Super Rugby Pacific 2025
- Thread starter rugbyAU
- Start date
Wilson
Rod McCall (65)
Not sure it'll ever get up as a straight top 4 from each - most of the models I've seen proposed have a more directly geographical bent to qualification and are heavier on the super rugby sides.
So something more like:
3 top Kiwi sides,
2 top Australian sides
1 of Moana/Drua
and
2 top Japanese sides for 8 overall
Might need to be larger to really be of value at which point some sort of 6 and 6 from each comp might be the minimum.
that 3rd kiwi side could end up being more wild card, or they could end up just going top 6 which does have good synergy with the finals now, but I suspect it doesn't get up without some sort of a guarantee there will be teams from both major markets in Super Rugby (Aus and NZ).
Strewthcobber
David Codey (61)
I like it. Play it during August/September so the Top League teams won't release their South Africans for TRC
The Ghost of Raelene
Michael Lynagh (62)
I get that for some idea of parody but if you can't qualify 2 Aus sides then you don't deserve it IMO anyway... Could be 6th or 7th in Super Rugby but the 2nd best Aus side then draw the Blues in Auckland and have their teeth kicked in straight away.
All the fun of off season itchy hypothetical chat. How good.
Dctarget
David Wilson (68)
That's 5 weeks of games, not bad. When do you fit them? CC is run throughout their domestic leagues and there's enough games that all the teams are busy.
The Ghost of Raelene
Michael Lynagh (62)
I absolutely did not think it through to that sort of detail.
It was an exercise in work avoidance.
It was an exercise in work avoidance.
Wilson
Rod McCall (65)
I get what your saying but logistically this doesn't get up without guaranteed regional representation. The simplest way to bypass that is having the whole 6 finals teams qualify, which technically isn't guaranteed but is probably close enough from a functional perspective. Otherwise you need to go down the geographical conference route to effectively sell it to the constituent broadcasters.
It might be a different story if the competition was on a level playing field, but until it is there will always be a need for these sorts of distortions. Bringing in a standardised, whole of comp salary cap and free movement within the comp from an eligibility standpoint are the big two that would probably need to happen to change this.
Dan54
David Wilson (68)
Not sure if the standard salary cap is all that it seems, if what I read Australian teams may of had $1 mill a year more than kiwi ones, (but only what I read on net etc), and even freeing the eligibilty rules is a bit of furphy. I hope it nevers happens, just my opinion, but to be honest,I not sure top Wallabies playing in NZ teams will atrract more fans, or vice versa. From my experience living in both countries, really not all that many Auusies knew a many ABs apart from 4-5, and basically same in NZ.
Just fom what I picked up in general in both countries.
Wilson
Rod McCall (65)
The salary caps are fairly distorted by international top ups as it currently stands but if they are too exist as a competition leveling mechanism then they should be standardised across the comp (along with financial grants based on broadcast revenue). It is quite difficult to do with those top ups though, so it may never happen, at least not without significant carve outs that limit their effectiveness.
As far as knowing players from NZ in Australia and vice versa goes, a massive part of that is because of the separation. Standard fans know the players in their team and follow them, regardless of where they come from, open the flow of talent and the fans will pretty quickly come on board. It's not as though it would be a huge amount of talent would flow back and forth, but a few players here and there would help bridge the marketing gap and move the competition on from one too often seen as Australia vs New Zealand. You can see this pretty clearly in the NRL where kiwi players are spread across the comp and well known and liked by the fans of the teams they play for. The ultimate goal for this is not necessarily attracting more fans (though it improves the product which will in turn bring in more fans) but it's to help fans engage across the competition and outside of their home region - you don't think more people would turn out to see the Hurricanes v Force in Wellington if Jordie Barrett and Jordi Viljoen were turning out for the Force next year, even if they weren't playing any better than the last few?
That said, while I do think both these things would be good moves for the comp they're not strictly necessary for a cross over comp. They (or changes like them) become necessary if you're talking about a straight, 'merit based' qualification for that cross-over comp. While there are still these significant regional distortions impacting teams ability to preform and appeal to fans, there will need to be regional qualifications to effectively market and sell that competition to broadcasters. Otherwise the individual broadcasters will pay significantly less for the comp due to the risk it may not have any cut through in their market for a given year.
Adam84
John Eales (66)
Let's put it this way: I will actually have a vested interest in watching some Crusaders games in 2025 because James O'Connor is playing for them... Not that I expect him to play too much... But this is in contrast to years gone by when the idea of watching 2 NZ teams play gave me zero interest.
Dan54
David Wilson (68)
Ok I get that Adam, just I found I had no more interest in Reds last year with Toomaga-Allen and Alex Hodgeman in them than other times.
Just felt once they were Reds players, that's what they were, Toomaga-Allen used to be a Canes player I liked, but once he left that was it.
I still watched Reds now and then, but just because I watch rugby. Same with Force and ex Canes(kiwi)players they have. Players that went to Moana Pasifika from Canes etc never got me watching them anymore,etc. Don't know really anyone who watc Japanese or URC etc just to see players from here. With players that go to other NZ team, I see them just because I watch almost every kiwi team play.
Though I do concede there might be a few that will a player, but not many.
Dan54
David Wilson (68)
Get your point on salary and test top ups,but wouldn't that kill teams like Tahs have Sua'ali'i on supposedy $1.6 mill a year, than Tupou etc who get big coin from RA. NZ would be same with Blues and BB (who is one of higher paid players, etc, think like it or lump it they have to keep test and super payments seperate.
PhilClinton
Mark Loane (55)
At least in Australia, the success of Super Rugby is unfortunately still pretty heavily linked to the success of the Wallabies so I am not getting too excited about anything more that SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) could potentially offer.
The provincial teams will draw another 5-10k fans through the gate each week if they're travelling well. But it is really going to be important that the Wallabies perform alright against the Lions to start properly bringing rugby back into the picture.
I'm expecting some increased viewership numbers for SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) this year, but the real jump would happen in 2026 if the Wallabies have a strong 2025.
I'd love RA to run a promotion where fans can get discounted Stan Sports code if they buy a ticket to attend an SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) game this year. Get more eyes on the glass and reward fans for coming to support their team.
The provincial teams will draw another 5-10k fans through the gate each week if they're travelling well. But it is really going to be important that the Wallabies perform alright against the Lions to start properly bringing rugby back into the picture.
I'm expecting some increased viewership numbers for SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) this year, but the real jump would happen in 2026 if the Wallabies have a strong 2025.
I'd love RA to run a promotion where fans can get discounted Stan Sports code if they buy a ticket to attend an SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) game this year. Get more eyes on the glass and reward fans for coming to support their team.
Wilson
Rod McCall (65)
No necessarily, there's plenty of room for marquee player exemptions under a salary cap, it would just need to be formalised. It would certainly change things overall though, but that's the point of it. It would only happen if Australia and New Zealand decided that Super Rugby needed to be treated as a premium product, not just a supplemental to test rugby.
But as I have repeatedly said, it's not that these changes need to happen, it's that they need to happen if we were to establish a crossover comp with Japan with a simple merit based qualification like top 4. Without first leveling the competition and breaking down some of the regional barriers the competition would require regional qualification (as in reserved places for Australian and NZ teams separately) to be an effective product.
Strewthcobber
David Codey (61)
That would
This is the real issue, players who would actually move the needle are currently mostly paid by the national union. Would Sua'ali'i get $1.6m if he decided to play for the Blues? Probably not, because RA are paying for a lot more than just playing rugby. And same for any NZ player that comes over here
Tah's aren't paying $1.6m a year for Sua'ali'i though.
This is the real issue, players who would actually move the needle are currently mostly paid by the national union. Would Sua'ali'i get $1.6m if he decided to play for the Blues? Probably not, because RA are paying for a lot more than just playing rugby. And same for any NZ player that comes over here
dru
David Wilson (68)
The ONLY point of freeing up eligibility rules for ABs/WBs in the SuperPac comp is to shore up an even playing field where Australia was struggling to fill a fifth team. Now we are, by hook or crook, reduced to greatness, the AB eligible players can fuck right off from the Aus teams. I'm OK with former Kiwis who are able to make themselves available for the WBs, and I'm OK with current ABs filling a slot for overseas talent.
Outside of that hell no.
Outside of that hell no.
Dan54
David Wilson (68)
Yep strewth, I agree, was making point you can't use player test payments as part of super salary.
We in agreement. I just making point earlier that salary cap isn't everything anyway, as Aussie teams seem to have a higher one.
Dan54
David Wilson (68)
I'm in full agreement dru, if a player isn't eligible for Wallabies, I don't think Aus teams should play them, same as I not keen on non eligible players playing in NZ teams, but can understand how and why it happens. But the thing I dislike the most about current ABs playing in Aus teams for example, they will be paid top money ,that should be paid to Aus players and vice versa for Wallaby players.
Most rugby unions have same policy, to play at home or only play test rugby in special circumstances! And they are all prem comps as a rule.