Small squad anyway, and then sign SBW with the agreement that he can go back to NZ after the season has started.
Get that it’s for the birth of his child and why they would let him go, but he had plenty of time to make arrangements for said child to be born over here - smacks of desperation to get SBW at all costs.
I’m one who does think that they should be given some leeway/concessions as a new expansion club, but they’re hardly helping themselves either.

1. How on earth do you manage to define them as an expansion club?? They committed to expanding the TV deal with North American TV Money, but there isn't any such money?

2. They committed to expanding the pro payer pool with grid iron converts "pretty quickly" that failed completely?

3. When SL gained TWP they lost London so again what expanded? Geographically SL no longer has a London presence?

4. let's say five new North American clubs replace five English clubs and buy all their players is that "expansion"

it's surely contraction of the game here more so as the closure of an English club as a professional entity permanently means they ultimately shut their reserves and academy. Will NY and Ottawa have reserves and academies?

So do please define for me how TWP are an expansion club?. The RL media and journos ram this [i"expansion"[/i definition down our throats, probably because they get a lot more work and attention trumpeting such clubs and laughably even the ones that don't exist like New York and Ottawa.

4. Just recently it has been revealed that the small squad of players TWP have largely did not want to be back and forth across the Atlantic, and so Argyle was forced to offer them bigger salaries until they agreed to play for TWP. It's not a matter of them not helping themselves, it's a case of them not being attractive to professional players here because of the travel distance.

5. Ironically it was Brian McDermott who when he was London Broncos coach and they were serial losers with a thin squad said that every time he tried to sign an M62 based player they refused because they didn't like the idea of 400 mile round trips. Players certainly don't like the idea of 6,000 mile round trips to North America unless they are paid big salaries. By the end of next year how many TWP players will be wanting to go home to England. How many here will want to play for what is looking like serial losers.

Please review how TWP are "expansion" and why you want to do them favours whilst London lose their SL status and drop a division to make way?????.

Wow - you seem very angry about my view of them as an expansion club, and appear to have made a whole host of assumptions based on what seems an irrational over reaction, but I'll answer your points;

1 - I class them as an expansion club because they're non-heartlands. They're a relatively new entity in an area that is not historically and RL hotbed. As for TV deal etc, I would never have expected them to bring immediate revenue in this area, but long term, if RL is to take off in North America, there are huge potential benefits - but this will very much be a slow burner and relies on plenty of other things to work.

2 - Again, it's impossible to expect them to be supplying Super League level home grown players in such a short period of time and this would very much be a long term aim. They are a figurehead at the top table (which is needed to attract non-traditional RL families to the kids game), but building the infrastructure in terms of junior leagues, development pathways etc will take decades to start producing players of the required standard. This is an argument I've seen a lot of people raising 'they've not got any Canadian players'... Do you really expect them to have at this point in their journey? Melbourne are one of, if not THE most successful clubs in the NRL, yet after 30 years of existence, they've only had the 1 Victorian come through their systems and make grade in NRL, and he was a Tongan heritage player anyway. Would you say Melbourne are a failure as a club?

3 - Agree this is a shame, but that was based on the rules of promotion/relegation, hardly TWP's fault that London finished bottom. For what's it worth, I would like to see both TWP and London around the top table, and I'd be happy for the governing body to provide support/concessions to both clubs in order to help them be successful. If (and I accept it's a big if) we can make London, TWP, other French and North American clubs successful enough to stand on their own 2 feet, that can only be a positive for the sport of RL as a whole.

4 - Again, I get the view that you are looking at things purely in the short term. If we can get 5 successful North American clubs, I couldn't give a rats backside where they get their players from - if people are willing to pay to turn up and watch it, that sets a platform for each of those clubs to set up all of the infrastructure needed for junior development etc and grow the fanbase of RL worldwide. If North America became that much of a success, I'm sure they'd want their own league - and that would be wonderful.

5 - That's TWP's issue to deal with - The fact players don't want to travel 400 miles to play in London shows how small time we are culturally as a sport. If TWP have the money and have success, the players will be more than happy to travel. Melbourne faced similar issues in Aus, as have Canberra historically - yet both teams have no problems attracting players during their successful periods.

So, in summary, and to answer your final point, I can see the potential benefits that could be achieved if TWP (or any other expansion club, including London) were to be a success long term and believe as a sport, we should do everything we can to help them get there. Melbourne have been given plenty of support of the years, and RL in Melbourne is now flourishing, though they're still struggling to develop local juniors 30 years into their existence, but they do produce lots of superstars from their juniors, albeit those players brought in at a young age from more traditional RL heartlands in Aus, or from the pacific Islands. Melbourne have a very solid fan base though and are now one of the most successful commercial entities in the NRL, but that has taken a staggering amount of financial support from News LTD and the NRL.

The way I see it, we can stick with our traditional clubs, and the sport will never reach it's potential, we'll stay at the sort of level we're at now in terms of financial power and stature within the sporting world (or more likely we'll fall further behind). I'd prefer to work through time and resource behind trying to grow the game, expansion clubs are vital for this, but it will take decades before this pays off.

Didn't see the game or highlights but was closer than i expected? Toronto play Wigan in Thursday's Sky game so will get a good luck at them now they have had a couple of run outs in SL I'm more inclined to side with Donnymans view on the Wolfpack but both sides have explained their pov well. Back to this game, did Salford play poorly or did Toronto improve markedly from Cas game? Can't see Wigan going easy on them next up

Salford have had a big turnaround of players since last season and it's going to take some time for them to gel.
Good 2 pts for us I reckon.

Ted, thanks for the post and thanks for your time as well.......We are miles apart and can't agree on anything as long as you think your view is "rational"?

1. Yes I agree it needs "Plenty of things to work" for a TV deal, Perez himself said it would need [i[u"5-6 North American clubs in Superleague before there could be a large NA TV deal".[/u[/i Any less than 9 English clubs in Superleague and the existing SKY deal is gone so it's impossible to get to an NATV deal without without half the English SL clubs gone, then the other half would go as the SKY deal collapses. Your first point is nonsense mate.

2 Yes I agree it's impossible for TWP to supply home grown SL players which is why they didn't commit to doing this. Player production was to be the conversion of Grid Iron players that was tried and failed, and TWP announced they would not be undertaking Junior development. Melbourne are nothing to do with this, I think everyone would be delighted if David Argyle came to London and threw $Millions at the Broncos....... Melbourne is a terrible and irrelevant argument to use mate. It's an Aussie club in Aussie equivalent to London Broncos.

3. You talk about making London, TWP, other French clubs (Avignon, Toulouse, Catalans) and North American clubs (Ottawa, New York, Montreal) successful through "concessions" - what would you concede to these clubs that you would not concede to actual successful English clubs? Why would English clubs stand for it - they wouldn't would they? I am suspicious of you here...

4. You say "[iIf we can get 5 successful North American clubs, I couldn't give a rats backside where they get their players from[/i". This is both poor and it gives you away big time....

a. You know full well New York, Ottawa, Montreal and Toulouse will want to sign the squads of relegated clubs like Salford, Huddersfield, Wakefield and Castleford.
b. You know full well such relegations will start to destroy the infrastructure of player development here as foundations reserves and academies close.
c. You know full well that fans here will be up in arms and will leave the game in droves if their clubs are removed and their players shipped abroad to North America - and many players will not go, and will go find other jobs here. Argylle has to massively overpay the few he can get.
.
[u5. You don't "see" anything, it's just a poor bit of trolling...[/u you answered nothing mate...

I don't think he explained his point of view well at all Craig? He grossly assumed clubs and fans here would standby and cheer the North Americans on whilst their own clubs were disadvantaged and relegated. Go back and read the rubbish he posts?

Does "Craig HKR" mean your a HKR fan? The betting on here was HKR would be relegated and TWP stay up. It could still happen. Maybe Hull could have a bad year one year and New York could replace them too....[uHow well would that go down in Hull[/u?????? We've already seen one poll where 80% of Hull people already think TWP are a nonsense??

One thing is for sure it won't happen, but if it did they would have to extend the KC to accommodate Hull City's thousands of new fans.....

It wouldn't be the first time fans have stood by and watched their club die though donnyman, although I agree with pretty much everything else you said.

The day this nonsense started I thought what happens when NA clubs replace SL clubs here. Will the English directors be happy and still put the money in? will their English fans be happy and still watch? Will SKY be happy to pay for a Transatlantic league, will the junior and amateur game be happy as interest and opportunities are lost here?

Sadler opines [u[i"It is clearly in the interest of rugby league as a whole that Torinto Wolfpack are successful to the point where they create a significant market for Rugby League in North America"[/i[/u

It isn't clear to me at all what that soundbite means and Sadler and Lockwood never explain it. NATV re not interested in screening RL, Rugby Players in NA (and there are tens of thousands) are not interested in playing RL, and despite several thousand paying fans TWP's losses are now what about $10,000,000? That's OK if the owner is a massively rich RL fanatic - how many more of them are there in NA?

And every time NARL tries to grow a club NARU appears on the scene to counter it. The RL press really owe fans here an explanation, I won't hold my breath.....

Why on earth would I be trolling - I'm presuming you think I'm an alt account for another poster (or posters), but I can tell you I am genuinely not. I believe expansion is an opportunity, but it's one that will take decades to pay off.

You assume I want expansion at the cost of traditional clubs, and you couldn't be further from the truth - If it's done right, with the right amount of investment and commitment long term, it will be good for the sport as a whole. My view is that I'd like to see the whole professional structure of rugby league grow - super league should eventually be 16 teams, play each other home/away, no loop fixtures (apart from play-offs), but the long term aim should be that a number of these 16 clubs are non-heartland. And the long, long term aim should be to have more than 1 full-time professional league - the Championship should be full time, and ideally, these call all be English clubs, because America and France would be strong enough to have the same - appreciate that is all pie in the sky at the moment, but you've got to start somewhere, and why not with expansion of Super League?

Yes, in the short term expansion clubs will have to rely on players from heartlands, mercenaries, poached talent (call it whatever you want), yes it will nark off some of the traditional clubs who are rightfully only interested in their own survival, but I believe it's good for the long term health of the game. I'm also willing to accept I might be wrong, but I think the potential benefits are worth the risk (which I see as negligible).

Genuinely not trolling - they way I see it, if we don't do expansion, we will struggle to get better than what we have currently - there are plenty of Super League clubs who live hand to mouth, and there's a whole different argument about what those clubs could/should be doing to improve their fanbase and commerciality, most of the clubs below Super League (bar a couple) rely heavily on being propped up by fan funding or other short term schemes to survive.

The money just isn't in the game currently to enable it to reach it's potential, expansion offers an opportunity, but will also rely on some very rich benefactors. In my mind, the super rich are more likely to want to invest in expansion areas where the markets are potentially huge (such as Toronto, New York etc) than any small town or even City in Northern England. These people know they're going to have to throw plenty of money at the project, so if they ever want a return on that money, they'll need that bigger market. And if they're just doing it as a plaything, then again with no disrespect to any traditional club (including Leeds, my own club), they're probably going to want to be somewhere a bit more exciting than most Northern UK cities, and I'm guessing will want them near their other business enterprises.

I get that some will see this as a dig at traditional clubs, areas etc (and presumably that's why you think I'm trolling), but it's not - the heartland clubs are vital to the game, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't look to expand our footprint.

In terms of what concessions should they get, I'd like to see them given bigger allowances for overseas players and an increased salary cap that starts with a fairly substantial increase and gradually reduces over say a 5 or 10 year period (this would probably also mean needing to scrap relegation all together and have licencing). I get this potentially creates an uneven playing field, but as you stated, they will have to pay 'overs' for players to attract them in the short term, and ultimately, I want them to be successful, as if they're successful, there's more chance the locals will buy in and become rusted on fans, then their families and kids etc become fans, then kids might want to play the game etc etc, but it takes a lot of time and money. If some rich sugar daddy is willing to put in that time and money, then what has everyone else got to lose?

I'd be interested to hear your views Donnyman on what the game looks like in 10/20 years time? Where is the investment and growth of the game coming from?