1 bad season. We finished 2nd the 2 years before as well as making the CCF in 94 and 95 and 5th the year after. We were not consistently poor over a 4 year period like salford, london, wakey, cas and bradford have been.

Hmm interesting debate

Care to venture an opinion?

So what? Wakefield were one of the best (if not the best) sides in the 60's, Widnes used to be the best side in the country.



What you're basically saying is that these teams have had their chance already we should just relegate them.



For all we know in 2023 Salford will be the side to beat, Widnes might be about to play their Word Club Challenge match against South Sydney. Who are you to say that these 'no-hoper' clubs will never be successful again?

So what your saying is because a team was successful 50years ago they deserve a place in SL. Most people want to bring back P+R but your argument seems to be we were successful 50years ago dont relegate us now we might be good in 10yrs time.

Where did I say that?



I said that those teams were successful back then, but never said that they should have a SL place because of this. Stop misconstruing things.



What I do imply from my previous comment is that it just goes to show that teams other than Saints, Wigan, Wire and Leeds have and will be successful again in the future.



Like I said before, what gives you the right to think that these teams should be written off? Please enlighten me?

Its just my opinion on how to would improve RL in Britain.



Do you agree with promotion and relegation?? I do, I also think that smaller leagues would increase intensity, so the only way to achieve this is to relegate the 4/5 weakest teams in the league! I am not writing them off, if the said teams are good enough they will finish in the top 10, if not they get relegated and if they are the best in that league they get promoted.



The teams at risk of the cull if I had my way would be:



Widnes

Salford

Cas

Wakey

London

Bradford



Bradford offer big crowds and London offer expansion, but what exactly have the others achieved in the SL era? They dont really offer the league much!

A league of 10 doesn't work, that's 9 home matches a season, or 8 if we still have the Magic weekend for some, which means less money, shorter seasons, less Sky matches.

It's not about what they haven't achieved but what they WILL achieve, I for one hope to see Wakefield win silverware in the next ten years, and in my eyes there is no reason to think otherwise, and I'm sure the other clubs are the same.



You are being too short sighted, Manchester City were probably written off 10 years ago, look at them now, equally Leeds United not so long ago were competing for the Champions League, look at them now. Success comes and goes, and there is no reason for it to be any different for Super League. You can't just write teams off so flippantly and on the basis of such a short period of time where a number of factors affect the performance of clubs.

It's got it's positives and negatives.



I'm not decided either way at the minute but can't see it happening any time soon.

I have been banging on about an alternative for years.



The consensus seems to be that everyone agrees promotion, eventually to SL, is a "good thing" and a great incentive; but relegation is a "bad thing" because the gulf between SL and the rest is just so massive.



(Incidentally, they fail to understand that the size of the rapidly increasing gulf is great evidence of what progress in standards SL has achieved - but that's another story).



Most people agree that playoffs are an essential. Some don't like them, but even they wouldn't disagree that the playoffs are the most popular part of the comp - albeit the effect is diluted, the more teams you invite to join the playoffs. this much is obvious; during the regular and post season, the games which will always attract the biggest crowds are invariably the most competitive ones, leaving grudge derbies aside, and that's why the GF can attract a huge gate to somewhere as big as Old Trafford.



So, where is there a highly successful league, with lots of teams, and no promotion or relegation at all? One place is the NFL. They have (currently) 32 teams. And ALL can say they play in the big league. Because they do.



Why not devise a conference style system based around that general framework?



1. Nobody gets relegated.



2. Promotion is easy - if a team is good enough and ticks the boxes, just stick it into one of the divisions.



3. As there are only a few teams in each division, (4 per division in the NFL currently) all except the biggest duffers in any given year are in with a chance of making the end of season party for most of the season. The winner of each division is in, and then there are wild cards - but the beauty is that the wild card is often not decided till the last week as it is based on overall winning percentages.



4. The NFL has 31 teams currently, and the schedule for fairly distributing the 16 regular season games each plays is bloody ingeniousicon_sad.gif[urlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Football_League_regular_season#Current_formula[/url)



5. The playoffs thus involve 8 teams (the winners of the divisions) plus 4 wild card "runners up", i.e 12 teams in all. Or put another way, nearly 40% of the teams qualify for the playiffs, which must mean a significantly higher percentage have a genuine chance of making the playoffs right till the end of the regular season, maintaining interest.



If you were to introduce something similar over here, you would start with SL plus Championship 1 teams. However, in such a system, you could easily accommodate expansion teams, by adding the occasional one to a division.



This to me is a sensible approach to expansion. Whilst a SL of just the top 10 or even 8 teams may be attractive to Peacock, I can't see it being remotely attractive to the fans, or to broadcasters, and it dooms expansion realistically forever, as such a level of league would have to be essentially a closed shop. Whereas in a closed shop conference system, the main SL wannabees would already be in, as you have got to the same result, but by ADDING a lot of teams to your league, rather than taking any away

Had u read my original post i said that team would play each other 3 times to make up the number of games!! Obviously you didnt!! Your right things can change quickly, but you cannot use the argument that u might be good in a few years as an excuse to stay in SL. 13 years ago Man City were in League1 because they wernt good enough for the premiership. The same principle should apply to SL.



If the teams are good enough they will finish in the top 10 or get promoted at the first chance. Halifax were good many years ago but thats not an argument for them to be in SL now is it???



Please answer me this: Do you believe in promotion and relegation or do you think the Franchise system is better?

Peacock needs managing by the RFL. He hasnt got the brains or looks to be the voice of rugby League. If they want a players voice use Hall at Leeds. Articulate with decent looks.



Football have used Beckham very well. Its very rare he offers an outspoken or controversial opinion as that isnt what he is there for.



Peacock on the other hand is an ugly, gruff, thick northerner who has no place to offer an opinion. The game is trying to get away from being seen as a thick northerners game and he isnt helping