I have thought about this today, I would not say that super league has failed, I would say though that super league has failed rugby league. This has more to do with the people running the RFL than anything else.
I will use the football example, sky and other TV companies pay for the rights to show the premier league, they also pay to broadcast the championship, and lower divisions. This money is then put into one big pot and divided throughout all of football right down to subsidising the running of kids’ football and pub team football. The higher the league you are in the more of a percentage you receive. The football association don’t give TV companies games for free; they also don’t give sponsorship rights away for free.

I think super league would be an overwhelming success if

A) The licence application rules were set in stone, no bending them at all. The rules are changed only by a majority vote of all clubs it would effect not just the super league clubs.

B) If you break any of the rules it automatically terminates your licence.

This would keep all clubs honest. If we brought going into administration back as a licence termination it would make clubs think about managing their finances better.

It would encourage the lower division clubs to improve as they will get a chance when / if a super league club fails.

This can only be done with money feeding its way down from the top. Better management of rugby league.

At the moment the whole structure of rugby league is top heavy with the support below it getting thinner and thinner, and eventually it will break, the top will come crashing down and it will all have to start at the bottom again, unless you start to strengthen the support below super league will have failed.

I would suggest that the RFL has failed superleague. Between 2000 and 2008 superleague was a great product and needed to be enhanced to the next business sporting model. Lewis and Wood became too blinkered the last 4 years with the Sky contract and RFL profit.
When in reality they were failing in global sponsors, marketing and national media exposure. I would imagine the RFL don,t have the people in place to address these issues to flaghip the sport, an individual club can,t as a single entity.
Marketing is EVERYTHING to give a sport stability and stature, this is one of the RFL,s total failings.
Maybe we need to streamline Superleague and use the RFL profits to give the sport the national exposure it deserves.....before its too late.

Super league has not failed it is the people that are in charge of our clubs that have failed when we get somebody to take charge of the chairmen and owners we will be better run and we might get more fans to watch the greatest game of all

You answer your own question, apart from the Premier League ( the most widely watched, supported , sponsored, internationally worker populated competition of the worlds most popular sport ) all your other examples are not club sport, but International sport, we dont have a competitive International aspect to RL, therefore RL will remain a regional sport, its marketing should reflect that, our only option is to build up our clubs local support

Australian rules is a regional sport, Gealic football and Hurling similarily are regional non international sports, yes we need to try to expand the International interest in RL, on the other thread I pointed out an idea several years ago when Russia were showing interest, but as usual RL never does anything properly, it is always half cocked, underfunded, our club sides ( all of them ) have no interest in building the game ( we see criticism of ' self interest ' by SL fans of the lower tier clubs, well the SL clubs are no different in that regard )

We are a regional sport, and that isnt going to change any day soon, until we can run a world Cup with 16 nations ' competing ' and 6 potential winners we will remain a minority regional sport played in Australia, Norther England and the south of France ( even in NZ the sport is seen as something the ' Coconuts ' , slang term for South Sea Islanders and the Moaris not good enough for Union play )

More voting power? , meaning an increase in the salary cap, meaning a bigger gap between the top 5/6 and the rest, that will help

No, you are on the wrong wavelength. Its about getting the successful clubs to demonstate how to be more successful without effecting there market share. For example Featherstone Rovers might be better run and more successful pro rata than Salford so Featherstone would have more voting power.
On the subject of the salary cap we still have a lot of clubs who do not spend up to the salary cap limit because they do not have income revenue streams or business plans in place to achieve this. The more successful better run clubs need for the future existence of the sport share the business methods or have a bigger influence in this area by voting power.
The objective should be 10 clubs in profit spending to salary cap.......then looking at raising it according to the cross section finance of superleague, for the championships this would be filtered down and partly financed through RFL subsidy.

5 years ago Bradford would have been in that list. "Chairman stupidity" is a fluent market.

2nd and 3rd tier RL divisions have drawn sub 1500 crowds for the whole 30 years I've followed the game, how has SL made it any worse?

Thats correct, its because we have this "I,m alright Jack" mentality amongst clubs instead of integration and transparency we only react on failure. Think Mc Manus covered this early this season on the deaf ears of the RFL and his only avenue to raise the issue was with the media.

The successful clubs are successful partly because of historical support, Leeds have been the ' richest ' club for decades because they are from a large city, how can you change that?

Yes your idea is great, but it just wont happen, when licening was originally suggested we were told CLUBS would behave differently, those among the doubters suggested differently, we stated that coaches would still look for the finished article before a junior, tgat Chairmen would still demand succes, fans also would not be willing to wait to see if their junior development would pay off 5/6/7 years down the line

Are SL clubs giving young British coaches a chance? , no, we have an influx of coaches from down under

Clubs and their owners will do what they consider is best for their club, not the sport as a whole, their fans demand it

Has it made it any better?

And Mr Mc Manus would be just the same, he might comment about something, but if it adversley affected his club ( but was better for the sport as a whole ) he would do anything to change it

Sorry, I've just had a couple of days of shocked delayed reaction: did someone from the woe is us camp really cite MICK GLEDHILL as a reliable source???!!!!