And what is the legacy of these 'great' wins.
Decrepit stadia or even no stadium at all.
Crowds that amateurs can better.
HIstory tells you that some of the clubs you rhyme off as potential SL clubs will never, ever attract enough people to be able to hack it at what is NOW the top level, not what the top level was 50 years ago.
And maybe no avenue to the top is partly responsible for such a state of affairs.
But you miss the point. The point I was making is that 50 or more years ago these clubs were the top dogs but things changed. A cast in stone, unchanging SL will have teams in it that are on their way down to the levels of the Swinton's and Workington's but ring fencing will keep them slowly fading in the top tier and prevent any newly vibrant clubs from replacing them. Why on earth should the Broncos be kept in SL at the expense of Fax or Fev or Toulouse ?
Look at Huddersfield pre Davy, rotting stadium, crowds in the hundreds and in what is now CC1. If Davy was just taking charge of a Huddersfield in that state now, we would never see them in SL and maybe looking at a double and providing England with numerous international players,
Look at Hull KR, same thing. Crowds in the low 1000's, decrepit stadium. In CC1. Now they are in SL, crowds in the 7,000 range, totally revamped stadium. yes they are losing money like most of the rest of SL but look how far they have progressed. If the SL was ring fenced they would not have been there.
These new proposals will give lower level teams who are making serious progress a chance of making the top tier and replacing failing clubs who are already there. This, in my opinion, is a good thing.
The creation of a larger number of stable teams and an avenue for them to progress and replace stagnant, moribund teams from the top division is a good thing.
Don't give me the "Promotion has never worked guff either ". For Huddersfield, Wakefield, Hull KR, Salford and Castleford, it has worked just fine. Even Wigan maybe.