I personally think the game is just a lot more defensive now and the fear of failure stops creative players from chancing their arm as much.
I watch nrl as much as sl and tho the standard is better, their game is first and foremost about defence and some games are little more then 5 drives and a kick and not great to watch. ( tho some are outstanding open rugby matches)
Unfortunately i think maverick half back play is considered too risky by most coaches in favour of safe get up field power house style rugby.
Dont know if the standard has got as low as some think .
Defo dont buy into the too many games excuse. The better nrl players at good sides prob play almost as many as ours if you include play offs and soo ( and most back up with club games a few days later)

As SmokeyTA says, Super League was reduced from 14 to 12 teams but the number of professional clubs wasn't reduced. The new structure has also allowed Championship clubs to be more ambitious. Leigh have certainly signed up a number of players who could have added depth to Super League. With players continuing to leave for the NRL and clubs promoting from the under 19's we've seen the talent spread out across Super League and in the Championship.

We seem to be getting the 'more competitive' league from the point of view that two previously top teams (Leeds and Huddersfield) are in the qualifying 8's while Hull are fighting for top spot while Catalans probably would have been too had it not been for injuries. Castleford also could have been up there with better luck on the injury front.

It could be argued that some bigger clubs are stockpiling talent and depriving other Super League clubs from creating enough depth in their squad, although they'd no doubt argue that if they bring so many players through the academy they're entitled to keep who they want. Wigan have 37 professional players under contract next season, and that's assuming Matty Smith goes to Saints. Not sure what the numbers are for other clubs but that seems quite a large squad.

because we havent gone from 14 to 12. London and Bradford stayed full time, leigh joined them. So we went from 14 to 15 and a few who were playing at it.

But that full time element is by no means certain for the future is it ?
Bradford may go part time and London, who knows.

Either way, the top flight is 2 clubs light (4 if you compare back to the old first division), which necessarily shrinks both the talent pool and the opportunity for young players who may want a career in RL.

My poit was that far from increasing intensity in the top flight, the new structure has diminished it, unless you count the games in the Qualifiers ??

And im agreeing with you. Im saying that shrinking the top flight from 14 to 12 should have seen the best players of the two worst clubs distributed amongst the others. Concentrating the talent. It didnt because those two stayed full time, leigh joined them and others could offer more to more players. We have expanded the number of clubs taking from the player pool and not increased the player pool.

Premiership rugby union make an announcement that they are actually going to freeze their salary cap for a couple of years, at £7m. Would be amazed to see us unfreeze ours.

They bring in the sponsorship and tv money by allowing the big teams to spend money and attract the stars. The smaller teams (Sale being one of those) have managed to attract big new sponsors and owners due to being in that league.

Polar opposite of Rugby League where we constrain our clubs (and by god don't the clubs want it. Wouldnt you rather pay your employees less if you ran a business?!?!?!?!) and drag the whole competition level into the gutter. Many of the casual viewers I knew have stopped going to games and watching on tv. What hope to we have of attracting sponsors if these sorts of fans walk away.