RL at its core is all about state of origin, nsw vs qld.
The NRL nucleus therefore "should" be 6 NSW clubs and 6 QLD clubs. With a satellite of "one town" clubs from WA, SA, ViC, ACT, and when it has 1x NZ and 1x PNG, RL is now cementing a long-term future and growth in Oceania/Pacific, that AFL can't compete with, can't outgrow.
That's an 18 team national/trans-national comp.
I would cap the NRL at 18 by rationalizing some Sydney clubs. Tho it's controversial.
There'd have to be a second tier comp, nationwide, full of regional clubs, demoted clubs, future expansion clubs. Rather than a strict NRL Reserves containing the same clubs.
It's inevitable we will have a WA, SA, PNG team, and another Brisbane (Western corridor) team, and a Sunshine Coast team and a Central QLD team. The population growth of Perth and Brisbane/northern corridor is a guarantee that there will be NRL clubs there eventually.
How or what order it occurs in is anyone's guess.
I would say tho ... we already have a NZ team so there's no point adding another there before adding a Perth team. Perth has to be ahead of NZ. Brisbane-West and Sunshine Coast are more necessary before a second NZ team too.
Maybe a chronological sequence of Perth 18, Sunshine Coast 19, Brisbane West 20, PNG/Cairns 21, SA 22.
But again, rationalization has to occur to keep the total to 18-20 max.
Use the state leagues to keep old but outgrown clubs still around for posterity, like Wynnum-Manly, Valleys Diehards, Newtown Jets, North Sydney Bears, Wests Magpies, Balmain Tigers, Illawarra Steelers, etc.
The tricky part is rationalizing the NSW NRL clubs down to max 6...Dragons in Wollongong, Knights in Newcastle, that leaves 4 spots. Tigers-Campbelltown, Penrith-Parramatta merger, a centralized East (roosters-rabbits merger) and single North Shore franchise (bears-eagles) or Central Coast instead of North Shore.
I've said it before....to repeat....what should've happened when creating a NRL was to have all new "Broncos-like" franchises set up in those NSW regions, and demoting the established famous clubs to NSWRL to maintain their posterity rather than merging, relocating or ending them altogether. But those new clubs would be set up as a joint venture between two existing teams. Eg, Roosters and Rabbitohs would demote to existing in the NSWRL but both entities would be joint partners in a, say, "Sydney Outlaws" NRL franchise, joint colors of red, blue, green and white. Panthers and Eels would demote to NSWRL, but be joint partners in a, say, "West Sydney Devils" franchise, joint colors of black, blue, yellow. Just like how Wests Tigers already exists as a joint venture between Tigers and Magpies, while keeping both clubs in the NSWRL, juniors. That "should've" been the plan, tho very contentious and causing angat, fact is, 30 years later people have moved on and accepted that joint entity and no tears over Balmain and Wests given they still exist like the Jets abd Bears do.
A way to preserve history whilst also starting a new era, but keeping those old teams financially invested still via the joint ventures.
That could still be doable i guess. St George Dragons and Illawarra Steelers are another example of that. Northern Eagles could've been another. And all that is left is Roosters-Rabbits, Panthers-Eels, and Sharks-Bulldogs.
But, I know that's highly contentious. Still, imo, it's better than relocating or killing off clubs.
Anyway.....given where we already are now, and no way forward with expansion except by adding clubs to an already over-filled Sydney-centric comp, it'll eventually mean rationalization will occur anyway to achieve a truly national/trans-national comp of 20 max
