Why Super Rugby expansion should be shelved

By Liam Napier

Super Rugby Pacific is riding an early season glow that must be maintained by kicking expansion plans to touch.

Much maligned since its Covid-enforced revamp, Super Rugby Pacific has hit the rare sweet spot in its fourth edition to meld fast, enterprising entertainment – thanks to continued law tweaks – with highly competitive contests.

This year’s competition can’t, however, be a short-term sugar hit eroded by the predictable push for broadcast revenue.

One sure-fire way to kneecap progress, just as the competition finds its feet, is to introduce a 12th team or expand further without bolted on guarantees that avenue will genuinely improve the viewing experience.

Money isn’t everything.

Any Super Rugby executive will tell you an 11-team format is far from ideal. The competition starts earlier and finishes later. Two byes is one too many, leaving teams sitting idle and revenue intake in those weeks stressed.

In a perfect world Super Rugby would source a 12th team to fix its fixture problem for next season. That team would spring from a geographically friendly location and be assured to challenge as a contender from its introduction.

That’s a fanciful dream, though. Just ask the Sunwolves or Southern Kings.

The Melbourne Rebels’ financial collapse last year forced Super Rugby to retract. Such a necessary, blindingly obvious, change may never have occurred otherwise – yet the benefits are immediately there.

Australia’s competitiveness can’t be attributed to the Rebels’ demise alone. Joe Schmidt’s Wallabies tenure, constructed on accuracy and relentless detail, has restored confidence that’s filtered down to Australia’s domestic teams.

And it’s no coincidence Dan McKellar’s return to Australia to lead the Waratahs has lifted one of Super Rugby’s great underachievers to, at this stage, this year’s only unbeaten team.

The Rebels’ exit has, however, finally condensed Australia’s talent to significantly improve their overall competitiveness.

Five teams were always too many for Australia’s talent pool and financial resource to maintain. Four is stretching it, too.

For now, though, disbursing former Rebels players is having a profound impact that could promote as many as three Australian teams to this year’s top six finals format.

In previous years, the Brumbies were Australia’s lone consistent contender.

This year’s competition will evolve as winter approaches but consider the table now, with four points separating third (Highlanders) and last (Hurricanes) and it’s clear the last notion Super Rugby needs is another whipping team compromising its burgeoning integrity.

Nothing could be further from the much-touted fan engagement pledge.

Moana Pasifika are the perfect example of how long a start-up team needs to become competitive. Only now, in their fourth campaign, are Moana grasping everything Super Rugby demands.

Tana Umaga’s appointment to lead Moana’s vastly strengthened coaching team can’t be underestimated. Without Umaga, Moana don’t lure Ardie Savea’s inspiring presence this season. Those progressions take time.

Moana face further challenges as they attempt to bolster their roster and consistently knock over Kiwi rivals but with a home in Albany; a budding, vibrant fan base, braais outside the stadium and the dark, uncertain financial clouds seemingly banished, their future is positive.

The captivating Pasifika element Moana and the Fijian Drua inject will be an increasing selling point in the coming years. The scenes in Lautoka, where the Drua stunned the Chiefs last week, project connection and passion other established teams only dream of.

The unpredictable nature of this year’s competition is evident in the defending champion Blues slumping to 1-3, with one more defeat than they suffered en route to their breakthrough title last year. And the Hurricanes, who topped last year’s regular season, are occupying bottom spot.

Why disrupt a competition that’s finally delivering?

After exploring the possibility of welcoming Argentina’s Jaguares or teams from Japan or the west coast of America, Super Rugby Pacific is expected to maintain 11 sides next year.

Pressure will, though, inevitably come from broadcasters to expand. Content is king, after all. Content generates cash.

That’s why the NRL, Australasia’s most financially successful league, with a $43 million annual increase last year, will expand to 19 teams and nine games per round by 2028.

Adding teams in Papua New Guinea and, likely, Western Australia will boost coffers of all NRL clubs but it could well undermine the golden goose – just as Super Rugby did when it swelled to 18 teams and the convoluted four conference system.

Super Rugby must learn from its litany of past failings. Bigger often isn’t better. Fans want quality of quantity. Less is more.

The NFL, with its 17-game regular season, delivers on that notion to leave punters craving more than the four-month showcase of the pinnacle version of its sport.

The revival of afternoon rugby fixtures is another example of fans and broadcasters clashing on competing ideals.

Any visions of manufacturing a half-baked Super Rugby team from the likes of the United States, one that would need at least four years to gain a foothold and may never be competitive, should be shelved.

Super Rugby’s only realistic expansion avenue is linking with Japan’s established League One. Even then, there’s only three, possibly four, teams that would add to Super Rugby.

While tapping into Japan’s domestic competition or, more specifically, their financial security is appealing for Super Rugby, the big question is whether there are enough reciprocal benefits.

As it stands, as Super Rugby Pacific delivers a compelling revival, there’s every argument to avoid messing with this year’s formula.

This article was first published on nzherald.co.nz and is republished here with permission