No it doesnt.

Having been shown up(again!) is this the point you start pretending you were trolling?

No it's a serious question , I'm not pretending anything ?

Quins are RL expansion , Catalans SL expansion , simple really , that's probably why you didn't get it , if it isn't complicated and confusing , you don't understand it

I would have thought Catalans were obviously one of the 6 clubs who were suceeding. It seems I didnt dumb it down enough again for you. It's my fault really, I constantly give you too much credit. Maybe it isnt all an act. Maybe you are this stupid.

Maybe I am , but it is confusing , are Bradford and Huddersfield in that group as well ?

So why dont we have more teams at SL level then? why not 20? 40? Why limit the amount of training facilities and talent at the highest level at all and just have every team playing at SL level? You havent made any argument showing why 14 is better than 12 but not worse than 16/20/100

So out of 14 we have two clubs who are whipping boys, one of them a team who has been at the elite level for 14 years but this shows 14 is the right amount? How many whipping boys does there need to be for there to be too many? 3? 6?

But again, this doesnt address the reason why 14 is the optimum number? and your argument works both ways. Yes it is a good thing that players are exposed to a higher level because it makes them better, but conversely the top players are being exposed to players below their level which lowers their intensity and makes them worse players. Kallum Watkins hasnt improved by being part of a team which has just won 56-0, Joe Arundel wont improve by playing against teams so clearly superior and losing 56-0. Both will have improved by playing in a close, tight, intense game which finished 8-10 between two fairly evenly matched teams. But Castleford couldnt repeat that performance because they havent got the depth to compete in two games like that back-to-back. The lose a few players and what they bring in simply isnt good enough. And they cant get the depth they need to compete because we 12 clubs all fighting for the same players from the same areas.

Whereas if we were to bring the number of clubs down to 10 or 12, then the club which survived in the WMDC would have more youngsters to pick from, be able to pick more of the highest quality, put out a team which could compete week in week out rather than every so often. This would result in more games, of a higher intensity exposing the best players to a high quality game making them better players and improving the quality of the league.

Nope.

Just to stop the barrage of innane questions which has become your forte, the 6 elite sides are
Leeds, Wigan, Warrington, St Helens, Hull, and Les Catalans, clubs who have the stability on and off the field and are operating at an elite level in both areas.

Bradford, Hudds, and HKR are just about making it

Quins would obviously be the expansion side, Salford the one hoping their new stadium will be the catalyst for growth.

You see it all becomes clearer when everything is out in the open , overall you have it about right there

Where is your argument that 10 or 12 is better than 8 or 6?

I've already said we have 9 clubs at an 'acceptable level'. Going 8 or 6 would cut out 1 or 3 clubs who are already contributing to SL.

Salford? What about Wakey and Cas who both have new stadiums on the horizon, have contributed far more to SL over the course of it's tenure, get bigger crowds and have far superior academy and youth set-ups? Widnes have already got the infrastructure and finances to compete and Wakefield's owner has announced that we can spend up to the full cap if required next season.

It'd be foolish to get rid of 4 clubs who are progressing well and could easily achieve at least a B rating in the non too distant future.

Surely its better to have 14 healthy, thriving clubs than just 10? More people attending matches, more sponsorship and community programmes around the extra clubs etc.

Have you ever tried to walk , drive , swim or even fly to the horizon ?

Wakey and Cas dont have new stadiums on the horizon. When they start building, then they will be in the position Salford are in. before that, they arent.

Those 3 (not 4) clubs arent progressing well. We are 15 years into SL and those clubs are still struggling. And we dont have 14 healthy, thriving clubs. If we did then we would be right to have 14 clubs in SL. Wakefield and Castleford arent close to being healthy, or thriving.

Pretty straight forward really:

Remerge Hudds and Sheff and move them back to Sheffield
Wakey to merge with Skolars to form a second SL London team
Hull FC back to Gateshead where they belong
Cas to merge with Doncaster to play at that nice shiny stadium
Salford to rebrand themselves Manchester
Widnes to Merge with Wrexham and we can have another faux Welsh club
Wigan and Warrington super club merger

Would give us a much more national look:

1. Wigan Wolves
2. Manchester Reds
3. Hull KR
4. Leeds Rhinos
5. Gateshead Sharks
6. London Skolars
7. Quinsfulbroncs
8. Western Crusaders
9. Sheffield Giants
10 Doncaster Tigers

Just sit back and watch the corporate and TV pounds role in!

It's a MASTERPLAN!