SA Rugby wants 2 more Professional Franchises

[TRF_heineken]

http://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/sa-rugby-eyeing-2-more-franchises-20170922

Cape Town - SA Rugby is reportedly planning on forming two new franchises by the end of the year.

A tender process will begin on October 4, with the national rugby governing body looking to have eight professional teams with a four/four split between the southern and northern hemispheres

Interesting news. I see it will be a tender process, which could mean that rugby unions like the Pumas/Griquas/Boland/Falcons/Griffons/Leopards etc. could team up with private companies in order to make a bid.

Actually, I think the Pumas and the Leopards could make a very good case. The Leopards, would be greatly assisted by the North-West University, and they have state of the art facilities.

Whereas the Pumas have been a regular contender in the Premier division of the Currie Cup, and has a settled base in Nelspruit.

I like the idea of a four-four split, and surely this is all part of the planning process towards the global season that will start in 2020.

Also it's comforting to me, to see that yet again, SARU has reiterated it's commitment to Super Rugby and SANZAAR:

Roux however emphasised that SA Rugby remains to SANZAAR beyond 2020

 

[ratsapprentice]

How wonderful for the rest of the world, even more thinly diluted Saffa teams. That's exactly what the Pro14/Anglo Welsh needed...

 

[TRF_heineken]

How wonderful for the rest of the world, even more thinly diluted Saffa teams. That's exactly what the Pro14/Anglo Welsh needed...

Ha!

The fact that they say it will be a tender process, makes me think that there will be financial obligations placed on the new franchises, which could mean that their players might be getting a decent salary.

The hope is that this plan will curb the vast exodus of players heading overseas, and maybe having more of them staying in SA while still competing in NH based tournaments.

 

[WaterboySA]

Any person willing to commit millions to a business which you know you will never be allowed to run as you please(come in rules enforced by ANC), would be an idiot. We don't need any more teams, we need freedom for the existing teams.

PS: Sorry Heineken, not growling at you, just ticked of at the very idea of more teams....

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Where would they play?
England doesn't want them, France doesn't want them, and there's already 500 sides in the pro-∞
Are they going to set up a Super Rugby NH bracket?

 

[ratsapprentice]

I've heard the AW suggested...

 

[TRF_heineken]

Where would they play?
England doesn't want them, France doesn't want them, and there's already 500 sides in the pro-∞
Are they going to set up a Super Rugby NH bracket?

According to the article, they are interested in the Anglo-Welsh cup. But I'm sure that they will look at every avenue or tournament available and which would make the most sense financially and competitively to join.

But Olyy, why so negative about this?? There is already so many Saffas playing in the Anglo-Welsh cup, with the guys already in NH, we can already make up 2 teams...

 

[Bruce_ma gooshvili]

I have to join the negative pile until the Cheetahs and / or Kings show they can challenge for a playoff spot in the Pro14 - which almost certainly can't happen this year.

I don't think SA franchises in European leagues will have the financial clout to lure back European based South Africans. Not in year one anyway. The teams will have to be a success on and off the park to have any chance of that.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

According to the article, they are interested in the Anglo-Welsh cup. But I'm sure that they will look at every avenue or tournament available and which would make the most sense financially and competitively to join.

But Olyy, why so negative about this?? There is already so many Saffas playing in the Anglo-Welsh cup, with the guys already in NH, we can already make up 2 teams...

Well they literally couldn't join the English or French leagues due to the structure - promotion/relegation all the way down to grassroots. You'd never get the club's signing off on it (which they'd have to) as it is them signing their own relegation/death sentence.
Anglo Welsh cup could work but the comp is dying as it is, low attendances, low interest, sides putting out low level squads. I can't see how adding to made up sides with no relevance to UK rugby would add anything to it.

Call me a cynic but I don't see why we should dilute our leagues with sides deemed not good enough for super rugby, or micky mouse made up teams who want to get in on the advertising money.

I have nothing against South African sides or south African rugby but I don't see the point of adding them to NH comps. For the level of competitiveness and the crowds they're drawing we should have added a Romania and/or Georgia side (as in make a franchise of their best players, So essentially add the countries) to the pro12

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

If they join the AWC dear god

I want that comp gone FFS.

 

[Big_Grumper]

Is there a compromise or quid pro quo that would allow NH sides to compete in the Currie Cup?

 

[snoopy snoopy dog dog]

Best case scenario if new franchises are formed and join the Anglo-Welsh Cup is the teams will play 6 games in a competition that nobody really cares about. I can't see anybody investing in that.

SA could sustain 4 franchises in European competitions. First they have to get the Kings and Cheetahs up to a high enough standard. If that happens and they repatriate a lot of SA players from European clubs to their own franchises (eg Ulster lose 3/4 of their team to the Kings or Cheetahs) then new franchises would be welcome in the Pro14 expanded to Pro16. A 4 team SA conference, 4 team Irish conference, 4 team Welsh conference and 4 team Scottish/Italian conference makes a lot of sense. More sense than adding North American teams anyway.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

I imagine they're trying to get the attention of the EPCR. Show they're committed to European rugby and are willing to spend a bit of money to get in.

 

[Durbanite]

The logical route, just knew that SARU wouldn't be happy with 2 in 4 out.

It is a bit soon, but then again the longer we wait, the less competitive these franchises will be next year or the year after.
Very happy that instead of proposing a 3 - 3 split we're talking growth, even if we can't quite handle it yet.

Pumas is an obvious choice for ascension, @TRF_heineken you make good points about the Leopards, but I can't help yearning to see NH teams playing rugga on concrete NC fields against the Griquas, and you could argue that the Griquas have been the closest to the SR unions in terms of breaking into the main CC comp over the last couple of years

 

[pagliaccio_euforico]

There are rumours of us teams joining the aw cup in the near future as well.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Basically means the AW cup is being abandoned, and replaced.

As long as there isn't a net increase in games played for the senior club sides, I wouldn't necessarily be against it.

 

[mdaclarke]

i think it's a great idea. Maybe stop the player drain up North. The Country has over 50million people. It can support 8 top professional teams.

 

[User1245]

Also it's comforting to me, to see that yet again, SARU has reiterated it's commitment to Super Rugby and SANZAAR:

I'm not really in favour of staying with SANZAAR. Money and travel being the big gripes. Am I missing something?

 

[AM_Bokke]

I'm not really in favour of staying with SANZAAR. Money and travel being the big gripes. Am I missing something?

Well, as others have noted, the Leinster side that came to Bloemfontein was far inferior to the Crusaders side that came last year in SR. With that as context one could say that the PRO 14 is the inferior competition.

I actually think that PRO 14 is more at risk as a league than Super Rugby. Super Rugby has teams in major global cities with large populations (plus NZ) and PRO 14 does not. I think that it will be far harder for PRO 14 to grow revenue than Super Rugby in the next 10 yrs. People are mad that SR expanded to Tokyo and Buenos Aires with pops greater than 10M but think it's OK that PRO 14 expanded to Bloemfontein and Port Elizabeth?

I also don't know why people think that SA playing in the NH will bring more revenue to SA teams. Everyone needs to earn their own money. PRO 14 unions want more money too. They are not going to give anything away to SA. It is much easier to earn money in Cape Town, Gautang and Durban than Bloemfontein and Port Elizabeth. SARU made their own decision to keep the largest markets in SR.

SANZAAR also has the rugby championship, which is the comp that earns the most revenue. As far as I can tell, everyone in SA wants to keep playing in it. SA would have to be invited to play in the 6 nations for SA to leave SANZAAR.

Also, as an American, I can tell you that SANZAAR has very well developed broadcaster relationships. They are much farther along with ESPN than any other rugby content provider is over here with any other broadcaster.

 

[User1245]

Well, as others have noted, the Leinster side that came to Bloemfontein was far inferior to the Crusaders side that came last year in SR. With that as context one could say that the PRO 14 is the inferior competition.

I actually think that PRO 14 is more at risk as a league than Super Rugby. Super Rugby has teams in major global cities with large populations (plus NZ) and PRO 14 does not. I think that it will be far harder for PRO 14 to grow revenue than Super Rugby in the next 10 yrs. People are mad that SR expanded to Tokyo and Buenos Aires with pops greater than 10M but think it's OK that PRO 14 expanded to Bloemfontein and Port Elizabeth?

I also don't know why people think that SA playing in the NH will bring more revenue to SA teams. Everyone needs to earn their own money. PRO 14 unions want more money too. They are not going to give anything away to SA. It is much easier to earn money in Cape Town, Gautang and Durban than Bloemfontein and Port Elizabeth. SARU made their own decision to keep the largest markets in SR.

SANZAAR also has the rugby championship, which is the comp that earns the most revenue. As far as I can tell, everyone in SA wants to keep playing in it. SA would have to be invited to play in the 6 nations for SA to leave SANZAAR.

Also, as an American, I can tell you that SANZAAR has very well developed broadcaster relationships. They are much farther along with ESPN than any other rugby content provider is over here with any other broadcaster.

From a rugby perspective SANZAAR is more appealing (I'm viewing SR and the RC separately. RC makes sense compared to SR). I may be incorrect but I think most of the money comes from broadcast deals? Hence one of the reasons why SA pulls the most money into SANZAAR because (1) the rugby market in SA is relatively big (offset being the weak Rand) and (2) attracting viewers from Europe because of the favourable time zone.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

Well, as others have noted, the Leinster side that came to Bloemfontein was far inferior to the Crusaders side that came last year in SR. With that as context one could say that the PRO 14 is the inferior competition.

I actually think that PRO 14 is more at risk as a league than Super Rugby. Super Rugby has teams in major global cities with large populations (plus NZ) and PRO 14 does not. I think that it will be far harder for PRO 14 to grow revenue than Super Rugby in the next 10 yrs. People are mad that SR expanded to Tokyo and Buenos Aires with pops greater than 10M but think it's OK that PRO 14 expanded to Bloemfontein and Port Elizabeth?

I also don't know why people think that SA playing in the NH will bring more revenue to SA teams. Everyone needs to earn their own money. PRO 14 unions want more money too. They are not going to give anything away to SA. It is much easier to earn money in Cape Town, Gautang and Durban than Bloemfontein and Port Elizabeth. SARU made their own decision to keep the largest markets in SR.

SANZAAR also has the rugby championship, which is the comp that earns the most revenue. As far as I can tell, everyone in SA wants to keep playing in it. SA would have to be invited to play in the 6 nations for SA to leave SANZAAR.

Also, as an American, I can tell you that SANZAAR has very well developed broadcaster relationships. They are much farther along with ESPN than any other rugby content provider is over here with any other broadcaster.

The Leinster side in Bloemfontein was missing 14 international players for various reasons so while the Pro 14 isn't as strong as super rugby (It's fairer to compare it to a domestic league or cup anyway) the top half of the table wouldn't be out of their depth playing Super Rugby.

In addition to that the competition from other sports is significantly less, soccer's main attractions in Ireland are Man U and Liverpool, Scotland have a wholly uncompetitive league and the Welsh have a couple bang average sides all of whom are competing with rugby team that compete at the latter end of this competition. In this sense Dublin's 1.5 million population is way more lucrative than Melbourne's 3.8. In addition to this the Pro 14 is supplemented by the European Cup which adds London and Paris to the mix and I'd wager that the Cheetahs will be testing the waters of that competition in 2019. SARU's goal from this venture is to get into Europe and the viewing figures of European rugby plus the Pro 14 would eclipse that of Super Rugby plus the Currie Cup I would imagine without knowing the statistics.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

The most annoying thing about the pro 12 and now pro14 is how badly Cardiff and Edinburgh under perform.
Both are in prime real estate yet for the last nearly always under-perform and the attendances reflects that.

Also not sure how a Italian team has not tried to move to Rome yet, or at least tried to play some games there.

 

[Bruce_ma gooshvili]

Well, as others have noted, the Leinster side that came to Bloemfontein was far inferior to the Crusaders side that came last year in SR. With that as context one could say that the PRO 14 is the inferior competition.

I actually think that PRO 14 is more at risk as a league than Super Rugby. Super Rugby has teams in major global cities with large populations (plus NZ) and PRO 14 does not. I think that it will be far harder for PRO 14 to grow revenue than Super Rugby in the next 10 yrs. People are mad that SR expanded to Tokyo and Buenos Aires with pops greater than 10M but think it's OK that PRO 14 expanded to Bloemfontein and Port Elizabeth?

I also don't know why people think that SA playing in the NH will bring more revenue to SA teams. Everyone needs to earn their own money. PRO 14 unions want more money too. They are not going to give anything away to SA. It is much easier to earn money in Cape Town, Gautang and Durban than Bloemfontein and Port Elizabeth. SARU made their own decision to keep the largest markets in SR.

SANZAAR also has the rugby championship, which is the comp that earns the most revenue. As far as I can tell, everyone in SA wants to keep playing in it. SA would have to be invited to play in the 6 nations for SA to leave SANZAAR.

Also, as an American, I can tell you that SANZAAR has very well developed broadcaster relationships. They are much farther along with ESPN than any other rugby content provider is over here with any other broadcaster.

I am glad to have the SA sides in the Pro14 and disagree with the Crusaders/Leinster comparison but think the rest of your arguments are spot on. There is no potential expansion in Europe or North America that could compete on financial terms with the expansion into Japan in the next 10 years (all hypothetical). So from a narrowly financial standpoint I think Super Rugby could be the better bet short to medium term despite the major wobble in union in Oz.

It is up to the SARU and fans to decide if that is outweighed by the timezones issue. At least now they are able to gather data to try and work that out.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Well they literally couldn't join the English or French leagues due to the structure - promotion/relegation all the way down to grassroots. You'd never get the club's signing off on it (which they'd have to) as it is them signing their own relegation/death sentence.
Anglo Welsh cup could work but the comp is dying as it is, low attendances, low interest, sides putting out low level squads. I can't see how adding to made up sides with no relevance to UK rugby would add anything to it.

Call me a cynic but I don't see why we should dilute our leagues with sides deemed not good enough for super rugby, or micky mouse made up teams who want to get in on the advertising money.

I have nothing against South African sides or south African rugby but I don't see the point of adding them to NH comps. For the level of competitiveness and the crowds they're drawing we should have added a Romania and/or Georgia side (as in make a franchise of their best players, So essentially add the countries) to the pro12

Well, I think this is a pipedream that SARU wants. I don't think there is anything concrete at the moment.

But with regard to the Anglo-Welsh cup, wasn't the Pro12 in the same precarious position just a few years ago? Doesn't this type of expansion mean that tournaments can be reborn?

Also, I don't think that SARU wants their franchises to take up a position as a domestic club in any NH country, and be looked at ahead of lower tiered clubs from that country. I think the intention is to introduce teams into cross-country like tournaments, where crowds would like to see different playing styles, and that is the only reason why I think they mentioned the Anglo-Welsh cup.

There might even be a possibility of the creation of a new tournament and who knows which teams or countries could form part of that??

I'm not really in favour of staying with SANZAAR. Money and travel being the big gripes. Am I missing something?

I get that many Saffas would feel the same as you. But I'm not one of them, and I guess the issue here, which many of our pundits on Supersport also agree on, is that in order for us to remain competitive, we need to play against NZ teams consistently. They are our measuring tool for success. And while the traveling might be an issue for some, I have heard that others actually enjoy it, and it prepared players should they be called up to the Springboks and have to play an away match.

Every tournament will have it's pro's and con's. There is no such thing as the perfect tournament.

 

[saulan]

I get that many Saffas would feel the same as you. But I'm not one of them, and I guess the issue here, which many of our pundits on Supersport also agree on, is that in order for us to remain competitive, we need to play against NZ teams consistently. They are our measuring tool for success.

Here is a different perspective on that Heineken: http://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/Rugb...-blacks-fixation-stifles-our-rugby-20170924-3
I also don't believe that holds true anymore. I mean, yes I believe that playing against New Zealand internationally is our best test, but if you look at the results, we have been failing abysmally for the last 15 years. Statistics from over 20 years ago skew things, if we look at the post professionalism era, we are not really a rival to New Zealand, that win about 70% of the time (which is a problem for the competitiveness of the sport, they have no real rival anymore).

I've posted something like this before, but I think it's relevant to repea.t

Also, recent results also show that the plan of using New Zealand and Super Rugby as our go to tournament hasn't been working out too well for us. Again, I know we have our political issues, but the main issue really is retaining players and that means we need to generate more money to retain players and stop them going north... Actually, let me just copy paste that previous post, it says most of what I want to say again (and it got no ones attention last time).

I kinda agree with this, yes it is a shame if in the future we aren't playing against the New Zealand sides in Super Rugby, but as long as we are playing against NZ in the Rugby Championship, I'm happy. In all honesty, the thought that playing against the NZ sides making sure we are competitive is dated. That was good for when we could retain our players, but financially we can't anymore. What will make us more competitive against NZ nowadays is being able to retain our players when they are at their prime, and that means more money is required, which means playing in Europe. I didn't fully realize how many prime players were in Europe (I knew there were a lot but...) until I saw that Ulster side last night... Ludik, Diack, Deysel, Herbert, Van Der Merwe and Coetzee all from SA. I know not all the teams have this many, but spread across 60 teams in Europe, that's a huge impact.

We will be better when we can keep these players and can benefit from their prime play.

Also, I think there were a lot of South Africans watching last night, I definitely believe the Pro 14 will see a nice bump in viewership from adding SA sides, even in games where SA teams aren't playing.

Edit: Just counted, 22 SA players in the Pro 14 in other squads. 37 players in the Premiership. 13 players in the Championship. 52 players in the Top 14 and then 18 players in the Pro D2.

In total, 142 players in the NH, or just over 6 match day squads.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Here is a different perspective on that Heineken: http://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/Rugb...-blacks-fixation-stifles-our-rugby-20170924-3
I also don't believe that holds true anymore. I mean, yes I believe that playing against New Zealand internationally is our best test, but if you look at the results, we have been failing abysmally for the last 15 years. Statistics from over 20 years ago skew things, if we look at the post professionalism era, we are not really a rival to New Zealand, that win about 70% of the time (which is a problem for the competitiveness of the sport, they have no real rival anymore).

I've posted something like this before, but I think it's relevant to repea.t

Also, recent results also show that the plan of using New Zealand and Super Rugby as our go to tournament hasn't been working out too well for us. Again, I know we have our political issues, but the main issue really is retaining players and that means we need to generate more money to retain players and stop them going north... Actually, let me just copy paste that previous post, it says most of what I want to say again (and it got no ones attention last time).

Sorry Saulan, but I'm not even going to read that article. Mr. Xabanisa, the writer of that article has a very skewed viewpoint with regard to SA Rugby, and most of his opinion pieces, aren't worth reading, and is spewing of racially biased notions. I remember that one article which he wrote, that was removed from Sport24's site when it reached a 1000 dislikes and over 500 negative comments. And since then I have found his articles to be tasteless.

I hate the idea of us not measuring ourselves against the best in the world. And for some to say that we shouldn't, shows that we are starting to give in. That we have lost our status as being one of the best rugby nations in the world, and there is no way we will go back to our former glory days. And I refuse to accept that. I can't understand how people can't see that. The innovation the players and coaches from New Zealand show in the Super Rugby, proves that they are the trendsetters and that we all must play catch-up.

Yes, I understand that we should look at beating other nations too, and measure ourselves against them. But for me, The All Blacks are the pinnacle of Rugby excellence and that is what we should strive at beating or being equal to.

 

[saulan]

Sorry Saulan, but I'm not even going to read that article. Mr. Xabanisa, the writer of that article has a very skewed viewpoint with regard to SA Rugby, and most of his opinion pieces, aren't worth reading, and is spewing of racially biased notions. I remember that one article which he wrote, that was removed from Sport24's site when it reached a 1000 dislikes and over 500 negative comments. And since then I have found his articles to be tasteless.

I hate the idea of us not measuring ourselves against the best in the world. And for some to say that we shouldn't, shows that we are starting to give in. That we have lost our status as being one of the best rugby nations in the world, and there is no way we will go back to our former glory days. And I refuse to accept that. I can't understand how people can't see that. The innovation the players and coaches from New Zealand show in the Super Rugby, proves that they are the trendsetters and that we all must play catch-up.

Yes, I understand that we should look at beating other nations too, and measure ourselves against them. But for me, The All Blacks are the pinnacle of Rugby excellence and that is what we should strive at beating or being equal to.

Fair enough on not reading the article, but it did have some interesting points despite the writer.

I think my point was missed here, I still think we should compete against the All Blacks, and should measure ourselves against them, but the current methodology that is being used to improve ourselves is failing. In the current format, our players get better as the mature physically and in terms of experience then they go overseas and make big money, which doesn't leave us in a good position to beat the All Blacks. We need a way to retain our players so that we can get player consistency in the squad and build on players in their prime. I believe we are still a top rugby nation, but the current method we are using is failing and it needs to be changed. I don't believe playing NZ teams in Super Rugby makes us pick up their style of play or skillset, look at the Bulls and Stormers recently. It's more dictated by your coach. If we want to play like them, then either we ship coaches over for NZ coaching training camps or we get NZ coaches.

I want us to beat New Zealand, hell any South African does, it's the ultimate in rugby for us, but I believe you and I have different views on how we achieve that.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Fair enough on not reading the article, but it did have some interesting points despite the writer.

I think my point was missed here, I still think we should compete against the All Blacks, and should measure ourselves against them, but the current methodology that is being used to improve ourselves is failing. In the current format, our players get better as the mature physically and in terms of experience then they go overseas and make big money, which doesn't leave us in a good position to beat the All Blacks. We need a way to retain our players so that we can get player consistency in the squad and build on players in their prime. I believe we are still a top rugby nation, but the current method we are using is failing and it needs to be changed. I don't believe playing NZ teams in Super Rugby makes us pick up their style of play or skillset, look at the Bulls and Stormers recently. It's more dictated by your coach. If we want to play like them, then either we ship coaches over for NZ coaching training camps or we get NZ coaches.

I want us to beat New Zealand, hell any South African does, it's the ultimate in rugby for us, but I believe you and I have different views on how we achieve that.

“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”
― Sun Tzu, The Art of War

By keeping on playing against them, and losing, we learn from it. The more we learn from them, the higher our chances of being able to beating them.

There will come a time, when the All Blacks will crack, and the question will be, who will be the team that can consistently crack them. In the past, it was us, and I hope in future it will be us too.

We all can see how our younger generation of players are already showing better skills. And a lot of our young guys have role models like SBW.

With regard to your opinion of keeping the NH-bound players in SA, we have to get centralised contracts in place like NZ are doing. At the moment we are suffering a bigger exodus than NZ, because the unions in charge of their salaries, are not being able to compete with the NH teams, and can't provide as much protection to the player's welfare as the NH clubs.

But keeping the players in SA, has less to do with playing the All Blacks or Super Rugby, and more to do with players wanting more money for the matches they play...

 

[saulan]

By keeping on playing against them, and losing, we learn from it. The more we learn from them, the higher our chances of being able to beating them.

Which is irrelevant if the players that learn from playing against them for three years leave to go to Europe to make more money, taking their experience and skills with them.

There will come a time, when the All Blacks will crack, and the question will be, who will be the team that can consistently crack them. In the past, it was us, and I hope in future it will be us too.

I would also like that to be us, no differing views there.

We all can see how our younger generation of players are already showing better skills. And a lot of our young guys have role models like SBW.

But this reflects what I was saying above, it's all good and well them having better skills, but if they utilise their skills in their prime overseas in Europe, then it doesn't help the Springboks.

With regard to your opinion of keeping the NH-bound players in SA, we have to get centralised contracts in place like NZ are doing. At the moment we are suffering a bigger exodus than NZ, because the unions in charge of their salaries, are not being able to compete with the NH teams, and can't provide as much protection to the player's welfare as the NH clubs.

But keeping the players in SA, has less to do with playing the All Blacks or Super Rugby, and more to do with players wanting more money for the matches they play...

I hear you on this, but does SARU have additional funds to provide salaries to keep as much talent as what New Zealand Rugby does? Honestly, yes money does play the main role in this, but I would also say that our political environment and lack of clarity on Springbok selection criteria also plays a role in players jumping over to Europe, which New Zealand players don't have to worry about.

We can't do anything to solve the second factor, but the least we could do is to get ourselves in a position where our players get competitive wages in comparison to Europe.

I stand to be corrected, but I can't see the New Zealand Rugby Union being able to provide significantly higher salaries to their players than SARU has with their contracted Boks. Does anyone have stats on this? Player wages across the different Super Rugby nations/sides?

 

[Bruce_ma gooshvili]

Am I missing something? How can you go from saying 6 franchises was spreading the talent too thin and unprofitable, to saying 8 franchises is now the solution. In the space of 6 months! The SARU will have a whiplash from such u-turn.