https://www.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... per-league This is an idea to make Superleague more competitive. That it comes from Mr. Blease of Salford who don't run an academy (no criticism as they don't have the money) you could accuse him of self interest, but it still remains a viable idea anyway. There does to me sometimes seem an unfairness when you see budding talent around say Cas and Wakey going off to join the Wigan academy, IIRC Sinfield and Watkins played their junior games around the Greater Manchester area yet went to Leeds. Would a more even competition work?

https://www.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... per-league This is an idea to make Superleague more competitive. That it comes from Mr. Blease of Salford who don't run an academy (no criticism as they don't have the money) you could accuse him of self interest, but it still remains a viable idea anyway. There does to me sometimes seem an unfairness when you see budding talent around say Cas and Wakey going off to join the Wigan academy, IIRC Sinfield and Watkins played their junior games around the Greater Manchester area yet went to Leeds. Would a more even competition work?

I thi knit would work well I would even go as far as to change the entire league structure to replicate the nfl too we could have a lot more clubs that have been cast adrift in the top tier and over time.e will develop and become more competitive. It would mean buying games are seen as a big games as they dont come around as often.

The finances are the issue and would require super league clubs to take a cut into money but again somthing like an f1 distribution of funds would be ok to start with. But with more sides playing in to top their we could work the tv rites similar to the premier league and have money from sky and possibly bt or maybe prime or Amazon? One thing to point out too is being in the top flight would attract better sponsorship and investment t for a lot of clubs .

My initial thought is that if I was a 16/17 year old lad in Wigan and was one of the most promising RL players for my age, then I wouldn't be best pleased being told I was going to have to start my career playing for Salford/Wakefield/Hull KR, etc.

Seems an obvious ploy by clubs who can't be bothered to develop their own youth system.

It's not a given that they would end up at cas or wakey tho and it could also be a good thing are they more likely to get game time there ? I feel this would be a better way of distributing talent and creating a more competitive league than just restricting how much clubs could spend you only have to look at the list of sides to have contested the superbowl to see it's a system that works as the worse sides get first picks of the draft so in time they have a much better squad.

You can also look to players like Gareth o'Brien for us at warrington was ok but a move to Salford was a good move for him under their structure he really flourished or was a completely different player than we saw at warrington

Correct. It works in the NFL because the sports they are competing with also have a draft, and they are paying players more than enough to make up for moving house and playing for a bad team. Here a quality youngster from Wigan isn't going to go and play for Hull KR for buttons, he's going to play union, or get a normal job and play for Pats

No young lad in Wigan is growing up dreaming of turning out for Hull KR or Wakefield.. fair enough, if you aren't quite top level and end up there by default, but if you are an elite youngster and forced to pack up and spend your fledging career and life in Hull, then I'd suggest that player will quickly be quitting for rosier places like RU.

Like I say, it's a scheme designed to bail out clubs who can't sort themselves out and, in reality, should be kicked out of the league. Having a working academy should be a minimum requirement for a SL franchise.

I largely agree that a draft isn’t really workable.

However, I think in the absence of meaningful transfer fees, there’s not much of a carrot for the less well off clubs to invest heavily in their youth systems. You can make them spend more through franchise criteria, but if it is done grudgingly it likely won’t be done well. And if it is done at the expense of first-team spending, it’ll lead to a more unbalanced competition.

After years of under delivery and a few more merged with Hull, Rovers have been focusing really heavily on their academy lately. This has been widely welcomed by fans, as far as I can tell. And I think having an important structural element of the club basically fail has been more than problematic. However, I’m sceptical about the likely scale of the pay-off without pretty dramatic parallel improvements in the performance of the first-team.

I’d lean towards regional academies, funded centrally by reduced Sky distributions. Then you’re not asking or demanding some clubs to spend ‘their’ money on something which doesn’t much benefit them.

The problem with kicking out the poorer teams is that you’d be left with a pretty tiny league. And those that are left whose business model is to some extent based around winning rugby, would be winning rather less. We kind of subsidise the league by winning so rarely - you’re welcome.


It was quite a big blow when the league was cut from 14 back down to 12, for us imo - we got a bit more Sky money but lost 4 winnable fixtures.

This is why I'm against relegation/promotion in its traditional guise.

If a club like Hull KR is making genuine efforts to build it's academy for the good of the future of its senior side, then it naturally needs time to come to fruition - A relegation/promotion system works against that and so sides have to cut corners and bring in short term signings, who drain the wage budgets, in order to simply survive.

Giving 5 or ideally 10 year licences to clubs who are making the effort to develop young players, has got to be better than having those clubs constantly living on the edge?

Against the draft system. It completely removes the local character of the team's playing staff.

Take Michael Jordan (for example), born in New York, college in Carolina, drafted by and became a Chicago hero. I only pick out him as an example everyone will know. The American squads have almost no natural attachment to their team.

There would never have been the Fowler, McManaman, Owen, Gerrard, Carragher core at Liverpool, nor the United equivalent of the Nevilles, Scholes et al if English sport had adopted this model. Teams should retain some local flavour.

Stupid idea and will never happen

The only way forward is a pool of players in local amateur leagues & schools to progress up to professional standards to provide players for all the league clubs ,superleague & below.
Alas ,amateur & works clubs aren't as abundant as they used to be & i don't know what is played in schools these days in order to provide the players of the future.

Perhaps there is an algorithm to forecast how the game will pan out in years to come.

Stupid idea and will never work. No surprise it’s mentioned by a club who can’t produce their own players or make their club attractive to local players