But that counts for very little in RL these days.

I think that SL should be cut back to 12 teams or the reduction on import numbers be reversed, simply because I do not believe that there is enough quality players in the league to support 14 top flight teams. We've cut back on overseas players (our first mistake) which has ment our talent pool has decreased, not increased. I know lots of the "it's the overseas player's fault we never beat the aussies" crowd were convinced that a drop in overseas players would see 3,000,000 young british superstars suddenly burst into the game, no longer held back by the overseas player glass celing. but suprise, suprise, that has not happend. Super League, IMO, is a less competitive competition than it was a few years ago. Leeds' dominance in the GF is evidence of that. That's not to knock the Rhinos, they've been the best team in the competition. However the rest of the league has been a bad bunch.

The increase in teams and decrease in availible players was always going to be a mistake. How can you have more teams with less players? Basic maths would tell you that was going to be stupid.

The move to 12 appears to be gathering support. With 9/10 clubs confident of being in the 12. The prospect of an extra £150 - 200K per year is far too tempting.

Given at least one team will be elevated that means 3 current teams to go. Crusaders are bound to be favourite to drop. That leaves 2 slots!

In 2006, SL contained 12 English teams. In 2010, it contains 12 English teams. I'm struggling to see the difference in terms of players.

The problem is people expect things to change in an instant, it's not going to happen so soon, and chopping and changing rules every other season will not help. The RFL should stick with 14 clubs for the foreseeable and see how it pans out.

Edited

If the RFL were to drop 3 teams to promote 1 and i hope they dont, i think they would still keep Celtic, they semed determined on that one. Using the last set of critera for the rest ie stadia, crowds, onfield performance, and geography etc I'd say (as i have before) first to go will be salford, and then i see cas and wakey going only because of there are so many west yorks clubs and neither of them will have a ground by the 2012 season. For the same reason Halifax wont come up, so it would be between Widnes and Barrow. Unless they collapse finacially and on the pitch, Widnes must be firm favourites either way.

…. and then we would go back to the ridiculous situation of playing five extra fixtures as clubs will not want to lose out on income from that avenue, despite a spilt of a potential £2.4m windfall.

2006, 2005 … meh (my finger slipped, honest guv )

Less teams would probably mean less Sky money, which with the sudden attention being given to ratings is something we may have to accept anyway.

like i said earlier in the thread, derbies became boring, with a cup tie and playoff's i think leeds played bradford 7 times one year!

My point was, you can't cut the number of availible players then increase the number of teams and expect the players now playing to be at a competetive level that can be improved to comparable to the NRL. I for one would love to see a 14 team SL with each team fielding a world class team of home grown players. That isn't going to happen if the RFL keep moving the goal posts every year.

What should have happend, imo, is that if the RFL wanted 14 teams they should have left the overseas quota alone for the next 3 years.

14 is fine. Leave it.

im pretty sure this is just a kick up the backside to some clubs who may be thinking that being only the 3rd worst club will save them if (as expected) 2 are promoted.

A little nudge to remind them that isnt good enough