Hmm interesting debate

Care to venture an opinion?

So what? Wakefield were one of the best (if not the best) sides in the 60's, Widnes used to be the best side in the country.

What you're basically saying is that these teams have had their chance already we should just relegate them.

For all we know in 2023 Salford will be the side to beat, Widnes might be about to play their Word Club Challenge match against South Sydney. Who are you to say that these 'no-hoper' clubs will never be successful again?

So what your saying is because a team was successful 50years ago they deserve a place in SL. Most people want to bring back P+R but your argument seems to be we were successful 50years ago dont relegate us now we might be good in 10yrs time.

Where did I say that?

I said that those teams were successful back then, but never said that they should have a SL place because of this. Stop misconstruing things.

What I do imply from my previous comment is that it just goes to show that teams other than Saints, Wigan, Wire and Leeds have and will be successful again in the future.

Like I said before, what gives you the right to think that these teams should be written off? Please enlighten me?

Its just my opinion on how to would improve RL in Britain.

Do you agree with promotion and relegation?? I do, I also think that smaller leagues would increase intensity, so the only way to achieve this is to relegate the 4/5 weakest teams in the league! I am not writing them off, if the said teams are good enough they will finish in the top 10, if not they get relegated and if they are the best in that league they get promoted.

The teams at risk of the cull if I had my way would be:

Widnes
Salford
Cas
Wakey
London
Bradford

Bradford offer big crowds and London offer expansion, but what exactly have the others achieved in the SL era? They dont really offer the league much!

A league of 10 doesn't work, that's 9 home matches a season, or 8 if we still have the Magic weekend for some, which means less money, shorter seasons, less Sky matches.
It's not about what they haven't achieved but what they WILL achieve, I for one hope to see Wakefield win silverware in the next ten years, and in my eyes there is no reason to think otherwise, and I'm sure the other clubs are the same.

You are being too short sighted, Manchester City were probably written off 10 years ago, look at them now, equally Leeds United not so long ago were competing for the Champions League, look at them now. Success comes and goes, and there is no reason for it to be any different for Super League. You can't just write teams off so flippantly and on the basis of such a short period of time where a number of factors affect the performance of clubs.

It's got it's positives and negatives.

I'm not decided either way at the minute but can't see it happening any time soon.

I have been banging on about an alternative for years.

The consensus seems to be that everyone agrees promotion, eventually to SL, is a "good thing" and a great incentive; but relegation is a "bad thing" because the gulf between SL and the rest is just so massive.

(Incidentally, they fail to understand that the size of the rapidly increasing gulf is great evidence of what progress in standards SL has achieved - but that's another story).

Most people agree that playoffs are an essential. Some don't like them, but even they wouldn't disagree that the playoffs are the most popular part of the comp - albeit the effect is diluted, the more teams you invite to join the playoffs. this much is obvious; during the regular and post season, the games which will always attract the biggest crowds are invariably the most competitive ones, leaving grudge derbies aside, and that's why the GF can attract a huge gate to somewhere as big as Old Trafford.

So, where is there a highly successful league, with lots of teams, and no promotion or relegation at all? One place is the NFL. They have (currently) 32 teams. And ALL can say they play in the big league. Because they do.

Why not devise a conference style system based around that general framework?

1. Nobody gets relegated.

2. Promotion is easy - if a team is good enough and ticks the boxes, just stick it into one of the divisions.

3. As there are only a few teams in each division, (4 per division in the NFL currently) all except the biggest duffers in any given year are in with a chance of making the end of season party for most of the season. The winner of each division is in, and then there are wild cards - but the beauty is that the wild card is often not decided till the last week as it is based on overall winning percentages.

4. The NFL has 31 teams currently, and the schedule for fairly distributing the 16 regular season games each plays is bloody ingeniousicon_sad.gif[urlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Football_League_regular_season#Current_formula[/url)

5. The playoffs thus involve 8 teams (the winners of the divisions) plus 4 wild card "runners up", i.e 12 teams in all. Or put another way, nearly 40% of the teams qualify for the playiffs, which must mean a significantly higher percentage have a genuine chance of making the playoffs right till the end of the regular season, maintaining interest.

If you were to introduce something similar over here, you would start with SL plus Championship 1 teams. However, in such a system, you could easily accommodate expansion teams, by adding the occasional one to a division.

This to me is a sensible approach to expansion. Whilst a SL of just the top 10 or even 8 teams may be attractive to Peacock, I can't see it being remotely attractive to the fans, or to broadcasters, and it dooms expansion realistically forever, as such a level of league would have to be essentially a closed shop. Whereas in a closed shop conference system, the main SL wannabees would already be in, as you have got to the same result, but by ADDING a lot of teams to your league, rather than taking any away

Had u read my original post i said that team would play each other 3 times to make up the number of games!! Obviously you didnt!! Your right things can change quickly, but you cannot use the argument that u might be good in a few years as an excuse to stay in SL. 13 years ago Man City were in League1 because they wernt good enough for the premiership. The same principle should apply to SL.

If the teams are good enough they will finish in the top 10 or get promoted at the first chance. Halifax were good many years ago but thats not an argument for them to be in SL now is it???

Please answer me this: Do you believe in promotion and relegation or do you think the Franchise system is better?

Peacock needs managing by the RFL. He hasnt got the brains or looks to be the voice of rugby League. If they want a players voice use Hall at Leeds. Articulate with decent looks.

Football have used Beckham very well. Its very rare he offers an outspoken or controversial opinion as that isnt what he is there for.

Peacock on the other hand is an ugly, gruff, thick northerner who has no place to offer an opinion. The game is trying to get away from being seen as a thick northerners game and he isnt helping

Here we go again...

Yes I read your post

I actually thought it was a joke at the time, seeing as that system is awful and nobody likes it.



Okay then if we are playing this game, Wakefield have never been relegated, nor finished bottom of Super League, nor have London.



Like Hull KR? Catalans? Or Widnes who have just made the step back into Super League?



Halifax finished (firmly) bottom of Super League and didn't win promotion back, they are currently trying to get back into Super League. Once again, I never said that being good once upon a time equated to being in Super League now





If the RFL had a clear and fair agenda then Franchising, unfortunately I don't agree with their vision for Super League, their bias towards expansion and their protection of big clubs. I just don't believe in the system, I don't believe in Richard Lewis or Nigel Wood, they have no integrity. Promotion and Relegation is the only fair option at the moment, yet even P&R has so many faults. It's hard to say really.

Back to the original point, this system would not work, it wouldn't be beneficial, and the majority of people would not back such a system IMO. I don't know why we are even having this discussion, because it won't happen!

Peacock is an idiot, he never shuts up whinging about something.

I would think that a conference system is the obvious way to go, and a closed shop adding teams 'as and when' they are ready is clearest and most obvious option and also the one i think we are moving towards. But i dont think we have either the player strength, nor the financial strength to have 24 teams playing fully pro RL right now, adding another 10 teams all at once is far too much.

I wouldnt take any teams away, i think we are at just about the right level, yes a couple of clubs are a bit below the standard we should expect but dropping them down is only going to move them further away.

I would, in the next franchise round, offer one spot to the best french bid and one to the best bid from anywhere, expand the league to 16, split it into 2 conferences, you play the 7 other teams in your conference twice, the 8 in the other conference once, half home, half away, top 4 from both conferences qualify for 8 team play-offs, depending on which play off system we chose this would result in a roughly 25 game season which is a cut down of 5 weeks from right now which should be used for international games and an expanded WCC.

Splendid body too, for a Leeds lad, if the latest naked calendar isn't too airbrushed.


As a northerner, I agree with you 100%. Every time he is on TV I cringe.

I'd go conference league.
You can expand the teams and improve the intensity at the same time, not at the beggining of the season though but you get a better 2nd half of the season

1. Wire 1. Leeds
2. Wigan 2. Bradford
3. Saints 3. Hull FC
4. Widnes 4. Hull KR
5. Salford 5. Castleford
6. Leigh 6. Wakefield
7. Catalans 7. Halifax
8. Huddersfield 8. London

16 teams.
2 leagues
14 first round games
top 4 of each go into another league, points reset
bottom 4 another league, points reset

The next leagues play each other twice. top league winner goes into final 2&3 playoff for final. GF winner

Bottom league play each other twice
Bottom club playoff with lower league club for promotion and relegation.
Top 2 in this league play under card for GF and win a minor trophy (keep fans interested).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The second half of the season raises the intensity, ready for the 4 nations.

As already pointed out, the players want to play less, but never ever say they should also take a cut in pay do they?

Doesnt everybody want to work less and get paid the same? If you normally work 40hrs a week for £500, I am sure you would prefer to work 30hrs for £500!! However much people enjoy there job wouldnt you rather have more free time to do what you want!!

I absolutely agree that conferences are the way to go. You can still set minimum standards,but, if they are met, there is no barrier to the number of teams that can join SL and the current bitterness eminating from those teams being ringfenced out of the league will be removed.

Another advantage is that,if the conferences are established using geographical areas, then you can remove a lot of travelling expenses as the teams are mostly close to one another and you also get a lot of historic derby games with their commensurate huge attendances.

A further possibility, as in the NFL,is to give each conference to a different TV outlet for coverage with the increase in TV revenue that this would bring not to mention the greater viewer base.

It may be an American concept but it has proved hugely successful and I see no reason why it could not be equally so in Super League. It would also be an incentive to those outside SL as they would know that, if they met the standards, there would be an almost guaranteed place available for them at the top table. It could be an incentive to expansion and heartland areas alike to aspire to the SL.

Yes, but we know it's not going to happen!

Hmm I quite like this conference thing, might have to look into it before I make any judgement though!

I agree in principle but there are flaws, if a team is well ahead of the rest and a good few points ahead of 2nd 3rd and 4th place and at least 4th place is guaranteed, whats to stop them fielding their youth team for the remaining few games of the '1st round'. thus giving the opposition a far greater chance of beating them, and so a better chance of making the 4 themselves.

Again I agree but there needs to be incentive for finishing top of the '1st round'

I suppose an incentive could be, top 2 teams in each league get 2 points instead of 0 for the start of the 2nd round of games. Plus is blooding youngsters a bad things, plus you can loan players to different leagues so that it never effects your results.

No he never shuts up whinging about this! It;s the same thing over and over again



The RL players wan't more money in the game yet less fixtures and less top flight teams... Yea that'll work lads!

From a clubs point of view they announce 25+ man squads for a reason, it was commented on last year Wigan should have rested key players more before the end of the season and that's all there is to it! If Peacock had his way how many young bucks would get their chance if it wasn't for injury / suspension? Hardly any.

It's interesting that the young bucks snapping at JP's heels are not calling for fewer games per season; the older he gets, the stronger his views on this issue seem to become.

He probably needs to be managed a bit more robustly by Leeds and the RFL.