I rate them better than Salford on many counts.

If it all comes down to stadiums, I'd say Bradford or Hull KR

As it shouldn't come down to stadiums, I'd probably say Quins due to consistently poor performances on the pitch.

That would be funny the RFL wouldmt have a clue then would they

probably drawn out of a hat.



hopefully richard wright and his opposite number at salford and wakefield have taken ino acount that their respective club even if they have a fully built stadium that this could happen (probably wont but stranger things have happened) and each club only builds with how much money they have at the time of building and dont bet on superleague money in the future akin to what leeds united did by buying players (and exotic fish) with champions league money that they expected to get.

so if there are no debts on a new stadium when the next round off liscences are dished out and either cas, wakey or salford lose out they can just hang around and do there best to show the rfl that they deserve to be in the superleague

but if they take crippling debts with them and the ground is theres all they could do really is sell it and lease it back

This is interesting
How are clubs planning new or redeveloped stadia going to be assessed?

New stadiums or redevelopments of existing stadiums will only be taken into account if the RFL is satisfied that the stadium will be open or the redevelopment finished by the start of the 2012 season.

rlTaken From RFLrl

then Salford would have to go (if all was fair) because of the contribution to the competition, unless the RFL do believe that propping up the league means you are the strongest team, and before you start , the 2 below salford are shoe ins

its a funny old game , well since this franchise e started

Here's a big what if..... (and there are rumours already starting in regards to this)....what if the afore mentioned teams and others get there stadiums and the debt that goes with them....and then SKY pull out?

There is already a rumour going round that a large Murdoch owned newpaper has been isntructed to downscale it's already feeble coverage of Rugby League. Some have already suggestd that this could be the start of SKY pulling out.

So, I ask the question what would happen if SKY did pull out?

Why would Sky pull out? RL is already one of their largest revenue drivers.

They won't. Yes, the money means a lot to the clubs. But what SKY pay for RL is an absolute bargain, it costs them just under £5M PER MATCH. They fill three hours of prime time viewing (Sat and Sun night) for most of the year for consideably less than 5m per match, the RFL are happy to re-arrange fixtures as soon as SKY ask.

Also, there are a hell of a lot of people who subscibe to SKY because of the Rugby League. I know I certainly am, without it I would get rid.

WHAT DEBT ???????? You need to be a bit brighter and re read the Hull Daily Mail then we will see who the brighter one is but of course you don't get that paper in sunny Cas do you so until you ave the correct facts suggest you keep your nose out.............

Merged the "What if?????" thread into the existing Franchises thread. Please check existing threads when posting to avoid starting repeat threads, as seems to be happening and awful lot at the moment.

You mean the Times not keeping Chris Irvine on a retainer as rugby league correspondent on relying on stringers and PA? It's not good, but it's not quite the end of the world either.

rlSee the discussion on the VTrl

Tetchy ..................... very tetchy indeed . so theres no debt and the Hull Daily Mail is the best , most informative rag in the world.

Hows that debt again ?

Just read all the rubbish posted by gingerspice i had to comment. I've only visited Craven Park once and would never go again after cutting my finger open on their portaloos i wasn't even allowed to go and clean it up in a sink.So i find it ridiculous for him to slag our toilets off.

But its the best ground in .................................... east Hull mebbe