Love the way people preach this two divisions of 10 (Jamie Peacock is one of them) but can never provide any financial numbers to back this plan.



Can someone please tell me how the 2nd division of 10 is gonna generate TV money? How will they afford to pay full time wages?



No TV executive will be interested in paying for 2nd division TV rights.



What evidence or actual argument have you got to say that non franchising would have stopped teams going bust?

I like how you are now moving on to your fairly vague and subjective interpretation of 'serious financial problems' rather than any actual, definable issue. It will allow you hide behind your usual fog-knitting and deliberate-confusion.



But other than Wakefield and Crusaders, and now Bradford, which was your other one?

While I like the idea of the 10 team leagues you are quite correct, unless the 2 nd tier recieved a reasonable TV deal it isnt workable,



Again correct, so why is the 2 nd tier on TV now?



Again no evidence, but it was one of the major arguments for it at the time, something us more knowledgeable ( about human nature ) fans pointed out, I suppose that is the argument

Celtic Crusaders

Wakefield

Crusaders

Bradford



And we still have a few months to go yet

You outdo yourself.

but at the moment the 2nd tier gets no money for TV rights. So yeah we may get that no problem but thats no good if people want a professional 2nd division.

Why which one of them was just a dream in the shower?

I suppose it depends if anybody was willing to stump up 3-4 million a year, if there isnt then as you say, it wont work

Don't forget the extra crowds and revenue generated from the P&R battles..

For you? probably all of them.

Good point, not many meaningless matches before August/September like we have now

So 4 it is then, you should learn to count

Ten team divisions would make the second tier more attractive, promotion makes the second tier more attractive.

Even with the existing total income for the top tier alone each top tier club could keep 100% of it's current TV income and each tier 2 would get 40% if the RFL split it that way. A small cut would make the second tier even better as would a separate deal or an integrated deal granting second tier more money.

The second tier would require smaller outgoings as the best paid players would be in the NRL/tier 1 anyway.



Four franchises failing in four years is how I would describe it too (unless the Bradford business plan included begging buckets)

Of course they will survive! This is why it is ridiculous anybody giving them any donations! They won't reach the amount needed in the, and will have to go into administration. What will they then do with the

Money raised? Give it back!? They will get bailed out by the rfl, or somebody under the influence of the corrupt crooks.



We have all been saying it a while, but our game is in a right mess. They can hide behind 'improved crowds' and 'new stadia' all they like, if a club like Bradford with all the success they have had in the last 10 years can end Up like this then ask yourself what state the other clubs are in!



Until heads roll at the top we stand no chance.



They lie, twist stories, and change the goalposts nearly weekly!



If they come out and save Bradford, resulting in no punishment for the bulls (ie drooping a league or loosing their licence) which I am fairly confident will be the way this pans out, I am done with the game.

No it isnt four. Clearly it is three but ones lasted more than a year so you decided to count it twice to fit with your vague nonsense.



Though why you have chosen to include the first Crusaders and Bradford, and not London, Salford, HKR who have all had financial difficulties i dont know.



We could count all the clubs who had financial difficulties under P+R but that would be boring for everyone, We could look at clubs who had sever financial difficulties directly attributed to P+R, like Leigh. But that would also be boring.



Or we could skip ahead of you dancing round the obvious for two days, and just admit financial difficulties are inherent and endemic in our game because some clubs are poorly managed and any system, any at all will still leave us in a position where some clubs will be mismanaged and some will have financial difficulties, our only responsibility is to have a system which allows the space and time for well run clubs to succeed.



Fact is regardless of whether we use P+R or franchising, or a new system where every five years each chairman is let loose in an enclosed woodland and has to catch as many bears as they can and teach them a passable version of Michael Jackson's thriller using only a hula hoop and a tin of John West Tuna with the judging being based on how many bears are caught and the quality of their dancing with the 14 highest scores getting a place in SL for the next five years, it wouldnt have made the slightest bit of difference to Bradfords position which has been caused by nothing more than managerial incompetence.

So what happens now? start again in SL and await the next cock up?

For Bradford?



At this point, who can even speculate? A million different things could happen in the near future.

Good to see the well educated, non producers of Lewisland coming to defend the flawed system - what a suprise.

Finances - 4 clubs drop from the current deal, remaining ten receive same. I believe 500k from the deal would allow SL2 to be a viable FT league. 27 games by playing 3 times - as now Play offs decide promotion, bottom SL1 relegated - £1m min salary expenditure in SL2. Max 2 overseas in any team for SL2.

SL1 gets substantial increase in average gates, we grow players better equipped to handle international intensity, SL1 increases salary cap to protect against RU.

Smokey ta, you seem to enjoy shooting other posters suggestions down, while not really coming up with any constructive ideas yourself.



Come on, the sport is obviously in a mess, what's your suggestion?

Stop it maurice your talking sense but the franchise fairies will tell you its not the rfl fault no,its not the franchise failing no.Its some chairman who is cocking it all up.But can they explain how this super franchise system allows it?????



They would sooner see some 37 year old aussie being paid a fortune to plod round the field than use that money to make our game stronger



Time to go tricky dicky take your tennis racket with you

I have given my suggestions plenty of times. For your benefit, and just as an overview.



I would increase the league to 16 sides and give each club a place in perpetuity and only add to it as and when necessary.



Split it into two conferences of 8. You play the 7 teams in your conference twice, and the 8 teams in the other conference once, 4 home, 4 away. Top four in each league into play-offs, 1st conference A plays 4th conference B and so on in straight knock-out comp. Which would give us 22 rounds, plus 3 rounds in the play offs.



I would use the spare rounds to put in an international competition between the 4 home nations and france mid season. With GB competing in 4 nations competitions and tours.



I would scrap the cap completely and look at the make up of squads. Insist that clubs register a 20 man squad at the start of a season, either they leave a space spare or any transfers must replace a registered player, the only other players who could represent the club would need to be academy registered players below the age of 21. Clubs must have at least 10 players in their 20man squad who were registered to the club on their 19th birthday, and no more than 5 players who werent registered to a european club on their 19th birthday.



I would (and i did suggest this before the NRL) split the game into quarters, to increase ad revenue and as such the value of the product, I also believe this would result in closer games. I would also look to sell everything under the sun to sponsors ala IPL cricket to increase funds.



I think doing these things would put the game in position where it can build, and give the space needed for clubs to grow.



The two tier simply wont work. The SL two will just be the championship by another name.

Thank you TA.



I could pull holes in it all day, but its your vision and without 10000 words you have supported it.



Two tens is far better and ticks more boxes for the future though.

two tens does nothing but put 4 SL sides in the championship and 4 championship sides in championship 1. Takes money Sky has paid for SL, gives it to a competition they dont screen and forces SL to either play an extra round or lose the millennium weekend and makes the SL season uneven with some clubs getting 1 more home game than others.

If the magic weekend is included in the 3 games that teams play against each other then the home/away games will be equal. 13 home 13 away 1 magic weekend. 27 games just as there are now.



The 2 tier system creates a stronger second tier which would hopefully reduce the gap in quality between the 2 divisions allowing the reintroduction of P+R.



A lot of this all depends if more money can be generated through sponsorship/TV for SL2 but I think that ESPN/Premier Sports/Terrestrial Channels would invest more heavily in the second tier if it was strengthened.

TA is talking SL2 as the new PT championship, I am selling it as SL2 - a vibrant competitive FT comp containing clubs with realistic SL1 ambition showcasing British talent in front of good attendances in quality stadiums. I am assuming Sky will want a game a week