Most of the clubs would be bankrupt after a couple of seasons.

In my capacity as the resident genius, I have the answer to Mr. Tallis's problems.

Don't change the number of games. Negotiate yourself a new contract which says that you will only have to play in a maximum of 15 of your club's games. They choose which ones.

It's like "part time" in the real world.

Better attended games - Better viewing figures - Increased media interest - Bigger sponsorship deals - Bigger season ticket sales - Fewer injuries - Better TV deals

how do you figure all of them out...
Better attended games - less game does not mean more people (although it does mean more people likely to work their schedule around them)
Better viewing figures - why ?
Increased media interest - indeed, less games would really get the media interested
Bigger sponsorship deals - more money for less games, lol
Bigger season ticket sales - highly unlikely, if i miss one or two games with my current ticket then i don't mind. however half the games, them two games then become a big percentage. so more likely to pay on the day
Better TV deals - again, more money for less games, lol

How is it less? They'll be more internationals which after a little while will generate more media interest meaning bigger TV deals and interest not only in th heartlands but everywhere as they can unite together as a country, not support a team 50+ miles away.

Who will?

I presume when he says stand alone internationals he means during this 15 round season after a certain amount of games, meaning more overall.

who are these internationals going to be against? png, Fiji, tonga, samoa, new zealand? bar the last team need i say more

I presume so which will only make those nations stronger in the future. It can only be a good thing and with rl finally having a proper international set up, the media will acknowledge this sport and RU fans will convert or atleast pay attention.

in the future maybe, currently it would be 50/60 point wins for aus every game. still think more interest, more money....or in fact would it actually do a lot of harm to the game

Bob on. I've been saying it for years. If players are getting burnt out due to too many games, reduce the number of games they can play in a season. You don't have to reduce the games (and lose money from it in the process).

Go check out the NFL business model. Eight home games a season per club.

But they're getting paid Billions

Southern Hemishere Tri Nations involving Kangaroos, Kiwis, combined PI team (every second year, as PI team would break up for RLWC qualifiers year and RLWC year). Then home and away tours against European nations (e.g. England, Wales and France). The non-test NRL players could play in a NRC style competition. Each club could still get 12 home games, but test players would only play in the 8 NRL home games.

The RFL could reduce the load on Europe's test players in the same way - reduce the SL to 20 rounds, yet let the clubs enter the NRC (minus test players) to make up the 6 rounds. SL clubs would still get 13 home games, but England could get a 10 test program.

the solution is for the nrl to stop for 3 weeks for origin.

origin would then be held for 3 straight weeks with all attention on that.

the rest of the nrl would get a break and the rep. players will have a lower workload by not having to back up for club games.

i think the nrl should be 22 rounds.

we need to have an annual 3 match test series with NZ.

one off tests dont work well for nz, they need a game or so to get warmed up unlike australia.