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.

if we do keep the magic weekend hows about turning it into a sevens tournament, could be cool if marketed properly, though my favourite idea is to have a 3 game Exile series mid season and market it like the Aussies do with SOO, could bring a much needed boost to the game if handled correctly

Not often I agree with you, but near enough spot on.

I'd try to expand the international game/Exiles concept using the spare weekends from reducing the teams, as well as having a second french team in the competition to try and build on the success of Catalans.

The reason a salary cap works well (in the broad sense) in the NRL is that even a club at the bottom of a table can a) afford to sign a star player, and b) attract them in the knowledge that they can challenge.

Wigan
Wire
Saints
Leeds
Hudds
Hull
Catalans

...they are all teams I'd put in that Category at the minute, that can challenge at the top and can spend to the full cap (in a 12 team league). Put another French team in there, tax breaks + living in france would be an attractive proposition, which takes it up to 8. Hopefully Bradford can sort their act out as well.

So now you want cash hand-outs as well as demanding that other teams have star-names dropped for when they play you?

Just out of interest, do you live your personal life on this 'charity, yes please' basis?

One thing that makes no sense at all, whichever way you cut it, is both Cas and Wakey seeking to separately build new stadia.