Highlanders 2026
-
@Yeetyaah said in Highlanders 2026:
@frugby said in Highlanders 2026:
Why would you want a player who has publicly stated his desire to leave, has signed elsewhere, and is not even first choice?
Probably to play hard ball and prove a point.
You'd hope that they would actually make a decision in the best interests of their team rather than be petty.
Why invest further in Jacomb when you know you need to develop someone else? -
@Yeetyaah said in Highlanders 2026:
@reprobate holy heckas we're going around in circles. There is no one suitable. The "best interests of their team" would be to have a suitable back up to DMac and Jacomb is the closest to that.
For sure keeping him is in the best interests of the team for 2026, but it isn't in their best interests for 2027 onwards.
-
@Yeetyaah said in Highlanders 2026:
@reprobate holy heckas we're going around in circles. There is no one suitable. The "best interests of their team" would be to have a suitable back up to DMac and Jacomb is the closest to that.
I think the point is that, Jacomb doesn’t want to be there - so is he the best option?
-
@ploughboy I could be entirely incorrect, but the way I read this, the Highlanders and Jacomb (through his agent) have gone public in an attempt to force the Chiefs arm.
I don’t know exactly when he signed on the line for 2027, but the Highlanders and Chuefs have been negotiating for months.
-
Interesting that almost all player contract negotiations are kept confidential and historically it was seen as important for players to honor contracts they signed.
All protocols and common sense seem to be lost here as some parties try to play this out in public to influence public opinion. I am not impressed.
-
@SouthernMann said in Highlanders 2026:
Article quoting Jacomb's agent. Saying they are seeking an immediate release
Quote from the story
*But Jacomb’s agent, Ben Boyle from Orbit Sports Management, told The Post that he remained hopeful of negotiating a release for the No 10 to join the Highlanders from 2026 onwards.
In response to a list of emailed questions from The Post, Boyle acknowledged the Chiefs have “invested significantly in Josh’s development, and it’s understandable that they would want to retain a player of his calibre”, but noted that Jacomb was keen to lead a Super Rugby backline in 2026 to boost his All Blacks aspirations.
“Josh has made it clear that he sees his long-term future with the Highlanders, and ideally, he would like to make that move in 2026 rather than wait until 2027,” Boyle said in a statement*
Ben Boyle! My old PE Teacher.
Random fact of the day. As you were guys.
-
@ARHS The flip of this is that this sort of things gets the casual fan talking a bit more - Super Rugby is in the stone age in that sense. Find me another serious professional sports league where you don't know the contract length of every single player on the roster - and further to that, a rough estimate of their salary.
-
@frugby said in Highlanders 2026:
@ploughboy I could be entirely incorrect, but the way I read this, the Highlanders and Jacomb (through his agent) have gone public in an attempt to force the Chiefs arm.
I don’t know exactly when he signed on the line for 2027, but the Highlanders and Chuefs have been negotiating for months.
Then why do you think that is a good thing? It's just going to mean the next time a player wants to leave a franchise they're likely going to play hardball from the start because they don't want to have it all play out in public.
-
My belief is that we are more likely to see Jacomb playing for the Highlanders than the Chiefs next year.
The Chiefs will be miffed with Jacomb's agent going public about him wanting to break contract. It changes it from a well substantied rumour to a fact.
It will rumble away for another couple more weeks in the media.
Paul Cully will drive the media coverage.
The next piece will be him approaching the Chiefs. They will say Jacomb is under contract for next year and that they won't comment about contractual matters. May be something about respecting Jacomb's seek a starting opportunity from 2027. That he remains part of their plans for 2026. The rest of Cully's article will be re-hashing recent pieces.
He will then ask the Rugby Players Assn and NZR. As well as ask the Highlanders if they want him next year.
Jacomb and his manager will get called in to Chiefs HQ and it will then be up to the financial deal between the two franchises. I just can't see how it is viable to keep him, with what his representation has said.
This has been a bold move from the Landers and Jacomb's management. The backroom negotiations clearly failed and they went for the nuclear option. The relationship between the Chiefs and the Landers will be fairly shot now too.
From an ethical perspective. I'm not comfortable with franchises and management stamping their feet and spilling the beans publicly to get what they want. Contracts should be honoured. Also, what comes around goes around. We will be pissy in the future if a talented young player we have on our books does the same back to us.
-
@SouthernMann agree with all of this. Our Loose forward stocks, and outside backs are stacked are prime to be raided down the road. I could see young Will Stodart, Finn Hurley or Stanley Solomon being eyed up by a few franchises at the end of next season.
-
@SouthernMann I’m more in the ‘things will eventually work themselves out’ camp and so don’t mind this sort of stuff.
When these things tend to happen there will be an evolution to contract structure, parameters around when players can officially talk to other teams etc like we see in other sports.
One challenge for super rugby is that the pool of players and number of contracts is small so a little more tighter regulation than say what the NRL have around this might be warranted.
-
@handa457 said in Highlanders 2026:
@SouthernMann agree with all of this. Our Loose forward stocks, and outside backs are stacked are prime to be raided down the road. I could see young Will Stodart, Finn Hurley or Stanley Solomon being eyed up by a few franchises at the end of next season.
But don’t you think that is going to happen anyway regardless of how the Jacomb situation is playing out?
Players like those you mention will be competing for the same spots and playing time so as a natural course will look elsewhere and teams will be looking to if they show promise.
-
@ACT-Crusader said in Highlanders 2026:
@SouthernMann I’m more in the ‘things will eventually work themselves out’ camp and so don’t mind this sort of stuff.
When these things tend to happen there will be an evolution to contract structure, parameters around when players can officially talk to other teams etc like we see in other sports.
One challenge for super rugby is that the pool of players and number of contracts is small so a little more tighter regulation than say what the NRL have around this might be warranted.
The thing with this particular move is it has just got a bit messy. It wasn't a secret that he was being chased and likely to leave in the long-term. No one wants to let quality players go, whether they are starters or depth guys like Jacomb. Teams also won't want player agents being publicly quoted saying my guy wants out.
As a few people have said, there needs to be a bit more transparency with signings re-signings. It adds to the fan experience and improves engagement.
In terms of keeping our guys. The best we can do is maintain culture. Other high performing teams can hoard players. We can too. Success is built on depth.
-
@handa457 said in Highlanders 2026:
@SouthernMann agree with all of this. Our Loose forward stocks, and outside backs are stacked are prime to be raided down the road. I could see young Will Stodart, Finn Hurley or Stanley Solomon being eyed up by a few franchises at the end of next season.
I swear we released Josh Ioane a few years back with time on his contract remaining to the Chiefs lol, it left us with Mid Hunt and a past it Marty Banks, I think if the Chiefs were to release Jacomb now having Mckenzie & BOP 10 Lucas Cashmore hitting his straps it wouldn't be that disastrous?
The Post
