I would have 14 teams with 7 teams in play off with team that finishes 1st straight to grand final and rest put into a draw and play knock-out also have two minimum non British players in every team.

By having minimum of 2 non British players that would even the playing field.

This.

The call to reduce the number of teams in SL is short-sighted and based on self-interest. If there is a genuine belief that we have a dearth of talent, SL teams should be compelled to do something about that - stricter rules around overseas players and a requirement to partner in a meaningful way with grassroots clubs would be a good start, along with some consideration of limiting the number of games each player can participate in, to force clubs to rotate their squads for reasons other than injury.

To base long term decisions about the future of the sport on a snapshot in time is just daft; there needs to be a 10 year plan that encourages (and compels) SL clubs to behave virtously for the good of the game, not just themselves.

I dont get why having a team in the capital does us so much good. At the end of the day London are poor, they dont produce many competitive games, and they dont win many so therefore they should go.

Widnes seem to be coming alright at the moment, they meet a lot of the criteria and hoepfully next season will be more of a threat and continue to grow.

Wakefield and Cas to me are more or less in the same boat, very inconsistent, and all I ever seem to see or hear about is "plans for the future" or "will come good". In my eyes it would be one of these that went along with London, how that is decided finally should be based on everything, gates, youth, stadium, finances, all of it to a very high level (ie not just a quick look like the licensing fiasco that said Bradford were going ok).

I dont know why we cant have both Franchise and P+R to be fair. Take three year periods, and set targets, over the three years in Championship it is weighed up, so the teams that finish top, win the cup, and meet criteria needed to sustain a team in Super League then at the end of three years, small tournament between those teams, winner goes up.

Similar for the bottom of Super League, over the three years look at performance and the bottom club(s) play to see who goes.

To me Sky should love it, while only every three years they should pull in some great figures, and the knock on effect is that league matched mean something again, resulting in higher figures and hopefully higher gates.

12 team superleague, max of 5 or 6 for playoffs, and a much bigger empasis on cup and league leaders. Make it about three peices of silverware rather than just one.

erm...they've never finished bottom of super league,reached the playoffs 3 or 4 times,finished 2nd before play off where introduced and over the course of 16 SL seasons they average 8th place.........but yeah therefore they should go.........