Modabee! Oh hang on...

Salford and Wakey.
Wakey for obvious reasons and salford because although congratulations on getting your ground built first (imo), you've not really offered a lot else. What the salford fan quoted above me almost any club could quote and you've been whipping boys for the best part of 3 years. I wouldnt demote you personally i'd make a 15 team comp but Fax deserve their chance and out of Cas/Salford, Cas are the stronger club.
Crusaders i'd give another 3 years to and then weigh it up. Depending on how things go SWS could be waiting to take their place or the Chps could be ready for a decent sky investment to make it 2 divisions.

Thats a fantastic idea.

So you think it would be good business sense to replace a Welsh club (that failed to get any significant support despite being geographically reasonably close to other SL clubs / the RL 'heartland') with a smaller Welsh club (that are not only many miles and hours away in a car from their nearest SL rivals but are also sited in a similar area to where the last Welsh club failed?)



I'm out.

Leeds for me. Sky would then switch to financing The Championship and we would all want crap grounds so we could join 'em.

Quins, they are just embarrasing to the name of Rugby League.

I went for Wakey and Quins, with a preference for the latter if its only one.

You may call Salford the 'whipping boys', but we still haven't finished bottom. Infact, Bradford went on one of the longest losing streaks in SL history, does that mean Bradford should be relegated. Do Halifax really deserve their chance, what makes them a better club than Salford? Yes Salford lost their super league spot a few years ago, but even if there had been promotion/relegation we still would have come back up.

The whole idea of franchising was to create well structured and financially viable clubs. Clubs with good facilities, that are producing talented players. Like it or not that is Salford, or it will be once the ground is built and McRae has gone. It isn't Wakey, it isn't Celtic and it isn't HKA.

I agree if Halifax are good enough then make the competition a 15 team competition. They could take a slice of the TV money from the richer clubs, those who brag about being able to spend more than the salary cap.

Bradford went on a losing streak so bad it was humiliating yet they still finished above Salford didn't they? How can Halifax be put one on one with Salford when you've had 3.6 million more invested solely from Sky because of them. They deserve a chance as they already have a ground up and running and have been the strongest Chp club on the playing front and not far off elsewhere.
There is 'potential' of sorts in Salford, however please point me to these great facilities, talented players you've produced and this contribution you've made to the league in 3 years? IMO, and thats all it is, others like yourself would disagree, its bobbins.. you havent delivered the stadium in this period and havent done a whole lot else

Salford should not have been allowed back in until their stadium was built imo.
Wakey can only blame themselves, they've had clost to 10million of RFL money invested in them and still haven't got a decent ground
Cas have the crowd potential to be up around 8-9000 but again need to have the stadium by end of the next round
Quins are a joke and we'd be better spending the 1million a year on Jnr RL in the South and development of Skolars
Crusaders deserve perservering with. Shame the're not still in Sth Wales but as long as they have links into that area and take responsibility for developing Jnr talent across Wales then they deserve a spot
HKR are getting it together with their ground and have decent financial backing. All would agree that Jnr development should be their forced priority


One of the things I would like to see in this whole process is the RFL reveiwing the submissions then setting some goald for clubs to acheive during the next 3 year period. If they dont meet those goals they are at inccreased risk of being relegated.

Thrown out, we don't have relegation anymore.

I've mentioned the players we've produced earlier in the thread. We have good players, but together the have not been a good team. Until Simms took charge. 40mins against Leeds aside, Salford have looked a completely different side. Since you took Myler, there's in no way any Warrington could say Tony Smith wouldn't be interested in Ratchford. Honestly, that's not just sour grapes, and I'm pleased he's doing better for you guys now. Adamson has potential, but McRae has been stifling him, Sidlow on his day is hadnful for any team, just needs the coach to give a kick up the backside occassionally. Jordan Turner looked a classy player, until we lost him, and we gave Jodie Broughton a chance, who is one of the quickest players I've seen since Offiah and actually has an understanding of how to play Rugby.

As for great facilities, I did say when the ground is built. Fair point about the cash, but Widnes aren't having any trouble with their junior sides.

To JB down under and Salford not being allowed in until the stadium was built, that criteria could, and probably should, have been levelled at Wakey, Cas, Saints and the Crusaders.

Back to the franchising issue and sustainable clubs. Salford have always been sound financially, you can't say the same about Halifax/Widnes/Crusaders/Wakey. As for the Crusaders, they are practically playing in the heartlands now, and should have any special dispensation stopped.

Lincoln, you're wasting your time - these people will never agree that Salford are a team worth having, let them dream about Salford not being given a licence for the next three years, the fact is we will be there. However, another club that has spent years spending beyond it's means to get results on the pitch whilst giving promises to develop their ground that never happened, won't be - despite a new backer. I don't expect any other current SL club to make way for a championship side - sorry Fax!

Sad to say it, but IMO I think it'll be Wakefield.

It should be Crusaders, but we all know the RFL would never go there.

They do have a point, but the fact remains Manchester/Salford is the largest populated area in the north England and SL needs a presence in an area that large, more than it needs another club from a small town in Yorkshire. This aside if we don't get rid of McRae, and don't start getting results on the pitch by the end of the next franchise, we are going to struggle to get a third franchise.

We had the chance to grow after the 2006 season, but crippling injury list and Harrison staying in post, longer than he should have, prevented us from capitalising on the momentum we built up. After that, the club went for a big name manager and thought a long term contract was good option. As we all know McRae isn't the coach he once was, methods and techniques have moved on, whereas McRae has lost his confidence and the players fail to respond to him.

If things can keep picking up in McRae's absence, we could fulfill that play off position, the assembled squad should give us. If we can achieve that, next season, in the new stadium, with a vibe about the club, the chance is there to really produce in SL. The RFL would be mad to chop us for Fax, who have gone into administration in the past and don't appear as financially solid as Salford, even without the Sky money.

I do not want any team to be thrown out, I want the system used to select the team to be transparent with all the marks clearly scored.

It should not be left to us to select one or even speculate, the criteria is in place and all people have to do is tick the boxes.

Its that simple

Licence criteria Stage two of the licence decision process saw the clubs allocated the points used to decide licence grades according to their strength in several areas

Facilities Teams will get one point for having a stadium with a capacity of 12,000 or more. Another point will be awarded if the ground meets the standards of a premier competition in the 21st century.

Attendances A point will be awarded to clubs with an average attendance of around 10,000 spectators. Another point will be awarded if stadiums are operating at 40 per cent capacity.

Licence criteria Stage two of the licence decision process saw the clubs allocated the points used to decide licence grades according to their strength in several areas.

FacilitiesTeams will get one point for having a stadium with a capacity of 12,000 or more. Another point will be awarded if the ground meets the standards of a premier competition in the 21st century.

Attendances A point will be awarded to clubs with an average attendance of around 10,000 spectators. Another point will be awarded if stadiums are operating at 40 per cent capacity.

FinancesTeams will receive a point if they are solvent. Another point will be awarded if their turnover is more than £4 million.

Player strength Teams earn one point if they are considered to have made a contribution to the competition - that means averaging a place in the top eight over each of the last three seasons. Another point is available to clubs who make a contribution to home-grown player development. That means at least eight members of a first-team squad of 25 should be discovered, trained and developed in the team's home country (United Kingdom or France).

Salary cap One point is on offer to teams who have not committed a major breach of the salary cap in the last three seasons

Geographical expansion The final point goes to clubs who do not have another rugby league club within a 20-mile radius.

The scores attained by each club (out of ten) are translated into a Licence grading.

8 or more points - A licence
5-7 points - B licence
4 points or less - C licence

they are the oild criteria. there are only 4 criteria this time which cover most of the above areas but are much more vaguely worded.

Fantastic!

Quins and Crusaders.

Crusaders cos they got in pretending to be an expansion team then fecked off back to the waste.... sorry HEARTland and ditched most of the Welsh players.

Hull KR -wasting time in SL with their antipodean squad, should join the NRL plus only 1 team in Hull

Leeds -if only to get rid or their noisy musically talentless "fans".

Widnes- Yes I know they are not it it yet but won't bring anything new to the party so why bother.

Saints- for such a "forward thinking" club they can't even orgainise their own home ground yet people slag wakey for thinking of going to Barnsley

Bradford- Cos they get council freebies which Keighley people pay for and the cougars get nowt!

Huddersfield - As the birthplace of the game the galpharm should be sold out week in week out yet... just taking up space.

Salford - Why?

Castleford - Wakey is a bigger club

So my SL is now

Wigan
Warrington
Crusaders
Hull
Harlequins
Wakefield
Catalans

A nice geographical mix with each team playing the other home and away twice.

Simples........................

salford won't get kicked out cos they are in the middle of actually building a new stadium..i could see the RFL being sued by the builders of the stadium if salford get booted...someone has committed £20 odd million into build a club a super league stadium

cas won't cos they've done enough on the pitch,brought kids through and are finalizing a new stadium

quins,catalan,crusaders.....exspansion trumps everything..3 safest clubs in super league...


wakefield....erm.....bye...

I fail to see why the majority of people think wakey should be nailed on to go. Wakey don't have the worst crowds in super league, they aren't the only club who's current facilities are below par/new ground isn't finalised yet, and they're not the only club to go into administration. Also, they've never finished bottom or intentionally broke the rules.....So can anyone explain why Wakey are the club most people are saying would like to see demoted?

Because most people seem to think that stadium facilities is the be all and end all of the franchise process. 4 clubs are perceived to have stadiums of insufficient quality - Wakey, Cas, Saints & Salford. The latter 2 of those are building their new stadiums and expect to be playing in them from 2012 so that leaves Wakey & Cas.

Cas are flying high in the league, have a pile of locally developed youngsters in their side and didn't go into administration recently. So that leaves.....

Because despite everyone else being able to see expansion clearly doesnt work, the RFL are adamant that having a French side in SL plus poorly supported no marks like Crusaders and Quins means that it IS working.


Yes if a club has to go it should be one of those three.


Sadly for Wakefield it won't be.


And I think thats a great shame.

Sooo excuse me but im tired.. I made 3 players in that list that you've produced (not nicked), and Im not sure but was Ratchford ever at Wigan? Certainly not a claim for great youth development anyway, you've just strung together a bunch of castoffs from other clubs and done okay with them.
To put it slightly differently, your attendances are less that Cas and Wakefields, your youth development is worse, your performance is marginally better than wakey and financially Cas are one of only 4 clubs to make a profit. Lastly you have a stadium half (im in a generous mood) built. It certainly isnt a safe bet if the RFL decide to put a marker down and promote 2 clubs