Can't really argue with that. Leaving the 14 SL clubs as they are, I'd set the feeder clubs up like this:

S.Wales -> Wigan
Leigh -> Saints
Cumbria (W'ton, Barrow, Haven) -> Wire
Hunslet -> Leeds
Keighley -> Bradford
Dewsbury -> Wakey
Batley -> Cas
Fev -> Hull FC
Sheffield -> Hull KR
Fax -> Hudds
N.Wales -> Widnes
Toulouse -> Catalan
Skolars -> Broncos
Manchester (Swinton, Oldham, Rochdale) -> Salford

That leaves the likes of York, Doncaster, Gateshead and the expansions in Northampton and Hemel to either join up with any of the teams listed above or to form a secondary championship. They could then join up with the other teams as and when needed.

I go along with Scouse Pie 2 still with the 14 teams. Scrap the Magic weekend. The exiles games will bring in more money, plus it can never be a fair reflection whichever way it is done, such as Wolves V Widnes . Certain points for Wolves which could make all the difference at the end of the season. No team should have an advantage over any other. Top 5 play off only, the top of the league club to get the advantage as reward for finishing top. There would be a couple of games less to play without getting rid of anyone, our game should grow with our own teams not throwing them out.

So who is to be booted out then?
Why dont we start with the clubs that dont have a ground

Well share the bloody money out more evenly then, then there wouldnt be such a gap,

Yawn.

I would get rid of Salford (no fans, ground is very far from the town centre, been unsuccessful for as long as I've been watching, the academy tend to feed off Wire, Saints and Wigan rejects too) and Wakefield (rubbish ground, unsuccessful for as long as I've been watching apart from one year when they made the play offs, not many fans, went into administration not long ago, Castleford and Leeds both nearby)

Go back to having 12 teams (23 games inc magic weekend) with a 6 team play off structure (same method we used to employ). Reducing the number of games makes each league game more important, I don't like meaningless games. With the extra weeks gained by reducing the amount of games I would extend the World Club Challenge to a 6 or 8 team competition between our best and their best, maybe extend the exiles series to three games too. We need to market close games between quality sides.

Internationally I would bring back the NZ and Aus tours. Maybe go:
2013 World Cup
2014 Ashes tour
2015 Four nations
2016 Kiwi tour
Rinse and repeat every four years, being sure to alternate the location so each hemisphere has either the extended WCC competition or an international event

Which clubs don't have a ground?

This doesn't seem the most useful contribution to the debate.

What did the odd team out do in the past when we had tours? Aren't the NRL coaches complaining about too many games anyway? The reason I want to bring back tours is because they seemed to get people's attention more than the four nations do now.

People should stop perpetuating the myth that Leeds last year 'proved' end of year positions are meaningless. Apart from last year hasn't the title been won by the club finishing 1st/2nd? All Leeds proved is that it is POSSIBLE to win from as low as 5th - its not likely, and certainly not something any club should aim to do.

The play-off system has changed so the fact that a club has won it from fifth when previously (I think) only one club had won from third and the rest from 1st or 2nd is evidence that the change has made it easier for lower ranked clubs to win the SL. It doesn't mean the end of year positions are meaningless, but many question whether the advantage of finishing 1st or 2nd is significant enough under the new system.

one simple way of making sure that teams strive to finish as high as possible in these financially hard times is to have bonus payments for league placings that have greater rewards for the higher you finish. Also the higher placed team in any play off match always get home advantage and keep all the gate receipts etc etc...... All clubs need the finances so make the rewards for finishing higher worth it

You really think you're onto something with this, don't you,.

You aren't.

Wigan's lease on the DW will likely outlast the period of your lifetime.

What's really funny though is that much better trolls than you - from Wire, Saints, Leeds, etc - all realised this at least 10 years ago.

Whilst the suggestion that Wigan shouldn't get a place in this revised Super League is obviousdly stupid the stadium issue is a valid point within this debate.

Deloitte's recent report into rugby finances across Europe made it quite clear that the key to raising revenue and being sustainable was through the utilisation of stadia to increase revenue from non-rugby related uses outside of matchdays.

The reduction of the competition to 12 or 10 teams would, unless the proposal is to play teams numerous times throughout the season which history has shown to be a turn-off to fans, lead to reduced number of fixtures and consequently for clubs leasing stadia a drop in revenue with the associated consequences (reduced money for wages, reduced quality, etc etc).

There is no magic wand. The RFL are continually criticised but in truth they do a decent job with the cards they have been dealt. It is alright for McManus to have a go at them; truth is, if the RFL had lost the money Saints have over the last 10 years the game would have now been bankrupt and its regulative governing body (the RFL) ceased to operate.

Personally I would go to a 12 team competition (London are looking more and more difficult to justify (and I've been a supporter of expansion) who together with Cas, Wakefiled, Widnes, Salford and Bradford being the clubs under threat), worked on a three year licence basis, playing each other home and away plus a magic weekend like event (probably a heritage weekend concept) and a top five play-off system uses the same format as it use to be.

A magic weekend is a bit of a farce as you could get uneven match-ups. One of the top teams in the league could get to play the worst team for a 3rd time and be gifted an easy 2 points, where as 2 other teams who are at the top could end up playing each other.
So if we do persist with this idea lets play it at round 15 and the fixtures are based on the league table after half a season once all teams have played each other at least once. then we play 1 v 2, 3 v 4, etc etc......this way all games should be close and competitive.