Why do you want to give the top 6 in the Championship a shot at promotion ?
I'm ok with the top 2 having a play off but, lets just go back to 1 up 1 down or 2 up 2 down.

Rather than scrap "Magic", why not get back to it's original purpose of taking RL to new areas.
I know this isn't as convenient for some that go to the Etihad but, it may just spread the gospel, even if it's just a small amount and moving it around should help the RL "publicity machine"

Reserves and academies have to be a must.

Finally whichever structure is put in place must be future proof and allow for new/improved clubs to have a hot at promotion.

Why don’t Leigh form their own league

They already have, in Canada, trouble is there is only one team in it.

The original purpose of Magic Weekend was to make money. It only came about because the RFL received an incentive from the Welsh Tourism Board to hold it. "Expanding the game" was never a primary purpose of Magic.

And at a time when the game sorely needs more money, scrapping a profitable event that offers some profile seems utterly ridiculous.

Given the current state of the sport, we really need to put more emphasis on the commercial side of the sport and focus clubs on commercial growth, not short-term survival.

Personally, I would go with 12 teams in a franchise model, with a much more robust set of criteria than the previous model. The old franchising model encourgaed the wrong behaviour, and didn't force clubs to focus on the long-term.

Once we have enough clubs that are financially stable, then talk about opening up the trap door once again.

Why 12 teams? Well, two reasons. I think people need to remember why we dropped from 14 to 12 teams in 2015. We reduced the number of teams because we didn't have the talent to create 14 competitive clubs, and the quality of the league fell as a result. Since that time, player participation has fallen and it has become harder for clubs to attract overseas talent. So why would we suddenly decide to spread an even thinner talent pool further? It makes no sense.

Secondly, this is supposed to be Super League, emphasis on the "Super". This isn't and shouldn't be an "everybody gets to have a turn" school fete. It really wouldn't harm this sport to insist that the top league needs to be made up of "the best of the best", not "the best of the best, plus anyone else who think they deserve a go". If we want to drive up standards, it's in our interests to set the bar high.

Because in the era of low-cost airlines, one thing that is really arduous these days is catching a plane.

We seem to be the only professional sport in the world where the supporters think that the players all suffer from aviophobia.

It curiously only seems to affect UK based teams though. Coaches are always moaning on about what a tough week playing annually away at Catalans or Toulouse is, yet somehow noone ever bangs on about how doing it every fortnight in the other direction could be a disadvantage. Obviously acclimatisation must be a factor.

There used to be a Leigh District RL.

I agree with a lot of this, however I do think we have enough quality available for 14 teams. Toronto, Toulouse, Leigh, Fax, Fev and London have all shown over the middle 8's inclusion that they can build teams that can at least challenge. For me I think if we want to increase participation we need more opportunities for players to reach the elite level, having 14 teams means the pathway increases for players in championship to go SL and from league 1 to championship and cycle created. What going to 14 let's say with toulouse and toronto included means you have the opportunity to target player pools rarely seen. With an inclusion of a reserve league the opportunity to increase player participation is already increasing. There are plenty of other ways to improve the skill level including rule changes, intepreatations and coaching as well as teams not playing with busted players as they have nobody to step in.

IMO these two teams are wasted in the championship where 6 of the teams have no realistic chance or aim for SL, we should harness the growth of ambitious clubs and increase our profile and player pool. Short term standard would not neccasarily increase, but I think looking at things in 3 year cycles is pointless and gives us no long term strategy.

I also think funding across the board needs to increase ( i know this is dependant on sky ) but also clubs commercial aspect should be scrutinised. We as a sport are always cost cutting and looking at saving money )( see the lose magic example) we need to accumulate money and then have commercial acumen at club and game level to reinvest. I don't get why we are so bad at it across the game and if theres anything you can say Toronto do well is connecting with an audience.

I agree that we have a cluster of clubs in that "too good for the Championship, not good enough for SL" bracket. I think the M8s have shown that competition is there, but let's not forget that they're competing with the lower end of SL. Competing with the worst in SL shouldn't be the ambition - we ideally need to get back to a situation in SL where we have that "any given Sunday" feeling about it, and I don't think we will get that with 14.

Over the last few years, the average winning margin in SL has increased, and the proportion of games being won by one score or less has decreased (on both measures, the opposite is true in the Aviva Premiership). That is a big problem for me and it doesn't make a for a good spectator sport. You're right in that Toulouse and North America are potential new talent pools but, certainly in the case of Toronto, they are just that for now - potential. We have only just started to sow the seeds, and it will take time before we can harvest.

Until participation levels grow, and until we become less reliant on a handful of clubs to develop the bulk of elite talent, any attempt to increase the number of clubs risks damaging the spectacle, and that's something we can't afford to do in my opinion.

I agree.

However, having suffered through two recent cycles of failed long-termism at Hull KR, I feel compelled to highlight its dangers if a club loses sight of the short-term goals on which long-term success has to be based. No organisation ever became a leader in its field by deciding to be poop for a few years first. Now, in the absence franchising we wouldn’t have had the crisis of relegation, but there are other pressures. an underperforming team will eventually hit the bottom line, become unattractive to potential recruits, and beg questions about what a club really brings to the competition - in about three years (arguably the medium-term) that is likely to become seriously problematic, imo and second hand experience.

Clubs, generally, don’t focus on the short term because they are run by short sighted fools - they do it out of necessity. Franchising might alleviate that a little, but no system can realistically remove it altogether.

What are France's plans for RL, you have to admit that if you want to saturate SL with superstar laden French teams it isnt really saying much for your adopted country in terms of expanding the sport there.

In the words of good old Stevo; “it’s as simple as that”!

And it really is. I don’t know why the RFL make it so difficult.

Well it would be interesting to see the criteria, because based on anything like the previous franchise system I wouldn't think we have 14 acceptable teams

Until the game gets on its feet properly why not.
Rugby Union has no issues with multinational competitions only fickle RL types with head in sand syndrome.