You'd be surprised how many Crusaders fans tipped up at Headingley on Sunday actually.

Just what we need a elite league producing less and less players for england

We have been talking for over 10 years that we have too many games.

Should be a 12 team Superleague, with no magic weekend just home and away - 22 games.

Promotion/Relegation every 2 years giving the promoted team 1 year to adjust to the demands of Superleague.

Instead of the magic weekend, we have a 3 game origin series, Easts versus Wests.(UK players only) Preperation for international.

Cap on internationl (UK) players to 27 games instead of potentially present of 35 games.

Grand Play offs top 4 only, Minor shield play off 5th to 8th.

That's far too sensible.

Funnily enough, that is along the lines of what I was thinking except rather than making it exclusive to UK players have a 3-player cap from each side SL side, which would allow for equality amongst clubs and so a few clubs aren't directly affected by injuries AND missing players.

And England v Other Nationalities would be of more value than East v West for me.

Sounds good enough for me, do you think it might be too complicated for the RFL and they tell us to stop talking sense.

You could also have a "pre warm up" game between the championship East/West sides a couple of hours before the main event, this would generate a bigger attendance with non superleague clubs feeling part of the origin event.

That sounds good too. The only question is slotting them in where to the fixture list.

How about when England are playing in a major football championship?

Mr Smith wants greater intensity in Superleague, a greater concentration of the best players - less teams and less fixtures would hopefully lead to better rugby and a better product would hopefully lead to higher crowds per game, this fell last year with an increase in teams and reduction in quality

An Origin style series would also help increase the top players exposure to the highest of intensities

As the most recent england coach he is well placed to comment on this issue, as is the present England captain

Fantasies about 16 teams plus? Where are the players coming from?

It is not just about where you are in the league it is about the whole club. Warrington play in a quality stadium and will make a profit this year. They also get great crowds and have superb away support.

Right.... so Catalan should be in despite only winning 3 games all season and Hull KR should be in because they are millions in debt and have the worst facilities for away fans in the whole league.

There's that many different ideas on here my head is in bits.

That is far too sensible!!

Like I said its not about how many games a team has won. Catalans have had more success though in the last 4 years than many clubs have had for 20 years just for the record.

Hull KR have solid plans to improve craven park and have great crowds and awesome away support.

Strangely I agree with Mr Smith , ' Super league ' should be for ' Super ' clubs

We dont have 14 ' Super ' clubs

We don't have 10.

Club sport is not supposed to be as intense as Representitive. It's there for enjoyment for the fans, and for rugby we don't need a tiny core of strong teams unless we want to keep within the limits we have always had.

I'd rather see a diluted pool of 16 drawing from many potential areas than have a core where everyone has to move to if they are any good.

If you are talking like that then we have 4 IMO. 5 when saints have their new ground.

The rest...

Bradford
Hull KR
Catalans
Hudds
Crusaders

Are all good enough really, especially once Hull KR get a stadium sorted and Bradford get their crowds back up.

After that I would say Widnes and One of Wakey or Cas would be next.

i love the idea of a genuine ten team european league [with room for expansion in the near future.
manchester,covering gt manc
liverpool covering merseyside n.wales,chester
leeds
hull
a.another from yorkshire
london
cardiff
bordeaux
toulouse
mille.
at the moment there's about £17million a season split between 14 clubs.
if that was distributed along with french tv money amongst the above clubs within a few years this league could be worth £30 million a year in tv rights alone and with increased advertizing revenue and gate reciepts could be worth £50 million+ a season.
as i said above i love the idea of a genuine european league.leigh centurions on a tues/weds evening then on a saturday go watching the best rugby players in the world in manchester or liverpool.

"at the moment there's about £17million a season split between 14 clubs.
if that was distributed along with french tv money amongst the above clubs within a few years this league could be worth £30 million a year in tv rights alone and with increased advertizing revenue and gate reciepts could be worth £50 million+ a season."

Right Mr Murdoch, we,ve got a new plan ... we are going to have less games you can show ... no don't run away as the reduction in advertising will be matched by the increased number of Sky licences ... honest ... but some games need to be offered to the French television ... look you're not listening ... the amazing Wigan v Leeds would replace Salford v Quinns ... I know you already show the first but imagine better sides ... oh ... so you are pulling the plug ... yes we can manage on less money (thinks: back to part-time for all but 3/4 clubs) ... yes the exodus of players will improve Union (Murdoch thinks ... better for the more widely accepted games).

Meanwhile Smith tries it with BurgerKing: the reduction in size of burgers and chips means more time in preparation but McDonalds laughs to the bank.

Sheesh ... business please. Oh, Sky DOES call the shots OR we would not have gone full-time.

dont forget it would'nt be ten teams for long,other big cities might like a peice of the action.hopefully the international game would grow much quicker and dont forget the challenge cup.loads of potential for more games.
then theres the eng/brit domestic league made up of the town and small city teams.even more games for tv.

Sadly, the requirement of rugby league the business doesn't fit with the expectation for England to be competitive at international level.

Northern hemisphere players do play too many games in a season and their off-season is too short in comparison to their southern hemisphere counterparts. One way to reduce the number of games is to reduce the number of clubs in the elite competition.

That would mean the clubs losing out on home games however, and the idea of chairmen voting to reduce their income streams brings to mind turkeys and Christmas.

The best compromise re club, player and country is to put a limit on the number of games any individual player can play in.

Or have an elite squad of 42 players chosen by the England Coach at the beginning of the season who are signed to central contracts and restricted to 20 games a season.

Then have a draft of those players with 3 players going to each club and their salary is taken off the club's salary cap.

Would distribute the better players around the league more fairly equalling a more competitive league.

You've got to be kidding!! Can you really see see any club giving up their rights to a player? E.g. club X invests in its youth policy and develops, lets say, 5 home-grown stars (behaviour which the RL are trying to foster), it puts them of long contracts (as you would). They are selected for England at the start of one season, so how's that work then? The club potentially lose them all in the draft!!!! And, if they get to keep any, they lose their services for 7 games.