Always preferred p & r but I have to agree with you bobness, I think they are looking at a way of reducing the number of one sided scorelines, which are boring to watch. Theoretically the games after the split should be more competitive.

The problem with SL 1 & 2 is funding.
Whether the top division is 10 or 12 clubs, where will the funding come from for the 2nd tier of the game.
The reasoning behind the change is to give the big boys more cash (because they are basically greedy), which means that, just as we have now, the gap in funding between the top flight and second tier won allow any promoted club to compete and therefore the likes of Fev or Halifax (or whoever) will just yo-yo between the 2 divisions, which is why we moved to licensing in the first place.
Plus, with the likelihood of Toulouse being included, this means that the axe will fall on 2 or 3 current SL clubs.

In 2007 we had to stay up. Short term survival was all that mattered. The likes of Jim Gannon, Danny Ward, Mark Lennon, Luke Dyer etc we brought in to achieve this. Look at the side now. Liam Salter, Rich Beaumont, George Griffin, James Green etc. This is what the stability of licensing has brought. Developing young players is the only future, bringing back P&R would set us back years.

SL2 only works if there is enough cash for the teams in it to turn full time pro. Which'd mean fewer teams in SL1 and possibly a little less money for each of them. Seems a hard sell, but they would get the more intense competition they supposedly crave and more promising kids could remain in the full-time system for longer.
If it is just a re-brand of the Championship, I agree it is pointless.
£900k for 10 SL1 teams, £450k for those in SL2. Might just about work.

I haven't seen it asked (Sorry if I missed it) so here goes.
Does the new ideas (especially option 3) mean the club tie ups have to be thrown in the bin.
How can a comp that will suddenly involve all 24 teams allow for 2/3 of those teams to share a playing pool?

Yeah, I think they'd have to be - a few more season long loans, and a couple of overage players allowed at... Well the under19s, might be a bit young for that. Go back to 20s? Big gap from the 16s then, though.