1
A radical merger for Super Rugby to revive itself
By Ben Smith
The revamped Super Rugby Pacific competition, now in its third year, is still trying to capture imagination and relevance post-South Africa split.
ADVERTISEMENT
Round six of Super Rugby Pacific featured just four games as many teams hit their routinely scheduled bye weeks.
Of the four scheduled clashes, none were marketable as blockbusters. Two ended up as lopsided thrashings, which aren’t always a bad thing, but crowds weren’t out in force to see them happen.
With player resting protocols, rotation policies and extended squad sizes, the need for bye weeks is questionable in itself. Particularly when the competition can’t afford to concede air time to the NRL.
Sundays are now exclusively owned by rugby league in Australasia. There aren’t enough fixtures without the bye weeks let alone with them to compete. So the NRL has unbridled territory on a key broadcast day every weekend.
Without change, Super Rugby Pacific is unlikely to recapture the standing it used to have or challenge this new status quo.
The issue is not the talent. There are so many young, dynamic players that should be building hype and excitement for Super Rugby Pacific. There are many of the world’s best players in this competition.
ADVERTISEMENT
The sad reality is the stage is too small for them, the marketing and media presence is not big enough. Players are undersold and wrapped up in obscurity. They play in half-empty stadiums without any atmosphere.
Super Rugby as a competition has not figured it out. There is no media hype cycle for it. The overall extent of coverage is magnitudes smaller than it needs to be.
It’s a hard egg to crack now because of the catch-22 between the two. Independent media won’t cover it deeply if it has no public interest, yet it can’t build more interest without more media.
So what is the answer? What strategic move can be made to save the competition from malaise, boost its commercial viability, and start to grow?
ADVERTISEMENT
One answer, while acknowledging that it may not be feasible and is completely radical, is a total merger with Japan Rugby League One to create a Super League in the Pacific region.
The 12 Super Rugby Pacific teams combined with 12 League One teams in a 24-team league is a titanic amalgamation that would lean on the strength of the Japanese market.
The Japan Rugby League One made USD$21.7m in revenues in its first season and broke a profit.
It’s unknown what the teams backed by industry titans spent and whether they even cared to be in black with their rugby operation. It’s probably great for rugby that they don’t care.
Could TV rights from a newly formed Super League from the combined home markets of Japan, Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific be worth in excess of what the two competitions make separately? Arguably yes. And if that is the case, then a merger could be explored.
The true value of Super Rugby Pacific rights is unknown due to the bundled nature of the current deals. If they were sold as a standalone product outside of the Rugby Championship and international tests it wouldn’t be a surprise to see far less than expected brought in.
The way the broadcast rights deals are currently done, packaged up by SANZAAR partners as a bundled offering of domestic and international competitions all-in-one and sold into their home markets, would have to change.
If it was worth it to unbundle, they would.
This type of competition merger would completely break the current model in order to try and create a much stronger product, which is ultimately what should be desired.
A club competition worth more or near the international game creates power and strength for the owners and more prosperity for players.
Japan as the focal point with half of the teams in the competition would be a shock. But this move would stop fighting the tide and instead go with it.
The player drain from Australasia to Japan is well known. From legendary veterans, to mid-tier players, to young guns that haven’t even debuted, Japan is the destination.
Consider this list of internationals who currently play in Japan; Ardie Savea, Jesse Kriel, Ngani Laumape, Cheslin Kolbe, Beauden Barrett, Aaron Smith, Brodie Retallick, Richie Mo’unga, Charles Piutau, Israel Folau, Seta Tamanivalu, Quade Cooper, Pablo Matera, Damian de Allende, Marika Koroibete, Malcolm Marx, Liam Williams, Sam Cane, Pieter-Steph du Toit, Faf de Klerk.
When any competition loses these players, not only do the teams suffer, but the competition suffers from the loss of recognisable stars. Keeping stars and well-known names within the competition is integral.
The Japanese teams should be encouraged to sign as many young and old New Zealand and Australian players as possible in a new Super League, while at the same time, the Australasian teams would have more opportunities to tap into the Japanese commercial market for deals.
With frequent broadcast exposure on Japanese television weekly, there is direct incentive for sponsorship investment into Australasian and Pacific teams by Japanese companies.
When national World Cup hero Ayumu Goromaru signed with the Queensland Reds, there were full-time reporters posted in Brisbane to cover his movements all season. The Reds also landed a jersey sponsor deal with a Japanese company. He barely got on the field but the media interest was large.
This opportunity for players and teams alike to swim in a larger pool will make them more recognisable, more marketable and bring in more commercial dollars, or yen in this case.
International eligibility selection laws in Australia and New Zealand would have to expand as a result, All Blacks and Wallabies would have to be selected from anywhere within the Super League.
NZR have been fighting this battle for a decade with work-around rules and sabbaticals. Beauden Barrett will likely play for the All Blacks this year after a full season in Japan, like many others recently. The Wallabies have already tinkered and expanded their rules multiple times. It’s the next step.
An expanded playing field for New Zealand and Australian players only strengthens the base of potential All Blacks and Wallabies. As stars and experienced names head to Japan, more development players come through the home system.
Secondly, how the departed players fare against the new players can be determined directly through competition whereas currently there is no benchmark.
Former New Zealand Super Rugby players like Otere Black, Mitch Hunt, Malo Tuitama, Josh Goodhue, Rob Thompson, and Vince Aso all play in League One. If they were able to reach another level of play, there could be grounds for selection. There are many more Australians.
Within five years a viable free agency could emerge with frequent player movement across the competition driving interest and excitement.
We saw with the Sunwolves that crowds are regular and loyal and despite the lack of wins anytime they played in Tokyo they had sizeable turnouts. League One crowds are company-driven, but still larger than Super Rugby attendances.
Maybe all the division one Japanese clubs wouldn’t make it into a merged league, and the same applies for all of the Australian teams.
But the opportunity exists to keep divisions two and three of the Japanese leagues and allow the Super Rugby development teams and discards to join.
The Highlanders have the Bravehearts, the Hurricanes have the Hunters as development teams. There could be regular games for the rest of the extended New Zealand squads.
The current schedules overlap but don’t fully align with differences in seasons. But there are potential workarounds with early season games scheduled in Japan through January and February. Japanese teams could travel abroad later in the season from March onwards.
But the timezones align to pack each weekend full of fixtures and create a competition big enough to go head-to-head with the NRL.
An eight-team finals series makes sense in a 24-team league. It would make the regular season race meaningful, something missing in Super Rugby Pacific. Promotion and regulation is an option and adds intrigue at the other end.
This mega-merger would not be easy to get through, but the rewards on the other side could be worth it for a fledging Super Rugby competition.
Nothing stays still. If it’s not growing, it’s shrinking. It’s hard to argue Super Rugby hasn’t shrunk in relevance. It’s conceivable that Super Rugby ends up like the NPC over the next decade.
That is a place that no professional sport wants to be.
Do what the NFL do and limit cross league matches.
For example, go to 3 groups of 4 in each league, playing 10 matches, (6 in group, plus 4 from other groups).
Then have a rota of playing 1 group from the other league 4 matches.
Season of 14 matches plus play offs in in league, followed by a Super Final v other league winners.
Why? Thats dumb. Super rugby is fantastic as it is.
Great idea…if Japan wants it
Its worthwhile pursuing, super rugby cannot grow alone and needs Japan and access to other markets. It needs world class talent and money and thats the only thing that can move it forward. Whether league one would be interested or not is another thing. It has to make sense commercially to them and it must result in higher revenue. From a talent perspective theres no question everyone would benefit. Maybe a draft system could come into effect. This would be a powerhouse of a competition financially and would really be a good watch.
I called it.
Japan is the future of SR and will be NZ rugbys saving grace in the long term.
They have the population (to fill the stands) and the money to make the competition a hit internationally.
With the private equity investments into the Sharks and Stormers and the strong ownership at the Bulls is starting to see a steady flow of top players back to the Saffa sides, building depth and strength which will over time allow them to compete agains the strongly financed French sides. Takes a bit of time but happening. To compete against say Leinster or La Rochelle needs serious depth and talent.
Might be good to have the winner of the Super Rugger play in the Champions Cup, basing them in say Cape Town?
Maybe have the winner of the Champions cup play in SR. Base themselves in NZ. Say Invercargill.
How about the champions cup winner v super rugby winner in a one off super cup?
Crikey Ben, was not aware things had got that bad. Never thought that losing the Saffa would hurt that much. I miss the Super rugger games agains the NZ sides, even with the extended travel and tours. I doubt the proposal of linking to Japan will work wrt to spectators. We see from the URC and Champions Cup games now that playing recognizable franchises like Saracens, Toulouse and the like as well as Leinster, Munster etc makes for great game, massive local support on both sides and proper relevance for each region. Would be nice to have the Saders and the Blues playing in the URC as well, but would open up the debate on travel away from home again. Not sure what they eventual answer is, as NZ have amazing players.
Purely as a concept (there's a myriad of practical and other challenges in the way, I know), I love the overriding idea as a rugby fan. Main reasons:
1. We get a number of League One games over here in SA, and the quality (ball-retention, pace of play, etc) is much higher than I expected. But if you look at the quality of international players and coaches in the league, I guess it is to be expected.
2. I would expect such an expanded competition would see less Aussies and Kiwis headed to the NH, especially if, say, you could still play for the Wallabies or All Blacks if you play for e.g. Kobe or Suntory. Pay packages should be more competitive, no need to uproot yourself to head to Belfast/Paris, etc.
3. This would see a more robust regional power base being created in the Southern Hemisphere, which I think would serve as a healthy counterweight to a still too NH-centric world rugby landscape.
Just make it happen before Eddie's Midas touch permeates through Japanese rugby…
The Japanese clubs are happy with their league as it is. But I'd happily see a Heineken Cup/Challenge Cup type arrangement to be held every June.
Getting a bit hot then innit. Move them earlier and have it before a late SR?
It’s always interesting to read about more radical ideas for reviving/prolonging super rugby.
I think reducing the number of SR teams to 8 is an essential first step. As this article points out with so many top players in Japan or NH at any one time there is just not enough talent to support 12 teams. 3 from Australia, 4 from NZ, and the Drua would provide 8 genuinely competitive teams who are all capable of beating each other, rather maintaining the farce that started with Super 15 where at least half the teams are embarrassingly off the pace.
(From an NZ perspective this could coincide with reducing/combining NPC teams to 12 and aligning the NPC and SRP schedules so they take place at the same time. This would change the nature and purpose of NPC and give it more relevance as a development league for Super Rugby)
Joining the JL1 and SRP comps together would then make more sense and be less bloated. This could take the form of conferences for a combined league, or the top teams from each league could play a champions league type of series at the conclusion.
Essential to either option, and the failure of the SR conference system previously, is that players would retain their right to play for their respective countries no matter which SRP/JL1 team they play for. This would allow a free market for players to allocate talent more evenly across all the teams.
Just keep it at the 12 teams it is, and make eligibility for the ABs open to any NZ eligible players no matter who they play for as long as it is SR.
That way, NPC players who don’t make NZ franchises can still play SR and don’t get picked off by the rest of the world.
And, they still have a chance of standing out and making the ABs, keeps the dream alive.
Matt any non NZ SR team can sign any player from around the world that they want to. There is something like 20 ABs in Japan and not one was signed by an Aus side. They surely would have signed a Smith or Whitelock if they wanted to. The so called “draft” does zero for NZR. Also reality is what does it do for Aus sides?
NPC players who can't get a SR contract obviously aren't All Black level and already play for Aussie teams.
You’re dreaming. If beer-swilling NFL types can’t be persuaded to watch their own fellow citizens, what hope is there that they’ll watch teams from Japan which include players that are totally unknown to them?
And why would the Japanese dilute their product by the inclusion of a competition that, let's face it, is on its deathbed?
Can’t see it ever happening. On the contrary, NFL is very likely to expand, thus absorbing ever more promising Aussie youngsters.
24 teams seems a pretty bloated league. They had the formula right in the early days of 93-95 Super 10 rugby where (proper) Nz and SA provincial teams had to qualify through the previous local provincial comp to make it. Then they started tinkering, and have never stopped, and never for the better.
Most of this is a good idea though, especially having players turning out for Japanese sides still being eligible.
A quicker ‘fix’ in the meantime. Move away from these gigantic oversized stadiums that don’t suit today’s crowd numbers and make for a very bad look for your product. When NSW played at Brookvale the atmosphere was much better, as it is for the NZ teams when they (rarely) take the game to the smaller grounds/unions. Making it top 4 qualify only would add immediate edge.
However, can we please take off the rose tinted glasses about the SA sides. Crowds were still dwindling when they were involved, and the NH strip-mining their top players to Europe made most SA sides easy beats towards the end. You could easily form several stronger squads than are currently competing in Super Rugby just from all the nz/aus/sa players (and coaches) lost overseas.
And that’s a huge part of the problem, one side is constantly taking from the other and leaving the scraps, while they gloat how strong their competitions are now. Not hard to see why when the traffic flow is one way.
Firstly this year alone has seen NZ sides play in Invercargill, Palmerston Nth and Whangarei so not sure what you are saying they dont take games to smaller grounds. Other grounds commonly used are Tauranga and Nelson too.
Also SA sides were never successful in SR. They were weak. SA sides won 3 from 25+ SR years. All by the Bulls. Hardly a success at any time let alone lately. Arg did better after just a few years and consistantly improved.
Great post. Spot on correct on all counts.
the way mana pacifica and the force played on saturday maybe they should be replaced by somoa and tonga then
A Super Rugby/Japan Rugby League One finals series is more realistic. The top eight playoff. Seven games, then three finals games each.
It would have a lot of the same benefits. Save a lot on travel etc.
When/if Major League Rugby gets up to scratch then include them too. South American teams also.
Major League Rugby is also in financial trouble.