And we need to eliminate it.
No. It wouldnt. Leeds turnover ten times the TV money. Giv e Fev £1.2m. They still arent getting anywhere near £12m
Yes, they do. If Fev arent aiming to compete with Leeds. They shouldnt be in the same league as Leeds.

Yes
That is true. And that is why the game should be looking for ways to make the clubs surviving on Sugar Daddies and relying on the SC to compete to overcome those problems. Swapping one club which is struggling to compete and survive for another club struggling to compete and survive is not only pointless but counter-productive.

But that's the $64,000,000 question - How.

SL as it stands has not.

If you say that SL can carry and improve the current incumbents to the level of a "Leeds" then it should be able to do it with others.

You are creating a false nirvana of turning the bottom 6 into "leeds clones" which on the evidence looks like it isn't going to happen anytime soon, if ever.

Some clubs just can’t become that big. Some clubs just aren’t SL level clubs. Altering the entire structure of the game to try and force them to be doesn’t do anyone any good.

Not all clubs can be as big as Leeds/Wigan, but some can. We need a structure which gives them the best chance to do so. Not a structure which fills them with constant uncertainty that at any time they may be replaced by a club with no chance of reaching that level.

Giving up on trying to make Wakefield a top club because Fev aren’t ever going to be a top club is a stupid standpoint.

The cliff will always exist between a full time and a predominantly part time league. The only sport where the cliff is at an "acceptable" level is football and even then they have yo-yoing clubs and big parachute payments.

We need to improve the Championship until 6 or 7 clubs are at a reasonable standard compared to the bottom half of SL. This obviously requires money. IIRC from the Watkins Review, the Championship and CC1 clubs receive 1/16th of the SL tv deal. I'd suggest the tv deal be split into 18ths instead. With 14 of the 18ths going to each SL club, 1/18th to the RFL (as now) and then 1/18th split between the CC1 clubs and 2/18ths split between the Championship clubs on a sliding scale according to the previous years league table.
That should give each CC1 club £100k and each CC club nearly £150k on average. Each SL club will have to give up around £120k for this.
Not a mammoth shift but should give the Championship clubs the opportunity to sign some decent marketing/commercial staff to bring more money into the clubs.

You mean the structure that saw Bradford fail, Wakefield fail, Salford Fail, London fail......



I for one, did not suggest that and as for stupid comments, you don't do so bad yourself.

I would suggest that's a sensible idea, except, reduce SL to 10 teams and divide the Sky money from the other 4 around the Championship.

Do I?

Either way, its better than the structure that saw Halifax fail, Widnes fail, Workington fail, Wakefield fail, Oldham fail, Whitehaven fail, paris fail, hull fail, Sheffield fail……
Thats what P+R does. So yes.

Why do we need to do that?

The bottom clubs in SL aren’t SL standard now. Raising 6 or 7 championship clubs to their standard wont give us any more clubs of SL standard.

We need more clubs of SL standard, if we wanted more to just be ‘top end championship’ we could relegated 2-4 SL clubs and have a 10 team franchised SL, because none of them would be in a position to add to SL again.

Why does the entirety of any plan for the championships always boil down to ‘give them super leagues money and expect nothing back’

What are the championship clubs contributing to this?

If SL is just giving money away why are the championships more deserving of it than the players? or the amateur game? or the youth game?

Perhaps to improve the sport as a whole ? , perhaps to pressurise the underperforming SL clubs to work harder ? , perhaps to increase the number of people watching and interested in RL

You can ' WANT ' more SL standard clubs based around large population area's all you want , but they arent on the horizon yet , and I suspect they wont be for many decades , if ever , so in the meantime , a small amount of money spent ON the lower tier clubs and the competitions they play in could have large benifits for the future development of the sport

Maybe we might then see a ' Vibrant ' , worth winning in its own right Championships

Correct, money spent ON the clubs and competition, not given TO them

Bringing the championships closer to the level of the lower SL clubs necessitates that the championship clubs grow at a faster rate than the lower SL club.

To make a conscious decision to bring the championships closer to the level of the lower SL clubs necessitates that we make a conscious decision to grow the championship clubs at a faster rate than the lower SL clubs.

This will further exacerbate the gap between the lower SL clubs and the bigger SL clubs, or necessitate the ‘holding back’ of the bigger SL clubs.

This would also exacerbate the gap between the lower championship clubs and C1 clubs and the bigger championship clubs or necessitate us making a conscious decision to try and bring up the level of the lower championship clubs and C1 clubs to the bigger championship clubs, who we are already trying to bring up to the level of the lower SL clubs would mean holding back each level of the game until the one below had caught up. This would be quite obviously more damaging the further you went up.

If we were to cut 4 clubs, it would be massively better for us as a game to invest the £5m extra in to more and better youth coaching, and improving amateur facilities.

I also can’t agree that money spent on bringing a minority of championship clubs up to a level we know isn’t sustainable for SL would benefit the game massively, and certainly not more than that same money being spent on amateur and youth RL.