So you don't count the Broncos, Raiders, Warriors, etc, as genuine expansion by the NSWRL?
In hindsight if the NSWRL had mirrored some of the VFL's strategies when it came to Perth and Adelaide then their expansion in "heartland" markets outside of Sydney may have been significantly more successful, and RL almost certainly would have avoided the SL war.
The only miss the AFL has had in WA and SA is the Power, whom though not a failure by any means, totally underperform considering the potential.
There's no hard evidence that the Swans sudden boost in popularity in the late 90s was because of SL. It's all just lame anecdotes frankly.
People that like to push this idea also tend to pretend certain events didn't happen as they did as well. For example they like to ignore the Swans making the 1996 AFL grand final that lead into a golden period for the club that only finished recently. They also tend to ignore the fact that the Swans were absolute shit for almost a decade before 1996, and that they had a burst of popularity similar to the one in late 90s ten years earlier in the late 80s when they went well for a few years.
A lot of the timelines don't make sense either. For example people often say that the Swans growth was largely because of the disenfranchised fans of the merged and/or cut RL clubs, but their jump in popularity starting in 96 is too early for that to be the case, then there numbers start to come down until 01 before they start to build back up before jumping up again in 03, by which point it's way too late to have been because of those RL fans that had been cut loose.
Basically the SL war is a very convenient excuse for the Swans rise to some, but as far as I know there's no real undeniable evidence that it's actually the case, and I've been looking for said evidence for a very long time.