Well Both of you are partially right, yes top eight would be an excellent achievement after last season, but I don't think sixth is completely unachievable. We've signed a pretty strong first seventeen but then we're relying on youth players, so you can't really blame other fans for questioning our strength in depth. That said, I do think other clubs are maybe underestimating the quality of the younger members of our squad.

As to the anti-Salford brigade, eighteen months ago Hull fans were creaming themselves over the prospect of Chase joining them. Also, many Warrington, Wigan and Saints fans have expressed their desire to see Chase playing for their clubs. Once Salford signed him he suddenly became a much worse player in many people's eyes. So he didn't have the greatest World Cup, no scrum half creates anything without runners, so his lack of ability to play in a structure is somewhat of a fallacy.

Now let's show us salford fans can at least stick together!

Yeah. We wondered where you had got to.

No help from the RFL just a very good chairman, without who we'd be in a worse state than Bradford. That's the thing, an actual good and cashed up (and willing to spend it on the club) chairman and board could turn Bradford into a top venue and contender again

The current finances are on company's house for anyone who wants to look.

The only time I can think we received "aid" from the rfl would of been around the mid 90s (96?) when we were last in trouble. I don't know because I was 6 at the time...

Saints could of continued at Knowsley road, but McManus was tired of subsidising it (as, as with all charimen at all clubs, he can make that call) and with the foresight that he won't be around forever, built the stadium with the aim of turning a profitable club - something that we are still on target for according to those in the know.

Many on the saints board argue we sacrificed on field success during the year of the stadium, and working towards a profitable club, and perhaps if Bradford had spent the last year with that mantra, with no relegation, Bradford wouldnt be in this position now

Salford 1970.
I think you should read the whole thread. I have never used the word "hate". I said a "little anti Salford stuff."If my view on 6th place is "utterly ridiculous" I don't know what your view would be on Adrian Morley's statement in the League Express on 30-12-13 I quote; "Marwan wants the top four, and I don't think that's out of the question or unrealistic" I am happy to be a dreamer,but I think 6th place is up for grabs.

I've scanned the basic details of the league restructure proposals but still have a query... How do the RFL plan to give teams a chance to compete for the title? Very simple question that people will probably think I'm stupid for asking, but think about it...

At present there are probably only 4/5 teams that can realistically win SL. They then get all the best players and tend to generate the most money. Fair play to those clubs, I can't fault them.

What about the other teams? Specifically those in the bottom 3 or 4 of the league. What I mean by that is - with relegation always a threat (if it's brought back in) how will they grow?

I can't see us progressing as a sport with P&R. I'm not against it, but I don't see what it achieves for the health of the game. What has changed since we scrapped it in favour of licensing? Serious question. It just strikes me as going back to having teams "yo-yo'ing" up and down between SL and the Championship and a pool of players just switching from the team that goes down to the team that comes up.

Are the RFL or SLE aiming to introduce parachute payments? That is the only way to continue encouraging teams across the league to continue developing players... otherwise we're just going back to journeymen filling squad places through fear of relegation and ruin.

Have we lost sight of why Licensing was brought in in the first place? Yes, it has failed to stop the issues at some clubs (mainly financially) but P&R isn't going to solve it either - in fact, I'd say it'll probably be worse.

Sky money will be split still - but this needs to go all through the game - not just to the SL end where that gulf will continue to grow. Be interesting to see if SL clubs at the top of the game agree to a reduction in funding to improve the quality of rugby league (not just SL) in England.

As for the thread topic.... I'd have to say London and Bradford for the bottom two.

Ah look here's another of the 6 fingered brigade!!

The new structure does NOT mean AUTOMATIC promotion and relegation is back. That is the beauty of the new structure. It avoids the old yo-yo syndrome in that it could be years before a team is actually promoted to/relegated from SL. This is how it will work:-

Forthcoming 2014 season = bottom 2 in SL relegated at end of the season.

2015 season onwards = "SL1" - 12 teams and "SL2" - 12 teams
(the 12 in SL2 for the 2015 season will be the bottom 2 in SL that are relegated at the end of the forthcoming 2014 season plus the teams ending in the top 10 of the Championship at the end of the forthcoming 2014 season.)

Each season from 2015 onwards, the 12's play 23 matches. (Every team home & away and a Magic weekend match). Then, after the 23 games, the 24 teams are split into 3 groups of 8. The 8's play the other 7 teams once = 7 more matches.

The middle eight of the three lots of 8 is where the POTENTIAL for promotion comes in. The four teams ending in the top four places of the middle 8 re-join the top 8 to make up the 12 in SL1 for the following season. Thus, there is the POTENTIAL for promotion to SL1 - but promotion is NOT automatic (in that the four teams that end up top of the middle 8 may well be the same 4 that were in SL1 for the initial 23 games).

All this will be made very clear by the RFL in mid-January 2014 when the associated split of the distribution of SKY money relating to this new 2x12 - 3x8 structure is finally agreed by the clubs.

To answer your question about how the SL title is decided. The 4 teams finishing the season at the top of the top 8 will play off; 1v4, 2v3. The two winners meet in the Grand Final.

Q. What has changed since the potential for promotion was taken away by 'licensing'?
A Crowds outside SL have almost halved.
SL clubs' supporters are bored with playing the same old teams at the same old grounds time after time.

Well you have successfully made a sales pitch for a system you think will benefit your club. You have at no stage addressed any of his concerns. I assume the reason for that is because your preferred system can’t address any of his concerns.

No. I think this will be a fantastic long term structure for the game as a whole in this country.

The proposed framework for the split of sky money associated with the new 2x12; 3x8 structure and soon to be put to the clubs will be more equitable than the current split, better benefitting the top 12 clubs AND those below as well. Although it won't be explicit, there'll be effective provision for what have been called parachute payments. It will be pretty ingenious, albeit simple. You'll see.

They have form on changing their minds though as Widnes know to their cost.

Can anyone provide a link to an official statement as to how the reduction of SL by two places will be effected?

I

In that case rather than attempting another sales pitch, you could address some of the concerns offered? they are certainly concerns i agree with.

Im also interested to hear your explanation about how everyone will be better off from this new split of funds? Is there more money now guaranteed? because if not someone is losing out.

I'd be astounded if Salford made the top 6, as mentioned it'd be a big achievement to make the top 8. If I were a Salford fan I'd be looking for an 8th-10th finish this year and then steadily improve and build the squad year on year.

Whilst Salford have made some decent signings they still have a comparatively weak squad when judged next to the current top 6 or top 8 clubs.

Salford is a work in progress, it's not going to happen over night, and hopefully Dr Koukash is putting as much money into building the club and it's infrastructure as he is into the first team.

People have their views, I have mine. I'd suggest that whatever concerns are aluded to, they will be better addressed under the new long term structure than under the one that has prevailed in recent years.





I couldn't reveal the precise details at this stage even if were privy to them. Yes, the 2 SL clubs that are relegated at the end of this season will have a reduced Sky allocation in 2015. That apart, and in very general terms, everybody else will be better off as you'll agree that 1/15th of the Sky money for the top 12 is better than 1/16th and 2/15th's spread in a graded fashion across the clubs outside the top 12 is better than sharing 1/16th.

Your view is that you like this new structure so any concerns will be better addressed under it, even if you don’t know what those concerns are, or how they will be better under it. They just will be better under it. Because you like it. Well, if nothing else, at least that is honest.




So apart from the clubs who are financially negatively affected by it, everyone else will benefit from it. In very general terms of course.

Outstanding circularity of argument there Sir.

think it will be 1 team relegated at the the end of the 2014 season... that being london broncos who most likely will finish bottom.

Why only 1 team ?
There has only been talk of dropping to 12 and although the exact why's and where's still need to be ratified, it does appear that 2 teams will be culled/relegated.
Of course, if the 2 were Catalan and London, then expect some new criteria to be found (or some additional Sky funds etc)
Relegation cannot work if we are trying to expand the game beyond the M62 corridor, it just isn't possible.

They won't relegate 1 team. It'll either be 2 or none. Otherwise the Magic Weekend doesn't work.

why unbalance it wth a magic weekend when 22 games plus 7 more would suffice. totally makes a mockery of a proper league by picking which teams randomly play another mostly on the back of recognised rivalries. That it is one off event that generates less money for clubs if they had played that game at the respective grounds then it should be dropped IF the RFL are insistant on the 2x12 3x8 format.

Sadly I think bottom two will be London and ourselves. We've not strengthen well enough.

I happen to agree with you to some extent, but what is our squad?
Do you know any of them? Without cheating and googling it?
I keep hearing this "weak squad" line trotted out, but no-one seems to back it up with anything.

www.thereddevils.net/the-devils/ ... ings-2014/ I'll help you out

www.thereddevils.net/the-devils/ ... ings-2014/ I'll help you out

I'm not sure why whether or not someone being able to name 1 - 25 of a squad means their judgement of it is invalid - can you name every squad in superleague? Yet you'll have an idea of how each club will go.

The point is, if you scratch away the signings made this year, your left with a team who finished bottom, and wasn't strong on paper either.

Picking up 4/5 injuries at once isn't uncommon, but will expose those players who finished bottom this season, and will cause a much greater struggle. Coupled with the fact a few of the players you signed fall into the older category, if they pick up an injury it can take longer to return, further exposing the weaker players.

Other clubs, who you see Salford as competing with - will be much better able to cope with those injuries, as have players who have proven capable of stepping in in the case of injuries.

As I said, 7/8/9 is not unachievable, and should be celebrated, but it won't be easy.

Of course I had to google it! I had an idea from the signings made that I'd remembered but bloody hell I know we're all geeks on here by definition but I can't remember the exact squads of every team! I doubt I'd get Leeds' 1-25 exactly right.
But yeah, as Magic Superbeetle says, factor in injuries and the strength of the top 8/top 6 squads that was the context of my post, I'd still contend that Salford has a comparatively weak squad.