Re: League 1 : Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:14 pm  

wrencat1873 wrote:

League 1 is a graveyard for RL clubs.
For those that were dropped form the championship a few seasons back its been an absolute disaster.
There does need to be a gateway for new clubs but the likes of Hemel, Coventry, Oxford ans the Ironmen are not ready for that level and the effect that dropping down to such a level for clubs like Whitehaven, Barrow, York etc is shocking.
By trying to increase competitiveness in the Championship, we have all but cast certain clubs into the wilderness.

Jeez, you're a positive guy aren't you? "cast to the wilderness" - haven't York just announced plans for a new stadium? Doesn't L1 have two promotion spots available?

Re: League 1 : Mon Jul 24, 2017 3:46 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

a 14 team SL with no protection from relegation? it would be a good time to be an agent for Queensland cup players

The PNG Hunters are currently top of the league in the Queensland Cup. I'm sure a few of their players would go well in Super League.

Re: League 1 : Mon Jul 24, 2017 4:04 pm  

I know we change too much but I'd like to see four leagues of 10. Everyone plays each other twice, then the following split:

- SL super 8 as it is now
- Bottom 2 of SL and Top 2 of Championship 'middle 4' playing each other home and away. No need for the MPG
- Bottom 8 Championship shield as it is now

Same structure as above for League 1 and League 2.

4 less games reduces burnout/injuries (seems to be a massive issue at the mo) and allows for mid-season internationals.

Re: League 1 : Mon Jul 24, 2017 4:52 pm  

Grimmy wrote:

I know we change too much but I'd like to see four leagues of 10. Everyone plays each other twice, then the following split:

- SL super 8 as it is now
- Bottom 2 of SL and Top 2 of Championship 'middle 4' playing each other home and away. No need for the MPG
- Bottom 8 Championship shield as it is now

Same structure as above for League 1 and League 2.

4 less games reduces burnout/injuries (seems to be a massive issue at the mo) and allows for mid-season internationals.

But then that's 4 games less in terms of income too. And THAT, imo, is where the main issue with the game in this country lays. There's no money in RL at any real level and this is because the RFL are too willing to give away the TV rights to the whole UK game for peanuts and have nothing in place to ensure that it isn't just SL games that get shown. If the TV deal included a requirement for games from below SL to be shown on a regular basis, it would help those clubs outside the top table as they'd get exposure as well as be able to get a better deal from sponsors because of that exposure. And thus more money comes into the game. More money means that clubs can be in a stronger position and so can actually push for the opportunity of promotion from their current league because at the moment, there's plenty of clubs for whom promotion would actually be a bad thing as their current revenue streams would not be able to support the additional expenditure required

Re: League 1 : Mon Jul 24, 2017 6:05 pm  

roofaldo2 wrote:

But then that's 4 games less in terms of income too. And THAT, imo, is where the main issue with the game in this country lays. There's no money in RL at any real level and this is because the RFL are too willing to give away the TV rights to the whole UK game for peanuts and have nothing in place to ensure that it isn't just SL games that get shown. If the TV deal included a requirement for games from below SL to be shown on a regular basis, it would help those clubs outside the top table as they'd get exposure as well as be able to get a better deal from sponsors because of that exposure. And thus more money comes into the game. More money means that clubs can be in a stronger position and so can actually push for the opportunity of promotion from their current league because at the moment, there's plenty of clubs for whom promotion would actually be a bad thing as their current revenue streams would not be able to support the additional expenditure required

Agreed the SL clubs get 4 games less money, but the remaining Championship clubs benefit from two more teams with big followings bringing crowds. We also get a more marketable Championship as half of it would be a standard previously only seen in SL (e.g Widnes, Leigh, Hull KR, London and Toronto), maybe enough to tempt someone to pay for TV rights for that division and bring more cash in that way.

Re: League 1 : Mon Jul 24, 2017 7:06 pm  

I honestly don't know why the game is locked in to thinking that its most pressing issues could be solved, even in part, by cobbling together another, lesser competition to sell out of the sum of SL's lesser parts.

Re: League 1 : Tue Jul 25, 2017 2:00 pm  

there as simply too many pro clubs and not enough pro quality players and money available to run this many prop clubs.

super l;league 14 clubs franchises. division one 10-12 clubs (franchise). division two north and south, more development based clubs dual reg from super league clubs (Feeder clubs) any clubs not producing the goods on and off the field regardless of history or location, your out or drop down a division full stop. each super league club should be averaging 8k absolute minimum and if your not your franchise is under threat. league one 2k min. in the NFL they simply move your franchise or bring in a new club if there is not the support there.
time for RL to be harsh the last 20 years of swapping and changing formats and pussy footing around unsustainable clubs as to go.

Re: League 1 : Tue Jul 25, 2017 2:29 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

I honestly don't know why the game is locked in to thinking that its most pressing issues could be solved, even in part, by cobbling together another, lesser competition to sell out of the sum of SL's lesser parts.

Some people genuinely think that we could have two completely full time leagues of 10 teams with Sky showing both if we called them Super League and Super League II. That definitely wouldn't just be giving the Championship a new name.

Re: League 1 : Tue Jul 25, 2017 2:31 pm  

DGM wrote:

Jeez, you're a positive guy aren't you? "cast to the wilderness" - haven't York just announced plans for a new stadium? Doesn't L1 have two promotion spots available?

So does this mean you are happy with the composition of league 1 and how it works.
There are some "serious" RL clubs mixed with glorified "university" teams.
Hemel are a "Northern" team masquerading something else and then we've had Toronto demolishing all before them.
Dont confuse my opinion with being negative and allow the fools that cam up with the idea to get off the hook.

Re: League 1 : Tue Jul 25, 2017 2:48 pm  

wrencat1873 wrote:

So does this mean you are happy with the composition of league 1 and how it works.
There are some "serious" RL clubs mixed with glorified "university" teams.
Hemel are a "Northern" team masquerading something else and then we've had Toronto demolishing all before them.
Dont confuse my opinion with being negative and allow the fools that cam up with the idea to get off the hook.

In SL we have clubs without academies, Cas demolishing all before them, Widnes masquerading as a SL club and a club which will very soon be without a stadium to play at. All tiers of our comp are far from perfect.

Toronto will be in the Championship next year, taking advantage of the 2 up 2 down that exists between the two. Hemel have made some really poor decisions regarding their base, but prior to that were doing alright. The All Golds have exposed RL to the South West and provide some sort of pathway to the pro ranks (however small) from that region. Toulouse used it as a springboard last season.

You referred to it as a "Graveyard". If that's not negative, then what is? It could also be described as a "Birthplace", a place where ambitious new clubs can find their feet and grow, or a place where clubs have fallen on hard times have an environment to rebuild.

Clubs are also not "cast into the wilderness" as you put it. It's 2 up, 2 down. The "wilderness" would surely be seeing clubs fall from the pro ranks altogether?

You also by referring to some of the clubs as "serious", insinuating others aren't serious, again another negative remark towards the clubs.

All in all pretty negative I'd say.