So we're going back to a system that didn't work for years? Sure franchising has it's problems but I fail to see how giving clubs less stability in the current financial climate is going to improve matters. A 14 team SL wouldn't be a problem if we had 14 well run and competitive teams. This isn't going to increase playing standard it is merely going to increase the gap between the top of SL and the bottom.

I agree, hopefully getting rid of 2/3 of the poorest clubs will allow them to up the salary cap abit too. If it's affordable to the richest 4/5 then it's alright IMO, let's give clubs more scope to retain their stars. Not only is that better for the fans, it will also make the game more attractive to sponsors, investors and broadcasters

Bottom 3 at the end of next season go down, winner of the Championship GF comes up, no matter who the clubs are.

Surely by reducing to 12 teams the number of playoff places will reduce from 8?

It's already farcical as it is without giving a team that may have just avoided relegation by a point or two the chance to become the Champions.

You could end up with a team avoiding relegation on the final day then going on to become champions!!!

It's going to be 5 or 6, I prefer a 5 team playoff. The harder it is to qualify for, the better it will make the regular season

I hope they bring relegation back, I can't wait to watch the same two or three teams yo yo up and down every year.

Bit like watching the top 3/4 win everything and the bottom 3/4 having nothing to play for, oh except they have now.....

Franchising was supposed to help clubs financially and to bring more young players through. It's done well on the bringing youth players through, however not so financially.

It probably would have worked if The RFL had some balls and threw clubs who went into administration out. If relegation was in place now Koucash would just pay for some journeyman and not bring the best of his youth set up through.

As I was typing the bit above I have BBC breakfast on and the reporter said it MAY bring back relegation . I thought it was already confirmed is this not the case.

I hope they do keep franchising. I just don't think we can currently sustain promotion and relegation.

I agree London need to be ousted however the Sky contract states that we must have a team from london in super league unless it has changed recently so i cant see them getting shut of them, even though it would make sense!

Cas and Wakefield will be odds on to be moved because of their grounds and dyer financial situations.

I think one of the RL journos said no such clause exists re: London & Sky.

Are you sure about that clause?

We won't see the same teams yo-yo up and down each year as they won't last that long. It won't be more than two or three seasons and one or two clubs will have gone broke and into administration.
Thing is when clubs like Widnes, Wakey and Bradford with Salford almost, the three year licence brought in non RL buyers.
With P & R no one is going to buy a club where they can purchase it in January and it drop out of the League in September.
A 12 club SL didn't work previously so they've voted to reintroduce it.
P & R was a disaster for the sport of RL the last time around, so they've voted to reintroduce that too.
The best of all was this new players union bunch! Under a 14 team licencing structure there weren't any redundancies. They voted for P & R which means that each year 25 of their members will be made redundent and their contracts of employment made null and void.
Who the hell voted for all this nonsense?

I was under the impression P+R hadn't yet been confirmed, no?

Complete farce!!!! They need to sort out the playoff structure first. Not revert back to a system that has failed in the past.... P&R isn't the problem and its certainly not the answer.