I've actually found things have been getting just a little bit more reliable in my experience! Less cancellations, less short forms, which feels like nothing but a miracle.
Ultimately it's the old time triangle of project management. Cost, Speed and Quality; pick two. I think Cost, Frequency/Coverage and Reliability/Quality would probably apply to the railways. The government isn't willing to spend the money, fare income barely covers operating costs, so we have to pick low cost. We currently also have high frequency/coverage, which leaves reliability/quality as the corner of the triangle that must be lost. No amount of 'private sector competition' or 'efficiency savings' can get you something for nothing.
I really have to agree with everyone who bangs this drum, simplify, simplify, simplify is the only way out of this mess!
Honestly, I think the DfT under Failing Grayling shares the majority of the responsibility for this. The Northern franchise that was hashed out involved pie in the sky thinking for butter in the gutter pricing. The DfT needs to stop hiding behind private enterprise and getting it to soak up all of the blame for its failings, if Shapps had any sense, he would get the management of Northern to the table and after shouting at them for their share of the incompetence, re-negotiating the terms of the franchise to something more reasonable.
Northern could have a lot going for it. Some brand new trains, death to Pacers, eventually 769's, little bit more electrification circa 2019, etc. We just need some realism, patience and willing to all collectively make some sacrifices to our timetables in order to get trains that run reliably. If places that lost direct trains gained some fantastic, reliable shuttles that ran earlier/later to compensate and were timed well for connections, it could very well be a boost!