IMO our recovery will need to be slow and sustained. If we try to move too quickly we could end up being worse off in the future.

The first step is getting the finances of the club under control, and recognising that we must not spend beyond our means, even if we finish bottom of the league. ONly then can we begin to rebuild on the field. This could take years! We need to rebuild trust with players and potential players, making sure they are assured that if they sign a contract it will be honoured. this will be ongoing, and will constantly change and evolve.

the second step is identifying key priorities for development. The end result should be better results on the field, but how do we get there whilst not risking the entire club? this can be done quickly, but it needs to be done well to avoid wasting time and money.

The third step is implementing the required changes to the way the club is run. If it was just a cashflow issue that landed us in bother, it shouldnt be too hard to address as lots of debt form the old company isnt inherited. However, the sanctions from the RFL regarding Sky money will impact on us massively.

In a simple answer to the question I feel that because other clubs are growing and getting better, not standing still, it could be 10 years or more before we challenge in Super League. I dont expect to be in the playoffs in the next 3 years. If we make it through the next 3 years! A challenge cup run isnt out of the question though as the draw can be kind!

Looking at your post I was wondering if someone from SLE had shared with you their plans for the new slimed down competition?

Most of the clubs you list are genuinely well run and supported - but a few must have the odd worry about their Sugar Daddies finding a new hobby?

But if all the players that the TnA say they are talking to do sign we will have retained a lot of last years squad except props. What sort of a pack we have next year will be a key factor, Burgess Elima Hargreaves all need replacing Sibbit hardly played for us so any replacement has to be an improvement and Scruton needs to be back to his best. dont forget a lot of work fell on a few shoulders for sections of last season and we still managed playoffs before deduction despite only having 19 players to choose from at one point. the right blend of youth and experience is therefore critical this year, and luck has to change at some point.

The short term answer is 'no'

Increasingly it seems that we have two leagues within SL, as was alluded to earlier in the thread we have a Top 7 (Warrington, Wigan, Saints, Leeds. Hull, Catalans and Huddersfield). We are in the second tier of the other seven clubs. That might be unpalatable, but its a fact IMO

Success for the next two or three seasons would be winning that second league - which would put us into 8th and in the Play Offs. Even 9th would be, in actuality, 2nd in the second tier - not too shabby.

There's a lot that needs to be put in place on and off the field to put us in that top group of clubs. Can we ever get there. Yes, why not? But I don't expect it in the short term.

And out of them, just Leeds and Catalans who are not bankrolled by a rich owner?

Can I just point out that without the points deduction, we would have finished the season 3 points behind Leeds, who are the SL Champions? Yet I have read plenty of their "fans" - invariably the "McDermott Is A Rubbish Coach" brigade - who still say they are crap, although they tend to have had to evolve from "he can't coach" to "he may be able to sort of coach but I really hate the style of rugby we are playing, I don't enjoy the games any more" etc.

Personally I think that glory years are rare, and whether any team achieves them is in the lap of the gods. So, for example, Leeds have now won the SL title 2 years on the trot - and it is a massive achievement. Yet I can't call those seasons Leeds glory years really, as they haven't really stood out as the seasons have gone on, not in the way that Saints or Bradford used to in their pomp.

So personally, I would like to see us continue to evolve and build gradually, and hope agaisnt hope that the combination of progressive youngsters that we have, the quality of the established players, and maybe one or two shrewd signings, somehow end up being the magic mix that is so unpredictable but that you definitely need in order to even think about "glory years".

If it happens, it happens. For now I just want a competitive and learning/improving side, preferrably with a nucleus of our own best youngsters, playing with the "spirit of 2012". That will do for me, and let's see where we can go from there.

In our "glory years" we won SL four times. Leeds have won it five times in the last 6 years. It irks me to say it but if you take the whole SL era since 1996, Leeds are the only ones competing with St Helens for "the best club in the SL era".

There are 3 trophies on offer at most each year, 4 if you count the irrelevant hub cap, and Leeds have won 2 this year. They are the best club around as they seemingly have won the comp for the last 2 years whilst not relying on bending the salary rules like others (including ourselves in the past) have!

For many BUlls fans, the 2005 win from third was the best of our 4 SL titles (although I think the first was as it was under the old system), even better than our brilliant season in 2003. Does 1999 come close because we finished top but lost in the final? NOt for me I am afraid.

I dont normally ever want leeds to win anything, but lets not forget, they have helped us a lot this year when we've needed it the most! They deserve their plaudits. 9 years ago, Sinfiled was abit of a joke character when he shouldve gone for 2 at Cardiff, and we were the most successful club around. How times have changed!

So, well done Jimmy and Brian Mac. True BUlls legends. But lets not get concerend too much with Leeds, we have got bigger matters in hand here! BUt 5 titles in 6 years does in my opinion count as a golden era!

The voice of common sense, and I couldn't agree more. It's easy to get into the 'we're a big club near the top and it will last forever', sort of attitude, but generally it doesn't last "forever", or even close to it, and many clubs will get their turn in the sun, if they wait around for it. There are many decisions taken by the bods in charge; some turn out for the best and some, well, don't, but you can never tell what [iwill[/i work and what [iwon't[/i, until it's too late.

Let's get a team based around the young players and a few older veterans then give them their head - we've little to lose and much to gain, but let's keep immediate expectations to a minimum, eh?.

Personally I'm not sure there is any such plan, even considering your humorous faux pas. I generally think RFL or SLE do a reasonable job in impossible circumstances. It's the easiest thing in the world to blame all RL's problems, as those from Royston Vasey Warriors are doing because they lost in the play-offs, at the feet of the RFL without any knowledge of what work is actually going off behind the scenes.

Of the big 7, I presume you are referring to Hudds' sugar daddy, as this is oft mentioned. From what I can gather Davy has a genuine love of the area & is happy pumping in his money. Hudds are probably alone in that bunch in not being sustainable from a current attendance perspective. Cats have shown the difference between having a good coach & a useless fat Aussie on a drinking holiday with his Brizzy buddies. But that, & Wakey's remarkable achievements this season, what can be attained with the right structure in place.

Catalans took approx 5m Euros in sponsorship & corporate sales last financial year.

And their superb new stand had a significant amount of local/regional government support.

A club on the up.

This ^

I'll just be thankful to have a team to watch, and if they can compete, show some progress and not give in, all the better. Thats all I want from SL 2013.

You are welcome to your opinion, but this Leeds team isn't a patch on the Bulls at their pomp.


First I don't think the salary cap issues had [ianything at all[/i to do with our successes. Second, your comments reflect the difference between (and I am not aiming this personally at you BTW) a statistician who has all the figures numbers and percentages, and someone who actually watches the game and understands and appreciates the play. Statistics can be used to 'prove' pretty much anything.


I am one of those weird people that likes the playoffs. I think there is great merit in being the team that sweeps almost all before it to finish top of the pile, and that gives that team the best claim - at that stage - to be called a great team or to use the season's performance as partial evidence of greatness. The fact that you don't [ineed[/i to finish top to be Champions, whilst true, doesn't detract any more than a couple of percent from the achievement of a team which genuinely murdered the league.

But then there is the end of season comp, which is (almost) knock-out rugby, and to be Champions you have to be the best at that.

So if a team wins from 5th or 6th it CAN indeed cite those wins as evidence of it's claim to greatness. Unfortunately, though, it can NOT cite it's over-the-season performances in support, as frankly over the season it did not play all that great, and so to me can't qualify as a great team. in the sense I mean when I talk of great teams.

Moving on to Leeds specifically, we have a generally ageing squad that has two years on the trot summoned up from somewhere the spirit and determination to win at any price, and has done so. Taken in conjunction with their performances in the preceding years, when they were perhaps "at their peak" and playing overall far better rugby, they do indeed merit the description of a great team, golden era, call it what you want.


Actually I didn't blame him, the decision was on his shoulders, he made it and it was not an unreasonable one. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but nobody can say that decision cost Leeds the game, because it didn't. Times, of course, have always changed and always will. Leeds' good times will inevitably decline too. Sinfield, though, surely deserves to go down as one of the legends of the game.

I presumed Caddick was throwing his money at Leeds. Cats, I am not sure about.

It's my opinion that this Leeds team has won almost as many titles as Wigan did in their pomp but in a more competitive league.

Bit isn't that sort of stats based thing rather than an opinion?