Some would have a problem with it. Some wouldnt.

Whilst Hunslet may not wish to, a club like York may be more welcoming.

I wouldnt force it on anyone but its a great opportunity. The lower league club can get access to better facilities, SL quality coaches, and quality young players (not to mention the likely increase in youth products who dont make it joining that club full-time) the SL club gets an opportunity to blood young players, and a higher quality league within which to do that,

It is not an opportunity to a CC club, it is just a benefit to a SL club.

So access to better facilities, better coaching, and better young players doesnt benefit a championship/championship 1 club?

Not just that you'd also benefit the test team. I remain convinced as well that Oldham v Wigan Under 20s for example would attract more fans than Oldham v Gateshead did.

I don't think it would mate as including lower grade teams will just devalue the competition. It's not great as it is but if clubs are told they aren't even worthy of playing against first teams then it will collapse!

They're not worthy of playing against Super League first teams. That's why they're not in Super League.

A couple of weeks ago Quins weren't worthy of playing a SL team , drop them to Championship 1

It is a completely stupid idea , the Dual reg and loan regs are more than capable of helping to test juniors at SL clubs if they are used correctly , there is no need for anything else

One of the most sensible things I've seen on here in a long time

Yes they are, since a week or so before they had beaten both Leeds & Saints. Plus they are deemed worthy since they are actually in the same league. The whole reason behind having seperate leagues is exactly that the teams in the lower leagues are deemed "not good enough" to play the teams in the higher leagues. If they were good enough they'd be in that league or there would simply be 1 league encompassing all teams.

And semi pro senior teams are that , and under 20's are that , let them stay where they are

Why can people not see this?

Because SL is such a resounding success , they think they know everything about everything

Last time I checked, Under 20s weren't in an Under 20s league because they were deemed "not good enough" to play their Championship counterparts, hence this discussion. You'd probably find that there are a lot of U20s teams that would beat Championship 1 teams.

I think feeder clubs are a better way, personally. If a Championship club doesn't want to become a feeder club, can't the SL club just create their own "franchise" instead and apply for the CC1?

I think it's important that our young players are exposed to the better quality competition week-in week-out than what they are already getting, and this would likely help.

I didn't say anything about Super League first teams. But the point remains that it would hardly reflect well on the existing C1 clubs that their league would effectively stop being an open age competition.

This point being probably the best point being made, which is why I'd prefer feeder clubs over U20s. If clubs choose to play majority U20s players, that's their choice, but it remains an open competition which is the most important thing. Remember, there are some players that are late developers.