While the Championships die from lack of oxygen.

And then they get promoted take two thirds of the team that was relegated then get relegated anyway

Yes we would have done. How many of the clubs that brought those players through would have had a fear of relegation anyway?

Why wouldn't you have?

I don't know how feasible this is but I like the idea.

Good idea, I like it. Franchising is the way forward for the long term future of the British game, as long as the application process is reformed. It would work brilliantly if a more ruthless approach was taken (i.e. don't admit clubs with clear financial difficulties/ relegate clubs regardless of established heartland or expansion status). The talent pool in this country simply isn't big enough to sustain p and r; as those clubs who get promoted are resorted to signing average Aussies to even stand a chance of staying up the next season. This does nothing for junior development or long term financial security, as clubs would have to increase their expenditure significantly. Increasing prize money seems like the best solution for long term stability, as long as the money is used for just that purpose.

Championship clubs already receive healthy prize money. I'm not sure why some Championship fans seem to think that the RFL has an obligation to fund their clubs, but it needs to stop.

Well if you are so 'in the know' do reveal exactly how much it is then?

£100,000 for winning the Grand Final! And errrr £0.00 for TV rights.

The Super League clubs are being funded. That the Championship clubs are not is a big reason why the gap between the leagues is so large. Furthermore franchising appears to be the solution to the artificial problem caused by the stark difference in funding.

Hardaker was developed by Fev, he went to Leeds as the finished item. All he needed was full time fitness. He was supposed to spend a further season at Fev on loan, but because of injuries they recalled him. Leeds didn't need the security of licencing to "develop" him. Niether did they need it to develop Sinfield, McGuire, or Burrow in the P & R era.
The question we should be asking is if (for example) Fev had been playing in SL would Burrow & Briscoe have started their pro careers there instead of with a club from elsewhere? The lack of P &R is throttlng clubs in the lower leagues. Fev have dominated the Championship for the last two seasons but seem to have peaked. What happens if they can't keep it up until application time do they miss out? Probably. The whole thing is a bad joke dreamt up by someone who knew nothing of the game and TBH obvioulsy cared less since he's now off back to tennis.

Hardaker is FAR from the finished item.



No because the likes of Leeds & Hull would still be able to pay higher wages than Fev



The lack of P&R isn't throttling lower league clubs - the lower league clubs are what's throttling themselves, if they knew how to market themselves etc they could pull in crowds and make good money.

The fact of the matter is the majority of clubs in the lower leagues just aren't run well enough, have a good enough infrastructure or marketing to be a successful Super League club.

Franchising is the correct way to go - the RFL are just doing it wrong, what they're doing isn't franchising it's off-field bureaucracy P&R shrouded in secrecy and they know it's wrong because they bar teams from suing them over decisions they make during the process - if it was a more open process then they couldn't work it how they do.

Only 1 method of franchising works - the model the NRL and American sports use, you have your league set up and those teams are in the league for good (although conditions such as admin 20 team league split into 4 divisions of 5 teams.

Super League clubs are being funded by the money that Sky pay to televise their matches. If the Championships had an equivalent TV deal, they would get equivalent funding. The fact that they don't isn't an 'artificial' problem, it's completely natural, obviously the lower leagues are never going to attract as much funding as the top league. Like I said, I'm not sure why Championship clubs feel like they should be given an equal share when they are clearly not equal in terms of how much money they bring into the sport. Once again, it comes down to the fact that certain Championship fans for some reason seem to think that the RFL are doing them an injustice by not giving money unconditionally to their clubs. It's just competely ridiculous and illogical.

At the same time, the RFL reduced the amount of money they gave all of the teams below Super League by 10k last year, might not sound like a lot, but it nearly sunk my club.

We're not asking for a payout, we're asking for a chance to compete, that's sport isn't it? And why isn't it injustice if the RFL will tip money into Crusaders, London, Paris and Bradford, but not two entire divisions of clubs struggling to keep their heads above the water.

How about the overall health of the sport?

The NFL have a salary cap and draft system that massively holds back the biggest teams. Why? For the overall good of the sport.

Furthermore, if we're only going to give out money to those clubs that are attracting it, then I'm afraid we'd only be paying around 6 clubs — in terms of attracting Sky to the game, the rest are simply making up the numbers. Some teams are being massively funded by the TV deal despite the fact that they bring next to nothing to the table. If it's ok for them, why not for other clubs?