Luther_Hull
Cunt.
Recently in England we've seen Rugby League's Super League move to an NFL style franchise system where there's no promotion or relegation and teams have to apply to get a place in the league. Apparently this is to insure the good quality of the now European Super League. But does it work? And is it fair? For instance, at the end of the season teams who have no chance of reaching the play-offs have nothing to play for, as they have no relegation to worry about, making for less entertaining games. Same with teams in lower leagues, surely they deserve the chance to qualify for the biggest league.
Another point is that if a team suffers low attendances, in franchise leagues, they just pack up and move to another city, forgetting the fans in the previous city. In England a team is seen as an integral part of their community, which is why the MK Dons move was met with such disapproval.
Having said that, a franchise system in the Premiership would probably limit the number of clubs in London and spread football around the country, or in Super League, which is spreading the sport away from the M62.
So which is the best way of doing things? Clubs forming and earning the right to play in the top leagues? Or franchises applying to be in the top league without so much as playing a game?
Another point is that if a team suffers low attendances, in franchise leagues, they just pack up and move to another city, forgetting the fans in the previous city. In England a team is seen as an integral part of their community, which is why the MK Dons move was met with such disapproval.
Having said that, a franchise system in the Premiership would probably limit the number of clubs in London and spread football around the country, or in Super League, which is spreading the sport away from the M62.
So which is the best way of doing things? Clubs forming and earning the right to play in the top leagues? Or franchises applying to be in the top league without so much as playing a game?
