Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Terry Mullaney

Two tier SL on the way

724 posts in this topic

Yeah I remember it too, the top sides all had a say. My point is though, 10 years ago Wire wouldn't be in, 5 years ago Catalan and Widnes wouldn't be in, 1 year ago Salford wouldn't be in. Times change, situations change and it's only those at the top at this moment in tarm who get to really makes those decisions.

This is always been the case, just the names / clubs have changed..... Im not sure if its good or bad for the game....... we need a sponsor first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who would the extra 6 clubs be? The top 6 Championship clubs? Or would it be licensed so the top 20 licenses are picked and go from there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you'd need a licence/franchise to be in tier 2, effectively playing part-time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you'd need a licence/franchise to be in tier 2, effectively playing part-time?

Seeing whats going on in the championship at the moment,i'd bring licensing in now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeh I guess so. But all this is mainly about is for the top teams to i) get more money, and ii) get rid of the poor teams and take their best players they can no longer afford.

This is the crux of the matter, those who want SL2 to get half of the funding are missing the point

the top teams would not want to play each other 3 times a season for the same money as if they played in a 14 team league home and away against

strong and week teams, they would want more money without the weaker teams getting as equal a share as them

and would Sky pay money for the TV coverage of SL2 or would Premier sports pick it up for a song instead of the championship which would be broken up and the lower half merged with Cc1?

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But won't the gap in funding just make it the same few teams up and down each year? After all if the two teams promoted can pay the higher cap, why aren't they there in the first place? I reckon it would add variety by diluting the bottom yo-yo teams who can't quite compete with the full cap over and over again. Unless I'm missing something...!

I suggest adding a team and dividing SL into three leagues of five teams. Promotion and relegation would take place every six moths.

That would add variety.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suggest adding a team and dividing SL into three leagues of five teams. Promotion and relegation would take place every six moths.

That would add variety.

Good idea. Three up, three down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeh I guess so. But all this is mainly about is for the top teams to i) get more money, and ii) get rid of the poor teams and take their best players they can no longer afford.

Hit the nail on the head, the bottom of the pile get squeezed out, their little bit of corn will then go to the Super League2 clubs (who can't get promoted to Super League) this opens up for the Super League to up their cap a little to keep the top 4 or 5 teams happy. (Brian Clough once replied when asked by a very excited reporter what he thought about the new Premier League "It's the old first division isn't it")

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By my reckoning the North West Mens Premier Division could become Super League 8 (North-West Conference) :rolleyes::ph34r::rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is the way to go as well. The NRL in Australia should consider looking down this road as well by bring in another 8 teams with a 2 tiered comp, with 12 teams each in it.

Maybe in 20 to 50 years when it takes around 2 hours to travel between England and Australia there will be a 3 tiered world comp involving Australia, New Zealand, UK, France, USA, Canada, Italy, Germany, Russia and current rugby league minion countries where between now and then the game grows at a rapid rate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two equal conferences of ten with cross conference playoffs to decide the ultimate champion.Conference make ups could change each season depending on chosen criteria.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Warrington CEO, Andy Gatecliffe, believes there is a way of pleasing clubs both at the top and bottom of SL.

I'm for anything radical and exciting like this. just a few questions............

1. Anyone care to suggest the 20 chosen clubs??

2. Once we have a 20 what about the clubs outside this? Is it the end for several clubs? Is it the end of pro RL in West Cumbria for instance?

3. What about the clubs in the second tier of SL facing a need to turn over five or six million (two million of which is wages) if promoted to survive in SL1?

What about them needing to find money and crowds when (let's take Bradford or Wakefield for example if they were in SL2) they lose fixtures against Leeds, Wigan, Saints and instead are playing Barrow, Dewsbury and Batley?

4. Would this be the end of London for sure?

Could Toulouse do anything playing SL2

How would Catalans cope with SL2

5. Why would SKY bother to subsidise SL2, do they want the "Big games" only??

Given P & R has proved to be a turnoff how will crowds go for say the bottom SL club getting beat every week?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was wondering about the clubs myself Parky.

I came up with this wild and potentially way off the mark speculation on the back of a fag packet;

- 14 Existing Super League clubs

- Championship clubs not in a formal duel reg agreement last count I made this 5 but I’m sure someone will correct me if I’m wrong – no offence intended. (Barrow, Leigh, Sheffield, Halifax and Featherstone)

- An extra French side.

Wondering into the realms of really wild unfounded speculation if you needed to replace any of the above then I guess you could perhaps include one of the new expansion teams, perhaps Oxford or a resurrection of a Welsh side at this level. Not saying this is underpinned by anything logical and no I don’t have a 1500 word summary of a business plan I could post to underpin either!

Personally I hate the term “Super League 2”. But perhaps this is the draw bridge were by the P&R debate can be driven so far down the pyramid that few voices are left calling for it from SL2 to Championship/Division 3 (Call it what you will!) and it’ll be coming from clubs no dependent on higher level clubs via the duel reg system meaning until they break free of that the perfect excuse exists to turn them down with no further explanation required.

Not against it in principle, but have reservations about how you fund it unless Sky/TV Partner stump up serious cash and would still have reservations that even then its subject to change every TV negotiation. Also have reservations about 10 teams league, but to suggest any more would be fanciful given the clubs currently at our disposal, but I fail to come up with a format that I'd find interesting given the scope for repeat fixtures in the regular season, cup and play-offs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about this http://www.loverugbyleague.com/blogpost_467-an-alternative-league-structure.html

Except change the playoffs a bit in the leagues below SL to the second lowest side in the higher league and 2-5 in the lower league.

Match A - 2 v 3

Match B - 4 v 5

Match C - Team in higher league v Winner Match A (winner to playoff final)

Match D - Loser match A v Winner Match B

Match E - Loser match C v Winner Match D

Final - Winner match C v Winner match E

So this way it is 1 up 1 down with the playoff sides having to overcome a team in the higher division like it used to be between NL1 and NL2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, another case of the "haves" dictating the ways and means of the game. I wonder if Gatcliffe would have been so supportive of a two-tier system 10 years ago when the Wire weren't near the top of the tree*. Everyone will be up for it, providing they are in the top Super League.

(*assuming Gatcliffe was at Warrington back then, I don't know but I do know TRLers would be quick to point it out if he wasn't)

Yet in over 135 years Warrington have never been relegated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet in over 135 years Warrington have never been relegated

I'm not picking on them (they'd be no point, they're called Wolves for a reason) but as an example in 2001, 2002 and 2003 Warrington finished behind London, who today would be considered an SL2 team. My point is it's only now they're title contenders does the consideration seem appropriate, the same goes for the other top-6 contenders. They'll push because they know they'll be the winners in this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, another case of the "haves" dictating the ways and means of the game. I wonder if Gatcliffe would have been so supportive of a two-tier system 10 years ago when the Wire weren't near the top of the tree*. Everyone will be up for it, providing they are in the top Super League.

(*assuming Gatcliffe was at Warrington back then, I don't know but I do know TRLers would be quick to point it out if he wasn't)

I'm not really sure of your point here Hindle.

What Gatcliffe is supporting is actually bringing more clubs to the SL Table (without seeing his actual proposal we must assume that there would be TV funding to support the £1.2m SC for the 2nd conference).

This is actually a suggestion based on what is happening in the game right now.

There are 14 teams in SL. There are another 4 or 5 who have SL ambition and want to play at the top table. The rest seem to accept that they will not be fit for SL in the foreseeable future, so this appears to be a sensible structure that meets most of the clubs' needs.

I agree with Shrek that there are issues around how you structure the season to avoid too many repeat fixtures, but I'm sure it can be done, but it feels a relatively sensible starting point rather than 'somebody at the top' dictating how the game moves forward.

If it is a terrible idea, it will not go anywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet in over 135 years Warrington have never been relegated

Have we had P&R for 135 years seeing as the game of RL , or what came to be RL, only came into being in 1895?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I

Our biggest problem we have no ff-ing sponsors, our game is a joke at present with some fantastic clubs and wonderful players for once.

Is it really?

Firstly, we do have sponsors. We have no SL title sponsor. That's it. In an ideal world we would have one, but I'm not sure why you deem this as the 'biggest problem'.

Why is the game a joke? I'm enjoying it, we seem to be attracting more investment than ever in a horrendous financial climate.

Crowds appear to be down, but I'd suggest people read the report on the BBC website about the Football League where crowds are almost universally down and times are tough for our biggest sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not really sure of your point here Hindle.

What Gatcliffe is supporting is actually bringing more clubs to the SL Table (without seeing his actual proposal we must assume that there would be TV funding to support the £1.2m SC for the 2nd conference).

This is actually a suggestion based on what is happening in the game right now.

There are 14 teams in SL. There are another 4 or 5 who have SL ambition and want to play at the top table. The rest seem to accept that they will not be fit for SL in the foreseeable future, so this appears to be a sensible structure that meets most of the clubs' needs.

I agree with Shrek that there are issues around how you structure the season to avoid too many repeat fixtures, but I'm sure it can be done, but it feels a relatively sensible starting point rather than 'somebody at the top' dictating how the game moves forward.

If it is a terrible idea, it will not go anywhere.

My point was we only hear from those at the top on this idea, and now Salford because they think they should be at the top because they have money now, but those who would lose out, we don't here from them. If I remember rightly from last time it's Saints, Leeds, Wigan, Warrington who think this is the way forward, because it'll benefit them most and disrupt them least. My further point was historically, I don't think Warrington would have been so supportive if it was them who might have been at risk of finishing lower down the league a decade or so ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it really?

Firstly, we do have sponsors. We have no SL title sponsor. That's it. In an ideal world we would have one, but I'm not sure why you deem this as the 'biggest problem'.

Why is the game a joke? I'm enjoying it, we seem to be attracting more investment than ever in a horrendous financial climate.

Crowds appear to be down, but I'd suggest people read the report on the BBC website about the Football League where crowds are almost universally down and times are tough for our biggest sport.

I agree. Its bad news not having a title sponsor but the game still carries on and is far from a joke. In fact this season seems to be the best in a long while. I reckon sponsors must have more money than sense given the cash they waste on other sports. I saw a clip of the Basketball team from Sheffield last night (Sharks?), they won a trophy the other day. There was footage from Sky sports but their didn't seem to be a main sponsor. I haven't heard anyone calling Basketball a joke and that has a far 'cooler' image than RL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the idea and propose the following simple pay off system:

Teams finishing 2nd, 4th and 6th in SL1 play off against the teams in 1st, 3rd and 5th in SL2. All the winners go through.

The remaining teams form mini groups of three and all play each other with the winner of each group going through.

All the team left in play each other twice, home and away, with the number of points scored by each team divided by the number of tries scored to give a T-R-Y Strike Rate.

The four teams with the highest T-R-Y Strike Rate are in the semi-finals, although the team that finished first in SL1 gets to declare a re-match if it loses. If it loses a second time, the winning side is eliminated anyway and the team finishing first can choose to play either of the other semi-finalists to see if it can do any better against them. If it still can’t win Leeds are declared the winners, unless the team is Leeds in which case they are declared the winners anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suggest adding a team and dividing SL into three leagues of five teams. Promotion and relegation would take place every six months.

That would add variety.

Good idea. Three up, three down.

And the top five in each league making the playoffs. Eight is just stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - June 2017

League Express - Mon 17th July 2017