Quote DaveO="DaveO"So what you are saying is a SL license becomes available through a club being relegated based on league position? How else would it become available? If so, you are just talking simple P&R again with minimum criteria. We have been there before and it was a rubbish system.
Also what happens if no NL1 club gets a license? Then what you say above is actually not far off what used to happen when clubs having to meet minimum criteria was first introduced. This happened before the franchise system came into being and we had several seasons where no club was relegated (I think Wakey and maybe Hudds as well survived because of this). What that means is your fate as a SL club boils down to if you are lucky enough that the year you finish bottom no team in SL1 meets the criteria for a license.
As I said we had this before and it was an awful way to do things.
You will never get the SL chairman to agree to that. [size=150At the moment there isn't enough money in the game to run SL at its current level as we see clubs go into administration[/size, The only way to reduce the gap between leagues is IMO to cease to be a pro sport and to go back to being semi-pro.
We have had that before where a team not at the bottom got relegated and it was very unpopular to say the least.
Your system is actually unworkable anyway. For example if a team was at the bottom one season, behind the newly promoted side but then finished 3rd bottom, one above the promoted side, with a different side at the bottom at the end of the 2nd season who should go down? The average position of both sides over two seasons is 2nd bottom.
As I have mentioned just about everything you say has happened before and all you are saying is lets have P&R with minimum criteria. It doesn't work because its inconsistent.
With franchising you know exactly where you stand (or would do if the RFL didn't do daft things like guarantee a side will be promoted which defeats the object of any system that is supposed to be based on assessing none playing criteria).'"
An interesting post Dave but for me the issues of licensing and promotion and relegation (and even the SC)are side-shows, the key issue is the lack of growth in club revenue. We don't have a plan for club revenue to keep pace with wage inflation in the general economy over the long term.
It's hard to see any future other than a semi-pro SL in 10 or 20 years time. It may happen even sooner than that if the poor administration, financial monitoring and planning at club level continue.
Neither the franchising system nor the SC as they are currently administered by the RFL are effective tools for ensuring stable growth in club's revenue (they can't even prevent clubs going bust).
I await the usual posts from flat-earthers attempting to deny basic economics.