Opinions vary. I can see many differing views are being raised. As for this being raised often on here I don't visit too often these days, apologies. Each to their own. Enjoy your Rugby League icon_smile.gif" alt="icon_smile.gif" title="Smile" />

Opinions vary. I can see many differing views are being raised. As for this being raised often on here I don't visit too often these days, apologies. Each to their own. Enjoy your Rugby League icon_smile.gif" alt="icon_smile.gif" title="Smile" />

Quote Roofaldo="Roofaldo"He's not wrong though, is he? He's put his finger squarely on what is the main thing holding back the sport ie a lack of funds. SL is a league of haves and have nots. The clubs at the top of the table all have a rich backer willing to put money into the club to shore up unexpected debts or be able to pay for transfer fees and all for very little in terms of returned investment. And when you have a club without a rich backer who tried to run with the big boys you get the situation at Bradford. RL is a MINORITY sport. Our best players have often been poached by RU since it went pro and now with the stronger Aussie dollar, NRL clubs are able to offer attractive deals to players along with a far better lifestyle and greater exposure. After all, the NRL in Aus is comparable to Premiership football in this country in terms of crowds and interest. People need to grasp the fact that RL will NEVER be a top sport in England. We might be able to get to 3rd, maybe even 2nd. But football reigns supreme and it's likely it always ">will.'" Agreed, most people go into RL for enjoyment and the lucky ones might get to make a career out of it. There aren't too many that would go into the sport just for the money, Regarding cutting the numbers, IMO this is the road to ruin. There will still be teams regularly at the bottom of the new 10 team division, some folk need to accept that there will always be winners and losers in sport. If we really want an even competition, we should copy the American "draft" system and we can than have a different winner each season, unfortunately, the people wanting to cut down the numbers in league would lose out with this style of player distribution, so its a non-runner.

Quote Roofaldo="Roofaldo"He's not wrong though, is he? He's put his finger squarely on what is the main thing holding back the sport ie a lack of funds. SL is a league of haves and have nots. The clubs at the top of the table all have a rich backer willing to put money into the club to shore up unexpected debts or be able to pay for transfer fees and all for very little in terms of returned investment. And when you have a club without a rich backer who tried to run with the big boys you get the situation at Bradford. RL is a MINORITY sport. Our best players have often been poached by RU since it went pro and now with the stronger Aussie dollar, NRL clubs are able to offer attractive deals to players along with a far better lifestyle and greater exposure. After all, the NRL in Aus is comparable to Premiership football in this country in terms of crowds and interest. People need to grasp the fact that RL will NEVER be a top sport in England. We might be able to get to 3rd, maybe even 2nd. But football reigns supreme and it's likely it always ">will.'" Agreed, most people go into RL for enjoyment and the lucky ones might get to make a career out of it. There aren't too many that would go into the sport just for the money, Regarding cutting the numbers, IMO this is the road to ruin. There will still be teams regularly at the bottom of the new 10 team division, some folk need to accept that there will always be winners and losers in sport. If we really want an even competition, we should copy the American "draft" system and we can than have a different winner each season, unfortunately, the people wanting to cut down the numbers in league would lose out with this style of player distribution, so its a non-runner.

I think the only way to make a smaller system work alongside expansion would to go for an NFL style zonal system, have leagues of maybe 6 teams from Yorkshire, Lancashire, Cumbria/Newcastle, South, and France. With the winner of each one competing in a playoff system come year end?

How many people go into sport at 12 or 13 with the intention of doing it to make money? Generally you love the game and are good at it, everything else just happens. Become a RL player and you can earn an above avg living, become a very good RL player and you can earn a very good living. Paying top players an extra 50K quid would make no difference what so ever to the depth of the talent pool in the game. Taking 2million quid a year out of SL and using it to develop jnr elite RL programmes would.



RL doesn't need to be the number 1 sport in the country, it just needs to keep growing and be sustainable.

Quote JB Down Under="JB Down Under"How many people go into sport at 12 or 13 with the intention of doing it to make money? Generally you love the game and are good at it, everything else just happens. Become a RL player and you can earn an above avg living, become a very good RL player and you can earn a very good living. Paying top players an extra 50K quid would make no difference what so ever to the depth of the talent pool in the game. Taking 2million quid a year out of SL and using it to develop jnr elite RL programmes would. RL doesn't need to be the number 1 sport in the country, it just needs to keep growing and be ">sustainable.'" Agreed, although cutting the number of pro teams will make the target smaller for those who are "good enough" and as mentioned previously, I think this will propagate a further decline in the top tier. We need to attract additional investment to improve the game, not keep cutting back, unless we are admitting that this cannot be done ??

Quote JB Down Under="JB Down Under"How many people go into sport at 12 or 13 with the intention of doing it to make money? Generally you love the game and are good at it, everything else just happens. Become a RL player and you can earn an above avg living, become a very good RL player and you can earn a very good living. Paying top players an extra 50K quid would make no difference what so ever to the depth of the talent pool in the game. Taking 2million quid a year out of SL and using it to develop jnr elite RL programmes would. RL doesn't need to be the number 1 sport in the country, it just needs to keep growing and be ">sustainable.'" Agreed, although cutting the number of pro teams will make the target smaller for those who are "good enough" and as mentioned previously, I think this will propagate a further decline in the top tier. We need to attract additional investment to improve the game, not keep cutting back, unless we are admitting that this cannot be done ??

Quote Saddened!="Saddened!"Anyone who watched the St Helens v London game last night would surely agree with cutting the number of teams in Super League. Saints are currently third in Super League and won 30-0 last night despite an absolutely awful performance. Saints wouldn't have scored against a proper team last night, which says it all about London's performance. There was absolutely no intensity and little effort from either side to do anything bar going through the motions and trying to play safe, by the basic rugby league handbook. In terms of entertainment it was probably the most boring sporting event I've ever witnessed. There just isn't enough talent to support 14 teams, the calibre of [iSAINTS young player going into the game isn't good enough. [/iOnce in Super League the youth systems and coaching aren't sufficient and the intensity of competition is really poor. With the salary caps in the NRL and Union competitions on the increase, the top layer of talent is largely going to be sliced off the top of Super League, meaning the standard drops even further. Reducing the number of teams would mean more competition for ">places.'" I've offered a correction to the usual misery from Saddened. Improvement is always to be sought, but don't write off the whole league with issues that are more to do with Saints current plight.

Quote Saddened!="Saddened!"Anyone who watched the St Helens v London game last night would surely agree with cutting the number of teams in Super League. Saints are currently third in Super League and won 30-0 last night despite an absolutely awful performance. Saints wouldn't have scored against a proper team last night, which says it all about London's performance. There was absolutely no intensity and little effort from either side to do anything bar going through the motions and trying to play safe, by the basic rugby league handbook. In terms of entertainment it was probably the most boring sporting event I've ever witnessed. There just isn't enough talent to support 14 teams, the calibre of [iSAINTS young player going into the game isn't good enough. [/iOnce in Super League the youth systems and coaching aren't sufficient and the intensity of competition is really poor. With the salary caps in the NRL and Union competitions on the increase, the top layer of talent is largely going to be sliced off the top of Super League, meaning the standard drops even further. Reducing the number of teams would mean more competition for ">places.'" I've offered a correction to the usual misery from Saddened. Improvement is always to be sought, but don't write off the whole league with issues that are more to do with Saints current plight.