Super League teams to discuss 2 tier SL with P+R
Posted 26 October 2012 - 12:04 PM
Leeds Rhinos, St Albans Centurions y Griffons Madrid fan. Also follow (to a lesser extent) Catalans Dragons, London Broncos, South Sydney Rabbitohs, Jacksonville Axemen, Vrchlabi Mad Squirrels, København Black Swans, Red Star Belgrade and North Hertfordshire Crusaders.
Moderator of the International board
Posted 26 October 2012 - 12:05 PM
If you use "should of", "would of" or "could of", you are a moron.
On Odsal Top baht 'at.
Posted 26 October 2012 - 12:06 PM
Casual Postman of Orford says...
10:44am Fri 26 Oct 12
Spot on two divisions of ten, get two more French clubs in there and top 5 play off with promotion and relegation from SL2.
Posted 26 October 2012 - 12:08 PM
My only problem with stories like these is we only hear from the 'haves', a whiff of NIMBY-ism matched with I'm Alright Jack. I remember McManus from St Helens saying similar about reducing the league. I doubt Warrington would've been so supportive 10 years ago, for example.
Yes it suits the 10 better clubs, but clubs are trying to address issues for the good of the game!!
Play off crowds are down *, doesn't make our game look attractive - That's without talking of clubs in money crisis or poor stadiums etc etc
* versus regular season games
Edited by 1976PMJwires, 26 October 2012 - 12:09 PM.
Posted 26 October 2012 - 12:09 PM
Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"
This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.
Posted 26 October 2012 - 12:16 PM
Posted 26 October 2012 - 12:20 PM
Why would you split the top league just to satisy that? In splitting the Super League would we have 10 teams in the top league, 10 in the second, and the rest of the clubs making up the Championships?
If so, what is really the point?
Have those who want a return to promotion and relegation thought that in doing this the changes would only really be a smokescreen because, presumably, there would be no p&r between the second division and the Championship clubs below it?
Currently Sky's television deal is to show 14 clubs throughout the season; what happens if we extend it to 20, even though many people are saying the current format needs reducing to 12?
How do we sustain 20 clubs in two divisions if we there is a question mark over how the governing body is sustaining one league of 14?
So many questions...
Posted 26 October 2012 - 12:23 PM
So what's the difference between a 2 tier Super League and Super League + Championship? Other than P+R?
Central funding and criteria I'd guess.
Posted 26 October 2012 - 12:42 PM
Posted 26 October 2012 - 12:45 PM
Insofar as this allows Fax, Fev, Leigh, Sheff, Cumbrians etc a place in SL2, then I would welcome it with open arms.
If you take Wigan, Leeds and Wire, say, as organisations they are poles apart from Cas, London and Fev, who in turn are poles apart from Skolars, Gateshead and South Wales - I hope that is uncontroversial.
The position these clubs take will vary over time, and so we need the possibility of moving up and down. Currently, it seems to me there is very little in terms of potential between the bottom 4 in SL and the top 6 in the Champioship. Certainly very little that an even spread of Sky money would not smooth over.
Posted 26 October 2012 - 01:00 PM
Lilly, Jacob and Isaac, what my life is about. Although our route through life is not how it should be, I am a blessed man.
Posted 26 October 2012 - 01:06 PM
"Oh yes, this will be great if Sky, the SL clubs and the CC clubs support it"
"However, we can't afford that right now so how about a 12 club SL as a first step along that road and send Cas and HKR into the Championship to help boost that level with a view to attaining the 2 x 10 teams SL in the future"
Posted 26 October 2012 - 01:24 PM
Our best players would be under much more pressure week in, week out, and clubs like Wakey would be able to be more competitive in SL2. Too many of our top players, know that they can be some way below their best and still end up on the winning side if they're playing the likes of Wakey, Cas, Salford & Widnes.
With a salary cap of say £2m for SL1 and £1.5m for SL2, the gap between the two wouldn't be massive and clubs could step up, or move down without having to completely start again. That's the big problem with the old system. For those going down, all contracts became null & void, and those going up had to recruit a new team within a few months.
Key to ensure there is a tight control on "non-federation" players, to ensure clubs in SL2 don't just pack their squads with run around Aussies and Kiwis, rather than home grown players.
A franchise system for clubs wanting to join SL2 should be in place to ensure the downside of the old P&R system weren't just replicated but shoved down a tier.
Be good if they could get this in place for the 2015 season.
Posted 26 October 2012 - 01:30 PM
Bleedin ridiculous. What on earth for. Can we keep some things the same. When are we going to use helmets and the cricket bats then?
Not long since the cricketers split their league into 2 small divisions of 9 each.
Has it increased crowds ? Doubt it.
Posted 26 October 2012 - 01:34 PM
Slight error. It's actually Super Duper League and Stoopid League.
Wait, I've got it: we need to split Super League into Super League and Super Duper League. That would sort it.
And it's watched by sheeple.
- Severus, July 2012
Posted 26 October 2012 - 01:38 PM
Posted 26 October 2012 - 01:42 PM
Leave the number of SL sides the same, decrease the playoff numbers, and although relegation isn't an option, make it clear to the clubs that finish bottom that they would have to fulfill the other main criteria to retain their licenses.
So they're not being relegated but they lose their licence if they don't fulfil the criteria ?
What the hell does that mean ?
Posted 26 October 2012 - 01:42 PM
If we had 20 clubs capable of moving between divisions with nobody falling foul of current minimum standards all well and good, but we haven't so I don't see the point in discussing it uless they are going to scrap minimum standards.
I thought it was a stunning suggestion.
Only one thing missing.....
Any detail at all