I think that’s the wrong way to frame the question because it assumes the NRL’s current offer is the only alternative. Without investment and meaningful reform, Super League could face significant financial challenges over the next decade. But accepting the current proposal doesn’t automatically guarantee a stronger competition either, particularly if it means surrendering control of governance and commercial rights without a clear long term business plan. I’ve actually developed my own proposal based on NRL involvement, strategic investment, club incentives, expansion, player pathways and sustainable commercial growth. The question shouldn’t be whether Super League accepts this deal or faces an uncertain future. It should be how we structure an agreement that makes Super League stronger, financially independent and commercially successful in ten years’ time.