To apply a modicum of spin to the matter, this is how it looks to me: if, say, Coventry win promotion to the Premiership next season, they could cost England their World Cup.
Should Coventry's drive, ambition and capital outlay take them to the uppermost echelon of the club game, if they present a fine side and a gleaming new stadium as their credentials, and they are accepted, they could be doing rugby a dire disservice. Does that make any sense at all? Of course not.
The notion is a corruption of all that rugby - sport - stands for. Yet it is being used as an argument against the democratic advance of clubs like Coventry.
Unless promotion and relegation, into and out of the Premiership, is ceased forthwith, the 12 top clubs, the Dirty Dozen, The Bretheren, call them what you like, in order to sustain their hierarchical supremacy, will be forced to employ more foreign players than are good for the international team. Coventry intrude themselves into that scenario at rugby's peril.
Actually, Dirty Dozen is as misnomer. Northampton have distanced themselves from the plot, to the enormous credit of their owner, Keith Barwell, despite the fact that the Saints are strong favourites to go down.
Worcester, having themselves suffered from the Exclusivity Clause, would surprise a lot of their friends if they were not like-minded. But most of the rest of the Premiership sides, who got to be where they are by accident, believe that they have a right to eternal privilege.
They have invested heavily in players and ground improvements and it is just that they enjoy the fruits of those investments. For ever.
Furthermore, they are entirely responsible for the development of the players who have taken England (perhaps the past tense is now more appropriate) to the top of the world.
This is what Dave Thompson, Newcastle's owner, was quoted as saying last week: "If the RFU want a strong England team then they should scrap promotion and relegation. This would take away the fear for clubs and allow them to develop more English-qualified players in our teams. The RFU can't have their cake and eat it."
I think the Rugby Football Union are properly thankful to Newcastle for encouraging the emergence of a fly-half called Wilkinson and a centre called Noon but not for much else.
And as for the fear factor, there will be a few rugby folk, especially in Bristol, Exeter and Plymouth, who would take the view that a side who leaked 83 points, as Newcastle did at Leicester at the weekend, deserve to feel a pang or two of apprehension.
Which brings us to the Great Bribe Mystery. The Premiership clubs are said to be taking the hat around, hoping to fill it with £7 million, which will be shared among the 14 First Division clubs in exchange for their acquiescence in the 'No To Relegation' conspiracy.
This offer is not formally on the table and such is the repugnance felt by many that I suspect the cunning floatation of the plot will soon be forgotten but the word did get around and somebody did a count of those clubs who might be interested.
And remember this: there are those who are said to be keen on ring-fencing the First Division. Half a million pounds is a juicy inducement and, so the unofficial count reveals, as many as ten Division One clubs would be interested.
Make that nine, at most. Coventry would not touch the money, nor would Pertemps Bees. A two-thirds majority of First Division clubs would be needed to carry this pathetic plan, plus RFU agreement, and I'm pretty sure that it would not be forthcoming.
Geoff Cooke, the Division's chief executive, is on record as saying this: "We have an unshakeable belief in a pathway to Premiership rugby for ambitious clubs." And the noblest words of all come from Barwell: "We ( Northampton) could take relegation on the chin. But . . . we're here to fight our way out of trouble."
Those are reassuring sentiments but there is another insidious scheme creeping up on the rails. The play-off system. This could well prevail because rugby has become good at compromises and a compromise of the most craven kind is what the play-off system is. It means that if you are relegated/promoted you may not go down/up.
Having proved, conclusively-that you are the best club in the First Division, which is all that league rugby should be asking you to do, you then have to play - twice - a club from the division above who, because they have much more money, have far greater resources.
That one stinks. It's neither fair nor moral and if it comes to pass it will be further proof of the gutless guardianship that rugby has suffered from in the last two decades. So my award for the best speech of last week goes to Barwell, who said of the Premiership relegation battle: "Exciting stuff, which is the essence of sport."
Is it my imagination or is the word "sport" applied to rugby football a shade less frequently than it used to be?