And replced by a new intense u20's competition.How many times is it now that this grade has been changed about

If they allow a silly number of over age players in the u20s then it will still effectively be the Reserves.

Perhaps limit it to one, like it was with the u21s a few years ago

Or better still, none at all, but then how do you get players coming back from injury match practice

If we can replicate the U20 system down under then we will be on to a winner. But I suspect we won't.

It really makes no difference, the gap from " reserve grade" " u21s" " after school club" etc etc will still be to big to make the step to SL for most.

With franchise rugby the sooner the SL clubs adopt junior National league clubs for their youngsters the better.
The intensity will never be even remotely close to SL in under age rugby. Stick them in the NL with hairy assed old pros and watch them grow there. Similar to football. The example being Beckham who went to Preston ( I think ) to learn his trade before making it big.

The lower league clubs get a decent youngster for a period and the senior club still has the benefit of a player being broken in to pro football. The SL club pays his wages and he also trains with the team by day, whilst meeting up with the semi pro team at night.

NL gains a cheap quality player, SL gets a hardend pro who has served an apprentiship.

Yeah, why don't we throw another shrimp on the barbie while we're at it.

Toyota Cup U20 comp only works as a feeder to the NRL because you also have the NSW Cup / Queensland Cup competitions acting as a reserve grade comp for over 20's players not in first grade. As long as the UK league continues to have EITHER a youth competition OR a reserve grade league on their own, it will continue to not work effectively

SL clubs should have an U20 comp, and a short-term loan system where NL clubs become de-facto feeder teams. Either that or have an U20 SL comp AND a reserve-grade SL comp (but I doubt that's affordable, or that we have a big enough player pool to support it)

this would help with cutting Championship wage bills

I would rather they rise the age of the academy league to Under 20 than lower the reserve grade to Under 20s only personally. They had similar (Under 19s & 17s) in the past and it didn't work.

Not neccessarily , only if the supplying SL club is willing to pay the wages of thier juniors for season long loans

Anything less does not benifit the Championship club in it's own development

The under 20`s comp in australia is working very well, television audiences are very good and the quality and speed of the game is pleasing viewers. Recently in an australian paper they had pay tv figures and the under 20`s games were being watched by lets say 800 k people and the super 14 rugby had audiences of of 850k . The nrl must be very happy with this.

Lets hope in england that they televise it and its a winner as it is in australia, the future of the game is the youth so in my mind its a must.

The most worrying aspect of the changes is the fact that the RFL are considering allowing players to be dual registered with both a SL club and a Championship club.

This, in my view, is the first step towards establishing the Championship clubs as formal feeder clubs to SL.

A bad move in my opinion.

Where would returning over aged players regain their match fitness etc.

If as most teams do have a squad that has more than 17 over aged players how would those not selected keep up there match skills and fitness without a reserve grade option

So you dont think having youngsters like Tomkins & Eastmond playing for leigh or Widnes would benefit the clubs.

I suspect gates would increase to catch a glimpse of highly promising young players. The standard of play in the championship would also increase.

Ultimately i think Championship clubs will on the whole turn into feeder teams.

Its not really something new, as historically many clubs would produce youngsters who performed well and then moved onto the big teams.

Certainly the curent position were many championship/league 1 teams are merely existing, and contributing little to the overall well being of RL, cannot continue.
A look at the upper echelons of the main BARLA competitions shows clubs there that offer more to the sport than do the so called profesional teams.

During all of the franchising debates the pro-lobby were saying that the NL's should be vibrant competitions in their own right etc etc

Now all of sudden it seems it's ok for the Championship to merely be a SL reserves competition.

Funny that isn't it.

Might be reactionary,but for me colts and a-teams worked,as a good colt could be nurtured in the a-team.

I'd keep the reserves and have an u19's comp for the academy players if need be instead of whatever it is now. Maybe even under 20's straight from school although that 4 year gap is huge. I don't see the issue with the current reserves system to be honest other than hearing problems about intensity.
I think promising players should be loaned to Ch clubs as often as possible.
At Warrington we have Penny who's completely wasted in the reserves but can't get a first team game, might as well go somewhere like Widnes/Leigh and have a year there.

No, it might offer a short term benefit to the team but in the long term I don't see it helping the club.

Those viewing figures need to be divided by 10 for both super 14 and Toyota cup

Cant see it being televised if only 2 superleague games a week are actually shown now.

Needs the support structure HKB suggested to work.

That is what the NL should be - so we have an elite league where all the other leagues acting as feeders to the elite level. The attendances in the vast majority of the NL are a joke so things can only get better if the teams are made up of SL players who cannot make the team and elite junior players learning their trade from the senior players

If SL Clubs wanted feeder clubs, then they should form a B-team to enter into Championship One, which couldnt be promoted to the Championship, a la Castilla to Real Madrid.

You have already been answered by others

So unless the SL club is footing the bill then there is no benifit to the Championship clubs

Helping to develop SL players for SL clubs is counter productive to Championship clubs

The RFL wants clubs to poroduce thier own players to score browny points

Either the Championships are thier own comp in thier own right or they are a comp for feeder clubs

Nobody is going to invest in a feeder club , so if that is what they are they need funding from the relevant SL club

And the RFL are actively encouraging the Championship clubs to find investors , but then again the RFL havent a clue what they are doing from one minute to the next

I wouldnt be opposed to this, however the championship clubs would, as they know that they would be embarrassed by the likes of Saints and Wigan reserves giving them hammerings every week.

How many of the championship teams run under 21/ academy sides?
Cant see any mention of any on Widnes, Leigh or Halifax websites.

I know clubs do community work, but if they are merely running a first team and nothing else then i dont see how Championship clubs can complain about the RFL wanting them to do their bit for player develoment.

Sky in the early years of Super League used to show an hours highlights from an Academy Match each week (on a Tuesday Night if I recall) which they filmed from the venue of their live Friday Night match each week. But with most sides dropping academy curtain raisers (with the increase of ground sharing with football) and playing games at local amateur venues instead they had to stop doing it.