Premier league football appears to have everything the SL has not- vast sums of money, international interest and it attracts players from all corners of the globe rather than losing players to other countries or different sports. And yet like SL its the same half a dozen teams at the top of the table every year, the gap between top and bottom arguably as wide as that in SL and the national team continues to disappoint.
The Scottish Premier league doesn't have the finances of English teams and the better players tend to move to England and it has a smaller 12 teams rather than the 20, so a bit like JP's proposal -yet like SL its the same teams at the top of the table every year, the gap between top and bottom arguably as wide as that in SL and the national team continues to disappoint.
Think again JP, if you actually thought at all. Cutting the size of the SL will not bring the results you imagine.

You don't market that, because its not a fact and it would be stupid to do that. You have to first become more professional off the field, work harder and smarter at getting people both involved with the club and with RL in general, develop proper links with the local community. Then you market that to potential investors/sponsors. I don't pretend it's easy, but boy some clubs are pretty bloody pathetic at it.
There has to be a bigger incentive to winning the Champ GF, even if its just a big financial payout, which I would prefer to see not spent on player wages.
But I believe the gap between SL and the Championship is (and has been for some time) far too big for P&R to work properly. P&R should be the ultimate aim in the future, as P&R between 2 strong leagues is the ideal way for sport to work IMO, but that is based upon there being 2 strong leagues. And we don't currently have that. So we have to have licensing of some form to try and build 2 strong leagues. This takes time, perseverance, patience and possibly a dip in on-field standards as resources are re-distributed from mainly spent on-field to mainly spent off-field.

Very succinctly put - I concur.

Seconded !

Actually, I'd argue that when Union was losing talent to League, it was indeed a failing of their sport. They fixed it by making an extremely radical overhaul of their game and it worked.

Is that an endorsement of two Ft tens

A lovely fantasy, but back in the real-world its called a death-spiral. People are less interested in watching a poorer product. Companies are less interested in sponsoring it. Fewer people turn up to meaningless games. So this off-field spending you want to see comes from a smaller pot. Good luck 'marketing that potential' to investors and sponsors.

Peacock can bang on all he likes...reducing the league won't improve the standards on the field and we won't get any closer to beating the Australians in a meaniful international series.

Has anybody said Sky would support S.L 2 and would they even show any of the games live?

The sport has more pressing problems than tweaking the league formats.

Agree with this.
Excuse the football comparison but, just as people in general are not to interested in watching second tier football (the Championship), they will not be interested in watching second tier RL.
It doesn't matter if we call it Super League 2, Not Quite Super League or Second Division.
There will be no getting away from it being a lower grade product.
It may be that the RFL could negotiate an improved contract from Sky, which could help fund a total of 20 full time clubs and this may allow some form of automatic promotion and relegation but, let's not kid anyone that people will tune their TV's in significant number or, turn up to watch live, in the same numbers as the current SL clubs.
The whole concept is about sharing the wealth among fewer clubs and when this is done, there will still be a percentage of clubs in the All New Super Duper League that cant compete every week and finish in the lower portion of the league.

Are you suggesting clubs are doing all they can to get people not only to attend games but also involved in the club and RL? If you aren't then you would have to agree clubs can work harder and smarter. If you are then I'd suggest its you living a fantasy.

No. Because a 10 team league either has not enough fixtures or too many against the same opposition. And if we're struggling to support 14 full time teams I don't see how we can suddenly support 20?