There's always an ' if '

Your problem is that this hypothetical situation LifeLongHKRFan wasnt treated as a certainty ? fine...

I've said before, it will be brilliant when the game outgrows leeds. When we get to a point where the major European cities are getting 40k a game and Leeds just can't compete I will be the first in line saying lets merge the West Yorkshire clubs and have at least one able to compete.

Then why spend the time and suffer the aggravation of trying to persuade clubs to merge? It would actually be simpler to start a new club in an untapped area than it would to sell the merger to existing clubs. Or has that been tried and failed so many times that mergers have become the final chuck of the dice?

I dont think it is an either or situation. Why not have both?

So it's simple really , when the sport outgrows the club I follow , I'll be happy to continue watching them in a lower tier , if they don't then survive , I'll do like most Bradford fans are suggesting they'll do , not bother with RL any more

But anyway , if the Bradford club disappear , at least the other clubs in Yorkshire , mostly Leeds probably will gain from it , happy days

In blind idiocy, you have stumbled across the point. The game hasnt outgrown Bradford, The game hasnt moved forward from where Bradford were at all. Bradfords problems arent because they can't keep up with the rate at which the game is moving forward and expanding.

I've put some thought into how I'd do things if I were suddenly put in charge of things. I'm not a business man, and have simply tried to use common sense.

I would return to franchising. I believe this creates the best opportunity to both consolidate existing teams, and grow. I personally believe the current structure creates a lot of uncertainty, which stops top flight clubs from developing talent and encourages championship clubs to mortgage the farm, to borrow a phrase.

I would initially be looking at a 12 team top flight. With all clubs having to reapply for a licence. My criteria for a licence would look something like this:

Does the club posses or have a viable long term option at a suitable playing facility?

Does the club run within its means ie at a profit? If they are a 'sugar daddy' type club,is there a contingency or would they be able to continue to operate should this suddenly change? Basically if is it financially sound.

Does the club attract good gates at home fixtures (minimum 7 thousand plus).

Does the club operate it's own academy? How many academy graduates in the last 5 years (both there and at other clubs) is x percentage of their squad academy graduates.

Is the club involved in the grassroots game?

Is the team competitive on the field.

I'd pick the 12 clubs who fit this bill. I'd run a top 6 playoff system. And play less games, operating a draw like happens in the NRL and NFL (hopefully leaving space for internationals). I'd also look for mid-season internationals as players going on tour leaves others to step up.

Each year or maybe bi-anually If a team in the 'lower league' can reach this standard, then I would look to either expand or replace someone who is perhaps not meeting those standards. (in that sense the top flight is not a closed shop, rather a selective one based on whether teams can operate in or improve the top flight).

I'd also look to raise the salary cap (at least to match inflation since its inception) but lower the overseas quota to 4.

Just my 2 penneth.

So your 12 team SL just became a 6/7 team SL , the Championship would be decent though

If that's the case then the game is in worse health than I thought, as to me that should be what is required for a professional competition that wants to be sustainable long term.

RLs problem for a long time seems to have been far too much short term thinking.

I also note that when these threads come up, people are always quick to ask (normally asking Leeds or Wigan fans) if your team was going to loose a franchise or merge would you support it?

My answer would be yes, as I am a fan of the game first.

I'd also add than if more clubs were like Leeds or Wigan we wouldn't need to have this conversation.

You set the criteria , it's not hard to work through it

Leigh fail , crowds and academy
Cas fail , stadium
Wakey fail , stadium and crowds
Salford fail crowds and academy
Giants fail crowds
Widnes ?

As a Leigh fan , if there are/were 12/14 clubs fitting your criteria then I wouldn't really argue , but until then , you'll just have to put up with us

Didn't the criteria of franchising also include sharing football grounds as being a no no..

Franchising doesn't necessarily have to be the same rules as the previous franchising period. So sharing football grounds would be okay, seen as though all shared football grounds are better than 90% built for RL grounds. Maybe LSV and Halliwell Jones as exceptions.

Nope

But we're discussing Barrie glass eyes criteria

Again Barries glass eyes criteria

And yes it's always been acces to a suitable stadium , access being the operative word

Could I ask then gubrats, which of the criteria put forward would you say should not be the expectation of a fully professional top flight club?

I would perhaps change the wording of the crowd sizes to is it reasonable to expect that a club will be able to attract 7k if in the top flight and competitive. (after all there are extraneous circumstances, but is there the potential for it to happen within a licencing period).

You misunderstand me , all of your criteria is fine , in fact its less than we would/should hope for

But we don't reach it currently , so you have 2 choices , reduce your criteria , or don't have franchising , simple really

Ah, apologies for misunderstanding, I don't know which of that criteria I'd be willing to get rid of.

I'd also imagine that there are a few clubs not currently meeting the criteria would quickly be able to make amendments if they were were told it was you did this or you didn't get SL.

I'll admit that I don't know the answer, I just feel like the current setup isn't conducive to strengthening the game I love.

The only criteria that could be easily passed ( and even then having an end product guarantee is difficult ) is the academy , attendances and stadia issues are not something to be sorted overnight

I too admit I don't know the answer , till somebody does I'll just carry on enjoying watching my team whatever competition they are in , providing that structure excites me , franchising doesn't and didn't , I stopped watching when locked out of SL

Was the start of the demise.How far has the sport travelled since that lock down? Did the sport improve in any capacity?

Everything was pointing to feeder clubs to feed SL,follow the Aussie strategy.Could never happen with heartland clubs still disadvantaged..

As I've stated before,media coverage/money carries the weight,we just have a governing body that can't see any further than Sly and SL.

It's difficult to know what the sport does to significantly change its standing in world sport.
RL is so far behind football and Union in this country, it wont "compete" anytime soon.

People always talk about building up from the grass roots but, to do this will take another 100 years and during this time Football and Union will keep on growing.

Should we accept "defeat" in terms of revenue from TV and sponsorship or keep on trying to punch above our weight.

Sadly, it all comes down to money and with our governing body snapping Sky's hand off and accepting a relatively poor deal (compared to the gut wrenching increases that Football and Union achieved, we are left even further behind.

All of the bleating and moaning in the world wont change this and we really do need to accept having SL as the premier competition and The Championship comes second.

The funding that we have should be concentrated in the top flight, just as every other world sport does and to help the top flight clubs to be a little more stable, we should probably scrap the "super 8" system which, has half of the competition fighting to avoid the drop, while the other half become stronger and stronger (relatively speaking).

We should do away with the salary cap but, any club going into administration drop 1 division and any club liquidated would mean the new entity starts in the third tier.

This would stabilise the top flight clubs and allow the wealthy clubs, or those with wealthy owners, to splash the cash.

Finally, I would increase SL to 14 clubs to accommodate KR and London and increase still further if Toronto and Toulouse make the grade.

Having said that, Toronto, along with any other North American clubs, is not really a practical location to have for any SL club and the plan for them in the long term, has to be to compete in a North American league.

So more teams would spread the money further , to acomodate 2 clubs , neither of which pass Barrie's reasonable criteria

So filling up SL with more poor clubs is what you're suggesting , all decided by committee

I actually believe Toronto and Toulouse are two of the clubs likely to pass the criteria, (which you agree are kind of a minimum expectation for a top flight). Obviously as you say not straight away, but you half to ask which championship clubs would/could reach most of my criteria. Maybe KR, maybe Bradford (if run properly) maybe London, though crowds have always been a problem.

I have nothing against Leagues below super league, I have family that are Hunslet fans and have been to their games as a fan, and also when the team I coach have played curtain raisers etc, and I've really enjoyed it, but with the best will in the world there are some clubs in the championship and champ 1 who are never going to be a top flight team.

And while I get you fell out with the game when your club was not on the top table so to speak, and while I'd like to think I'd be high and mighty and take it as a 'for the good of the game' if I was ever in that situation the chances are I wouldn't. (Even when I think RL is the best specatator sport in the world).

I'm simply advocating putting everyone in a position to grow where they are comfortable and not encouraged to shoot themsleves in the foot chasing the dream, whilst also making sure everyone knows what is expected of them.

Whatever the answer is for the game in this country, it's not refusing to run academies, it's not being content to play out of small, no longer fit for purpose grounds, and it's not imo, being happy to run at the level SL is currently at.

The whole attitude in the game at the minute seems to be 'Well it's good enough'

Too early to make any judgement on Toronto ( although I do hope they are a success ) ATM , Similarily Toulouse , yes it's a massive city , but from when I visited during their last Championship spell , a lot of work to be done , I struggled to find much interest from the locals

Bradford ? , well something just not right there , it cannot be just down to a succession of bad management , Odsal perhaps ? , and if it is , just what are their options ?

London , not going to happen , they fail on 4 of your 4 main criteria , stadium ,crowd , financial security , not sure on academy

It wasn't that Leigh weren't in SL , it was that we couldn't get in , no confidence that we would ever be offered a franchise/licence given previous history , so it just felt boring , or maybe ' comfortable ' , that isn't why I go watching RL , I don't want it comfortable , I want it exciting , scary , it needs to bring out emotion in me , a franchise be it outside in the Championship or in it in SL just doesn't do it for me

It is kind of a catch 22, I agree that if nothing else the p and r had brought the excitement etc, and we do need that, particularly for clubs that find themselves at the lower end of the spectrum.

But at the same time I believe we need to give clubs safety in which to build and develop without the potential long term damage that relegation, or chasing promotion and failing can bring.

Rock and a hard place springs to mind.

[code[/code

What it does show is that you cannot just isolate the Championship , which is essentially partly what this thread was about in the 1 st place , it is intrinsically linked to SL