Being a "yo-yo" club isn't necessarily a bad thing if you use the funding available intelligently. Promotion to SL means a lot more central funding than being in the Championship. Use it wisely, together with the income from bigger gates and sponsorship, but accept that you're likely to be bottom of the pile come the end of the season. You're now in a good position to boss the Championship and gain promotion again. Next time out you have some money in the bank to start with, and fans/players are getting used to you being a SL team / top Championship team. Repeat several times, carefully building your bank balance until you can compete successfully in SL.



Simplistic and probably naive I know, but it sounds good to me!

From memory I think it was the clubs who were being promoted that put forward the idea that they should be given a couple of seasons to consolidate with no danger of relegation.

Okay for them but not for the others that were left with no chance of progress.

To me one up one down is better than a closed shop but if a team like Leigh or HKR are so far ahead of the pack with several games to go there will be a lot of meaningless games as everyone else will have little to play for unless a tiered funding system is retained.

Whether it is one up and one down or an eights format the clubs who have a financial backer are the ones likely to go up and have a chance of staying up.

After that it's how you give the rest of the comp some meaning to attract fans and backers.

I would rather keep this system



Halifax v hull kr 8k ish attendance

Halifax v wire 8300 attendance



look at some the super 8s who are pulling in 2-5 k per game



This creates more interest and I would love to see the sky viewing figures.



The only thin what as annoyed me is no championship v championship on sky but we know what sky think of the championship

At the end of the day there is no perfect solution to this, possibly top up / bottom down and then 2nd bottom and 2-4 in a play-off system, it would be tough to get two teams up but the opportunity is there and Sky still get a bit of play-off action at the bottom of the table. Increase SL to 14 again and the number of games is potentially reduced or as near as it is now as they will still no doubt want the Magic weekend but at least you don't have 7 or possibly 8 games tagged on to the end of the season.

The current system works well in the middle but is pretty much dire at the other ends due to the team's keeping their points, how to get round that, whomthe hell knows?

You have to give clubs something they can aspire to or you just get mediocrity and stagnation. It may be twitchy bum time for SL clubs but for Championship clubs it's a big opportunity.



Under the pre SL system you got relegation but it was usually decided before the last game of the season so effectively clubs could plan for it. With "making every game count" there's less time for either side in the MPG to adjust to life in a new division.



As Norman says there's no perfect solution. You have to have some movement up and down.

[part quote="Bullseye"

As Norman says there's no perfect solution. You have to have some movement up and down.



Norms right because among other things there is a conflict of interest.



Part of the solution for Championship clubs would include some movement up and down.



Part of the solution for SL clubs would include no movement up or down.

Yep, turkeys voting for Christmas.

I think the if the RFL gave more money to Championship clubs from central funding the lower league clubs would be able to afford better players, training and maybe more clubs going full time. Raising the standard of the league and closing the gap between the upper and lower competitions. The more full time clubs we have in the Championship the better standard of rugby, more interest from new and old fans, larger crowds and more revenue generated by the clubs themselves. But the RFL don't really give a sh*te about the lower leagues which is a shame.

The RFL are indifferent to Championship Clubs as we know its Super Greed & Sky that determine how things are run.

Especially certain Club Chairmen who don't want their cosy little cartels and status quo disturbed

There are only so many "better players" around, although more funding for Championship teams could potentially mean more reserve squads being formed, which should increase the overall size of the player pool. Having more full time teams in the Championship would certainly increase skill levels, but if every team was full time, then some pretty decent players (the ones who want to keep their other job) would need to go and play in Championship 1, thus decreasing the number of available players again.



It's not a straightforward equation.

This weeks press states any changes will be decided in 2018 and come into force in 2019.



If a new form of licensing is introduced it will be interesting to see what the criteria will be and how the RFL maneuver things.



If it is tick boxes A,B,C and D and using things as they stand now and all the existing 12 SL clubs do, and in addition HKR, Toulouse, Toronto, London do, then what, 16 teams in SL and if not why not if they tick the box.



I suspect it will be rigged and the RFL will make the boxes fit their chosen clubs as opposed to making the clubs tick the boxes in an open fair fashion and then the door will be shut again.

Where are the extra 100 or so $uperleague standard players going to come from ?