I am not so sure that it would. Certainly it did in the past, when a full time team dropped into a part time division.

But if the rules around the salary cap were followed this would not be the case.
Also
If let's say featherstone were promoted is it unthinkable that they could manage to get above just one SL team? Because I am not so sure that they wouldn't .

Take widnes last season, admittedly they finished bottom but were within a whisker of Cas and London.

I think it could encourage more investors in the lower leagues as there are more chances to gain promotion to the next level.

Those that are in the the SL and dropping to the middle 8 won't drop too much in crowds as they'll have season ticket holders. If you're hanging around that end of the SL your crowds aren't exactly going to be huge anyways! Flip that around with the top four Championship clubs who will be playing bigger clubs in more important games. Their crowds are going to go up. Then look at the top 8. Bigger teams playing each other in more competitive matches. Crowd pleaser.

It's just the last 8 I'm concerned don't have much to play for.

Option 3 is a very interesting proposition and one that opens up a vey competitive scenario.
First 11 games should be very intense to finish in the Top 8, then you will have to do it all over again to finish in the Top 4 (guess)
Top 4 in the second 8 gives the likes of Featherstone a great chance to be in the first 12 following season instead of being exiled into the lower league.
I reckon the RFL will have to reduce the gap of monies between the 2 starting leagues which might encourge a few players in the lower sides to go full time.

I've given up caring anymore, they never give the game long enough to stabilise without fannying about with it. The BBC aren't interested, SKY treat it with contempt, it now appears to be dying a death with the RFL holding it underwater.

We seem to be heading back to the 90s with all of these proposals and add in getting rid of the salary cap and this sport will go into freefall. No one wants to see one sided games with maybe three teams in the mix for all the honours and the rest making the numbers up.

I wonder if anyone has asked Sky what they want, because without there wad of cash this sport is bankrupt. The proposals will drive away people investing at a crucial time, what is the point in anyone investing in clubs with possibly no future in SL long term. How many clubs are actually running at a profit again and how many are close to going under.

This sport needs stability the thought of yo yo clubs, parachute payments is a recipe for disaster. History has shown us the promotion to the SL can be the poison chalice and it has nearly been the death of more then one club. The simple truth is the sport can not support more the around 10 - 12 clubs at the top level. We have neither the finances or the players and these proposals do nothing to tackling either. Its the RFL knee jerk reaction instead of facing that the sport is a minority sport with limited appeal.

The current system is not perfect, but it started to a take us all forward and some people are living in the past. The world as moved on and franchising happens in most sports now, the NRL should be a model for us to follow.

I'd agree with most of that, except to say that it is the clubs driving this not the RFL. The clubs voted that the current system couldn't stay and it'll be clubs that vote on which new system they want.
The fact that most clubs couldn't organise a p|ss up in a brewery should be a worry to all of us.

If we are going daft ideas why not just pick the 20 strongest clubs
Divide them into East and West divisions 10 each
play each team once.

Top 4 in each play each other in go into another league system to decide champions.

12 lower teams get more games to get their receipts up, play for a cup similar to Northern Rail, bottom 1 of 2nd league go down.

small clubs play with the big boys, have a chance to get big sponsors in, more of a chance of eventually competing with the big boys, less travelling beginning of the season keeps costs down.

Any flaws with that system

The same flaw they all have, money, and how to divide it up

Money shared out equally for first season, then given out incrementally dependant on league position the following years.

I am seriously starting to worry that my 3 year old son wont ever get to play RL.

i wouldnt worry to much about that rl will always be played

Spot on.

The proposal does allow for 1 promotion place from C1 to the 3rd tier each season, it jsut hasn't been given any publicity because SL is the main focus.

The proposal is that C1 as we know it will disappear and 2 new clubs (Coventry and ???) will be added to give 16 clubs in the 4th tier. The suggestion is that these will play in 2 conference-style leagues of 8 clubs each and the winners of each conference will play off for the promotion place.

The more I look at this, the more I dislike it. There are lots of detailed objections, but to kep it short, I'd go with two :

1) It's far, far too complex. Any system which can't be understood very quickly by the uninformed is losing the whole philosophy of sport.

2) There is an unmistakable sense here of the tail wagging the dog. These proposals seem to have, at their centre, the desire to find a way of giving a handful of Championship clubs a chance to access more of the money generated by the bigger clubs. That's a bloody stupid motivation.

A simple question

What has the RFL actually done to make licencing work for all concerned? , be it SL or the Championships?

I do understand the same question should be asked of the clubs