What about the idea of Kiara being born first?
It's outlined pretty well here:
http://www.animationsource.org/lion_kin ... id_film=14
I can't see any wholes in it - the entire plot of SP slots in between the second last and last scenes of the original film. It explains why Simba is a more nervous parent with Kiara than Kopa (because she's his first cub); It explains why the issue with the oulanders is never mentioned in the Six New Adventures (because they have been resolved); It explains why Kopa is never mentioned in SP (because he wasn't actually born yet).
To me, it all makes sense - but can anyone (more eagle eyed than me) spot any problems with this theory?
The only thing I can see is this: At the end of TLK, why was the presentation of Kopa (second child) shown and not the presentation of Kiara (the ceremonies are so different that I can't accept them being the same cub)?
Actually, I found an anwser for this as well - Kopa being the first male cub, he is the future king and therefore his birth is the next significant thing in the timeline of lion kings.
Yeah, I know that the chances are Disney never even considered this - but I like having a 'canon' story in my head, it makes me feel like I appreciate the universe much better.
So, any plotholes with this theory?