Good, but you forgot one thing...

30 rounds - 2 byes = 28 games each.
28 games - 1 game at MM = 27 games.
27 / 2 (for home and away purposes) = 13.5 games.

Since you can't have 13.5 home and away games, which teams are you proposing should only get 13 home games and which have 14?

And before you say it, no you cannot have an odd number of games!

Do away with the Magic Weekend?

A couple of points :

1) You have ten teams on your list
2) Bradfords ground is not up to scratch and as a team on field performances are on the decline but they are in and Hull KR and Cas who have decent teams and as good a stadium aren't in
3) How on earth can you include Widnes when you don't know what crowds they are going to get in SL and don't know what squad they are going to have and therefore how competitive they are going to be?

Unfortunately for you, Administrationn is no longer a factor in stopping a team getting a licence (so that the RFL can justify keeping Crusaders in).

Public perception has Cas well ahead of Wakey but that's because Richard Wright is a master of positive spin and not actually because you are way ahead.

Neither of us will have a new ground for next year, and how far away either is is anybody's guess at the minute. It will be March next year before we know who is really ahead in the stadium race.

I hate to pour cold water over this (

), but the clubs agreed some time back that there would be 14 clubs in SL for this round of franchises.

This would be a pathetic move. I agree with the Pie earlier who posted about reducing the number of SL teams rather than expanding it. Expanding would be the cowards way out of the situation they created for themselves.

The likes of Salford, Quins, Crusaders, Cas, Wakefield and probably Widnes simply do not warrant a SL place.

There currently arent enough SL standard players to go round 14 teams.... adding another team and diluting this player pool even further will only lead to more one sided matches.

If we want the quality of the product to improve, SL should contain less teams not more..

12 would probably be the ideal number

I can't believe someone set Starbug off about this issue again!!

Ok, here's what I've been saying for a while;

We need more SL teams, we need a larger elite level talent pool, we need wider interest, we need a few expansion clubs to chug along, we need a good number of strong heatland clubs, we need a bit of a reduction on the number of matches, so...

Bring Fax up as well as Widnes, keep all SL clubs.
Two conferences, loosely based on Yorkshire and Lanc, of eight teams.
Each team plays everyone in their league home and away (14 matches), everyone in the in the other conference once (four at home, four away - eight matches) and then one MM match.
So, that's 23 SL matches.
Play off series involves top four of each conference.
Less league matches means room for a three match representative series.
This does mean, however, that the WCC has to be played on a seperate date to MM

It would have to be very loosely based on Yorks & Lancs, given one current SL team is French.

Wakey, Cas, Bradford, Fax, Leeds, Hull, Rovers, Catalans

Widnes, Salford, Saints, Wigan, Cru, Wire, Hudds, Quins

Alternate the conference that Quins and Catalans are in at the end of every season and after four seasons everyone will have played an equal amount of matches against them home and away.

There is nothing more frustrating than when somebody posts something without actually thinking if it can actually happen , or the simple consequences of it ?

The point being you'd HAVE to for 15 teams to work.

People keep trying to make impossible or unfair structures to accommodate it with 15 teams but it won't work.

Personally, I'd have Round 4 of the CC seeded so it's 16 qualifiers vs 14 SL teams (& 2 more qualifiers), then have Round 5 (most likely all SL teams) at Millennium Stadium.

stop talking stupid martin... brisbane wont win the nrl

Really? Apart from it being accidentally published in a leading marketing magazine a couple of months back?

Really?

The one bit I agree with is the fact that we need a larger elite talent pool, however, having that number of SL teams and claiming they will all be staffed by "elite players" is stretching credibility a bit unless the 'elite' player pool increases very quickly.

1 and 2 are within the same answer. I put Bradford in at the end and forgot to change the 9 to 10. People often talk about Bradfords stadium like it is as bad as Cas and Wakey but it isn't. It has a whole end of the ground which is brand new and dedicated to hospitality. It has almost 6k seats which is more than a lot of other stadiums, The terracing is not crumbling away like most old grounds and it is a high capacity for the big games.

The 3rd one was controversial but you only have to look at the crowds last time they were in super league to notice they will do better than most current super league teams. The local derbies agains Wigan, Saints and especially Warrington will be pulling 9-10k maybe even sell-outs. Their away support has also always been superb from what I have seen. I bet they will be the best supported team at MM, yes because its their first game but it shows the fans are willing to travel.
As for being competitive, the chairman has already said they will be spending to the full cap. This will automatically make them a top 8 team as there is only around 6 or 7 teams who actually spend the full cap.

Due to my quite extreme view of a large cut... I would have to agree with you.

My other point is that if the number of teams in super league was reduced then the salary cap in the championship should go up so it can get a lot closer to super league.

Anyone with half a brain can see that reducing the number of teams in SL would shrink the player pool, not expand it.

For the hard of thinking, it goes like this.

For easy calculation, lets say there are 14 teams with 25 players each at the moment, giving 350 SL players. Remove 2 teams, and that number obviously shrinks to 300, with the 50 'lesser' players presumably ending up in the lower divisions.
This removes the opportunity for players who were borderline SL players to improve their game (if indeed they do stay with the game, and don't go to RU) and in doing so they eventually weaken SL and the European game in general as if/when those players are needed they won't be up to speed.

As for the original suggestion, it could work if MM was counted as a normal fixture for teams, with one team considering it their home game, and then with the WCC as a bonus game on top. Other than that, none starter.
And how many clubs would give up a home fixture during the season? I'll bet it's less than one...

Finally... Starbug... you don't like SL/Licensing. We get that. No, really, we've picked it up by now... but if LCRLC were granted a licence then I'd guarantee that within two years you'd have changed your tune. P&R is a luxury RL can't afford at the moment.