To tie in with my proposal for internationals, a proposal for the domestic game.

[uNumber of Teams[/u

It is clear that 14 teams is too many. It is also clear that currently, there are at most 7 clubs (Leeds, Bradford, Hull FC, Wigan, Warrington, St Helens & Catalans) that can be self-sustaining while competing for silverware. Not that they have done - catastrophic mismanagement has done for Bradford - but all achieve 10k or greater home averages or thereabouts while putting out a decent squad. Certainly one would say that if the Bulls had been able to hold onto their academy products of late (the Burgesses, Kopczak & Whitehead for a start) they'd be prospective challengers.

There is also a problem that outside of SL there are not enough teams that can realistically sustain themselves. The likes of Leigh, Halifax & Sheffield could all become self-sustainining, but the likes of Featherstone simply never will be. Therefore, I'd suggest that SL should be comprised only of ten teams.

[uLeague Structure[/u

P&R is not good. It means that the weakest clubs will never be able to implement long-term plans for success, because they've always got to prioritise the short-term goal of avoiding the drop. It incurs massive financial penalties for clubs that do get relegated (SL simply doesn't have the money for serious parachute payments), and teams coming up will always be getting a pick of players no-one else wanted, because they didn't know their status until relatively late.

I'd therefore Propose:

1. Super League Premiership. The main competition. 10 teams.

2. Super League Championship. The 'nursery' competition for developing clubs. 10 teams or as many as can meet a set of [uminimum criteria[/u. No licenscing - if you can meet the criteria, you're in.

3. National Leagues. Divisions with P&R for clubs, of any pro/am status, competing nationally. Membership by application from clubs who can manage the costs of National travel. All of UK.

4. Regional Leagues. Divisions with P&R for clubs, of any pro/am status, competing within a defined region. Membership by application from any club within that region.

[uSeason Structure[/u

Summary



Regular Rounds: 18
Magic Weekend: 1
On the Road: 1
Challenge Cup: 6
6 Nations: 5
WCC: 1
Playoffs: 3

TOTAL: 35*

N.B. This is shorter than the current season, which is 37 weeks.

Regular Rounds

1 fixture, home and away, against each team in the competition

Magic Weekend

The opening ceremony of the season. To take place at the Grand Final venue, with a random draw of teams. Only non-random tie is last game of weekend, to be a rematch of the Grand Final.

On the Road

One fixture, to be a derby if possible, played in a development region (e.g. Bristol, Scotland, Wales). This gives the Development region a regular set of RL fixtures to develop interest while not having to sustain a team on their own.

World Club Challenge

European Champions v NRL Champions. No other games.

Challenge Cup

64 team straight knockout*, random draw competition, consisting of:

10 SLP teams
10+ SLC teams
10 Elite One Championship / French competition teams
34 teams through open qualification - any club may apply.

* N.B. no byes will be given, it is entirely possible that R1 of the CC could draw Featherstone Lions v Featherstone Rovers

Playoffs

Top 5 playoff only

League Leaders get a bye straight to the Grand Final

Round 1: 2nd v 5th & 3rd v 4th

Round 2: Winner of 2v5 V Winner of 3v4

Rounds 3: Grand Final - League Leader v Qualifier

* if applied to 2013 SL season, this would have produced (assuming same results as in 2013):

Round 1: Warrington v St Helens & Leeds v Wigan
Round 2: Warrington v Wigan
GF: Huddersfield v Wigan

6 Nations

See 'A Proper Proposal for International RL' for more details.

6 team Round-Robin with England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland & France all playing one another.

Too few games... Over the years it has has conistently been the view of club chairmen that they need at least 12 (but preferably 14) home games per regular season to make ends meet. 9 guaranteed home games just won't be enough unless other revenue sources take up the slack. And, as the TV money will be required to also fund the lower competitions, there won't be much of that to spare.

Central funding from the RFL to all clubs coming from the revenue off of international fixtures. Also split the money from Magic Weekend & OTR fixtures 50-50. So that's at least 10 home games on average.

And TV money would be thicker spread across fewer teams.

I don't agree with a 10 team league, there aren't enough games. Clubs will struggle with their stadium only being used 9 times a season. I like the idea of an "on the road" round though, as long as it's done sensibly.

I'd do:

Super League
- 12 teams
- 5 year licence
- Much more in-depth and transparent club evaluations with grades given for various areas of the club (finances, playing strength, facilities etc) along with in-depth reasons for the grades and targets to be met by the end of the licence period. If targets not met then a proportion of TV money withheld if club not relegated at end of licence period.
- 22 regular games
- Magic Weekend
- "on the road" round
- SL clubs put into the Cup a round earlier
- Top 6 playoffs
- only teams finishing 12th each year eligible for relegation plus clubs that go into administration
- SL players chosen in an Elite Training Squad at start of season to play a max of 24 domestic games in the season (not including WCC or Playoffs)
- Non-Fed Trained quota reduced to 3
- Current salary cap limit, with a max of 2 players allowed "off quota".

Championship
- 14 teams
- P&R with league below
- 26 regular games
- Top 6 playoffs
- Only winner of Grand Final each year eligible for promotion at next licence period
- Dual Reg available to those clubs that want it
- SL club that has Dual Reg partnership agreement must make available at least 1 home SL game as a double header with Championship club and provide Championship club a significant share of the gate income.
- More compensation to Championship clubs that develop players who go to SL clubs, a higher amount if they're in a club that win a trophy, and a higher amount if they go on to represent England/GB.


Championship One
- 12 teams
- P&R with Championship. 2 up, 2 down. League Leader and Playoff winner.
- 22 regular games
- 2nd to 6th playoffs

Challenge Cup
- SL clubs entered a round earlier
- when playing Championship clubs, SL clubs must abide by Championship quota limits
- Amateur games stopped for CC semis and finals
- all clubs including amateur to be given a cut of any tickets they sell for semis and final
- RFL to help clubs get discounted coach travel for semis and final

World Club Challenge
- a 2 tier comp
- World Club Challenge, as now, SL GF winner v NRL GF winner
- World Club Plate (better name needed) 4 team comp - Challenge Cup winner v NRL runner up, next highest placed SL v next highest placed NRL

Money distribution
- higher proportion to Championshio clubs, with some set aside as a separate marketing budget specifically for Championship.

We need to increase the player pool two tens does that
Folk say that the pt clubs don't offer anything yet Chris hill was outstanding on Saturday raised by Leigh yet not a kr fc London Widnes raised player in sight
Cut the carp two tens 27 fixtures and a 5 team play off

How does 2 ten team leagues increase the player pool?

So what income is it that supports these lower leagues?

In the current scheme the RFL idea seems to be that this would largely be the TV revenue from the teams dropped from SL (i.e. no increased share for the remaining teams!)

I know people are getting swept away with how brilliant the World Cup has been so far, but as it stands a mid-season break for an international competition would be pointless. England would still walk it. Also the NRL based players that have made themselves available for the World Cup would definitely not be playing in a mid-season comp. It would just appear that we were trying to copy RU.

I think any European international competition should involve the England Knights rather than the first team. But any talk of a mid-season break for internationals is a complete non-starter.

Wrong.

Rugby League needs a pyramid structure whereby any club can see a route to the top (as with Soccer in this country). For example, during the successful World Cup match in Bristol last night we heard about the fantastic development of the Bristol Sonics club over the last five years. The people involved there need to see that if they continue to do everything right successive promotions could see them reach Super League in the [inext[/i five years.

As regards the top of structure, the 2 leagues of 12 (Super League 1 and Super League 2) splitting into 3 8's at the business end of the season is something that should be adopted and retained long term. Note that most people think that the middle eight will result in the 4 that came down from SL 1 ending up at the top - so that it will be the same 12 teams that start in SL1 the next season - with effectively no-one promoted. But that's not the point - there is the PROSPECT of promotion through to the top - if earned on the field. And that is what will allow Rugby League to grow and prosper at every level in the pyramid.

Rugby league had a pyramid structure for over 30 years. It didn’t grow and prosper. It offered clubs the opportunity to grow from the grass-roots up. The success of that totalled the London Skolars in the entire history of the game.

We have tried what you have said. It is a proven failure.

RU has spent the last 20 years copying RL - they've done fine.

I think that may be true, but if you look at my other thread I did suggest allowing players eligible for European Nations an exemption from the NFT Cap. So Keith Galloway, Peter Wallace, James McManus, Anthony Minichiello et al could all come over to SL.

I'd also allow clubs to have two 'Designated Player' spots, where the club chairman is directly liable for their renumeration and not the club, and where there is no salary cap limit. This would allow the biggest clubs to try and pull off the headline-grabbing signings UK RL needs. Would love to see Koukash dip into his pockets personally to bring SBW to Salford.

Any competition with the Knights will be treated as it deserves. As a 2nd tier tournament with limited interest. The Aussie based players wouldn’t play if there wasn’t a mid-season break. Next to nobody would play for the other nations if they are put in a competition with Englands reserves.

If there is one thing this tournament should teach us its than when the nations outside of England, Australia and NZ are treated with respect, treated as equals and given time to plan and build towards a tournament they are capable of performing on and off the pitch, showing the game in its best light.

Time and time again international sides are denigrated in their quality and the pride they show in their shirt. Time and time again when we treat them with respect they pay it back ten-fold.

Nobody can watch the American side celebrate yesterday and tell me it meant nothing to them. Nobody can watch that Samoan performance a few days ago and say that these were just a bunch of kiwi rejects and not a soul on this earth could watch the Fiji national side singing a hymn in a Rochdale church, or listen to Mike Ratu talk about his pride in seeing 3 generations of his family play for Rochdale and then be able to bring his national side there and credibly argue that what they are doing is any less important or worthy than what England or Australia are doing. International sport is the future of our game. It always has been and all these nations with all their idiosyncrasies are just as much part of that narrative as England, Australia and NZ.

The old days where there was automatically 4 up 4 down every season was a mistake. That mistake has been learned. The new 2 x 12 / 3 x 8 will be fantastic for the game once it is introduced and beds down over the years. As I said, unlike the old days of automatic 4 up, 4 down, the new structure [icould[/i mean there is in practice nobody promoted or relegated for years - but that's not the point.

Beds down over the years! Oh you do make us LAFF!

500 FT players as opposed to 350, seems like an increase to me

if you have 350 pro players and 150 part time players, and you make those 500 ft players you havent increased The player pool at all. You have just paid some a bit more. The increase in the player pool comes from the very very bottom. We could have a professional team representing all 11k parishes in the UK (and im sure some would see that as ideal) but if we don’t increase the number of players at youth level graduating through every level up to pro our player pool doesn’t increase at all.

Our player pool isnt the number of pro-players we have, it’s the number of players we have to pick pro-players from.

But how would they be full time if they're not at the moment? Are there 6 clubs currently outside SL that can sustain entirely full time squads? Plus the spending on facilities, coaching and sports science etc to make being full time worthwhile?

How about a similar idea to the nfl - have say Wigan vs Warrington played in Bristol or Huddersfield vs Leeds in Cumbria. Wembley sells out for nfl and lets face it no-one really went to see the Jags did they! A couple of big games in a few different cities could help bring in new fans

This is the 'On the Road' fixture in the schedule. A chosen development area to get a game every week, bringing in supporters from established clubs and allowing local interested people to see top-level RL on a regular basis. Held at the same ground, locals could buy a 'Season Ticket' for a vastly reduced price, giving them a game of RL to go to every Weekend.

I said last season when the RFL took that 600k from Bradford that we should have taken that money and put in to a pot and used that pot to put on some big ‘event’ games. Take Leeds V Bradford rent out Elland Road. The RFL guarantee Leeds whatever that game would have made at headingley, pay for the rent of Elland Road out of that pot, spend a bit marketing it, and sell it out.

So for instance. Leeds would get about 18k at Headingley, so lets say each fan spends an average of £20 on ticket and merchandise. That’s £360k the RFL guarantee for Leeds Rhinos. We then spend £100k renting Elland Road and spend £140k marketing the absolute hell out of it in Leeds. Total Spend £600k.

We sell out at Elland road so that’s 38k with that same £20 average per fan we bring back in £760k. The £600k outlay from the RFL is paid back in to that pot, along with half of the extra £160k profit made with Leeds and Bradford splitting the other half. That means the ‘event pot’ is now worth £680k. That £680k is then used for to put on the Hull KR hull Derby at St James’s Park and try and do the same thing, Saints v Wigan and Anfield, Cas v Wakefield at Bramall Lane

We do 6 games per year, each club loses one home game every 2 years, done on different weeks over the summer as the only game played that week. Best case scenario we have a self-perpetuating central pot for putting on these event games and marketing the game in general.

Don't you have to factor in the effect of season ticket purchases? It's not just a matter of saying 18k x £20 is it?

Yeah but that will work both ways in that would be income the RFL wouldnt need to remiburse the income from those ticket sales as the club would already have them as part of season ticket sales. THere would also be issues regarding concession sales and the logistics of how we would cost that out, each stadium is likely to be a little different (some wouldnt make a charge but take the concession income, some would rent out the whole stadium and you take the concessions)

I wasnt really trying to put too much detail in to it. Just more put the principle across.

I think the principle is a good one - I think it's pretty unlikely that existing stadia can grow attendances organically, after all most have been trying for years! So the idea of some BIG events at different venues that already have their own regular attendees, coupled with some imaginative and well targeted marketing campaigns must be worth a try.

I'd have a normal league structure but have a play-off between the bottom Super League side and the team that finishes top of the second flight, by doing that the likes of Sheffield, Featherstone and many other Championship clubs would surely raise their standards so they can beat Super League teams and it also gives the Super League team the chance to prove whether they are good enough to be in the top flight. It also gives us an exciting end of season game that people will want to see. I have mentioned this idea a lot but nobody ever responds to it.

I'd add to previous complaints about the need for sides to grow.

'A route to the top for any club' and 'Promotion and Relegation from SL' are not necessarily the same thing.

Given P&R requires clubs to gamble financially on both going up & staying there, while period licenscing creates the same problem on three-year cycles, it might be better to abandon both.

Instead have fixed criteria, assessed over multiple seasons, with any club meeting those criteria being included. E.g. if you can reach & sustain a minimum turnover, minimum profit, not be too indebted, have sufficient crowds & win a number of games, you can come up. Such criteria should be achievable (to get clubs to come forward) but stringent (so we don't promote clubs who'll never work as a business).

We should not be expecting clubs to go from amateurs to SL in five years. Fifteen years is more like it.