Hi I've just been reading the posts re play offs I was wondering what you think of this one
Winning should get a reward so
The play offs are for the top 5 teams
For winning top spot the reward is an automatic grand final spot
Week 1. 2nd v 5th
3rd v. 4th
Highest graded winning team at home to winners of second game winner progresses to GF
It's very simple AND makes you play hard to the end as the carrot for top spot is huge.... Thoughts peoples. ?

Automatic final place for finnishing forth with a 24 point start

Exactly has it should be, but our leaders at Sky are the ones who dictate what happens and the RLFC are powerless to stop it.

They should only be top 6/top 5 but I'm not sure auto GF isn't right to me. Make bigger financial award or a play in a second WCC match for the LLS winner, but don't put them straight in the GF. Its possibly a disadvantage as you could finish the season against weaker teams and have no hard games to prepare you for the GF against a battle hardened team. The top 6 system we had for most of SL years is my preferred option.

There's nothing wrong with the original top 5 system. To win from 5th you would have to beat all of the top 4 away (excluding the final), if you achieved this you would deserve it. System also guarantees one of the top 2 in the final.

YEP , original top 5 system, higher prize money for finishing top (if this means less for those 2-14 then tough)

While I agree it was a good system as no matter where you finished you had to beat every team that finished above you at least once to win the title, the top 5 system didn't guarantee one of the top two would make the GF, it just happened that at least one always did under that system. The schedule was

Week 1
1st has week off
A - 2nd v 3rd (winner plays 1st in week 2, loser plays winner of match B in week 2)
B - 4th v 5th (loser is out)

Week 2
C - 1st v Winner of A (winner to GF, loser plays winner of D in week 3)
D - Loser from A v Winner of B (loser is out)

Week 3
Loser of C v Winner of D (winner to GF)

It never happened but a scenario of

Week 1
3rd beats 2nd (3rd to play 1st for GF place)
5th beats 4th (4th out)

Week 2
3rd beats 1st (3rd to GF)
5th beats 2nd (2nd out)

Week 3
5th beats 1st (5th to GF)

gives you a 3rd v 5th GF as we had 2 years ago (3rd v 4th could happen in the same way). The top two would both need to lose both times they played but they could both miss out under the top 5 system. The top 6 did guarantee one of the top two made the GF as they always met to determine the first GF place.

Said for years top 5 was the only play off system that had any credibility for the exact reasons stated!

If we go for the leagues of 8 though 5 will be too much.

Personally if its leagues of 8 then for me those games should be the play off 'series' if you like, to determine your top two for Old Trafford IMO, so no further play off should be needed.

If we have to have a play off system then I would go with a top 4, both now, and when/if the league adopts the division of 8 scenario.

My play off series would be.

1st v 2nd Qualifying Semi - Winners through to Grand Final
3rd v 4th Elimination Semi - Losers out, Winners through to play losers of qualifyer

Losers of Qualifyer v Winners of Eliminator Final Eliminator - Winners through to Grand Final.

For me there was always something great about that final eliminator match and this rewards top two with a second bite as should be the case

This is the system we should have had all along with 14 teams. Gives a genuine advantage for every place higher that you finish, something that definitely cannot be said for the current system. When the reduction to 12 happens, then I can't see a better system than the top 4 that another poster has put on one of the other topics.

Maybe I'm old fashioned but 1st should be champions and that's the end of it! Premiership play off competition following the league was fine by me. I know we'll never get back to that but if we did, bet ur life the coaches would be picking the strongest team possible every week and bring some intensity back!

2 weeks off is too long IMO. If we go with just 2x12 I'd go for the old top 5 system, if we do the 3x8 split I'd go for top 4 as follows:

Week 1 - Qualifiers
A - 1st v 2nd
B - 3rd v 4th

Week 2 - Final Eliminator
C - Loser A v Winner B

Week 3 - Final
D - Winner A v Winner C

Slightly OT, but as well as thinking an 8 team play off is too many for a 14 team league, I don't even like the way we go about it. I'd prefer:

Week 1 - Preliminary Eliminators
A - 1 v 8
B - 2 v 7
C - 3 v 6
D - 4 v 5

Losers out. Winners are then ranked 1-4 based on their league position, then same as the system above

The leagues of 8 would mean a top 4 playoff. That has already been decided. It's just the format of the top 4 that hasn't been decided.