My [uGUESSES[/u and opinions. A bit more laissez faire, stressing mobility (dreams, hope, excitement, hurrah) over security (stagnation, predictability, boo).

Must have missed the years where the clubs at the bottom and facing possible relegation were drawing fantastic crowds?

No i don't, that's why they need more money, so that they are competing, currently it won't work but if say clubs like Leigh and Halifax competed with a good share of money then it could.
At the moment they'd get their backsides handed to them.

Truly horrible idea. Some smart has been reading internet forums and seen us complain of meaningless games, and decided that squeezing 2 competitions into 1 season would solve everything. That's all it is.

No. Too messy, too much arsing around, and for half the season 16 sides will be condemned to playing either the mediocre or the poorest teams left, with no chance of playing the 'big' sides until next season. How is that going to improve anything - playing standards, crowds, etc? Another manufactured faux competition. No thanks.

Plus, how can you sell a season sponsorship or advertising? "We can guarantee 11 games in the main competition, but after that we're not sure on TV or press exposure or attendances, and then next season we could be in either division of 12." The 2nd and 3rd tiers would see the least exposure while the top 8 get all the limelight. Sponsors don't want to hear that sort of uncertainty - they want guaranteed numbers and their brand on TV and in the press.

Part of the reason for getting rid of relegation was tied into decreasing the number of overseas players - to remove clubs relying on over-the-hill Aussies to help them avoid the drop and encourage them to test their own kids in SL. That has been increasingly successful and we're seeing some cracking kids come through. As long as we keep a strict cap on the number of overseas players, that issue is solved. Relegation can be brought back.

The Salford-Cas game, as entertaining as it was, meant nothing. With relegation hanging over their heads suddenly it's a huge game.

Keep 14 at the top, introduce 1 team relegation and trim the play-offs back to top 6.

1) It's actually not that uncommon here. Obviously I went through the Wigan experience which may skew how I see things, but also in other sports relegation provides a strong incentive for fans to support teams.

2) There's a difference between only battling maybe one or two other awful teams whilst being ripped to shreds by teams so much better, and fighting a relegation battle with 4 teams after p.romotion and 3 others looking to avoid it.

With the money for 24 teams
This system > PR > Licensing
Without the money
Licensing > Anything else

The bottom 4 clubs in SL would still be spending 1.2-1.5mill on players, pray do tell where the money will come from to give that sort of funding to second tier clubs?

Mate i'm with you, until the money starts to come in a league restructure won't be any benefit, the same clubs will compete for trophies the same clubs will yo yo between leagues and the same clubs will get a battering.

No major company wants to touch RL in this country and until that changes we only really have sky and i can't see them wanting to fund every semi pro club in existence.

Call me a cynic but, this is probably a plan to get all the clubs to agree the principal of 2 leagues x 12, based on additional funding and then at some point, Big Nige will tell us that funding wasn't available, so we have to go with a 12 team SL

Weirdly, compared to what is being proposed. That is the preferable option.

Good idea? bad idea? who knows? what I want to know is who put this in the public domain. I understand that the proposals were put to a meeting of SL clubs (IN CONFIDENCE) to look at various ways to improve the game at all levels. Instead some one has run to the press shooting their big mouths off & we are left with only a vauge idea of what was actualy disscussed & what they (SL clubs) actualy think about it. No wonder the RFL are always copping flack every time they try to open discussions to advance the game some idiot shoots their mouth off & creates a lot of unwanted fuss before anthing has been decided. If these ideas were disscused in private & rejected as daft then no harm done, but now every detractor of the game can have a field day with it. It is no way to run a sport.

Exactly. It's easy to talk down an idea. Not many are coming up with solutions though. There's a reason why not everyone gets to be in the decision making process.

Personally think the idea has plenty of merit, the crucial factor which no one knows is how tv money would be distributed. For it to work the bigger stronger clubs would have to take less.

Not sure if a simple solution might be better e.g. with 2 leagues of 10, one up one down and top five play offs on the old Aussie system (by far the best system for a progressive reward on where you finish in the table). For this to work again the crucial factor is more even distribution of monies, with salary caps in the 2nd tier at least half of the top tier.

What is undoubtedly needed is a bridge between lower super league and the rest of the game. Not just in terms of promotion/relegation but also finance and salary cap. It may well be that these leaked ideas are a useful starting point for addressing that.