Well done, you won a point on a technicality - go you!
Just to be clear, it is more than a technicality to refute your claim that the BBC have no interest in broadcasting regular league games in any sport, and your extrapolation from it that the BBC consequently are not an option for the RFL.
Unlike the passive nature of their NFL coverage, where they simply take a feed from the US host broadcaster (originally filling commercial breaks with static graphics, before the NFL funded a studio show), the BBC's rugby union and football coverage is an active one, where they send outside broadcast units to produce the coverage.
The BBC also expanded their Pro12 coverage to include Ulster, Edinburgh, and Glasgow matches in 2010, under the current financial settlement which sees them having to make cuts across the corporation. So even in the current climate they are willing to increase their coverage of regular league games in other sports. Where the public service demand and cost is appropriate, the BBC are interested in regularly broadcasting league games.
There are fundamental differences in how BBC nations are funded and run that allows them a level of freedom that BBC English regions do not have, but if the RFL were willing to put the value of exposure ahead of the much greater income that comes from subscription TV then the BBC can be an option. While rugby league is not important to the BBC nationally, it is significant to BBC North, not only through them funding the Super League Show but also the level of coverage provided by their radio stations and online.
Were a financially acceptable deal possible,it is not impossible to envisage a situation like that with Scrum V, having matches shown live on BBC one in the north and nationally via the red button. Though personally I think it highly unlikely as the increased exposure is not as valuable as some on here seem to think that financially the BBC and the RFL will be too far apart.