The irony of franchising : Mon Mar 30, 2009 7:10 pm
franchising love it or hate it is hear to stay, for the time being. one of biggest sports in terms of revenue the NFL uses it as do nearly all american sports.
the RFL has franchised the SL on a 3 year term. however in reality what is the chance of any team currently in SL losing their license in 3 years? ok there are the usual this team has this stadium this attendence etc buts lets face facts certain teams are never going to lose their license, leeds saints wigan hull, hudderfield. are all to historically important in the game (apologies to the ones i havn't mentioned but you get the drift) quins will never lose their license the RFL would never give up the oppertunity of having a SL right outside the RFU's window (literally)
the fact is as mentioned on another thread most players in SL have clauses in their contracts that say they are released should the club go down. this stops them leaving the top flight and stops clubs forking out a fortune on contracts when they lose the tv revenue of the top flight.
but surely that is the nail in the coffin of any non SL team. why take the license away from a current SL who perform poorly only for the players to be released into free agency. what choice does the newly licensed side up form RL1 have but to sign up these superleague experience players.
all that will happen is you'll see essentially the same squad playing in another town in another strip.