So you admit you hadn't thought at all about what you were posting, and don't have anything further to contribute. Thanks for that.

So the best players from the bottom 4 clubs would be redistributed across SL1, right? How many players do you imagine that would be and how much of a difference in competitiveness do you think they would make? Would it have prevented Huddersfield getting smashed 54-6 by Wire? Would it have stopped the Bulls having 70 put past them by Hull? What about Leeds' 8-50 loss against us? Could these blowouts [ibetween the top sides of SL[/i be prevented by the redistribution of a handful of players from the bottom 4 clubs? And how good will SL2 actually be once all the best players have been stripped from its top 4 clubs?

It's not any freak blow outs between the big sides that's the issue, that's just sport but watching Wigan go in to 30+ point leads on a regular basis last season without breaking sweat is.

A smaller top division would naturally ensure the best players would be spread amongst those sides and mean more competitive games 'more often'. The 2nd tier competition would obviously be of a lesser quality then superleague but if they could manage to make it fulltime it would certainly be better then the championship as it is.

How they manage to make that happen is the challenge! The salary cap would need to be lower the the top tier as would the distribution of TV money and obviously that would mean the players would be paid less but then they'd mainly get what their quality warrants. The players in that 2nd tier, like the clubs, would have that carrot of getting promotion up to the top division and therefore a salary increase to aim for.

It'll be interesting to see if it can happen, I hope it does.

The main problem with all these ideas is one of money.

There's not enough money in RL to support the league as it stands, let alone adding more clubs to the mix.

That lack of money is also why there's such a shallow player pool. Why would a kid want to be a 20k a year RL player when he could be a 20k a week footballer?

The RFL and the SL clubs need to improve the money coming into the game as well as the games exposure. At the moment we've a number of clubs who are walking a knife edge regarding their finances. We need to stabilize and strengthen what we have before we start fooling about change it.

The answer and the point are the same , outside the top 7/8 in SL, interest in the game is waning, the bottom SL clubs are not improving on or off the pitch as they have absolutley nothing to play for, ditto the top 4/5 in the Championship, the lower Championship clubs are all grasping the tie ups with SL clubs to desperatly avoid dropping into the financial oblivion of next years Championship 1

The gaps are all too big to bridge and too deep to survive dropping into, so the answer and the point is make the gaps smaller and easier to jump, and give the fans of all clubs hope that they will progress by what happens on the pitch, failure to do this will result in more clubs disapearing and less money coming into the sport

How much do SL clubs receive from SKY?
How much do Championship clubs receive from any TV/Media company if anything?

If we went 10 & 10

How much would the top 10 clubs receive?
How much would the lower 10 clubs receive?

Only with those questions answered can we even begin to realise if this is a good idea or not?

Are SKY themselves willing to pay extra to fund another 6 clubs because they believe that there is some substance to the idea and think THEIR revenues will increase with the extra investment, are SKY willing to play the long game and tie us up to some long term deal in the hope this increases the popularity of the game?

SL clubs get 1.2 million, Championship clubs get 90 K ' central funding ' down this year

The rest of your post is the 32 million dollar question, but are SKY happy with the way Franchising is paning out as regards enough exciting games to bring in viewers and advertisers? , if they are then nothing will change, simple as

I doubt that money is the incentive to the vast majority of kids when deciding what sport to play as an 8 year old

As for stabilizing and strengthening, that will not happen when the vast majority of our supposed clubs have little to actually play for

As much as i want this idea to be the future of the sport its clearly not going to happen without a lot more money coming into the game,and It seem pretty obvious sky wont pay anymore at the moment.

So If this idea is to work properly, and for the good of the long term future of the game,then french tv must be got on board,which obviously means the involvement of at least two more french teams, which would be great for the sport in the Europe.

We don't have 14 either. Or 12. Or even 8.

5, 6 tops with little sign of improvement.

The rest are making up the numbers, running headstrong into spiralling financial disaster chasing a salary cap that without the Sky money would be akin to a street beggar walking into a Range Rover garage saying 'I want that one'.

If you read the clubs accounts rather than the RFL spin, you'll see it too but you might need to open your eyes first.

Of course it makes sense and I would go as far as to say this is a MUST to save RL dieing on its @r5e!

Under the new proposal - Teams compete on a level with teams generally comparable with them to make an interesting close competition which will invigorate the current dour super league we currently have, where games can be over before they start.

Teams like Castleford / Salford/ London / Widnes are not realistically ever going to compete with the bigger teams like wigan / leeds/ wire /saints/ catalans however long they play in the same league, as they are simply much smaller clubs and are currently holding the top clubs back.

In reality what is the difference in support / facilities / crowd numbers / finances of the top championship teams and the bottom SL teams? The answer is very little - yet the bottom SL teams are miles away from the top teams, with the same position being replicated in the championship (teams like Swinton / Keighley, Doncaster are miles behind your Leighs Halfax's et in the same way) - so why do we persist with two un-competitive leagues (with a vast disparity between the top and the bottom teams) and freeze out the clubs at championship level who could move forward and compete with the lower SL teams (ie/ Fax / Featherstone / Barrow etc).

The current system is absolute madness as your castlefords / salfords / londons in SL hold back your wigans / leeds / wires etc, while the same happens in the championship with Doncaster / Swinton holding back your featherstones and halifax's who, under the current system wont get their chance! This system puts together teams who are pretty even and who can compete with each other to help the game grow!

I've supported wigan for 25 years yet next year is the first time I am considering not buying a season ticket as I am frankly bored $h1tless with half our home games (which are over without us even breaking sweat after 20 mins) and disillusioned with the current set up of the sport generally. While I say this supporting a top club the same must surely be said for Cas / London / Widnes / Salford fans - it can't be much fun for them knowing that 70% of their games, they are tonked out the game by half time and getting hammered most weeks - Surely they would rather compete with clubs on their same level each week and have an exciting and dynamic league?

This would create interest and two very compitive tiers of SL - And you could ensure that tier two is not simply a re-branded championship by having a fixture list with some cross pollenation - Ie/ Tier 2 clubs play 5 tier 1 clubs at home - thus have 5 marque fixtures which they can raise for across the season and may have half a chance in a one off fixture against tier 1 opposition ( like featherstone in the cup this year) but cant compete week in week out!

I think you would find crowds in both tiers would go up massively - Tier 1 I would expect crowds of 12-14k as averages within 3 years and tier 2 averages of around 4-5k due to the fact that generally, fans want to watch a vibrant competitive sport, and endless drubbings of top teams over bottom teams do nothing to achieve this!

Additional funding would come from increased crowd numbers and interest in the game and would more than pay for itself!

rubbish idea

we have a an elite of 5 teams all good enough to win the title Leeds, Wigan, Saints, Warrington, Catalans then below that we have competitive teams Hull F.C , Huddersfield, Bradford and a few clubs capable of breaking in to the top 8 like Wakey & KR

we don't need to change the league structure...we have a good competitive league I'd dare say more competitive than RL has been in 20 years

every league in any sport has bottom sides that are the whipping boys....its up to them to improve not for us to throw them out of the league

Just look at football , most leagues around the world only have 2 or 3 teams that are good enough to win the League and have 6-7 teams annually fighting for safety that struggle to get there win column into double figures

Because he plays rugby and not football

And its better than stacking shelves for 6.08 an hour

Your last paragraph points out what is missing, do you seriously think these clubs can improve to the point of competing? , and if not, how long do you expect fans to keep turning up to watch them?