20 years of Premier league

Winners

Man Utd
Blackburn
Arsenal
Chelsea
Man City

5 teams in 20 years

Rugby League
16 years of Super (dooper*) league.

Saints
Bradford
Wigan
Leeds

4 teams in 16

I'm seeing the massive difference

*must add this when talking with fans of lower league teams who don't have an ounce of jealousy in them.

How?

I'm sorry, are you wanting the details of an in-depth, fully costed, point by point, multi-year plan that involves all aspects of the sport?

Yes

Well the 50/50 tbread tells us all we need to know about SL fans

As for the criticism of the RFL? , well start getting it right and I wont criticise, simples

Well in the true spirit of RLFans, I'll show you mine if you'll show me yours.

Once again, your constant need to separate the Championship and SL is noted. Very few others on here do, why do you? Instead of complaining and criticising everything in sight, why not suggest a few ideas of your own?

Or how about instead of asking pointless, irrelevant questions why not say what is wrong the solutions proposed on this thread?

Massive ( in RL terms ) investement in ' localised ' marketing of all Championship clubs, no live televised championship matches, but a weekly highlights/review/preview show produced to best show the competition, investement on behalf of the clubs to increase,improve and find new income streams

A few other ideas as well but considering the time of night I'll decline fron going into details, the bottom line is for the International game to improve requires the levels below to improve , the same principles applies to other issues as well

I have on more than one occasion shown you how I would change the way the game is run.

By the way a few years ago the ECB looked at why cricket was failing to attract new players at local level, why crowd numbers were dropping generally why people were not interested in the sport anymore. From the report they made changes one of these changes was to bring in promotion and relegation from a two league system. And yes there were other changes but my point is that they brought in promotion and relegation to generate interest.

I doubt it because I have never met you, if you can link to these detailed, fully costed, comprehensive plans then I'll happily look at them. But Starbug has demanded that level of detail be required so until someone comes up with some this thread is pretty much irrelevant.

As for the ECB, again like football, it's not a close comparison. The ECB enjoys massive interest and funding from its internationals. That money can be, and is being, ploughed into the sport at domestic level to keep it running. Without the money from internationals domestic cricket would fold overnight. I'd also point to the clubs issue once again. We have 14 full time clubs, with interest and money focussed on and coming in through the top of those 14 clubs. How do you run a legitimate, functioning P&R system when only 10 or so clubs can actually compete? Having P&R between a top division which is completely full time and a 2nd division which has no full time clubs and are operating on crowds of hundreds in some cases is a recipe for disaster. Until there is a predominantly full time 2nd division P&R will not work.

If the RFL had run the game properly from the start then this would not be an issue. The reason the teams below super league are part time and have small crowds is because of the fact there is no dream, nothing to aspire to, yes you can win the respective league that you are in but what happens then? The reward for the clubs below Super league is little; the reward for the fans is far smaller. The fans want bragging rights. How do you attract new support for your club when
A) It gets limited publicity from the governing body,
B) You have your games shown on a channel that less than half the population of the country get (this is yet another great deal done by the people in charge) the clubs get nothing from the deal and actually harms the top clubs bid for a licence. The top games that would pull the interest of the neutral can be seen on the TV they can sit in a sports club/ bar and watch for free have a few beers. The games are switched to a Thursday night and many of the diehard fans cannot go.
If they are going to give it away give it away to a terrestrial TV channel that gets into every home then you have a chance of better sponsorship.
c) Super league clubs sell season tickets at a stupidly low price that they cannot afford causing the floating supporter to buy their season ticket because it has paid for itself even if they only go to two games. Then money that could have been used to promote the lower division clubs is spent buying a hole in the ground (iconic ground MY A (Jim Royal moment) ) and keeping a team that has bought its iconic status with money it did not have, running.
d) No promotion or relegation. Nothing to get excited about or biting nails time, talking about the connotations that may get you promoted or relegated, the excitement the disappointment until you reach the semifinals or the final of the playoffs there is none of that so people do not get attached to the club like the supporters that have been around for years and their family’s

it is because of a lack of promotion and relegation that the gap is as big as you say, although I think the top 5 championship clubs could compete with the bottom 5 Super League clubs with only a few adjustments needed.
Rugby league is top heavy too much money, time and promotion is put into super league and will fall over if something is not done about it. Without the lower leagues Super league will struggle.

Always travelling i think you've hit the nail on the head.

Unfortunately you've posted this on the VT, so stand back and be prepared for a tsunami of abuse from the pro licencing brigage who don't give a stuff about anything below super dooper league.