Let the squabbling over who should be in tier 1 or tier 2 begin!!

I personally think conferences are the way to go if there is funding to allow for 20 pro teams.

I could care less about which team is in which tier as long as we finally get a competitive league, something which isn't provided by a 14-team league and almost certainly wouldn't by 12 teams. We simply don't have the quality and depth of playing personnel, something which is only going to get worse with the increase in salary cap in the NRL.

So does that mean an 18 game season, or a convulted system to play each club 3 times to give 27 games (as we (sort of) previously had)?

Add in the Play Offs and you'll end up playing some teams 4 or 5 times in a single season, which IMHO really isn't what I want to watch.

Again!

As I mentioned: two 10 team conferences. Each play home and away, then top five of each conference form a separate league and play each other once, top 4/5 to play off for SL titile, bottom five of each conference to form another league and then top 4/5 from that group compete for a secondary title (the SL plate if you will),

Cue Smokey (who's made some sense recently to be fair!) and headhunter

and cue everyone else leaving the thread well alone! !

So... your solution to the issue that we haven't got 14 'competitive' teams in Super League, is to 'create' 20 competitive teams split across 2 Conferences of equal standing, with no P&R?

I like the sound of that but would sky cover all the teams in both 0ne and two comps

I don’t think reducing the opportunities for players to compete at the highest level is the way to improve the standard of the player pool. Anything below SL will just become the Championship by another name so changing things seems pointless.