Archived

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

Chariots

Super League 2 leagues of 12

562 posts in this topic

Say what?!?!?!?!

 

That sounds almost as complicated to explain as the current 8 team play offs. And as pointless.

I really hope they keep the Top-8 play-offs as well!

 

It'll make me chuckle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to clarify on what is being proposed.

 

The idea, as far as I understand it, is that the two bottom teams will be relegated from Super League at the end of 2014, regardless of which teams they will be. There could even be three teams relegated if the clubs decide they want Toulouse in the competition in 2015 with a TV deal possibly on the table from BeIn Sport.

 

There will then be two divisions of 12 each, which will play each other once (eleven games) in the first half of the season.

 

In the second half of the season, those clubs will split into three divisions of eight teams, depending on finishing places in the first half of the season. The bottom four Super League clubs will be in with the top four Championship clubs (which may include the two SL clubs relegated the previous season). Those teams will play each other at home and away (14 games) in the second half of the season.

 

The top four clubs in the second tier, at the end of that season, will then return to Super League for 2016.

Hmm, if we dig back a few months, that's not far off what i proposed. 

 

I think I did two tens though splitting into 6/6/8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to clarify on what is being proposed.

 

The idea, as far as I understand it, is that the two bottom teams will be relegated from Super League at the end of 2014, regardless of which teams they will be. There could even be three teams relegated if the clubs decide they want Toulouse in the competition in 2015 with a TV deal possibly on the table from BeIn Sport.

 

There will then be two divisions of 12 each, which will play each other once (eleven games) in the first half of the season.

 

In the second half of the season, those clubs will split into three divisions of eight teams, depending on finishing places in the first half of the season. The bottom four Super League clubs will be in with the top four Championship clubs (which may include the two SL clubs relegated the previous season). Those teams will play each other at home and away (14 games) in the second half of the season.

 

The top four clubs in the second tier, at the end of that season, will then return to Super League for 2016.

 

 

 

It's got to be a bluff, and opening gambit with the eventual end-game being something less extreme, but something that would be rejected if it were proposed first up.  That way the ones yielding the power can be seen as having negotiated fairly and settled on a solution that the other clubs feel compelled to support.

 

I like 14, and I like P&R.  What I would like is for Gary Hetherington and his pals to keep their greedy mitts off the structure of the sport.  Sport is a business, and it's not just about the top few clubs making as much money as possible, it's about all clubs being given a structure where they can all build towards profitability.  Look at the strides that the likes of Featherstone and Wakefield have made in the last couple of years, let's not kick them in the teeth again.

 

If that means we have a structure that allows growth and long term stability and profitability for all in the longterm then lets work at that, what we shouldn't be chasing is a structure which is all about maximising profits for the few.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a fan at all of this and the leadership at the top just gets worse. Very complicated and trying to please everybody while the problems are just left to get worse. The standards on and off the pitch get watered down each year. And where are the 24 clubs?

 

I would rather the RFL just said look a Licence for SL as from 2015 on a 3 year deal cost X amount. A bond of half a million is required. Clubs must run a reserve grade and U20 and U18s team and there must be certain other minimum standards met by ALL clubs. A club failing to meet such standards faces losing some of its bond. Any club going under would not receive its 1 million bond and that money would be used to pay debtors and be used to help develop the Grassroots level. A similar thing to operate at Championship level with clubs forced to commit and meet certain standards but obviously not have to pay such a big amount. I dont know if thats practical, but seems better than what is currently being planned

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope this isnt the actual structure, it would mean that those in the top 8 will play each other 3 times in the regular season and then possibly another couple of times in play-offs, not to mention the cup too.

 

How would the Salary Cap work? 

 

I can see where they are coming from, and it would lead to a very fluid movement between the divisions. Every game would without doubt mean something too!! Just might be overkill with repeat fixtures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, if we dig back a few months, that's not far off what i proposed. 

 

I think I did two tens though splitting into 6/6/8

Are you not concerned about playing the same teams 3, possibly 4, 5 times a season? That includes any unforseen play-off structure and Cup games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gruff, on 03 May 2013 - 11:06, said:

I like it - seems to tick all the boxes.

- Something for all clubs to play for throughout the season.

- Gives clubs the opportunity for promotion and relegation each year.

- Opportunity for multiple TV packages.

- Second half of season gives an elite league for the shield, a secondary league for promotion and relegation and a plate, and a tertiary league for developing teams to win the bowl.

Im actually warming to the idea after intially thinking its ludicrous! You make some good points.

Just worry about repeat fixtures, dont want to play the same teams 4/5 times a year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this proposal does go through this will set Rugby League back many years. It smacks of levelling the sport down to the lowest common denominator, this format does not create stability or allow clubs to build or develop players. Although licensing has its faults the main reasons why it was brought in were absolutely correct, ie, to develop clubs etc

 

I can only see the NRL moving further forward and creating an even bigger gap, instead of levelling up and creating more elite competition ie, Internationals etc and expanding into new areas the sport is levelling down to clubs which are barely able to support professionalism. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't see how system Martyn's explained is going to help with finances. Means top clubs play each other three times so more big home gates. Potentially a team in sl1 could get all top teams away from home in first half of season, thus no big gates, then have to play in middle eight division home and away so more lower gates. Would seem this system will just widen financial gulf between teams even more.

And how's the table determined at end of season? Are all results recombined and its based on wins/losses like now or is the top eight automatically the first eight positions even though a team in middle division may have won more games than a bottom end top eight team?

Needs more explaining how it would work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The benefits I see of it (if the funding is done right) is that IMHO it gives a realistic opportunity for clubs to grow into strong SL clubs.

 

It is difficult for somebody like Toulouse or Sheffield to use the Championship as a test-bed, whereas I think the SL2 could be a more realistic starting point for clubs with ambition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds good to me. The game has become stale and crowds are dwindling at many SL and almost all Championship clubs, so what's a better alternative to this? Trying to please everybody is absolutely the way to go in order to reinvigorate our struggling sport. Bring it on for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds good to me. The game has become stale and crowds are dwindling at many SL and almost all Championship clubs, so what's a better alternative to this? Trying to please everybody is absolutely the way to go in order to reinvigorate our struggling sport. Bring it on for me.

Trying to please everybody is going to cause a hell of a mess for our game. Why are people trying to recreate the sporting landscape of the 19th Century?

 

At the elite level we have the players for 12 teams, we have the finances for 12 teams, we have the spectator numbers for 12 teams, we have the corporate support for 12 teams, we have the media interest for 12 teams. So, naturally, we should create a structure where we attempt to involve 24 teams!

 

I honestly see myself as a fan of the game, rather than one particular club, and I can't see anything positive coming from this. We should be focusing our limited resources on creating a genuinely elite competition and use that to create further resources. Spreading what little we've got on 24 clubs is nothing short of ludicrous. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like it - seems to tick all the boxes.

 

 - Something for all clubs to play for throughout the season.

 - Gives clubs the opportunity for promotion and relegation each year.

 - Opportunity for multiple TV packages.

 - Second half of season gives an elite league for the shield, a secondary league for promotion and relegation and a plate, and a tertiary league for developing teams to win the bowl.

I like it too.  My only concern would be repeat fixtures.  Presumably there would be something like a top five play off also because to have anymore than that in an eight team final league would be silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The system would give 5 TV packages to sell, all offering different things

 

Package 1 - Top 12 for first half of the season

Package 2 - Bottom 12 for first half of the season

Package 3 - Elite League - for some the most exciting league

Package 4 - Promotion/Relegation League

Package 5 - Bottom league - only pride etc... to play for - apparently no different to the championship now

 

Those who just want to watch the best players thrash it out week in week out will go for packages 1 and 3

Those who want to see promotion/relegation battles will have packages 1 or 2 (depending on where their team starts) and 4 

Those who just want to see their team play matches will have  1 or 2 then 5.

 

This system will also help reduce the gap in the top teams and lower teams.  if this was implemented now then the likes of Salford/London would have played the big boys, then onto the larger championship teams like Halifax.  It gives the likes of Halifax the opportunity to play top tier teams 8 times in a season, with the chance of playing them all the year after.

 

I don't see many negatives - only the fact that the top league would play each other three times over a season - but this would be extra fixtures against the top teams, not against cannon fodder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trying to please everybody is going to cause a hell of a mess for our game. Why are people trying to recreate the sporting landscape of the 19th Century?

 

 

Lots of self interest and a governing body that doesn't appear to actually have the powers required to govern as it can only act on the majority vote from the clubs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds good to me. The game has become stale and crowds are dwindling at many SL and almost all Championship clubs, so what's a better alternative to this? Trying to please everybody is absolutely the way to go in order to reinvigorate our struggling sport. Bring it on for me.

I don't think it's fair to say that crowds are dwindling - there appears to be some challenges this year but I would put that more down to the economy so we need to be careful not to knee-jerk.

 

That said, there are more and more vocal fans who appear to have taken Leeds' recent victories badly and now talk down the regular rounds. If the cut is after only 11 rounds teams need to hit the ground running.

 

It's fair to say that in Rugby league (and probably sport in general in this country) that people seem to find it difficult to discuss these ideas without going to the extremes.

 

It's either a farce and it will kill the game, or it's the only way and the game will die if we don't do it.

 

I try and stay somewhere in the middle, there are benefits and challenges around every idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like it too.  My only concern would be repeat fixtures.  Presumably there would be something like a top five play off also because to have anymore than that in an eight team final league would be silly.

 Agree - top 4 in a straight knockout would be my preference.

 

This would then free up an extra few weeks of fixtures for an expanded WCC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This system will also help reduce the gap in the top teams and lower teams.  if this was implemented now then the likes of Salford/London would have played the big boys, then onto the larger championship teams like Halifax.  It gives the likes of Halifax the opportunity to play top tier teams 8 times in a season, with the chance of playing them all the year after.

 

It would be 11 games in first part of season, then 14 games in the split divisions, then the play offs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the daft idea that in "second half season" the 8th placed team in the Elite could do a Huddersfield, blob out and not win a game, and the 9th could do a Wakefield, go on a huge winning streak, and there's sod all anyone can do about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With regard to the top 8, I'd preferably go for a straight knockout play off at the end of year.

1st vs 4th

2nd vs 3rd

Lacks the intensity if there's 8 teams gunning for 5 or 6 spots, I want to see the team sat 3rd and 4th constantly looking over their shoulder. Sam for 1 and 2 fearing losing home advantage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Agree - top 4 in a straight knockout would be my preference.

 

This would then free up an extra few weeks of fixtures for an expanded WCC

I'd definitely agree to the play offs being a straight knock out (which IMO they should have been all along anyway) and yes, such an arrangement would open up the possibility of an expanded WCC (which I'm not in favour of) or just a regular round of international matches with enough time for those who are likely to form the majority of the international team to have a rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Agree - top 4 in a straight knockout would be my preference.

 

This would then free up an extra few weeks of fixtures for an expanded WCC

 

Let's not forget that GH has already flown out to Australia to negotiate an expanded WCC.  I'd love to see an expanded comp, and I'd love Leeds NOT to qualify.  I'm sick of this man being held up as an example for other chairmen to follow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the daft idea that in "second half season" the 8th placed team in the Elite could do a Huddersfield, blob out and not win a game, and the 9th could do a Wakefield, go on a huge winning streak, and there's sod all anyone can do about it.

 

You'd just have to pray that your team doesnt have a bad injury run in the first 11 games!

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