Two new teams and a big show of faith to two more - how Super Rugby must kick on from a thrilling start to 2024

Sorry yeah I meant for SR. NZ won't agree to this so we should just focus on a national comp.

No your wrong

If you mean worldwide it is never going to happen. T14 clubs have an income of about €34m and have playing squads of I think 45 players in their cap. They aren't going to agree to a €5m/$8.3m cap. SRP can't afford that cap nor can most leagues outside of Europe (even J1 have alot of players on small wages). If the max a player could be paid was $500k at club level you would see richer clubs just using the other money they were spending on wages being spent on other things that will result in them getting better players. Then you have what is union wages and what is club wages. If Ireland pay $20k per day to a player who attends international camps and they call up 100 players 5 times per year is that included in the wage? They can do it in SRP but teams like Drua and MP are never going to spend to it, Drua have a PPP advantage and its had to determine union v SRP wages.

Yeah agreed, that is why I think we need a universal salary cap that levels the playing field. Regarding the link between money and success, I think the book Soccernomics has useful insights here. While focused on soccer, they found the total salary of a team directly correlates with match results.

Sorry I meant to imply in an ideal situation there would be a common salary cap. Yeah I think it’s all too difficult with SRP, unlike the NRL, as there’s All Black and Wallaby top ups, the need to have eligible players on your own side of the ditch and the Fijian-only Drua and Samoan-Tongan Moana components make it far too difficult to finesse it. And fair point over who takes credit for development too

That could work. Either Ra follows the Irish and Welsh Model or they follow the Italy and Scotland model but until they gain $50m extra in income they can't follow the NZ model. Ireland and Wales - More professional teams who take players when they leave school and train them inhouse and play B side league among themselves. Italy and Scotland - Less p[professional teams and use a third tier to bring on the players, best professional players mover abroad and the best young players in the third level move up. I don't know if NPC will even be professional in 10 years time due to wage inflation, and NRC would be the same. If wages go up 20% over 10 years (likely more) the NPC is alot more expensive to run as J1 teams, European teams and MLR teams will be looking to replace the SA players that are harder to get, why stay in NPC on less money than OS and then if NPC dont have 200 NZ players who are OS is it worth running 14 teams, why not just run 5 SRP B teams.

Oz though have an issue against most of the top teams apart from SA. How many times under Eddie and Rennie did the lose games from a winning position or fail to get over the line in close games. In the game in question they only started doing well when they thought the game was lost and then came back. Argentina believed they could beat NZ and had the players who could dominate the breakdown (like all the teams who beat NZ under foster). Oz has not had a kicking back and breakdown dominance for along time and until they get both they will not beat NZ twice in a row and unless they can do that the Cup is going nowhere

There is already no cap as both RA and NZ are spending $5m+ outside the cap to keep test players there. SRP players in NZ also get NPC money which allows the NZ sides to have a player earning 10% extra outside SRP which in not included in the cap. Money doesn't mean success but expecting teams like the Force and MP to be the same as teams who are already spending 25-50% more than them because its not included in the cap is the same thing.

There is no Salary Cap in reality though. For the 2023 WC Highlanders had 3 ABs while Saders had 10. Most of these players are getting money outside the cap so if the average AB is getting a top up of $250k then Highlanders are $750k above the cap and Saders are $2.5m above the cap. Same applies in Oz, Force had 1 player at the WC while the other 4 teams had 6-8 players so again if a $250k top up per player on average the other 4 Oz teams are spending $1.25-1.75m more than the Force. There is also no way that the Drua and MP are spending $5m on wages. Pathways payments only work in a closed shop. If Reds develop a player should the reds then have to pay part to the school or club who got them to professional standard in the first place.

They are not stood down in UK and France. The clubs pay their salaries not the national body. It’s up to the clubs when they play , not the national governing bodies.

No scrum, not saying anyone has or hasn't got drawing power. But have a look at NH, they play a lot more games, but have no problems resting top players a lot more, and crowds still come. But anyway I quite happy with how they handle players in fitnes etc.

But all that does is move the development gap up to the jump between NRC and the Wallabies, with predictable consequences...either the Wallabies will drop to NRC standard, or the Wallabies will have to take on a large development burden with associated costs to make up the difference. Much as we are seeing now, trying to compensate for slipped standards at SR level, but supercharged as there won't even be a SR level and the whole team will require additional development. It is precisely what is happening in front of us...the money will be spent, the question is where and whether it is more efficient to do it early or try to magically fix things at the last minute.

I think for the competitiveness of the comp overall, a common salary cap is important. Although the need to have All Black and Wallaby eligible players playing for their domestic sides complicates things. If the Reds are financially successful and are able to produce a good conveyor belt of talent, they should be compensated by the clubs that buy Reds-developed players down the track. The same should apply to Crusaders etc. I think this system may apply in the NRL with Penrith doing a lot of work developing an abundance of talent - although that might possibly have been discussed but not adopted. Hopefully any excess cash that may result can be invested into building a bigger grassroots talent base. Although talking about excess cash in an Australian context is unfortunately very much a hypothetical at this stage.

You miss the point. Of course SR develops players like the NPC does for SR. Australia only has a rest and rotation policy in WC years and that has to be by agreement. NZR has that policy every season and can enforce it as NZR are the employer of coaches and players. Sometimes ABs who have had limited game time are stood down which is a bit difficult to grasp. Quite simply if you want SR to prosper you need your best players playing. With the exception of Ireland NH players have a far longer season and heavier workload and players are not stood down as the national body are not the employer and do not have that power. NZR are doing nothing for the SR comp by holding back star players. Are you saying superstar ABs have no drawing power.

Thank you for stating the obvious. Was merely saying how suprised I am at after all Fosters stack of record loses that losing the Bledisloe for the first time in 20+ years wasn’t one of them, and that their best chance of doing so in the Foster era probably would have been if Foley had kicked the ball out and got them the W in game 2022

Although you not seeing Stan being interested , I would be surprised, but also their is South American tv that may have an interest?

Of course up to a point there is development towards ABs, and you don't think Aus teams are same? So why do we have the likes of Schmidt etc talking to super coaches and players? Every comp is seen anywhere in world as stepping stone to higher honours etc. And as I say with your impression, that may well be your impression talking to kiwis where ever you live, but have not heard it once here in NZ. I quite sure you can always find someone who will agree, and many will find excuses why they can't be bothered going to rugby, all I can say what I have found amongst rugby community here in NZ. But I am quite interested you don't think RA etc don't use super as development for Wallabies etc.

Yep NZ does have salary cap though, but I think can be got around for 1 or 2 top players and 3rd party agreements. I take your point, and is NZ do have a salary cap higher than Aussie’s, should NZ cut theirs and lose more players to NH, or should Aus have one that is similar and play teams they can afford within that cap? Make no mistake I don’t have answers, but just question some of others.

I'm cautious of allowing teams to undermine a salary cap. 'Player agreements' in NZ is what led to the Crusaders winning every year, making it boring for everyone else. We need a universal salary cap that gives everyone an equal chance of winning the comp, more close games, more upsets etc. Give fans some excitement and some hope of winning the comp. If a team has more funds, they should put it into development pathways rather than star players.

Yeah a third tier has always struggled. Alternatively we run an NRC in Feb to May as our premiere comp that includes Wallabies players. Top clubs can then play NZ in a separate June tournament. Then we aren't paying for multiple tiers but have more Au games that people want to watch and an Au champion each year.