66 replies to this topic

[thirteenthman]

back to my point in getting teams to spend up to the cap limit as all the top 5 teams did this season . if you want more teams to be better then they have to either spend more money and sign better players or get a decent academy structure in place to produce the players themselves .

It's far more than just spending up to the cap though. London have proved that this year, and a substantial part of their salary cap spend apparently went on just one player. As for a 'decent' Academy structure to produce your own players, don't all SL clubs have an Academy structure anyway? Some areas just don't produce as many young players as other areas do. And certain clubs can afford to go out and cherry pick young lads from other areas - which brings us back to finances again. Warrington's rise up the pecking order has come from substantial investment in all areas - again, something many clubs just don't have.

[roughyedspud]

my idea..


a 10 team super league

1. catalan
2. london
3. wigan
4. st helens
5. warrington
6 .huddersfield
7. bradford
8. leeds
9. hull
10. hull kr

the 32 team championship,championship 1..and maybe championship 2

basically all the current 14 championship teams & 9 championship 1 teams plus all of the super league's under 23's teams apart from catalan..

scrap the northern rail cup and bring back the lancashire & yorkshire cups

for all the championship(s) clubs we can have two 16 team comps...2 finals...2 revenue streams...we could also play a "super cup" type game between the 2 winners as either a curtain raiser to the challenge cup final...or on the night before as part of the "friday night lights" concept...

Edited by roughyedspud, 08 October 2012 - 06:39 AM.

[Southstander13]

Leeds got to one GF and lost in 4 years of the top five system.
They reached four GFs in 7 years of the top six, winning 3.
They've now reached and won three GFs in 4 years of the top eight.

They've clearly done a lot better under the new system than the other two, so I'd understand why you wouldn't moan about it.

If Hull won the GF from 6th this year, it'd emphasise my point about the "champion" side not being the the real definition of the word. I'd be delighted that they did, but it wouldn't change the point, would it?

The phrase "Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics" springs to mind here.

Leeds winning those grand finals is more to do with the team we have than any changes to the play off system. For example, by the same method could you not argue that Bradford benefitted hugely from the earlier versions of the play off format?

Teams go through cycles of success, it comes and goes and it seems Leeds are in theirs at the moment. Bearing in mind that Leeds beat Wigan (A), Catalans (A) and Warrington (N) during this years play offs show that a top 5 system might not have made a difference as Leeds have beaten those teams above them.

For what its worth I would probably go with a top 6 system as i think 8 is too much, but i disagree that it would make too much difference to the outcome.

[Southstander13]

Top 6 play off system worked as follows:

Week One

• Elimination Semi-final A: 3rd vs 6th
• Elimination Semi-final B: 4th vs 5th

Week Two

• Qualification Match: 1st vs 2nd
• Elimination Final: Winners of Elimination Semi-final A vs Winners of Elimination Semi-final B

Week Three

• Final Qualifier: Losers of Qualification Match vs Winners of Elimination Final

Week Four

• Grand Final: Winners of Qualification Match vs Winners of Final Qualifier

I would back this version as it does give a bigger advantage to those finishing top 2 as one of them is guaranteed to reach the final.

It does however raise the previous problem of the team finishing in the top two winning their first match, meaning that prior to the grand final they have only played one game in three weeks.

[Ackroman]

Top 6 play off system worked as follows:

Week One

• Elimination Semi-final A: 3rd vs 6th
• Elimination Semi-final B: 4th vs 5th

Week Two

• Qualification Match: 1st vs 2nd
• Elimination Final: Winners of Elimination Semi-final A vs Winners of Elimination Semi-final B

Week Three

• Final Qualifier: Losers of Qualification Match vs Winners of Elimination Final

Week Four

• Grand Final: Winners of Qualification Match vs Winners of Final Qualifier

I would back this version as it does give a bigger advantage to those finishing top 2 as one of them is guaranteed to reach the final.

It does however raise the previous problem of the team finishing in the top two winning their first match, meaning that prior to the grand final they have only played one game in three weeks.

I would give the league winners automatic entry to the final.

The weekend before the final club 2 plays club 5, club 3 plays club 4. The winners play in the qualifying final at the home ground of the highest placed club the next Wednesday prior to the final on Saturday.

At least this way, if a club that doesn't win the league still manages to win the final they've bloody well earned it.

[my missus]

i am sick of folk banging on about the intensity in the nrl, when was this certainly not this season i have seen some complete blowouts from nearly every team.
whats wrong with having an exact copy of the nrl ladder 16 teams playing 24 games each including byes, it seems to work for them also because of the byes odd results are thrown up because of teams coming back fresh.
a ten team league would be a disgrace and another nail in the sl coffin.

[roughyedspud]

we'd have to scrap the challenge cup if we did that.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

i am sick of folk banging on about the intensity in the nrl, when was this certainly not this season i have seen some complete blowouts from nearly every team.
whats wrong with having an exact copy of the nrl ladder 16 teams playing 24 games each including byes, it seems to work for them also because of the byes odd results are thrown up because of teams coming back fresh.
a ten team league would be a disgrace and another nail in the sl coffin.

How can you have a dig at the NRL, then back it and tell us to copy them?!

[my missus]

not having a dig, i have watched nearly every game and enjoyed them all tight games or big wins mean nothing to me i enjoy my rugby.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

The phrase "Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics" springs to mind here.

Leeds winning those grand finals is more to do with the team we have than any changes to the play off system. For example, by the same method could you not argue that Bradford benefitted hugely from the earlier versions of the play off format?

Teams go through cycles of success, it comes and goes and it seems Leeds are in theirs at the moment. Bearing in mind that Leeds beat Wigan (A), Catalans (A) and Warrington (N) during this years play offs show that a top 5 system might not have made a difference as Leeds have beaten those teams above them.

For what its worth I would probably go with a top 6 system as i think 8 is too much, but i disagree that it would make too much difference to the outcome.

Leeds would have (most likely) had to have beaten every team above them in order to win the GF under the other two systems. So replace Wakefield at home with (most likely) St Helens away. I'd say that would be a significantly harder game.

On top of that, Wigan (and Wire in the top 6), would only have had to beat one team to reach the final, not two. They'd have also had two attempts to get to the final, not two attempts to get to the semi. It would be significantly easier for them.

I don't think Leeds would have gotten to the final under these systems, let alone won it.

[LordCharles]

I have said this for ages, but I doubt it will ever change, anyway here goes..............................

Problem you have is SLE and how funds are distributed from the Sky deal.

Currently I think each SL club gets £1,680,000 per season, with £1,680,000 going to the RFL and £1,680,000 being split between all 23 Championship clubs, giving you the 135 Million over the next 5 years.

If the SLE/RFL had anything about them they would restructure the Leagues and then broker a deal that benefited the sport as a whole instead of just the top end.

For example............................

SL - 10 teams getting £1,680,000 each.................if thats what it takes!

Championship - 10 teams getting 60% of the remaining £8,400,000...........so thats £504,000 each

Championship 1 - 2 Divisions of 10 Teams (North & South) getting the remaining 40% between them £3,360,000...........So thats £168,000 each

Championship 1 clubs would also save on travel costs as it would be regionalised (To an extent ), also meaning players would be less effected in their professional work lives by their participation in Semi pro sport, plus lots of other common sense benefits and solutions to problems faced by Championship 1 clubs and their players.

Play offs for Championship 1 would be top 4 North & Top 4 South, 8 team format, i.e......1 (N) v 4 (S), 2 (S) v 3 (N) etc, straight knockout, Q-Finals , Semi - Finals & Final with GF Winner getting a home tie in a P & R playoff against Bottom placed Championship Team, Whoever wins either remains in, or joins Championship.

Championship Play offs - Top 6 (Similar format to SL but with 6 not - GF winner gets a home tie in a P & R playoff against Bottom placed SL Team, Whoever wins either remains in, or joins SL.

SL Play offs - Top 6 (Similar to current format of 8 but with 6)

Challenge Cup to remain as it currently is.

SL & Championship to have an additional Cup Competition to include all teams in both Leagues that is to be played from April - July

Format - 4 Pools of 5 to be drawn giving 4 fixtures per team per group (Alternate draw to be used - SL club then C/ship club per group), 2 home, 2 away - All gates reciepts to be split equally between Home & Away teams for all fixtures.

Top 2 teams at the end of each Group stage to compete in Q - Finals, ie G1 winner v G4 Runner Up etc, Semi- Finals are open Draw and to be played at Neutral Venue, same for the Final.

Championship 1 to have an additional Cup Competition to include all teams in both Leagues played from April - July

Two groups of 5 from North - Two Groups of 5 from South giving 4 fixtures per team per group, 2 home, 2 away - All gates reciepts to be split equally between Home & Away teams for all fixtures.

Top 2 teams at the end of each Group stage to compete in Q - Finals, ie G1 winner v G4 Runner Up etc, Semi- Finals are open Draw and to be played at Neutral Venue, same for the Final.

Minimum fixtures for any Club in any division is 22 and it would be an equal split of 11 Home and 11 away.

This would produce a much more balanced competition all round, be more cost effective in many areas, be financially for more viable for most clubs and see revenue being generated and distributed more effectively to the benefit of the game as a whole.

It would also create a competition for 40 teams, open up opportunities for more players to develop at an appropriate level, particularly if SL clubs run Academies at U17s & U19's, Championship clubs run U21's reserves and Championship 1 clubs just focus on a first grade squad.

SL Clubs, whilst not running U21's/Reserve teams would be granted the opportunity to retain up to 8 players from their academies on intermediate contracts for a maximum of 2 years (if coming out of the U19's) or until they turned 21 years of age. These 8 players would not form part of the first team quota of 30 players, but would train full time and be part of the first team squad as "project players" and could be part of any dual registration agreement between the SL club and a Championship Club in order to give them regular game time in an environment which will assist their development and they can be monitored.

Signing of Academy players or U21's/Reserves could only take place from 1st November each year, this would give ample time for squads to be built for all concerned.

Clubs relegated from SL to Championship would not run an U21's in their first year of relegation but would continue with their U19's in the SL Academy for their initial Championship season, therefore allowing players they have brought through their system to remain playing at the club at an applicable level and to see out the remainder of their Academy contracts. Once finished (Start of 2nd Year Championship) they could then move into the U21's/Reserve team, again remaining with the club that had developed them and also bring stability and hopefully a strong reserve team to the Club, continuing to lay foundations for the future.

Teams gaining promotion from Championship to SL would not run U17's or U19's Academies in their first year but continue running their U21's/Reserves in the Championship U21's/Reserve Competition, therefore allowing some strength in depth to the Senior 1st Grade squad and giving the club a full season to put all the necessary requirements and staff in place to oversee any Academy set up for the following year should they remain in SL.

If a Championship club went up and came straight down, it would have no effect on their U21's/Reserve Team as it would continue as normal, if a SL club went down and then gained promotion again the following year, they would only need to recruit at U17's in full and employ staff for the same age group as the U19's would still be in place.

All too straight forward I know

So based on this year it would potentially look something like this...............

Super League

Wigan Warriors
Warrington Wolves
St Helens
Catalan Dragons
Leeds Rhinos
Hull FC
Huddersfield Giants
Wakefield Wildcats
Bradford Bulls
Hull KR

Championship

Salford City Reds
London Broncos
Castleford Tigers
Widnes Vikings
Featherstone
Leigh Centurions
Halifax
Sheffield
Batley
Keighley

Championship 1 - North

Dewsbury
Oldham
Rochdale
Hunslet
York
Barrow
Workington
Whitehaven
Gateshead
Swinton

Championship 1 - South

London Skolars
Crusaders
South Wales
Doncaster
Oxford
Hemel Hempstead
Gloucester
Northampton (Example)
Coventry (Example)
Nottingham (Example)



If only the RFL could see it

Edited by LordCharles, 09 October 2012 - 08:43 AM.

[roughyedspud]

thats very good work lord charles

[LordCharles]

thats very good work lord charles

Thanks, but the problem is the RFL spent over £7,000,000 on staff across all departments in 2011 and still they cannot come up with a way forward that will deliver a solid foundation for the sport as a WHOLE!

Edited by LordCharles, 09 October 2012 - 09:08 AM.

[southstand loiner]

Leeds would have (most likely) had to have beaten every team above them in order to win the GF under the other two systems. So replace Wakefield at home with (most likely) St Helens away. I'd say that would be a significantly harder game.

On top of that, Wigan (and Wire in the top 6), would only have had to beat one team to reach the final, not two. They'd have also had two attempts to get to the final, not two attempts to get to the semi. It would be significantly easier for them.

I don't think Leeds would have gotten to the final under these systems, let alone won it.

many people incuding the bookies who quoted 18/1 before the catalans game did not think leeds would get to this seasons grand final under the present system so why could they not get to it under yours ? ok it would be harder but they have proved they respond to a challenge.

[upyershirt]

As Leeds have shown, it doesn't matter how you perform during the season, just how you finish. You can just coast through the season, so long as you turn it on for the last month. If the league was more competitive, you wouldn't be able to just coast through it.

Less teams and less SL games would solve this somewhat, but what of the other clubs? And how do we create more fixtures to make the clubs financially stable? I've got my ideas that I've said in the past many a time, and I stick by them, but they realistically won't happen despite being pretty simple to do.

How can a team coast thru the season then expect to win a game at will with the quality of sides now in super league? Don't make me laugh. The fact of the matter is that Leeds won fair and square with a predominantly British side that wanted to win the grand final, it is a team game. Why doesn't everybody alse coast through and then try win it from 5th? Would you have bet on Leeds to win in any of the play off matches? Would you bet on Leeds beating Wakefield, Catalan and Wigan if they were to play them again tomorrow? If not then you have just told yourself what a riddiculous argument you are presenting.

By the way when I was at the match on saturday I thought Silverwood was giving the balance of decisions to Warrington then when I watched it on telly I felt Leeds got the balance of decisions, a bit different to the semi final. It does even itself out I am afraid.

[clarky1975]

I have said this for ages, but I doubt it will ever change, anyway here goes..............................

Problem you have is SLE and how funds are distributed from the Sky deal.

Currently I think each SL club gets £1,680,000 per season, with £1,680,000 going to the RFL and £1,680,000 being split between all 23 Championship clubs, giving you the 135 Million over the next 5 years.

If the SLE/RFL had anything about them they would restructure the Leagues and then broker a deal that benefited the sport as a whole instead of just the top end.

For example............................

SL - 10 teams getting £1,680,000 each.................if thats what it takes!

Championship - 10 teams getting 60% of the remaining £8,400,000...........so thats £504,000 each

Championship 1 - 2 Divisions of 10 Teams (North & South) getting the remaining 40% between them £3,360,000...........So thats £168,000 each

Championship 1 clubs would also save on travel costs as it would be regionalised (To an extent ), also meaning players would be less effected in their professional work lives by their participation in Semi pro sport, plus lots of other common sense benefits and solutions to problems faced by Championship 1 clubs and their players.

Play offs for Championship 1 would be top 4 North & Top 4 South, 8 team format, i.e......1 (N) v 4 (S), 2 (S) v 3 (N) etc, straight knockout, Q-Finals , Semi - Finals & Final with GF Winner getting a home tie in a P & R playoff against Bottom placed Championship Team, Whoever wins either remains in, or joins Championship.

Championship Play offs - Top 6 (Similar format to SL but with 6 not - GF winner gets a home tie in a P & R playoff against Bottom placed SL Team, Whoever wins either remains in, or joins SL.

SL Play offs - Top 6 (Similar to current format of 8 but with 6)

Challenge Cup to remain as it currently is.

SL & Championship to have an additional Cup Competition to include all teams in both Leagues that is to be played from April - July

Format - 4 Pools of 5 to be drawn giving 4 fixtures per team per group (Alternate draw to be used - SL club then C/ship club per group), 2 home, 2 away - All gates reciepts to be split equally between Home & Away teams for all fixtures.

Top 2 teams at the end of each Group stage to compete in Q - Finals, ie G1 winner v G4 Runner Up etc, Semi- Finals are open Draw and to be played at Neutral Venue, same for the Final.

Championship 1 to have an additional Cup Competition to include all teams in both Leagues played from April - July

Two groups of 5 from North - Two Groups of 5 from South giving 4 fixtures per team per group, 2 home, 2 away - All gates reciepts to be split equally between Home & Away teams for all fixtures.

Top 2 teams at the end of each Group stage to compete in Q - Finals, ie G1 winner v G4 Runner Up etc, Semi- Finals are open Draw and to be played at Neutral Venue, same for the Final.

Minimum fixtures for any Club in any division is 22 and it would be an equal split of 11 Home and 11 away.

This would produce a much more balanced competition all round, be more cost effective in many areas, be financially for more viable for most clubs and see revenue being generated and distributed more effectively to the benefit of the game as a whole.

It would also create a competition for 40 teams, open up opportunities for more players to develop at an appropriate level, particularly if SL clubs run Academies at U17s & U19's, Championship clubs run U21's reserves and Championship 1 clubs just focus on a first grade squad.

SL Clubs, whilst not running U21's/Reserve teams would be granted the opportunity to retain up to 8 players from their academies on intermediate contracts for a maximum of 2 years (if coming out of the U19's) or until they turned 21 years of age. These 8 players would not form part of the first team quota of 30 players, but would train full time and be part of the first team squad as "project players" and could be part of any dual registration agreement between the SL club and a Championship Club in order to give them regular game time in an environment which will assist their development and they can be monitored.

Signing of Academy players or U21's/Reserves could only take place from 1st November each year, this would give ample time for squads to be built for all concerned.

Clubs relegated from SL to Championship would not run an U21's in their first year of relegation but would continue with their U19's in the SL Academy for their initial Championship season, therefore allowing players they have brought through their system to remain playing at the club at an applicable level and to see out the remainder of their Academy contracts. Once finished (Start of 2nd Year Championship) they could then move into the U21's/Reserve team, again remaining with the club that had developed them and also bring stability and hopefully a strong reserve team to the Club, continuing to lay foundations for the future.

Teams gaining promotion from Championship to SL would not run U17's or U19's Academies in their first year but continue running their U21's/Reserves in the Championship U21's/Reserve Competition, therefore allowing some strength in depth to the Senior 1st Grade squad and giving the club a full season to put all the necessary requirements and staff in place to oversee any Academy set up for the following year should they remain in SL.

If a Championship club went up and came straight down, it would have no effect on their U21's/Reserve Team as it would continue as normal, if a SL club went down and then gained promotion again the following year, they would only need to recruit at U17's in full and employ staff for the same age group as the U19's would still be in place.

All too straight forward I know

So based on this year it would potentially look something like this...............

Super League

Wigan Warriors
Warrington Wolves
St Helens
Catalan Dragons
Leeds Rhinos
Hull FC
Huddersfield Giants
Wakefield Wildcats
Bradford Bulls
Hull KR

Championship

Salford City Reds
London Broncos
Castleford Tigers
Widnes Vikings
Featherstone
Leigh Centurions
Halifax
Sheffield
Batley
Keighley

Championship 1 - North

Dewsbury
Oldham
Rochdale
Hunslet
York
Barrow
Workington
Whitehaven
Gateshead
Swinton

Championship 1 - South

London Skolars
Crusaders
South Wales
Doncaster
Oxford
Hemel Hempstead
Gloucester
Northampton (Example)
Coventry (Example)
Nottingham (Example)



If only the RFL could see it

Makes a lot of sense with the academies to do something like that and all leagues look strong the way its done.

[southstand loiner]

I have said this for ages, but I doubt it will ever change, anyway here goes..............................

Problem you have is SLE and how funds are distributed from the Sky deal.

Currently I think each SL club gets £1,680,000 per season, with £1,680,000 going to the RFL and £1,680,000 being split between all 23 Championship clubs, giving you the 135 Million over the next 5 years.

If the SLE/RFL had anything about them they would restructure the Leagues and then broker a deal that benefited the sport as a whole instead of just the top end.

For example............................

SL - 10 teams getting £1,680,000 each.................if thats what it takes!

Championship - 10 teams getting 60% of the remaining £8,400,000...........so thats £504,000 each

Championship 1 - 2 Divisions of 10 Teams (North & South) getting the remaining 40% between them £3,360,000...........So thats £168,000 each

Championship 1 clubs would also save on travel costs as it would be regionalised (To an extent ), also meaning players would be less effected in their professional work lives by their participation in Semi pro sport, plus lots of other common sense benefits and solutions to problems faced by Championship 1 clubs and their players.

Play offs for Championship 1 would be top 4 North & Top 4 South, 8 team format, i.e......1 (N) v 4 (S), 2 (S) v 3 (N) etc, straight knockout, Q-Finals , Semi - Finals & Final with GF Winner getting a home tie in a P & R playoff against Bottom placed Championship Team, Whoever wins either remains in, or joins Championship.

Championship Play offs - Top 6 (Similar format to SL but with 6 not - GF winner gets a home tie in a P & R playoff against Bottom placed SL Team, Whoever wins either remains in, or joins SL.

SL Play offs - Top 6 (Similar to current format of 8 but with 6)

Challenge Cup to remain as it currently is.

SL & Championship to have an additional Cup Competition to include all teams in both Leagues that is to be played from April - July

Format - 4 Pools of 5 to be drawn giving 4 fixtures per team per group (Alternate draw to be used - SL club then C/ship club per group), 2 home, 2 away - All gates reciepts to be split equally between Home & Away teams for all fixtures.

Top 2 teams at the end of each Group stage to compete in Q - Finals, ie G1 winner v G4 Runner Up etc, Semi- Finals are open Draw and to be played at Neutral Venue, same for the Final.

Championship 1 to have an additional Cup Competition to include all teams in both Leagues played from April - July

Two groups of 5 from North - Two Groups of 5 from South giving 4 fixtures per team per group, 2 home, 2 away - All gates reciepts to be split equally between Home & Away teams for all fixtures.

Top 2 teams at the end of each Group stage to compete in Q - Finals, ie G1 winner v G4 Runner Up etc, Semi- Finals are open Draw and to be played at Neutral Venue, same for the Final.

Minimum fixtures for any Club in any division is 22 and it would be an equal split of 11 Home and 11 away.

This would produce a much more balanced competition all round, be more cost effective in many areas, be financially for more viable for most clubs and see revenue being generated and distributed more effectively to the benefit of the game as a whole.

It would also create a competition for 40 teams, open up opportunities for more players to develop at an appropriate level, particularly if SL clubs run Academies at U17s & U19's, Championship clubs run U21's reserves and Championship 1 clubs just focus on a first grade squad.

SL Clubs, whilst not running U21's/Reserve teams would be granted the opportunity to retain up to 8 players from their academies on intermediate contracts for a maximum of 2 years (if coming out of the U19's) or until they turned 21 years of age. These 8 players would not form part of the first team quota of 30 players, but would train full time and be part of the first team squad as "project players" and could be part of any dual registration agreement between the SL club and a Championship Club in order to give them regular game time in an environment which will assist their development and they can be monitored.

Signing of Academy players or U21's/Reserves could only take place from 1st November each year, this would give ample time for squads to be built for all concerned.

Clubs relegated from SL to Championship would not run an U21's in their first year of relegation but would continue with their U19's in the SL Academy for their initial Championship season, therefore allowing players they have brought through their system to remain playing at the club at an applicable level and to see out the remainder of their Academy contracts. Once finished (Start of 2nd Year Championship) they could then move into the U21's/Reserve team, again remaining with the club that had developed them and also bring stability and hopefully a strong reserve team to the Club, continuing to lay foundations for the future.

Teams gaining promotion from Championship to SL would not run U17's or U19's Academies in their first year but continue running their U21's/Reserves in the Championship U21's/Reserve Competition, therefore allowing some strength in depth to the Senior 1st Grade squad and giving the club a full season to put all the necessary requirements and staff in place to oversee any Academy set up for the following year should they remain in SL.

If a Championship club went up and came straight down, it would have no effect on their U21's/Reserve Team as it would continue as normal, if a SL club went down and then gained promotion again the following year, they would only need to recruit at U17's in full and employ staff for the same age group as the U19's would still be in place.

All too straight forward I know

So based on this year it would potentially look something like this...............

Super League

Wigan Warriors
Warrington Wolves
St Helens
Catalan Dragons
Leeds Rhinos
Hull FC
Huddersfield Giants
Wakefield Wildcats
Bradford Bulls
Hull KR

Championship

Salford City Reds
London Broncos
Castleford Tigers
Widnes Vikings
Featherstone
Leigh Centurions
Halifax
Sheffield
Batley
Keighley

Championship 1 - North

Dewsbury
Oldham
Rochdale
Hunslet
York
Barrow
Workington
Whitehaven
Gateshead
Swinton

Championship 1 - South

London Skolars
Crusaders
South Wales
Doncaster
Oxford
Hemel Hempstead
Gloucester
Northampton (Example)
Coventry (Example)
Nottingham (Example)



If only the RFL could see it

in your championship 1 leagues would it not make more sence to place doncaster in div 1 north and swinton in div 1 south due to travel for both wales teams plus oxford and gloucester been easier to the manchester area than to doncaster

[sheddings69]

I have said this for ages, but I doubt it will ever change, anyway here goes..............................

Problem you have is SLE and how funds are distributed from the Sky deal.

Currently I think each SL club gets £1,680,000 per season, with £1,680,000 going to the RFL and £1,680,000 being split between all 23 Championship clubs, giving you the 135 Million over the next 5 years.

If the SLE/RFL had anything about them they would restructure the Leagues and then broker a deal that benefited the sport as a whole instead of just the top end.

For example............................

SL - 10 teams getting £1,680,000 each.................if thats what it takes!

Championship - 10 teams getting 60% of the remaining £8,400,000...........so thats £504,000 each

Championship 1 - 2 Divisions of 10 Teams (North & South) getting the remaining 40% between them £3,360,000...........So thats £168,000 each

Championship 1 clubs would also save on travel costs as it would be regionalised (To an extent ), also meaning players would be less effected in their professional work lives by their participation in Semi pro sport, plus lots of other common sense benefits and solutions to problems faced by Championship 1 clubs and their players.

Play offs for Championship 1 would be top 4 North & Top 4 South, 8 team format, i.e......1 (N) v 4 (S), 2 (S) v 3 (N) etc, straight knockout, Q-Finals , Semi - Finals & Final with GF Winner getting a home tie in a P & R playoff against Bottom placed Championship Team, Whoever wins either remains in, or joins Championship.

Championship Play offs - Top 6 (Similar format to SL but with 6 not - GF winner gets a home tie in a P & R playoff against Bottom placed SL Team, Whoever wins either remains in, or joins SL.

SL Play offs - Top 6 (Similar to current format of 8 but with 6)

Challenge Cup to remain as it currently is.

SL & Championship to have an additional Cup Competition to include all teams in both Leagues that is to be played from April - July

Format - 4 Pools of 5 to be drawn giving 4 fixtures per team per group (Alternate draw to be used - SL club then C/ship club per group), 2 home, 2 away - All gates reciepts to be split equally between Home & Away teams for all fixtures.

Top 2 teams at the end of each Group stage to compete in Q - Finals, ie G1 winner v G4 Runner Up etc, Semi- Finals are open Draw and to be played at Neutral Venue, same for the Final.

Championship 1 to have an additional Cup Competition to include all teams in both Leagues played from April - July

Two groups of 5 from North - Two Groups of 5 from South giving 4 fixtures per team per group, 2 home, 2 away - All gates reciepts to be split equally between Home & Away teams for all fixtures.

Top 2 teams at the end of each Group stage to compete in Q - Finals, ie G1 winner v G4 Runner Up etc, Semi- Finals are open Draw and to be played at Neutral Venue, same for the Final.

Minimum fixtures for any Club in any division is 22 and it would be an equal split of 11 Home and 11 away.

This would produce a much more balanced competition all round, be more cost effective in many areas, be financially for more viable for most clubs and see revenue being generated and distributed more effectively to the benefit of the game as a whole.

It would also create a competition for 40 teams, open up opportunities for more players to develop at an appropriate level, particularly if SL clubs run Academies at U17s & U19's, Championship clubs run U21's reserves and Championship 1 clubs just focus on a first grade squad.

SL Clubs, whilst not running U21's/Reserve teams would be granted the opportunity to retain up to 8 players from their academies on intermediate contracts for a maximum of 2 years (if coming out of the U19's) or until they turned 21 years of age. These 8 players would not form part of the first team quota of 30 players, but would train full time and be part of the first team squad as "project players" and could be part of any dual registration agreement between the SL club and a Championship Club in order to give them regular game time in an environment which will assist their development and they can be monitored.

Signing of Academy players or U21's/Reserves could only take place from 1st November each year, this would give ample time for squads to be built for all concerned.

Clubs relegated from SL to Championship would not run an U21's in their first year of relegation but would continue with their U19's in the SL Academy for their initial Championship season, therefore allowing players they have brought through their system to remain playing at the club at an applicable level and to see out the remainder of their Academy contracts. Once finished (Start of 2nd Year Championship) they could then move into the U21's/Reserve team, again remaining with the club that had developed them and also bring stability and hopefully a strong reserve team to the Club, continuing to lay foundations for the future.

Teams gaining promotion from Championship to SL would not run U17's or U19's Academies in their first year but continue running their U21's/Reserves in the Championship U21's/Reserve Competition, therefore allowing some strength in depth to the Senior 1st Grade squad and giving the club a full season to put all the necessary requirements and staff in place to oversee any Academy set up for the following year should they remain in SL.

If a Championship club went up and came straight down, it would have no effect on their U21's/Reserve Team as it would continue as normal, if a SL club went down and then gained promotion again the following year, they would only need to recruit at U17's in full and employ staff for the same age group as the U19's would still be in place.

All too straight forward I know

So based on this year it would potentially look something like this...............

Super League

Wigan Warriors
Warrington Wolves
St Helens
Catalan Dragons
Leeds Rhinos
Hull FC
Huddersfield Giants
Wakefield Wildcats
Bradford Bulls
Hull KR

Championship

Salford City Reds
London Broncos
Castleford Tigers
Widnes Vikings
Featherstone
Leigh Centurions
Halifax
Sheffield
Batley
Keighley

Championship 1 - North

Dewsbury
Oldham
Rochdale
Hunslet
York
Barrow
Workington
Whitehaven
Gateshead
Swinton

Championship 1 - South

London Skolars
Crusaders
South Wales
Doncaster
Oxford
Hemel Hempstead
Gloucester
Northampton (Example)
Coventry (Example)
Nottingham (Example)



If only the RFL could see it

Makes complete sense - exactly why the RFL wouldn't consider it for a second!

[Matt J]

To increase the intensity, id just drop 2 play off places to a top 6 play off system. Make the play offs more sought after and itll see regular season games become more meaningful.

[roughyedspud]

or kick 4 teams of super league....better teams,less games more intensity