, maybe they'll have broken even.

Playing less games is simply not an option. 13 home games a year is too few financially IMO. 10 clubs playing each other 3 times would make more sense, or the old chestnut of a third competition.

You are right about the number of home games. As it stands, we've had two home games in eleven weeks. Imagine only eleven or fewer home games all season. People get out of the habbit of going to games.

The problem with a third competition is that if it's a straight knock-out Cup competition the same few side are likely to contest the latter stages. Plus the Challenge Cup holds little interest pre-final these days. Another cup is unlikely to pull the punters in.

I posted earlier that an uneven fixture list is unfair, but it might the only option. Perhaps the best way would be to base the extra games on the previous season's placings - IIRC this was done for a while in the early years of Super League. Twelve team league, home and away against everyone else plus previous years top six play each other once more as do the clubs who finished 7th-12th.

The downside being with the Magic fixture, Cup and play offs, you could have, say, Wigan and Saints playing each other five or six times a season.

Agree with all that apart from the extra fixtures. Teams in 6th with injuries might chuck the last games to get an easier the next year. Think they paired all the odd-placed teams against each other for the extra rounds and the even ones to give a fair spread.

Quote ="Panda92"It's from a press conference held yesterday, the same one that mentioned that we hadn't managed to get a Visa for Chase and other stuff about recruitment. He basically says that he thinks that for the talent to be 'spread around a bit thicker' Super League might need to be cut down to 12 teams. It's up on FCTV. www.hullfc.com/tv.aspx?v=tZfKdYE ... zmElQlxA=='" Cheers. The cynic in me thinks that it's money as much as talent that the chairmen advocating it want spreading thicker. Can't blame 'em like with the amount they're putting in. On the uneven fixtures - we did it before, and the hub-cap carries almost no kudos anyway. I'd like a third competition - maybe with a group stage, but I think it'd struggle to catch the imagination of many fans.

Quote ="Panda92"It's from a press conference held yesterday, the same one that mentioned that we hadn't managed to get a Visa for Chase and other stuff about recruitment. He basically says that he thinks that for the talent to be 'spread around a bit thicker' Super League might need to be cut down to 12 teams. It's up on FCTV. www.hullfc.com/tv.aspx?v=tZfKdYE ... zmElQlxA=='" Cheers. The cynic in me thinks that it's money as much as talent that the chairmen advocating it want spreading thicker. Can't blame 'em like with the amount they're putting in. On the uneven fixtures - we did it before, and the hub-cap carries almost no kudos anyway. I'd like a third competition - maybe with a group stage, but I think it'd struggle to catch the imagination of many fans.

I'd have two super leagues:

Yorkshire league:

Hull
Rovers
Leeds
Bradford
Wakefield
Castleford
Huddersfield
Featherstone?

Other league:

Saints
Wigan
Warrington
Catalan
London
Widnes
Salford
Leigh?

After regular season both leagues split, bottom and top half and they play each other. Add a Yorkshire and Lancashire game and have rules about playing so many local youngsters. Just a thought!

Would everyone play each other twice?
Looks like the way the NBA do things

One of the main issues is lack of talent, were would you get the players from?

My main problem with losing 2 sides is losing the fans and the youth structures at those clubs.

Castleford and Wakefield can't be lost, they develop to many good youngsters.

In your dreams dopey !

Another pointless post by you.

The idea that Rovers, a competitive, well supported, historic club should be removed from SL is just plain ridiculous.

For me the two clubs that would loose out should be "stalled" clubs like London and Wakefield. Although I suspect that the RFL will want to support London and keep flogging that one, so I fear it would be someone like Salford or Widnes, who are both progressing, or if Bradford can't remove themselves from their financial issues sadly, them.

I strongly suspect this is a mute point anyway.

A truly horrible idea. Sorry. I want to see Hull FC playing Wigan, and Saints and Warrington etc and completely without reason, which as far as I can see would be geography.

It could work, you play each side in your 'league' home and away and play the side in the other league once.

We haven't got the players for it though.

Good grief, are you lot for real? Petty, small-minded mentality.

I'd just lose Rovers & introduce a bye week

How about have a 12 team league and then bring back another knockout cup comp, like the yorkshire, Lancashire cups or a Regal trophy type comp?. Personally i would love to see the floodlit trophy back.

Or maybe the Stobart trophy were the winners don,t get anything

Who?

I'd rather have stand alone weekends for rep rl.