Why would you judge a competition on what "could happen" or some ridiculous format you've just invented. Warrington won the cup avoiding any team that's won something in the last 5+ years, when Bradford won the GF from third (the least deserving by your logic) they beat the current holders and the previous year's cup winners and hub cap holders to do it.

Quite easy to see which is the better to win when based on facts rather than what-ifs.

Or you can win it by facing quality in every round.

Such is the magic of the cup.

And whats more you never get a second chance in the cup, in the playoffs you can.

But the second chance is a reward to the teams who have been more consistent all through the season which has to be a good thing surely?

Oh i'm not saying that those teams dont deserve it, just that the reason why the cup means more to me is that there are no second chances.

As a Leeds fan I would say that winning the CC in 1999 wasn't a patch on the emotion we went through winning the GF in 2004, or even 2007 & 2008.

The hubcap is a piece of silverware that's nice to win but ultimately it is an optional bonus to winning the GF.

The WCC depends on who you are playing and how seriously the opposition are taking it. Beating Canterbury in 2005 was a bit of a joke game but the game against Melbourne in 2008 was a good acheivement. Either way, like the hubcap it is a nice honour to have but is really just a bonus accolade.