Championship Team guaranteed a franchise

[Mike]

Don't forget, in a frachise system based on playoffs deciding the winner, you can have as many or as few fixtures as you want.

We could have as many teams as we want - the league fixtures don't have to be fair and even as they just serve as qualifying for the playoffs.

Look at US sports, they have conferences and the teams play only a few outside their conference but their sporting public are happy with that as a systen to qualify for the playoffs.

The available pool of quality players is another issue however.

[Mike]

Btw - cp - the playing criteria was always play in a grand final or win a nr cup. I don't think that has changed at all since it was announced, I'm not sure why you think it was win a GF.

[GeoffN]

Don't forget, in a frachise system based on playoffs deciding the winner, you can have as many or as few fixtures as you want.

We could have as many teams as we want - the league fixtures don't have to be fair and even as they just serve as qualifying for the playoffs.

Look at US sports, they have conferences and the teams play only a few outside their conference but their sporting public are happy with that as a systen to qualify for the playoffs.

Very true Mike - I'm old enough to remember the single-division days of the early 70s, when 30 clubs were involved. It worked fine.

The available pool of quality players is another issue however.

Perhaps, but on the other hand look at all the youngsters we keep complaining can't get a game, but are too good for the reserve competition.

[DaveO]

Accotrding to Ray French in the RL Newspaper, 1 Championship club will get a spopt in SL during the next rd of franchises come what may. For once I agree with Frenchy. Crazy that 1 of the 14 SL franchises will lose their franchise even if all 14 meet their requirements.

Does this mean that the NL1 side could score less than any of the SL clubs on the franchise criteria and still be promoted?

If so it is a return to promotion and relegation that season unless of course they boot a SL side out that does not finish bottom.

It sets a dangerous precedent that we don't have a franchise system at all but in fact P&R every three years.

I wonder if they are banking Wakey to fail to meet the criteria due to their ground?

Dave

[DaveO]

I think the Super League should be expanded to 16 teams with 2 teams being relegated each season. As long as the teams can survive financially being promoted and relegated I don't see any problem.

P&R each season does not work because as Mike pointed out if we had two teams relegated as you suggest then both Salford and Celtic would be relegated after one season.

Given there is such a gap between SL and NL level and that when a club is relegated all its players become free agents and the salary cap is slashed relegation or losing your franchise is an absolute disaster. The fact there is no relegation for three years means clubs can attract players who might think twice signing for a club that might well lay them off at the end of the season.

Because of the big standards gap P&R just leaves us with the promoted teams getting relegated 9 times out of 10.

Just look at Huddersfield and Hull KR both teams who had to come through promotion and carried on that momentum to survive and establish themselves in Super League. It seems a bit stupid that Widnes can have two good season, have an awful third season but still make the Super League on the criteria and then enter Super League on poor form.

Huddersfield along with Wakefield survived at least one season because no NL side was promoted as they didn't meet ground standards before the franchise system was introduced.

HKR are a big team financially compared to clubs like Halifax and other NL sides and have a big following. I reckon if Hudds had gone down when they were due to they would have stayed down. Wakey definitely would IMO and if they get the boot next time it could finish them off.

I am not saying they should be guaranteed a place but if they meet the criteria then they should not be dumped out against the franchising rules.

Dave