Maybe the finances to compete in the SL currently are too much for all but a handful of clubs. Is it that there are too many who can't afford to be in SL or too few that can afford to be in SL?
Nice question, my view (that is not a fact but is a humble opinion based on reading all I can that's said by the power brokers and looking at all the information published) is that Leeds, Wigan, Wire and Saints rule the roost. After that Huddersfield are consistently heavily funded and Hull and Catalans also seem to make up the "handful". Bradford weren't saved for nothing and Toulouse were courted and spouting just how rich they would be in SL.
In terms of who can't afford to be in Superleague, I think (not as a fact but as a humble opinion based on reading all I can that's said by the power brokers and looking at all the information published)all you need to do is look at the Championship.
Look at how low the crowds are?
Look at the ageing demographic of those falling crowds??
Look at the way they are morphing into "A" teams???
Maybe nobody can afford to be in the Championship. The division of death tag used to belong to CC1.
I don't think anyone who ends up in the second tier is going to be saved from the problems it brings by simply calling it "SL2"
I can't see any funding system in which the top ten already rich clubs continue getting hundreds of thousands of pounds more than the rest AND can inject hundreds of thousand of pounds of more private money will do anything to create evenness between the divisions.
Wigan currrently are given £1.2m by sky, If Leigh get £680K from SKY with 2 x 10's and Wigan are allowed to spend another £400K of private money on players, you still have a discrepancy in spending power.
Wigan's turnover will gallop off towards £6M whilst Leigh's will be able to secure their business but won't be able to afford a Superleague team, there aren't the players for an extra six superleague clubs to buy.
Edited by The Parksider, 12 March 2013 - 03:12 PM.