Reduce the size of the Premiership

[Which Tyler]

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/ ... yer-strike

About 12-13 years ago, I proposed reducing the Premiership to 10, or even 8 teams, with increased promotion/relegation with the Championship; and turning the AWC into a knock-out competition with the Premiership and Champ teams. Even wrote a letter to Rob Andrew about the idea with some help from these parts.
I've even been known to bring it up occasionally since then too.

And now, PRL are seriously discussing it - well, the reduced Premium part anyway... Excellent news, even if it will require some turkeys to vote for Christmas.

[Mellsblue]

As it says further down the piece there is also a discussion on ring fencing the Prem. I know which I’d put my money on the clubs voting for.

[Puja]

I would be happy with ringfencing if it happened below the Championship and there were two leagues of 20.

This is great news that it's being discussed, even if it is far too sensible to actually happen.

Puja

[fivepointer]

The possibility of PRL taking over the top 2 leagues of 10 is a very interesting development. This has been touted before but its good to see that it is being actively considered.
Ringfencing? Bring it on, i've been a long term supporter.

[Stom]

Would be great. Just what many of us have been saying for years (with WTs prodding).

[Peej]

I think it's a great idea, but seems a bit daft to offer this as a way of reducing player burden thought when those same players have just been committed to a 10-month season. How will that much up?

10 team Premiership, scrap the AWC, and take a break during internationals.

[Which Tyler]

As ever, I'm okay with ringfencing below Championship level, with proper investment, and codified inclusion criteria going forwards - and some sort of criteria for an agreed minimum standard of administrative and facility levels... Maybe something that could weed out unscrupulous CEOs gunning for promotion due to freak results on the pitch whilst the club as a whole is entirely unsuited for that promotion.

[Digby]

If they ring-fence it only further advances the need for a minimum salary spend alongside the max salary cap

[Which Tyler]

If they ring-fence it only further advances the need for a minimum salary spend alongside the max salary cap

Not convinced there - a minimum squad size though...
Also, if we're codifying inclusion criteria from ND1 (which we'd have to do to get my support - which is the support that matters after all), then we can also include exclusion criteria for any teams taking the piss

[Puja]

One question which comes to mind is the logistics of reducing. Presumably any change would need to be done in time for the 2019/20 season (to synch with the "Global Season" that appears to just be moving the summer test window to July to screw the NH while making the SH happy). So that's basically this season to agree terms and next season to implement them.

Would it be 3 down, 1 up in 18/19? Probably more sensible to have 2 down and 0 up, but considering London Irish will likely be in the Championship that season, would that be politically acceptable?

And we'd need to trim 4 teams from the Championship somehow, casting them into semi-pro obscurity and blocking any route back, at least temporarily. Hartpury and Richmond would likely accept it, seeing as they've both refused to go fully pro anyway (and the latter are understandably very twitchy about being involved with anything to do with top-level rugby again), but the other two are more difficult. Performances in the Championship vary so wildly from season to season (as successful teams are invariably asset-stripped) that basing it on one year's results seems cruel. But doing it any other way is a can of worms - historical might save Rotherham, despite them being massively off the pace, facilities might suggest promoting Fylde or Darlington above their level, geographical considerations would screw the ambitious and well-funded Coventry as well as stitching up Ealing who are 2nd in the table.

Anyone got a coherent plan? I still like my idea of trying to flog London Scottish and Irish to the Pro 14.

Puja

[Which Tyler]

I don't see why the Champ needs to be 20 teams; I agree that we could lose 2 from the Champ voluntarily, but with the Champ not needing to find space for EPRC rugby, and not being so affected by international clashes, there's no particular reason to shirnk it IMO. He'll, I'd be happy to increase the Champ to 14, with 10 in the Prem.

[Digby]

What are the 10 teams in the AP people would want to keep? I've got Exeter, Sarries, Leicesters, Saints, Wuss, Glaws, Quins, Sale, Newcastle and Wasps

[Which Tyler]

The 10 who deserve it on merit.
No-one's talking about kicking clubs put based on anything else at all, talk of ringfencing is between Champ and ND1; not Prem and Champ

[Puja]

I don't see why the Champ needs to be 20 teams; I agree that we could lose 2 from the Champ voluntarily, but with the Champ not needing to find space for EPRC rugby, and not being so affected by international clashes, there's no particular reason to shirnk it IMO. He'll, I'd be happy to increase the Champ to 14, with 10 in the Prem.

The problem with that is that a professional and properly funded Champ would need fewer teams. The funding wouldn't work split across 14; hell, it's questionable whether it'd work across 10! Added to that is that we'd need to concentrate the talent to have a competitive second tier.

However you're right in that it wouldn't need to happen immediately. They could just lose an extra couple of teams each year rather than trying to get rid of 4 in one swell foop.

Puja

[Digby]

The 10 who deserve it on merit.
No-one's talking about kicking clubs put based on anything else at all, talk of ringfencing is between Champ and ND1; not Prem and Champ

If we're going to ringfence the AP, and that's where the money is no one really cares about the low end of the Champ and below, I'd want some consideration as to the geographic spread of teams. If we're going to have a system based on merit that's fine too, it's called promotion and relegation which I'd be happier to keep than not

[Mellsblue]

Both leagues down to 10. Ditch the Anglo-Welsh Cup(the B & I Cup has already been ditched as of next year) and A league, and have a domestic cup comp:
4 groups of 5, home and away fixtures, all fixtures, including semis and final, during the AI and 6N windows.

[Timbo]

Is there any chance of something like this happening? If I’m the owner of a loss-making Premiership club and I’m asked to vote for a proposal that removes 2 home league games and a few AW games....and give some of my guaranteed centralised income (tv and RFU money) to fund the Championship...and all I really get in return is that I can’t be relegated into the 3rd tier....

[Mellsblue]

You’d avert a player strike, have a slightly smaller squad and have larger gates as you’d have your test players for all your leagues matches.

[Which Tyler]

Both leagues down to 10. Ditch the Anglo-Welsh Cup(the B & I Cup has already been ditched as of next year) and A league, and have a domestic cup comp:
4 groups of 5, home and away fixtures, all fixtures, including semis and final, during the AI and 6N windows.

That suggestion looks remarkably familiar

[Mellsblue]

Both leagues down to 10. Ditch the Anglo-Welsh Cup(the B & I Cup has already been ditched as of next year) and A league, and have a domestic cup comp:
4 groups of 5, home and away fixtures, all fixtures, including semis and final, during the AI and 6N windows.

That suggestion looks remarkably familiar

Rob Andrew?

[Digby]

You’d avert a player strike, have a slightly smaller squad and have larger gates as you’d have your test players for all your leagues matches.

How much difference does having big name players make to attendances?

[Mellsblue]

You’d avert a player strike, have a slightly smaller squad and have larger gates as you’d have your test players for all your leagues matches.

How much difference does having big name players make to attendances?

I’ve read many a club cite it as an issue.

[Digby]

You’d avert a player strike, have a slightly smaller squad and have larger gates as you’d have your test players for all your leagues matches.

How much difference does having big name players make to attendances?

I’ve read many a club cite it as an issue.

Did Eddie say it, 'cause if Eddie said it it'll be true, or Trump, he's strong on truth too

[Mellsblue]

How much difference does having big name players make to attendances?

I’ve read many a club cite it as an issue.

Did Eddie say it, 'cause if Eddie said it it'll be true, or Trump, he's strong on truth too

The question was what do the club owners get. They get their internationals for all their league matches which is something they state they’d like. Whether it makes a difference to attendances I don’t know but it’s something they want.

[Digby]

I’ve read many a club cite it as an issue.

Did Eddie say it, 'cause if Eddie said it it'll be true, or Trump, he's strong on truth too

The question was what do the club owners get. They get their internationals for all their league matches which is something they state they’d like. Whether it makes a difference to attendances I don’t know but it’s something they want.

I don't think their EPS players should be playing 18 league games before play-offs anyway, maybe 10-12, so I'm not too worried about their concerns in this area.