Oh dear.

Do you really think most of the teams in super league really look like a club fit for the top league? I personally don't think so. It is clearly just my opinion.

All you would really be doing is reducing the pool of players playing at the top level and reducing the revenue for the clubs due to less games. We simply can't afford it.

In an ideal world i would like to see a top league of 10 clubs but only if there was a fully professional second division of another 10 teams. We could then re-introduce promotion and relegation. The gaps in the calender then filled by a regular '6 nations' style internationals.

Super League is a least 7 years from having a 16 team competition. the quality is simply not there at the moment for 14 teams let alone 16, plus neither is the TV money.

That is true but it is still what we should be aiming for the time scale is all that is in doubt. Sticking with 14 teams is vital as the more teams there are the more youngsters will get a chance. As for money all clubs need to improve to remove the need for Sky cash, it should be an added bonus for clubs not thier main source of cash.

WHY?

Eventually i think Super League will be a 16 team competition, and as you rightly point out the clubs do need to improve their revenue streams.

Until Sky want to show more than two games a week or FTA TV starts showing some games then it should stick to 14.

This is my forst ever post , so please forgive me if I am barking completely up the wrong tree with this one . I feel that the answer may be a 16 team super league , in essence , but split into two divisions of 8 . Let's say an elite league for the top division and a super league for the ' second tier ' . SKY money would be shared out between all 16 teams equally , as if they were all in one divison , at the start of the season . There would be an automatic promotion and relegation of one team per season , and a play-off for the top 5 in the elite league , to determine the Grand Final Winner , as is the case now . To keep games competitive for the whole season , a five team play-off for a ' second spot ' in the elite league could take place between the 7th team in elite league and the 2nd thru' 5th teams in ' super league ' . The winner taking the final place in the elite league for the following season . There would be no relegation from super league , meaning that any expansion clubs in the future or already established teams in the championship could still apply for a place in ' super league ' if they meet the criteria , as an extra team in the competition , or to replace an existing team .
Using this format , 28 games could be played each season on a home and away basis ( four times against each club ) . There would be a smaller salary cap imposed on the ' super league ' to try and ensure that financial stability could be maintained as , admittedly , revenue may be down as they wouldn't be playing the elite teams , but more competitive rugby MAY mean more interest and larger crowds in some cases , especially with the promise of automatic promotion if finishing top . Remember , they would still be receiving the same amount of cash as the elite league teams at the start of the season , and teams would also receive one extra home game per seaosn . SKY would probably concentrate more on the elite league , but could still show at least one ' super league ' game per week . Indeed , the fact that matches weren't on TV could make for larger crowds . IMO it would only help stabilise finances of the lower tier . A smaller salary cap , coupled with receiving the same initial outlay of cash , could make them financially much stronger , and in a much better position if they do gain elite league entry . The P & R factor would still be there , but without the threat of financial ruin which is facing the club/clubs who don't get a franchise now or in the future . Just a thought , does anybody agree , or as mentioned earlier , am I completely out of touch with reality

Hold the front page. Stop the press.

dally messenger just made a sensible comment.

There's no way you can expand the league to 16 with the current overseas quota as there is just not enough players of a decent quality to fill the teams. TBH, you could argue there's not enough to fill 14 teams.

There's also the fact that more teams mean less money and given that we're not a rich sport to begin with I can't see the majority of clubs, at least those without the sugar daddies, being willing to allow their income to reduce