Huddersfield Swinton up 74/75 down 75/76
Barrow Rochdale Leigh all up 75/76 down 76/77
Dewsbury Bramley Hunslet all up 76/77 all down 77/78
Barrow Rochdale Huddersfield all up 77/78 all down 78/79
Hunslet York Blackpool all up 79/80 all down 80/81
York Fulham Whitehaven all up 80/81 all down 81/82
Carlisle Workington Halifax all up 81/82 all down 82/83
Fulham Wakefield Salford Whitehaven all up 82/83 all down 83/84
Need I go on, this pattern has been repeated over and over again
Take a look carefully at those clubs and think about which teams have had financial troubles over the years.
Its pretty hilarious that you use seasons from the 1970's and early 1980's to highlight your point. Please get your Rothmans back out and examine the promotions and relegations from the season you chose to end your statistical spunkfest. You'll find that some clubs that were promoted went on to find relative success in the top flight, and even if relegated managed to make it back up within a season or two.
Personally, as a fan of a club that has NEVER played in the top flight of our sport, I'd much rather be a yo-yo club than be limited to the second echelon of the game for all eternity. Even if my club did fit most of the franchise criteria (i.e. number of seats, car parking, money in the bank, Academy set-up) the authorities would reject us on one of the more irrelevant boxes to be ticked, such as proximity to other Super League clubs, or even breast size of our cheerleaders.
As for looking at the clubs you have named and linking them with financial troubles, don't make me laugh. Practically every club in the game has encountered some kind of financial difficulty over the last 30 years. Even the mighty Leeds were nearly bankrupt in 1996, and flirted dangerously with relegtion thanks to a distinct lack of finance.
The real crux of the matter is that all those clubs you listed - the fans, the players, the directors etc - DESERVED their shot at the highest level, if only for a season - just as the fans, players and directors of Hunslet and Dewsbury deserved their chance in the big time in 1999 and 2001. Incidentally, Hunslet and Dewsbury were denied promotion BEFORE franchising was introduced, thanks to some ridiculous stipulation about plastic seats and car-parking spaces. Both Hunslet and Dewsbury put money into achieving promotion, and when denied the promotion they had earned went on to encounter financial problems. What a surprise. When you plough money into something to achieve a goal (reward) only to be denied it by some flimsy red tape, there's bound to be some sort of financial backlash when the carrot of success is removed.
Their ambition should have been rewarded with a place in Super League when promotion was achieved. How dare the RFL deny those clubs the chance to maybe realise their potential and have a season of glory in the top flight. Can you imagine the Premier League denying the likes of Blackpool, or Burnley, their rightful place in the top flight because they didn't fit a 'criteria'? There'd be absolute outrage, legal action and possible assassinations.
Rewarding achievement is one of the cornerstones of sport, and Rugby League has removed any reward for achievement by introducing franchising.
As a previous poster mentioned, parachute payments have pretty much ended the possibility of a relegated club encountering severe financial problems. When Leigh were promoted for the 2005 season, all the players they signed were on 1 year contracts, which allowed the club to get them off the books for the 2006 National League season and function as normal. So whats your problem?