No , it was being stuck at the bottom of a league for 3 years without dropping down , it decimated their fan base

but that only happened because they were promoted

this myth you are perpetuating that it was only relegation that caused the giants growth is nonsense.

Whilst not getting into your "debate" consider the following based on how it works here in the North Sydney example:

Norths are still a proud club and are a foundation club of Rugby League in Australia. At present, they cannot play in first grade (the top flight of competition out here) but still exist with funding from a League's club and sponsors. At present they are attempting to re-enter into the top flight again as the Central Coast Bears. If they do, they'll play in the NRL but also have their reserve grade as the North Sydney Bears, whilst having juniors on the Central Coast AND North Sydney.

The pros for Souths in this feeder arrangement are that they save a large amount of money, by not having to fund their own reserves and having a large first grade squad which has to fall into the salary cap. So they have less players on their payroll, they also don't have to pay for the coach, assistants, trainers, physios, masseurs, backroom staff and managers. As you can see, the first grade team gets to make lots of savings.

What Norths get out of it is a better team on game day, making them more competitive than they were before such feeder club arrangement. Just look at their results from 2001-2004. To give you an idea of the calibre of player you may have joining your reserve grade side, in a game in 2005 against Canterbury, Melbourne Storm send back 6 players, including Scott Hill and Adam Blair. Billy Slater even joined us for one game in 2006. They also share knowledge and have access on occasion to the facilities at Redfern. In fact as we speak, some of the Norths players have summer contracts and are training full time to try and get a first grade contract. The Rabbitohs have sent back players like Craig Wing, David Peachey and David Kidwell.

It wasn't their growth , it was their salvation

Why does it have to be our closest rivals? If the choice was that or going bust or descending into nothingness, then yeah.

I seriously don't see what the issue is. If it's that you don't want a partnership with a rival club, then don't have one with a rival club! It's not difficult! When lower league fans argue about this, they always say they don't want to be [insert rivals]'s feeder, or how would we feel if we were [insert rivals]'s feeder club?

If Hull were in the lower leagues, I wouldn't really care less if we were, say, Castleford's feeder club. If it benefited us I'd welcome it.

I don't see what the issue is that people are having other than "small man syndrome".
Is it being called a "feeder" club? That can always be changed to "partnership".
Is it the fact that they're getting "unwanted players"? They don't seem to have a problem signing them to contracts, or taking on dual reg players, so why does it matter if they're "on loan"?

The fact that they're a feeder club doesn't but an end to your ambitions. You can always go independent again. It's just a partnership that benefits both parties at a particular time. You wouldn't be "someone's b*tch". If the SL club don't give enough in the partnership, the CC team can end the deal at the end of the season and go with someone else, or go it alone. And vice versa.

So do you think it would be worth trying here for clubs that are willing to enter an agreement?

And do you think that SL clubs should be allowed to create their own feeder club should there not be enough clubs willing?

I reckon a club such as Blackpool could have benefited from this.

Couldn't care less if they try it or not , as long as my club doesn't become one , I can just about live with the dual reg situation although that can have significant impact on the leagues

Anything that reduces the credibility of the Championships as a stand alone ' worth winning in it's own right competition ' will just further damage a competition on it's knees right now , so I expect the RFL to announce it as from next season

So yes it might just happen , then I can start watching Miners and Easts instead

Why does it destroy the credibility of the competition?
Why wouldn't you want your club to have the benefits of such a partnership?
How is the competition on its knees?
And why would watching the two amateur sides be more credible?

Because even with DR players clubs can be significantly strengthened or weakened for short periods of time , if it was a case of up to half a team including battle hardened SL veterans could be used it would remove credibilty , not to mention upset your actual players who could lose out financially

Because I want a competitive league , not just the best team I can arrange a loan deal for

The Championship has lost its biggest club without a genuine replacement , next season it is basically the Yorkshire league with 2 other clubs sharing a stadium in Leigh , there are more players being released by clubs than ever before , payments to players are drastically down on recent years , we still have a non paying TV deal , which means less coverage but still lost revenue due to mudweek matches

Because the competition would be about the ability of that clubs players and coaching staff , not who you can borrow

You still haven't said why, you've just sad it would remove credibility.
Surely if the stream of players is constant, then clubs won't be strengthened and weakened over a short period of time? They'd be constantly strengthened.


It would be competitive. Why wouldn't it be?


Why does that mean it's on it's knees? There are only 4 Championship teams in "Lancashire". Half of them are in the top tier. There could have been more Cumbrian clubs if it wasn't for cheating, a different final result and a lack of poor financial planning. The rest are expansion sides. It's not really surprising that the top league is majority Yorkshire considering 9/20 CC sides are from Yorkshire.

And if players are being released and getting less money, then surely having free players would ease the burden and allow other players to get paid more?


Then perhaps you're not a supporter of the workings of professional sport? In which case, I'm surprised you haven't left the game yet altogether because all you do is complain about everything.

Why can't SLE start and pay for its own feeder league and just invite clubs to join it?.

What difference would that be from the reserves or academy league? Unless you're suggesting they take on a load of semi-pro players too, which they couldn't afford?

SLE and the championships are now 'effectivley' two seperate organisations playing under one umberella.
The championships need to start to build there own brands if they are to survive,that wont happen by taking loads of kiddies or players coming back from injuries from SL clubs,the entertainment value and quality will drop massively.

If sl has a problem producing enough players to play in sl and to a larger extent produce players capable of playing international rl then thats there problem,no one elses,hence the reason i say SL should start and pay for its own feeder league.

No, it's the game's problem if we aren't producing internationals, not SL's.
What you're suggesting is SL clubs make new teams and fill them with semi-pro players to make them competitive for the sake of about 7 players. If they could afford to do that, don't you think THAT would be more damaging to the Championships than then actually becoming feeder clubs? I mean where do you reckon they'd be getting the players from?