Given the poor state of the game i think a radical overhaul of the sport is required. No longer should we have 1 top league with a semi pro 2nd team. We should have 2 full time pro leagues, superleague and superleague 1.



My suggestion would be:



There should be 2 10 team divisions making up superleague and super league 1.



Top division has a salary cap of £1.6 mil with all clubs being viable to spend the limit, division 1 having a cap of £1m again with all clubs being fulol time and spending the limit.



That would provide a league programme of 18 games, 9 home and 9 away. This should then be topped up with a mini cup comp to make up the additional fixtures needed by all teams to make them viable similar to the Northern Rail cup.



Promotion and relegation should be re introduced with 1 team up and 1 team down. This would provide all div 1 sides something meaningfull to play for.



Licensing could apply for teams to get promiotion to superleague 1.



I based league selection on teams whom i thought could viably spend the full caps.



I think this would work far better than the current format.





20 teams



Wigan

Wire

Saints

Leeds

Hull

Hull KR

Hudds

Widnes

Wakey

Catalan



Bulls

Salford

Quins

Cas

Leigh

Fev

Batley

Keighley

Halifax

Sheffield

arent london spending the cap?

if they are then i hope they have kept the receipts

Where do you propose the money comes from to convert Leigh, Fax, Fev, Batley, Keighley and Sheffield into full time teams?



RL can't sustain 14 full time clubs let alone 20.

The main bulk of the money to convert them into a full time set up would be from TV deals, unfortunately I don't see Sky sustaining 20 teams it would need additional support from channels such as ESPN or Premier Sports. A more radical step would be a independent super league channel that has subscription fee's this option is more than likely unviable.

Tricky Dicky, please take no offence as non intended and your opinion is worth as much as anyone elses.



Although I see lots of sense in the post it just doesnt quite work (add up) for me.



As I said in my only other post on this forum, investment is required in a massive way. You dont create investment by weakening teams and the overall standard of the competition by forcing them to release their best players as they can get paid far more in Australia. Lets be honest no marquee signings will be coming this way anythime soon. A world class NRL Half is 600k+



Two leagues of ten are being proposed here, good, I like that part. Superleague needs to be reduced by at least 2 teams, and 4 would work for me.



1.6M Cap for each??? thats 32M required and quite simply that is never going to happen? Thats an extra 10m required for a weaker game. Yes the Top 10 may just about get there but the second tier, really?



I have a difference in thought here, a short term injection of cash option and a long term option



In a 10 team scenario I would take the Sky Money now not given to those 4 teams and divide it amongst those left and also increase the Cap in the same way giving Superleague 1 clubs a new Cap of approx 2.2M This will bring us closer to the NRL. It is then up to the teams to manage how they raise and indeed spend to this level. We dont want teams going bust but hey who can stop that? The RFL licensing system! Not...



I know that this isnt an ideal solution as the second tier is going to remain weaker but lets be honest, we have a small talent pool and its just getting smaller....



The secobnd option and the one I really believe is the answer for the future surely has to be in encouraging clubs to develop talent. This should be rewarded with Salary Cap dispensations far greater than allowed now and if it was it would negate the need for a lift in salary cap allowance altogether, in theory the clubs who develop more can spend more, that has to be the way to go! People say thats not fair on teams who dont develop players but I say yes it is, its absolutely fair!



I would also encourage that each Superleague 1 club to forge a relationship with a second tier club, a bit like Wigan have done in Wales but too a greater degree and use this as an opportunity to a) improve the quality of the second tier by utilising up and coming talent b)develop more players in a higher intensity situation than the current 20s setup.





I am sure that my theories are ridiculous and unworkable to a lot of people but its what I believe.



Have a great week all and enjoy the game friday, a 20k + crowd on the cards, superb.



Andrew

I posted on the VT that we should try to utilise feeder clubs

isnt that supposedly what is happening with the academy changes?

I said £1m cap for the 2nd tier not 1.6m.



That could even be reduced to £800k.



The current cap for super league is £1.6m and the championship is 400k.



The RFL give superleague clubs £1m per year, reducing clubs from 14 to 10 would generate £4m to redistribute to the second tier an additional 400k per club over and above what championship clubs are currently getting.



I think this is a viable option which would allow more teams to operate financially within their means, will provide a far better balance to games and would provide an incentive with promotion and relegation without the boom and bust scenario

Yes lets keep the cap at 1.6 mill so union and nrl can keep chucking big cash at our top players it needs to be made bigger not smaller



The league needs to go back to 12 with a top 6 scrap the franchise it's only in place to keep the likes of London in was for Crusaders but look what happened there



The whole league doesn't work like it does in oz over there your having close games every week and the odd run away and it's the opposite over here which is really boring , Rugby league over here is a northen sport it has worked out ok in Catalan but if you lived out there you wouldn't be flying over here every other week would you?



London need to go they just about get 2k it's embarrassing for our game get some teams in cumbria to merge and bring them through that would work

The present structure is ok for me, we went from 12 to 14 as clubs said there weren't enough home games.

The lack of talent is as old as Rugby League. The number of players produced by clubs here in the north is probably at it's highest in the history of the game. From 1895 and for 100 years Union players came to League in their dozens every year. In 1995 it stopped almost like a light switch being turned off.



We then imported NRL players of all standards and some of hardly any. Only 4-5 years ago we had around 48% of SL players were from overseas. Now it's down to around 25%. That's also with 2 additional clubs in SL. That extra 20% has come from club trained RL talent. In another two or three years we will have far more of our own players in SL and that number will increase each year as will the standard of player.



Three things have to happen IMO.

First we hold our nerve in maintaining 14 clubs. Even if the Bulls disappear a club should replace them.



Second, clubs have to be made far more financially accountable than they are now. Club's balance sheets and their company accounts must be scrutinised to ensure they are managing in a prudent and (hopefully) profitable way.

If we are to have a salary cap then it has to be monitored properly. The RFL must insist that they scrutinise players bank accounts and tax returns to see their Rugby income is the same as their club is declaring as payments. Without those checks, which are not in place now, the SC is worthless.

Third, a real structure in place for youth development so that the RFL can check on clubs involvement in schools, service area and amateur clubs to ensure quality coaching takes place both for the young players but also their coaches.

wasn't the whole point of the franchise system to promote internal/organic growth from within the clubs? Wigan are living up to their franchise by giving the young lads a chance and the average high attendences are appreciating good rugby and the opportunity given to the kids.

Cas/Hull/Widnes etc insist on buying older players and not introducing more youth into their squads. Shouldnt they be forced into using younger player? Im not ageist but non relegation means you take chances on your youth?? Right?? Whats going wrong? Its being policed like interfering with the ball carrier,, and the powers that be dont care or are powerless to do anything.

Didnt Bradford win 3 superleagues at the expense of the youth system? Now theyre in administration and the powers that be want to protect them, why?

Promote youth you numpties....