is too many?

Leeds will face Widnes for the 4th time in competition this year in the middle 8's, as will Toulouse and London, whilst Wigan and Wire together with Hudds and Catalans will also meet for the 4th time in competition when the Super 8's start....and Wakey v Hudds will meet for the fifth time this year.......five games in the same season????

If (as I think they will do) they scrap the concept, promote the top 6 in the middle 8's to SL XXIV and then have one up one down in a MPG between bottom SL and Top Champs, with a top 8 play-off then PLEASE GOD can they stick to the system longer than a couple of years.....on the current tables standing, that would leave a Championship with Toulouse, Bradford, Halifax, Featherstone and possibly Leigh (once DelBoy puts his dummy back in) scrapping for the chance to meet probably Widnes or London in a MPG......so not to dissimilar to what we had this year but without the cheating mancanadians......

The middle 8's have grown on me, but too much repetition of games is making fans stay away....and to a neutral, Wakefield v Huddersfield for the fifth time (with an average gate of 4,127) in a season makes us look a small and localised sport that only a few towns in the north play.

Great argument from someone who wants to cull the smaller clubs, absolutely brilliant.

I’d go to a 16 or even 20 team licensed SL. Play everyone once and then play the other 7 or 9 from your half of the table again.

Would give 24 or 29 league games per year including Magic weekend. Then a top 8 playoff.

]



I agree with this the problem is in the championship is that the top six all want to play SL and the rest don’t so you have two leagues in one extend it to 16 is the best option

....what, 16 clubs in the top tier with no P&R, a live salary cap, all games televised......you're dreaming. Where in the world would that ever happen?

Exactly. And people forget that the NRL is tailored to help those clubs in the bottom half of the table.

We should do the same. It clearly works.

Would Toronto have worked straight away with licensing, probably not. The current TV deal means they has to be some form of P/R and that's unlikely to change.

I was going to question this, but stopped myself and after reflection, you're spot on. Torontonians are getting to know a new sport and it's far better to be attracted to a winning side than one getting hammered week in week out....as they surely would have if they'd been dropped into SL straight up.
2 Years of winning nearly every game and only one defeat at Lamport has enabled them to build a base....so next year, when St Helens stick 50 on them the week after Wire have hammered them, there will be a hard core support who will hang around,,,,,but they will need to bring some new cash to the table and quick, because otherwise they will just be another London....well intended but ultimately useless.

I know many super league grounds ain't the greatest(character I say) give me a visit to Cas or Wakey over a visit to a soulless football stadium like Wigan or Huddersfield. But, would Toronto's ground be upto scratch.

As long as it doesn't have a WF post code, it will be ok.
Toulouse ground is pretty small AND they have some history in coal mining, GMG must be panicking now.

I'd go 15 (the current SL plus Toronto, Tolouse and London), not sure we have a 16th team who is ready to be honest, and two bye weeks may be useful to sides with mounting injury concerns/a cup run. Everyone plays each other twice (28 games) then a top 7 play off as follows:

Week 1 (Quarter finals)
2nd v 7th
3rd v 6th
4th v 5th

Week 2 (Semi finals)
1st v Lowest ranked week 1 winner
Highest ranked week 1 winner v Middle ranked week 1 winner

Week 3 (Final)
The two winners from week 2

Bottom team to play the top team from the Championship over two rounds (home and away) for the final spot in SL. If they are level on points and points difference (unlikely), then keep the status quo. No relegation in year 1 to allow Toronto, Tolouse and London to get up to speed. 1 years' exemption from relegation for any team who earns promotion thereafter as long as they run an academy or reserves which completes all its fixtures.

I am not aware of any suitable stadiums with a WF postcode that have the required health and safety certification

P and R works in football because the teams at the top of the Championship are pretty much as good as those at the bottom of the Premiership. The same generally cannot be said of Rugby League. I would not mind having an expanded top division that would be P and R free for a couple of years to allow new candidate teams to bed in or even for some teams to have a licence that protects them for a certain time. I know that it would lead to a lot of dead rubbers but so does any simple P and R system.
Personally I like the 3x8 system although I know that it is not popular. More of the games have value although it ultimately makes promotion more difficult. I also agree that we devalue individual games by clubs playing each other so often. Perhaps we need to know how many teams could realistically survive at Super League level and go from there. It seems a shame to have teams with Super League costs playing a division down and living on the edge like Leigh.

Should be 14 teams play each other home and away plus magic (with the matches based on league position) with the 14th club relegated and have the million pound game between the top 2 in the championship.