Jump to content

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 393
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I hope not, a ten team SL (or championship) would be woeful. 

2x10 just smacks of trying to please everyone, whilst at the same time not really pleasing anyone.  For starters, calling it "SL2" just cheapens the Super League brand. You may as well call it "S

This. I want 14 and a bit of variety. 10 just doesnt do it for me.

1 minute ago, Rupert Prince said:

Why would they pack in?  Have St Pats packed in?  Why woulg tjey pack in.  

Why are SL clubs worried about tv money.  The proposed 1 year deal as rumoured gives them more than now.

By ' pack in ' they mean as a semi professional club 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

The idea should be that playing a RL match should make a profit , or at least break even , the limit on the number of games should be for general player welfare , 26 games ( 6 months ) is probably the ideal number , that should really apply to all tiers , or at least be the aim 

Not a truer word spoken. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Blind side johnny said:

I hear that a tentative suggestion/proposal for the restructuring of the SL/Championship was floated by the RFL to a meeting last week. In a nutshell it was suggested that, ultimately, we might reduce to two leagues of 10 teams, and nothing else. The criteria for selection wasn't discussed in any details but  wouldn't take too much to work out.

This seems to have arisen borne of the panic of certain SL chairmen about their loss of TV income. Naturally the Championship chairmen are less than sanguine about such a suggestion

What might come of such discussions is anyone's guess but this does seem like a perfect time for another internal war within the sport.

Maybe LE will have picked up something about this for tomorrow's edition?

Where have you heard this one from then Johnny?

I must admit I am inclined to believe what you say and I have suggested this could well end up being the case.

I think the driver of this will be money.

I think we all know,or at least those of us who are realists that there is not enough money in rugby league to sustain 36 or 37 senior clubs as it already is.

 Indeed you will probably have seen my posts over a period of time where I have asked questions on this,given my thoughts and predictions often taking criticism for saying so.

I just wish that this issue was openly discussed by the RFL a couple of years ago,publicly between clubs and fans especially with the reduction in funding from SKY which is coming very soon.

 And yes as I mentioned I am very inclined to agree with you.

The big questions are going to be what will happen to the clubs?

And let’s be honest and Frank where will the axe fall and what will happen to those clubs who do not make the final cut?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

You mean like Scottish football?

Exactly. Paul Lambert, when manager at the right end of the A140, said he wouldn’t want to manage Celtic because it means so many repeat fixtures. They’re such a huge club but a small league is so unappealing. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Eddie said:

Exactly. Paul Lambert, when manager at the right end of the A140, said he wouldn’t want to manage Celtic because it means so many repeat fixtures. They’re such a huge club but a small league is so unappealing. 

I am no particular fan of a small league either.

But in the case of rugby league it will be £s and pennies that will ultimately make the call as to what will be.

 And the blunt harsh truth is that rugby league has none or very little money.

 And frankly I don’t think there is the money to support what is already here in this status quo. And I think it will be very much a case of cutting the cloth accordingly.

 And as Blind Side Johnny suggested it looks like a 10 team 2 division set up is possibly on the cards,because of a reduction in money.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Robthegasman said:

I am no particular fan of a small league either.

But in the case of rugby league it will be £s and pennies that will ultimately make the call as to what will be.

 And the blunt harsh truth is that rugby league has none or very little money.

 And frankly I don’t think there is the money to support what is already here in this status quo. And I think it will be very much a case of cutting the cloth accordingly.

 And as Blind Side Johnny suggested it looks like a 10 team 2 division set up is possibly on the cards,because of a reduction in money.

 

10 Teams doesn’t mean the same money as 12 teams though, if it did why not cut down to six teams. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The size of the TV deal will dictate the league structure, nothing else. If the 2x10 rumour is accurate then that suggests that our TV revenue is indeed due a hit, with no alternative funding to offset that. Going down to 20 clubs would indeed be a terrible move and I would assume especially worrying to Catalans, Toulouse and pretty much any none heartland club. As others have said, once you start to contract, it’s a trend that’s difficult to reverse.

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Oldbear said:

The size of the TV deal will dictate the league structure, nothing else. If the 2x10 rumour is accurate then that suggests that our TV revenue is indeed due a hit, with no alternative funding to offset that. Going down to 20 clubs would indeed be a terrible move and I would assume especially worrying to Catalans, Toulouse and pretty much any none heartland club. As others have said, once you start to contract, it’s a trend that’s difficult to reverse.

I think Catalans would be secure in all honesty.

 And if Super League was cut to 10 teams I think that out of the existing Super League clubs 5 or 6 would I think be absolute 💯 certain to get a place in it(as I think it will be on a franchise.

Those clubs would be in my opinion 

Catalans

Wigan

St Helens

 Warrington 

Leeds

Hull or Hull KR(not both)

I could not be certain with the other remaining Super League clubs.

 And I think and fear that many clubs in both Championship and Championship 1 would be facing a very uncertain future if as has been suggested by some here that there would only be 10 clubs in any new division.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

How 2x10 ‘could’ work 

SL 1

Castleford 
Catalans 
Huddersfield
Hull
Hull KR
Leeds
Saints
Salford 
Warrington
Wigan

SL2

Bradford
Featherstone
Halifax
Leigh
London
Newcastle
Toulouse
Wakefield
Widnes
York

Both leagues on telly (not just streaming). c.£20m/yr funding for SL1 clubs, c.£10m for SL2.

As part of the restructure, there could be payments (perhaps funded via Challenge Cup monies) to t’other 16 clubs - Barrow, Batley, Coventry, Dewsbury, Doncaster, Hunslet, Keighley, Oldham, London Skolars, North Wales, Rochdale, Sheffield, Swinton, West Wales, Whitehaven and Workington - to form an ‘RFL Championship’.’ 

There would be P&R between SL1&2 but not below. Just ideas!

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, newbe said:

Agree 14 in SL and 12 in Championship. No loop fixtures 2 less in Championship to help keep cost down. That's my two  penny worth.

14 in Super League and 14 in the Championship 26 regular home and away rounds for me, I’d rather reduce the funding Championship clubs get than reduce the number of Championship clubs, if that results in a bigger gap in standards between Super League and Championship so be it. League One should mostly be an expansion league, as it previously was.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My feeling is that it will be Super League and a new look Championship both with 10 clubs.

 And my feeling is that both the divisions will be franchised with a very strict criteria for entry.

The clubs that don’t make the final cut will become Conference type clubs.Or they will sadly cease to exist.

  • Sad 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

A 10 team Super League and 10 team Championship isn’t what I want to see, but if it does happen surely we have to split the division below that to League One North and League One South.

There won't be a division below that to split.

That's literally the point.

  • Like 5

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Man of Kent said:

How 2x10 ‘could’ work 

SL 1

Castleford 
Catalans 
Huddersfield
Hull
Hull KR
Leeds
Saints
Salford 
Warrington
Wigan

SL2

Bradford
Featherstone
Halifax
Leigh
London
Newcastle
Toulouse
Wakefield
Widnes
York

Both leagues on telly (not just streaming). c.£20m/yr funding for SL1 clubs, c.£10m for SL2.

As part of the restructure, there could be payments (perhaps funded via Challenge Cup monies) to t’other 16 clubs - Barrow, Batley, Coventry, Dewsbury, Doncaster, Hunslet, Keighley, Oldham, London Skolars, North Wales, Rochdale, Sheffield, Swinton, West Wales, Whitehaven and Workington - to form an ‘RFL Championship’.’ 

There would be P&R between SL1&2 but not below. Just ideas!

I think the dividing line between the 20 and the 16 is pretty obvious at this point. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The way I see it is this.

A £10m cut in funding,we will salvage something.We will still be able to have some clubs below Super League.

A £20m cut and even Super League clubs will be very worried about their futures.

We all know that the money is going to be cut.

But as far as I am concerned we do not yet know what the consequences will be. And in my opinion I think it is now time especially as the season will be starting again soon for the discussion to take place,and right now between the RFL,the clubs and the supporters so we all know exactly what the plans are and the clubs,ALL of them are playing for.

Let’s bring everything out into the open.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Without any sources to any credible journalists that such a meeting and such things were discussed, I’ll put this down to the rumour mill churning in the off season. That said, I’m sure this structure will be on the cards when the future is discussed, whenever that’ll be. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Robthegasman said:

 And frankly I don’t think there is the money to support what is already here in this status quo. And I think it will be very much a case of cutting the cloth accordingly

 

OK, so let's deal with the most important question in any of this - how does this structure (or any other structure anyone cares to propose) bring more money into the game? How does this structure get people who don't currently watch RL to watch RL? 

I get it - the bottom line is important. But do you know what's just as important? The top line. If you don't increase that, you end up in this perpetual state of cloth cutting, corner taking and racing to the bottom. If all the game thinks about is how it devises a structure to preserve what little it has, rather than to earn what it doesn't, then we're going to be having the same discussions when the next TV deal comes up for renewal. Because if the game's main stakeholders won't invest in the game, why the hell should Sky?

At the end of the day, this is an entertainment product and people want to walk away from it thinking that the organisers put on the best show that they possibly could. When was the last time you walked away from a theatre saying "that was brilliant - I really liked how they cheaped out on the actors and the set design!"? 

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Smudger06 said:

I think the dividing line between the 20 and the 16 is pretty obvious at this point. 

It really is, yes. We have 15 solid heartland clubs that are capable of being FT pro and five established non-M62 city clubs with growth potential.   

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Rupert Prince said:

Why would they pack in?  Have St Pats packed in?  Why woulg tjey pack in.  

Why are SL clubs worried about tv money.  The proposed 1 year deal as rumoured gives them more than now.

I assume that you understand the vast differences between a St Pats and say a Hunslet or a Workington?

SL clubs are very worried about TV money and have been looking at ways to increase their share/ pot for a number of years

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

The idea should be that playing a RL match should make a profit , or at least break even , the limit on the number of games should be for general player welfare , 26 games ( 6 months ) is probably the ideal number , that should really apply to all tiers , or at least be the aim 

Another thing on this though, the break even point for a said fixture is much higher than simply the cost of that match; you have to make enough in your home tie to cover the cost of the corresponding away fixture as well. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...