I think we should bite the bullet and go for quality not quantity at the premier level.

10 teams - 5 games per round and a free week from SL every 6th week to incorporate cup games.

All teams must have 15's 16's 18's and 21's and they would rotate as a pre game before the top team each week. These fixtures mirror SL.

3 overage players in 21's only.

No more than 3 overseas players signed up.

Play offs - top 4 qualify
1 v 2 - winner to final
3 v 4 - loser eliminated

loser v winner - qualify

Teams given Licence by me would be Wigan, Warrington, St Helens, Catalans, Leeds, Hull FC and Huddersfield which leaves 3 spots open.

Good ideas or crap and bin 'em?

I am surprised you aren't employed by the RFL.

The game outside the Untouchable League is crumbling and you want to make the strong stronger and the rest can presumably do what ?

With your type of thinking the pro game will be finished in no time. You probably support licenscing too which is of course at the root of the problem.

Reduce it to 2 teams. Catalan and London. The rest can go join BARLA.

Less teams = decrease in Sky money, decrease in gate money.

But hey-ho you support a "big" team so who cares about the rest of the sport, right?

Is it Groundhog Day?

'Big' team posts a one-sided win and supporter calls for a reduction in the number of teams in SL - it's getting rather dull.

lets go for 16 teams

the fanbase below sl is non existant not one of them can get anywhere near 2500 every week p&r wont change this all it would do is make yo yo teams again which would result in teams going bust AGAIN P&R is history let it remain there

Bradford comfortably got 10,000 and ended up going bust. Fanbase shambase.

they also charged them very little for the privlage plus with a high wage bill ment they ended up in the poop for a champ team to come up on P&R means they have to spend more but without a big incresse in income will go bust when they go down the following season feeder clubs is the only way forward leeds and hunslet have set the ball rolling more will follow FAX and leigh will be the only teams left in the lower leagues capable of comming up fev just to small to make it they need to merge with cas and wakey playing from the new stadium radical i know but we have to stop being trible for the good of the game

Time to expand

God can this be raised any more often - what a monumental bore people like you are and who gave you the right to decide.

Love the way the Bulls are no longer in your list when they would have been a given a few years back - yet still people like you don't get it, clubs go up and down and nothing stays the same. Why people like you keep trying to create a fake league is beyond me.

It also amazes me that seem hell bent on getting rid of genuinely viable clubs like Cas, Wakefield and HKR yet you cling onto a club like Hudds who anyone with a knowledge of the game knows will probably crash and burn when Uncle Ken calls it a day.

As for quality v quantity, what a joke. Their is no evidence that a smaller league would achieve this. There is however more evidence that a 10 league comp would not be economically viable. Only a SL fan could be deluded enough to think a 10 club SL and thus the killing off of 4 good clubs is a good idea.

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

Thanks Harry

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 young player going into the game isn't good enough. Once 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.

Have we the balls to do 2x10.
If we have it would for me be :
SL1.Bradford, Hull, Leeds, Saints, Wigan, Warrington, Catalans, London, Huddersfield, Wakefield
SL2. Cas, HKR, Toulouse, Leigh, Fev, Fax, Widnes, Salford, Sheffield and Barrow - possibly S Wales if in Swansea/Cardiff with backing.

27 games 6 team play offs over 3 weeks with 1&2 seeded. 1 up and 1 down.

It's baloney, sky would not pay as much for that format as they do the current setup. I know we're quite an impatient society these days, but give the franchising the opportunity to bed in and bear fruit, without suggesting endless ludicrous changes to the game every season.

I'm not sure about this whole issue. I'm sort of caught between two opinions. There clearly isn't enough talent to justify 14 teams, but Sky wouldn't wear a curtailed format I feel. It's a tricky one.

This !!! (including the P & R)but with London getting the chop and only the top 3 in SL1 making the playoffs, the team finishes top goes straight to Old Trafford with 2nd and 3rd playing (2nd place team gets home advantage)

You're kidding yourselves if you think a 10 team league is viable. How will clubs manage with only 9 home games and fewer playoff games? Most clubs are losing money as it is. And let's not pretend it would be a 2 tier SL, it wouldn't. It would be a 10 team SL and a 10 team 2nd Division/NL1/Championship just with 4 of the worst SL teams in it.

14 teams is the way forward for now, it provides a reasonable number of games without repeat fixtures and restricting the pathways for and money spent on young players by reducing the number of clubs is not the way to increase the quality of players in the league.

Yip, 27 games equals 9 at home................. granted it would be 13 and a Magic weekend.

I would expect you to be highly critical of the RFL in the farcial way they have messed about with Championship 1 then, currently only 8 teams , how will they manage?

I agree to a point, it should have been sorted earlier and I would prefer there to be a minimum of 12 teams in a league. Instead of a 14 team Championship and 10 team C1 I'd have gone with 12 in each. But you also can't directly compare a semi-pro league to a fully pro league.

As long as we're alright Jack, they're doing the right thing. Nothing to see here

True, its much easier for full time teams

Exactly, I don't understand how people can't see this - nobody would benefit in the long term.