I saw an Interesting article recently by Alex Murphy in the Manchester Evening News.
Super League has turned into a ‘three divisions in one’ competition, according to rugby league legend Alex Murphy.
He believes there is now too much inevitability about the outcome of games and blow-out score lines.
He has been quick to make comparisons with football’s Premier League in how the wealthier clubs dominate and have a clear advantage over the majority.
He told MEN Sport: “Seeing Salford annihilated at home by Leeds was just like watching United thrash Wolves 5-0.
So, looking at a 3 tier SL we would have “the haves” “the would-likes” and “the have-nots”
1. Leeds, Warrington, Wigan
2. Hull, Huddersfield, Saints, Catalans, Bradford, Hull KR
3. London, Widnes, Castleford, Salford, Wakefield
I would say Hull, Huddersfield and Catalans moving in the right direction to tier one.
Bulls and Hull KR stuck in tier two and likely to be joined by Salford and Wakey.
Castleford and London stuck in tier 3 with Widnes who have plenty of time on their side.
What would be your 3 tier structure of SL ?

This doesn't make any sense? A three tiered Super League, what does that even mean?

I think the point been is that the super league is becoming like the premeir league in the fact that the lower clubs will never compete with the those at the top (both on and off the field). And the league is pretty much the same year in year out with the clubs finishing in similar positions. Meaning games become more predictable aswell clubs league positions. Thats my understanding of it anyway.

I think my 3 tier would be.

1. Leeds, Warrington, Wigan, Saints (always up there recent history).
2. Bradford, Hull fc, Hull kr, Huddersfield, Catalan.
3. Wakefield, Salford, London, Widnes, Castleford.

Not taking into account runs of form or injury problems.

The games most entertaining for myself to watch are when the clubs compete with other clubs within their tiers.

I think this says more about Alex Murphy than it does about superleague.
It is a little bit disappointing that, one of the games legends doesn't have anything positive to say about the game.
Along with most other sports, all of the teams involved are tryin to improve their performance and both Catalan and Huddersfield are good examples of improvement.
Yes, many clubs, in the short term, may only have a realistic chance of finishing a couple of places higher than last term and some will drop a couple of places, but that doesn't make the game predictable.
Bottom club Widnes beat Wigan a couple of weeks ago (although there were some selection issues) and Wakey would have beaten Warrington last week if the ref had managed to count to six, so I dont agree that the game is too predictable.

Alex Murphy is comparing SL to football’s Premier League in "how the wealthier clubs dominate and have a clear advantage over the majority" hence the "have's" and "have not's" classifications. Its not too hard to understand.

How many years of Superleague? 17 is it? How many years of having a salary cap? 11 maybe?
But only 5 teams have contested the Grand Final. I think that's is disappointing.

It is disappointing, but there is movement. Less than five years ago Wire and Huddersfield would have been in 'Tier Three' and Wigan in 'Tier Two'. To a long-term Wire fan like me it still feels somewhat astonishing to find RL fans in general classifying us as up with the 'big boys'. Other clubs must aspire to make the same change.

That's just a part of every sport, team or individual. You have the top ones who are always favourites. F1 has McLaren, Red Bull and Ferrari. Tennis you can pretty much guarantee any major final will be between Nadal, Federer, Djorkovic and Murray, and of course the aforementioned football with the likes of Man Utd and City, Arsenal, Chelsea etc. Why would rugby league be any different?

Salary cap maybe-Do they do this in soccer, F1 or tennis using your examples

Do Swansea have the same "spend" as Man Utd?

The better players - at least the more ambitious, better players - are always going to end up at the same big clubs where they stand a chance of winning things and playing in front of larger crowds.

Kevin Sinfield said in one of his GF acceptance speeches (I forget which one, there have been so many lately) that a lot of the Leeds players could be on bigger money elsewhere but realise they're playing in a good side with the potential to pick up lots of honours.

Money isn't always the motivating factor in building a successful side, hence the salary cap will never create a truly level competition.

It will be interesting to see what difference UEFA's Financial Fair Play regulations (the nearest thing football has to a salary cap) will make the top teams.

Rugby League in "Allocating teams standing based on a specific snap-shot of history" shocker

I wouldn't call the SL era a snap-shot in history. We've had the same 4 teams (plus Hull) in all SL seasons for 17 years now. Granted Warrington look to be the 6th inductee.