It is but pure logic seems to be beyond the shoe gazers on here - it would be ridiculous for a rich sport let alone one of the poorest team sport in the world.

Most clubs do or have organised a warm weather training camp abroad for several days when they can just stay in the UK. If they can afford to do that then they can go to Toronto for a game.

Licencing is the only solution. 12 teams for 2020. 14 teams for 2021 with the option of future expansion to 16 teams.

All teams will immediately have a good stadium (except London and Castleford) and a 6,000 plus fan base (except London and Huddersfield). London would be expected to rectify its defects of poor stadium and fan base within five years under the new international competition, Huddersfield will be expected to rectify its fan base, and Castleford will be expected to rectify its stadium problem, within five years.


2020 lineup (12 teams)2021 lineup (14 teams) Future options (16 teams) Add:

New York, Boston/Philadelphia/Montreal/Chicago

With regards SKy, simply speculative maths, Leeds go down, Leeds have 30-40 regular and casual fans at least, i for one would stop my subscription to SKY if Leeds where not in super league and not on the tv. if 20-25k other Leeds fans do the same (conservative figure) sky could lose 8-10 million every year in subscriptions. Viewing figures have been down for a number of years, you have to consider the loss of the second biggest supported club in Bradford into that it will plummet even more without Leeds. Sky may not insist Leeds stay up, but they may offer a considerably less deal next time without Leeds to make up the short fall. Or insist on franchising again. Make no bones about it SKY want to sell subscriptions and losing the games best supported biggest club and losing tens of thousands of subscriptions will not sit well.

We won't go down anyway, think we have hit rock bottom only was is up now. and think with the last 10 games 8 at home we will pull well clear into mid table.

you feeling ok.

Yup. I'm not a Leeds fan I'm a Trinity fan, Leeds are important to our future - nobody cares if we win or lose to Hudds or London but they do when its Leeds or Cas. That's what team sport is all about, old rivalries and local bragging rights. BV is full when a good Leeds team turns up, thats what matters to me.

TBF Leeds are also a decent enough club these days. However Hurrell is still ordinary imo, good going forwards a liability going backwards - you're a poor team with poor recruitment at present, I can't offer you any solace on that I'm afraid.

Now Leeds create the What If? its amusing to see the reality dawn on some. RL is too small to lose fans and facilities. A FT structure of 20 clubs in 2 divisions with P&R between them with a 3 year licence, is affordable, common sense and strengthens RL. The second division may contain Bradford ( 2012, 12500 avg gate) Leigh (2017, 6700 avg gate) TWP (7000ish in lower leagues) TO, Salford, Widnes (6-7k), HKR (8-9k), London Avignon Newcastle/York etc. Caveats should be around min squad spend and potential bonds, owners willing to put in are essential to growing the sport - structures are critical.

There would not be seven teams from across the pond. Only [ifour[/i. Toronto, Ottawa, New York and [ione of[/i Boston, Philadelphia, Montreal and Chicago. Four north American teams
would not be enough for a separate league.

Also, even with the north American teams vacuuming up all the players from Salford and Wakefield it would still create a strain on the available player pool, pending the development of north American juniors. Which is another reason why four north American teams is the absolute maximum for the next decade.

You really do live in Chorley come cukoo land - when have any of those cities with the exception of Toronto ever expressed a desire for a RL team, 99.9999% of the populations of those cities have never heard of RL and wouldn't want it if they had. You're a very silly poster.

Why would they want players from these teams, in your dream of RL in the future these are a stain on the game.

I know that we've been here before but, your idea is pure fantasy.
Unless there were 2 conferences that came together for the play offs, interest in SL 2 would be broadly similar to The Championship. Plus, where is the money coming from for the additional 8 FT funded clubs.
Hell, the greedy clubs at the top of the pile have been working hard to reduce the number of SL clubs to try and gain a larger slice of the SL pie.
Add to that the likely reduction in funding, despite the inclusion of Toronto and Toulouse in the mix, next time around and it's just not going to happen.
There could be yet another re-branding / re-structure but, certainly not extra cash.

Plus the boredom factor of playing so many repeat fixtures AAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Fantasy is the domain of the brainless who feel that change isn't needed. We will struggle to expand in the south so must ensure we secure our foundations and create a strong France, whilst accepting strong American/Canadian clubs should they materialize. RL is undervalued massively on a £/viewer basis, we need to work with our broadcasting partner to release the funding needed to provide a more dynamic sport that creates the mutual benefits both crave.

I actually agree with the above.
However, this being the case, why, oh why, didn't we expand SL to 14 clubs (to include Toronto and Toulouse) at the last, very recent, restructure.
N. America is STILL an experiment and it needs to be tested at the top level.
On the (huge) minus side. Even with Toulouse and Toronto in SL, would this actually increase the TV deal ? and if so, can you explain just how, because, a few hundred extra Canadian / French subscribers wont make a TV deal happen.

Btw, I'm loving the threats from the RL fans of Leeds that they would cancel their Sky subscriptions if Leeds get relegated