What "innovation" are you looking for here?

Not to mention that Wigan and Widnes (where Offiah played) took the game and themselves to the brink, something certainly had to change.
However, to have a cap that wasn't increased, at least in line with inflation was crazy, absolutely mad.
Mind you, despite the size of the salary cap, how many clubs are spending the full cap and utilising both Marque spots, which would suggest that it's lack of cash and not the cap that is the problem.

St. Helens could spend the cap ten times over if they were allowed

The Marquee spots are the problem if the problem is the general competetitiveness of the league. Rich clubs can add top players on the basis of them supposedly attracting fans to watch these individuals, seen best when Wally Lewis came over albeit that was before the marquee system. We know results draw fans and crowds certainly go up and down with team performances over a period of time. Players themselves can choose to sign on with a winning club rather that sometimes get more cash from a losing club with ambition. Not so rich owners may not spend up to the cap.

Even beyond this straight "money" isn't the only problem for a competetive league, well paid scouts of top clubs will seek out the best young talent in other clubs areas to get them into their academies. So when Leeds were a top side they looked to Oldham and Salford and picked up two top youngsters who served them well for years.

If the Superleague craves a more "even league" then maybe the long debate over going down to 2x10 clubs was part of that. If the Superleague craves more money then maybe they calculated 2x10 would have provided that.

Well, good for them.
How many other clubs could match them, Warrington ?, there certainly aren't too many more.

The post by vastman explains what is going on here and it's all about the top 4/5 clubs protecting the monetary contribution that they receive from Sky, absolutely rock all to do with competitive leagues or increasing crowds etc.

I know that it's been covered many many times but, where will the game go after we reduce to 10 clubs ?
Will they drop to 8,7,6,5, just where is the limit.

The problem IS lack of cash within the game and going to a 10 club top flight (including 2 French clubs most certainly wont solve the problem, not a chance. Saints, Wire, Wigan and Leeds will still be demanding an ever larger slice of the TV cake to make up for the diminishing crowds.

The issues around repeat fixtures will become ever more prevalent and it wont be long before abandoning the Challenge cup is mooted.

Of course they could. Lolz. As a Warrington fan though why bring up Sintellins?

As I recall it was the Aus$ to £ exchange rate that put the Top NRL players out of reach
How much do Wigan still owe Widnes for Offiah?

Forget which club you support - the salary cap does need increasing. Players salaries are laughably low compared to other sports. We need more youngsters playing the game again - the numbers are dropping, even in the ‘heartlands’. Why? Because youngsters don’t see it as a game they can make a decent living at compared to Union etc… So, my reason for wanting an increase in cap isn’t to go out and buy more expensive players, it’s to attract our own talent to stick with the game as they know they can earn a decent living. The player pool is getting smaller so if we don’t do something soon the salary cap will be irrelevant - they’ll be no players to buy anyway. That’s my way of looking at it and I know a lot will disagree but an average wage, for a tough contact sport, not far off what you could earn doing overtime at Tesco is a joke. We have a great game but it’s treated, funded and run like a Sunday pub league.

Nice to see that you can get an Aussie team to pay your player and it does not count on the cap yet if a player gets paid for doing advertising it does go on the cap.