[urlhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2010/jan/25/super-league-may-cut-to-12-teams[/url

If so they have promised at least one team will get promoted so that means three to go?

Think its fair to assume Crusaders will be one of them, unless Wrexham turns out to be a miraculous success.

But who else?

Wakefield look in danger but personally I wonder if a 12 team Super League should have two teams in Hull?

How do you all think 14 teams worked last year?

I felt the quality dropped, certainly in tv coverage with Sky having more teams to cover, but then again Magic weekend aside it was a pretty even fixture list.

I dont think you could get rid of either Hull team mate, I think its going to be a good season for both teams.

Hull KR have been improving season by season and have a cracking coach, and FC have recruited well this off season and I can see a certain Mr Long have a massive say on this season (again)!

and there is no way I can see them merging.

Why are they cutting it back? a 14 Team comp makes sense to me. Each team home and away. Unless they are looking to cut the fixtures. I don't want it to go back to us playing Saints 13 times a year. I hope Barrow get a Super League place. I can't see either Hull team going down.

Why can't they just leave it alone.

14 is the correct number and has been what we have all wanted for years.

Quality will rise again as the players spread out and Cummings stops tinkering with the rules.

IMO they should leave it with the same amount as this year. It is up to the teams to come up to standard for SL. There are a few teams knocking at the door. Why reduce it ????

The sooner we get rid of Cummings, the better. The bloke really strikes me as being a legend in his own mind.

Thats a good question. It's the rumour that the press have picked up on though from the SL launch yesterday. I'm happy with 14 teams but the RFL are totally clueless.

I mean they've critcised Harlequins for their bad attendances but fail to recognise that the Magic Weekend harms their attendances because fans can't afford to do three or four weekends away a year, especially if they fall tight on the fixture list.

It's just tinkering for tinkering's sake. Let Let the licences come in, Get rid of those clubs that are floundering [Celtic and bring in a club that will flourish [Widnes, Halifax or Barrow. Get rid of Celtic, Let that new club in South Wales grow for 5 years then see if their suitable for a SL place. Jeez, it isn't rocket surgery! [Thanks Barrie

Hit the nail on the head.

Why can't the RFL leave something alone!!! Millenium magic was going fine, no reason to move it to Murrayfield what-so-ever, we see random rule changes every year and now they want to change the franchise system after only one period. 14 teams is fine! I know 28 games + internationals is alot, but if you want to do something, increase the cap and allow a team to have a bit more depth. We are lucky, we have a lot of good young players ready for Super League, but other clubs don't. Maybe allowig clubs to bring in an extra first teamer as cover isn't a bad thing. Bradford only have 3/4 recognised props this year, one injury to any of those and they are in trouble.

I'd personally like to see an increase in the number of teams in Superleague, however that rise shouldn't take place until 2015 at the earliest. We could then eventually have the same league structure as the NRL, therefore cutting down on the number of games we all play.

As for getting rid of clubs, Celtic have had some major toothing problems but they're gonna do, they need time, lets give them it and then judge them.

If it were my choice to pick a club who should be demoted it would Wakefield, I think they made a mockery out of the application process by submitting stadium plans only for those plans to fail soon as they were guaranteed a place in the league, and my bet would be that these current plans in development for a new stadium will also only last until just after the application process and then once again fall through. They're academy system, while they've done well this season, where's the effort been the years before? Only when really pushed have Wakefield decided to spend money, and I'd hate to see another club relegated before them who've been trying there hardest for a lot longer than wakey.

[size=150Rocket Surgery[/size !!!!!!!!!!

SL owes it to the greater community of RL to get all the teams that can make a decent go of SL (Widnes/Halifax/Barrow etc.) into SL. If there's too many games a season devise some sort of conference system playing some teams twice and some teams once.

14 is fine. Leave it.

This should be used as a final opportunity to finally stabilise and sort out SL imo.

I think I’m the only one but I’d like to drop down to 12 teams. I’d love to see 12 strong & stable teams in SL all playing out of top notch modern stadiums. Once we’ve got the base of SL as strong as it physical can be then we can look at expanding to other areas and increasing the league numbers. How are we supposed to expand to different areas and attract new fans when we’ve got tin pot stadiums like Wakey or Cas?

Although many fans won’t like it I’d love us to follow some of the ideas Peacock put forward in one of the RL mags a few months ago of moving Wakey and Castleford into one single stadium for them to share. This stadium would also work as RL’s HQ and in time I think it would work in our favour just like Twickers, Wembley or Wimbledon do for other sports.

I’d also make some more hard decisions like moving the two Hull teams into the KC stadium if KR can’t guarantee they will get a new ground set up asap. Harsh on a team like KR I know (and I actually really like KR) but SL has to come first and it’s has to look professional on the TV to attract new investors.

Leeds & Bradford have to realise their potential for fans as well. Leeds really are the beacon club in SL with a strong squad largely based on home grown talent. They’ve got the highest attendances in SL and it’s scary just how massive they would be if they could move into a 25-30k capacity new home of develop headingly.

My 12 would be

1-Wigan
2-Leeds
3-Saints
4-Wire
5-Bradford
6-Hudds
7-Cas
8-Wakey
9-Quins
10-Hull
11-Hull KR
12-Catalans

Once those 12 are looking good in the ground, finance and squad departments then we’d be in far better shape than we are in now.

The RL should be looking to increase SL not decrease it. I'm not one to say that everything the Aussies do is correct, at the same time, their system of not playing every team home and away plus byes is a good one.

At one time we had a 30 team league and although all teams played the same number of games did not play everyone else home and away, which is why we had the Championship play off to determine the League Champions. Over the years it ranged between the top 4, 8 and 16.

As each season goes by I have less confidence in the people running the game. I have non at all in Stuart Cummings.

me too.

cut it back to 12, play 22 games, and start the season in march, not in january.
then we might actually get close to summer rugby.
there will be time to fit in the challenge cup rounds, we can get the world club challenge out the way instead of one team playing a week earlier than the rest.

and do away with the MM weekend.
its a manufactured round designed to bring in the crowds, but its played out now imo.

instead copy the NFL and move 1 game to scotland/wales/wherever and make it a decent game, and compensate the home club for loss of revenue, otherwise nobody will want to give up a home fixture.

better still why not play international games v the home countrys all over the UK ?
RL spreads its wings, and the fans who want a jolly can have one.
everybody happy that way.

I don't see what's wrong with increasing the number of clubs to 16 like the NRL. It gives clubs like Wakefield and Castleford the chance to get new grounds and build up a stronger squad whilst there is still room for expansion sides like Toulouse or another Welsh side. Widnes or Barrow can be included which brings increased crowds from Widnes and a presence in Cumbria through Barrow.
If hypothetically Wakefield didn't get a new ground and were struggling with finances etc. then they could quite easily be replaced by another expansion side or a team like Halifax who have history and a decent fan base.

Cutting back on the number of sides in SL is just a step backwards unless the RFL seriously try to make big improvements to the Championship.

They have to make 14 teams work first before they look to be going upto 16. We only need to look at the average players Celtic have brought in over the past couple of years to prove theres just not enough quality to go around.

If teams continue to develope their own players in numbers meaning they have to release some of their senior squad players that will spread the quality down a little and make sure a 14 team league is more viable.

We're a good few years of being able to have a 16 team league yet though.

Is there anything really new in that article?

It seems to be saying the clubs that were warned about their future in SL are in danger of losing it, which they already knew. I suppose if that meant we end up with a 12 team league that is not something we expected (and IMO would be a bad idea)

The franchise rules state that if you get A or B status you can't be kicked out in the next round of franchises so it's pretty obvious who are in danger and that is the three mentioned, Castleford, Salford and Wakefield who I think all got a C grade last time (could be wrong). No idea where the Crusaders fit in with all this.

Of course they could change the rules on a whim as they seem to do quite often!

What I don't like though is this guarantee that a NL1 side will be promoted. What if they stack up worse on the franchise criteria than any of the current SL teams? Promoting a side with worse franchise credentials than the existing SL clubs would be mind numbingly stupid and would remove the certainty the franchise system is supposed to create. Now there's a good chance Widnes would be able to put in a better bid than those three I mentioned but it sets a precedent and I don't really think there is another NL1 side up there with them.

Dave

I'm going to sort of agree with Dave here.

IMO there is too much emphasis on the "stadium" . Surely the amount of class juniors that a team brings through should have a greater "weight" in the franchise application than if a club has a shiny new stadium.

For the good of the game junior development has to be the number one priority.

The two are linked in many ways.

It can't be overlooked just how important the image of the game is for attracting new people and kids 2 the game.

Both should have equal weighting IMO as both benefit each other.

We need more Catalans, Hull KR's and Warrington's and I don't see how cutting the amount of teams is going to help us do that.

Get rid of Salford and bring Widnes in.

Barrow in before any other team, Widnes had their shot and blew it hard luck, if any teams do go then they have to be from Yorkshire, too many SL teams coming from there, also stop expansion unlesas said club has been financially stable, has good support and had some on pitch success over a 5 year period.

And you want Barrow in? They are not even really an expansion club? So what do they offer? Other than satisfying all the flat cappers who think we NEED a cumbrian team.

Widnes will offer so much more to super league. We would see them average around 6-7000 in a great stadium, with a youth setup which has been sustained even outside super league, they are now financially sound as well.

And do away with the Top 8.
We've already had the threads on the real possibility of teams outside the top 4 winning, so a top 8 is unrealistic, and smacks of profiteering.
Go back to a top 6 or even 5, make it more rewarding to get into the playoffs, and then we'll get the best teams playing-off in a sensible knockout competition.
Or have 15 teams, play home and away in a League competition, and don't have a play-off. Winner takes all.