Seriously, when did any SL club bring a player over at the top of their game and not just seeing their career out - players who have mis-behaved or coming back from injury dont count ?
I think that you are just wishful thinking.
Of course when you go back to the 80's, we could plunder Union and steal some of their superstars but, that avenue is also a non runner.

It's all about the money and the level of sponsorship going into the NRL (and Union) utterly dwarfs RL in the UK and this isn't going to change anytime soon.

Even SBW, the "superstar" signing by Toronto, is an example of a player, albeit a very good one, coming to SL on a retirement contract and whilst it's right for the game to try and make as much from his conversion as they can, it is what it is and way over the odds as well

Other than the semi-pro bit, were already there.

Interesting thoughts. I'd agree to a certain extent about the competitiveness of SL, but we have Saints who cantered to two hubcaps and really ought to have won the treble in the past two years.
I suspect that the salary will start to work against them, in that the players who have reached regular first team standard over the last couple of years, will ask for an upgrade in monetary terms once contracts are up for renewal. It's either find a way to say yes, by reducing the cap elsewhere in the squad if your maxed out, or the lure of Australia beckons. Also, there's still only four clubs that have won SL in how many years? Yes, were finding different clubs making the GF in recent years, but the quality of our product is really suffering, with the recent GB tests highlighting the problem. It's a long, long time since the NRL was second class to the UK, and I cannot see us getting anywhere parity for another considerable length of time.

The salary cap is part of the problem with the quality of our product, and this is the reason that SL is more competitive. I cannot see an way forward where we have both.

With regard to the NRL competition, all the clubs receive a huge cash sum to/from the main sponsor, however they operate a salary cap, the difference being once a club reaches the top of the cap of look to be heading above the cap - the club in question has to off load high salary players if they do not want heavy penalties against them.
Whether right or wrong, here's the difference, the lower 3 clubs get first call on those players unless they leave & go abroad. This is the Australian way in order to stimulate the completion & lower clubs can rise, which happens.
Our top clubs would not stand for this & the top clubs, RFL & fans could not swallow this !
This country & clubs will never match money from USA & Canada, their business operations dwarf ours, next up is Ottawa, then New York, so stop dreaming, you cannot match them ! Only legislation can hope to regulate & control issues, the problem is to what extent ! ?????

It should absolutely be amended. FFP is the model to look at. The competition has been brought to it's knees quality wise and the only way players can earn as much as 20 years ago (ratio to living costs now) is if they are lucky enough (and good enough) to get an NRL gig.

It's a disgrace, no wonder the game is stale.

Fine as an answer - FFP rules type to apply, fine if an owner has cash to inject to offset allowed debt, but ultimately the club retains that debt created even if it's mitigated, accumulation over 3 seasons would still lead to clubs going bust as their is no league above super league with a tv injection of money available to wipe out debts as in your analogy championship to premier league.
In short all super league clubs would have to fall every time on a sugar daddy who did not want their money back, this is a tall ask times 12 clubs !!!!
Added to this is continuation of creditors wanting their money back, legal business rules apply in the UK, for all business to be paid within 1 month ! Continuation of debts unpaid can lead to your company being struck off registration to operate from the DTI - + all taxes must be paid first & kept up to date, these are legal issues that control debt ! Hence RFL rules of salary cap + right & proper person owning & running a club ( ability to ) I am not defending the RFL as they are not very good on the latter point, I am also not against raising salary cap but it has to be sustainable to the sport as a whole & not to a single or few select clubs, other wise, those few will only end up with each other !

As I stated earlier, it’s the football league model we should look at which is totally different to the ffp model

Who do you think would benefit the most rlfrom these quality sausage stuffersrl and under the football league model?

Good point Mounsey, only those to benefit is clubs who can run with money in the millions, do you think any club in the UK could run with those figures - expenditure ?? Others than that pick any FFP model you want, it's still
' Allowed managed debt" which eventually catches up at pay back time. People don't seem to understand that point + businesses in this country, (owners) cannot match large American & Canadian companies !
Remember Ottawa are in next 2021 & new York on the horizon !!!

Absolutely. Let’s stop the big teams from spending money they can afford just so Wakefield can finish 8th

You can keep going over that point all you want but lets be honest for a minute how many clubs are heavily reliant on investors to be able to spend to the cap as it currently is in this country? There are only so many Morans and Ken Davys that you will come across that will continuously pour money into the club that they love and it will not last forever.

What happens when the likes of Davy stand down? Who do you think will be there that will be happy to lose a million pound a year to watch a team play in a stadium that is at 15% capacity every week? The rise in salary cap would probably be sustainable for 50% of the teams in super league as it stands, but again that is heavily reliant on the investors at the clubs.

Our game will never be on a level with the likes of football and the level of investment and interest that clubs get in that game, I look at it like this - Toronto are a one off - If you don`t believe that, just look at the level that the Aussies have been at over the past 10 years and the size of the game and yet the once in a generation players - Thurston, Slater, Lockyer earned a fraction of what SBW has been given by Toronto. Maybe there are a few other investors in North America that want to follow suit and throw crazy money at a pet project, similar to MK with Salford.

In a few years time, if it does evolve and if there are multiple teams with the same level of investment as Toronto, I would be more than happy for my club to go there separate ways and stick to playing the likes of Salford, Leigh and KR in a different league and let the likes of Saints join them in a super duper league - I do however wonder how long it would take the likes of Wigan to join us though? They have lost around 700k a year over the last few years with things as they stand, how long can those losses be sustained?

No point in banding facts about the place. Their minds are made up and wont be changed. Like a petulant toddler throwing a tantrum.

Name me the current sides of the 28 top level pro RL sides in the world who currently make a profit.
St Helens
Wigan
Warrington
Castleford
Salford
Leeds
Catalans
Wakefield
Toronto
Huddersfield
HKR
Hull FC
Melbourne
Brisbane
New Zealand
Canberra
Newcastle
North Queensland
Gold coast
South Sydney
Roosters
Tigers
Manly
St George
Penrith
Eels
Sharks
Bulldogs
................ Now to be clear here. Make a profit, not debt free.
2016 NRL rlhttps://www.sportingnews.com/au/other-sports/list/how-much-debt-is-your-nrl-club-in-parramatta-eels-sydney-roosters-canberra-raiders-penrith-panthers/126btjdgrajn812q1fohicol1nrl
2013 SL. rlhttps://www.bbc.com/sport/rugby-league/21211330rl

Possibly none, but there are some outside of that list who are living within their means.

Not many of those though......