Thats not how anything works though. There is no guarantee that any club will get accepted into the SL if the clubs already there are in a better position. ATEOTD, apart from Crusaders, it has been spot on so far and I think the RFL have learnt from that. You can't just say, yes, you can come in if you do this, because what if the teams already there have done more? Why should they get kicked out when they deserve to be in? At the moment I think you have the 14 teams that best deserve to be there. In 18 months time, if Cas or Wakey haven't even started getting new stadiums, I'd like to see 2 new teams in and that will happen. Fax and another IMO. If Cas and Wakey do get it sorted though, then it'll take a good bid from below as new facilities added onto 2 teams going for Youth, playing well and averaging 8-10k will be hard to knock down, and rightly so.

Exactly what I was saying. To offer a guarantee (which makes investment much more secure) you have to accept that a situation may arise when a team meets the criteria, but likewise, no incumbant fails. Therefore the number of SL teams goes up by one. No catastrophe. If this happens a few times (it probably won't of course) the criteria will naturally rise and the things that all clubs have to do over the upcoming seasons as a club to stay in will go up too. Good. It mean standards are rising.



I know perfectly well that its not, as you say "how things work" today. So let's make things work better for potential investors.



The problem now is that, if you were thinking of investing in a championship side you face not only the normal competitive risk you would face with P&R ( i.e. not acheiving the finishing position you hoped for), but the additional risk [icompletely outside your control[/i that some existing clubs in SL will meet certain criteria that makes your bid fail.

A championship club cant compete with a SL club without being given the chance to prove they can do better with the money recieved from Sky and what increased attendances would do. I only use fax as a example as its my team but they are staying independant, Making profit, Have a stadium already fit for super league and competing regulary in finals and winning, top 3 most seasons. Yet without the chance to prove they can make the step up and given the 3 years to show it whats the point, I'm not going to go over ground that has been beaten to death over the last few years but chances must be given to stop the leagues going stale, playing the same teams week in week out, year in year out becomes boring, no matter what sport it is IMO.



Please for the love of god let smokey stay away from this thread !!!!.

If there is a club outside SL, ready for SL. They would be in there. Why wouldn’t they? Why wouldn’t the other SL clubs want them in?

PM Starbug, he might give you the echo chamber you are looking for.

Naturally, I'd hope that were the case. But, imagine trying to put a deal together with financiers to buy and fund a championship side with a view, say, to spend 3 years getting the club into SL. The phrase "Why wouldn't they?" wouldn't be strong enough for most financiers - anything can happen - including existing clubs deciding they've got enough teams. More significantly, you say "ready for SL". But, it could take 3 years or more of investment to get ready, during which time the definition of "ready for SL" might change. Its a different matter though if you can say to investors: "if we deliver on the following plan, we have guaranteed entry".



I'm not saying issuing such guarantees is pain-free or a trivial decision, but seems to me like a step that would add that little extra encouragement to Fev's richest man (or whatever) to go mad and put his dosh on the line.



I accept that a guarantee made 3 years out gives up a bit of flexibility - ideally we might WANT to be able to change (upwards) the definition of "ready for SL" during the 3 years. But the tradeoff is that it makes it harder (much harder in IMO) to make an ambitious investment in a non-SL club. I'd take the minor downside of slightly reduced flexibility in order to make a statement that says to potential backers of non-SL clubs: "Here is your route to SL status. This is what you have to do, and we promise not to move the goalposts for 3 years or to reject you because someone else happens to have done even better"



If what you say - "They would be in there" is true, then offering a guarantee shouldn't be a big deal in any case.

Crusaders got a guarantee

I can’t agree. I thnk it makes it massively more attractive to invest in, and sustain a club which has the growth potential to be at the very top of SL. Under P+R it was virtually impossible, its one of the reasons that we have had such a poor history of introducing new clubs. Now an ‘investor’ can look at an area, put in place the infrastructure to build, and plan and budget and aim towards a promotion and growth from that jump in a fairly clear and manageable fashion. This would be a club which would add to SL



What it has made less likely is that a moderately rich local guy done good will go in to a small club, throw cash at them to get them up, have none of the necessary infrastructure in place and no further plans or sustainability to do anything other than have a season in the sun. This wouldn’t be a club adding anything to SL.



I think if a Gary Hetherington or an Ian Lenegan takeover for instance Sheffield, set out their plans and vision for a sustainable project there, SL club chairmen would be bending over backwards to welcome them and help them achieve it.

Here we go again this old chestnut how many times a year does this crop up sick of it let the powers in charge do it and mess it up not us the fans thank you

Then the criteria were wrong ( or not properly imposed )

Forget about promotion and relegation, super league should go down to 12 teams.

Just to clarify, I'm not arguing for P&R, just the ability to know for certain, say 3 years out, that your effort will be worth it should your club meet a predetermined absolute ( as opposed to relative to other clubs at that three year point ) standard.