Super Rugby 2026
-
@mohikamo said in Super Rugby 2026:
I've said it before on here; it was a big mistake to form the SR comp when the game went pro back in the 90's.
Now we have a situation where a pro player can play for four different teams, on four different tiers, in one season (National/Super/NPC/club); no other pro football code does this.
Most pro codes have just one main level, with a small all-star level added.
And some dont even do that (AFL, NFL).We already had a competition which in parts was quite professionally run; and had a long tradition and legacy; then we created another, which now has it's own traditions and legacies.
Hard to argue with that in hindsight, but we now have an established Super competition and that's where the primary professional revenue comes from. We should have Super and reserve sides playing across the year.
I know we have a bunch of very engaged (older) fans who love the NPC; I can't see why they wouldn't equally enjoy that competition if it was focused on local amateur players who have come through the club competition.
This feels like an opportunity of separating the dollars for what different organizations do best - the pro teams for revenue and pathways to the ABs, while the local clubs and provinces focus on key metrics such as the number of local club players and competing for trophies that have traditional meaning. The Ranfurley shield, for example, should stay in this (mostly) amateur system.
@gt12 said in Super Rugby 2026:
@mohikamo said in Super Rugby 2026:
I've said it before on here; it was a big mistake to form the SR comp when the game went pro back in the 90's.
Now we have a situation where a pro player can play for four different teams, on four different tiers, in one season (National/Super/NPC/club); no other pro football code does this.
Most pro codes have just one main level, with a small all-star level added.
And some dont even do that (AFL, NFL).We already had a competition which in parts was quite professionally run; and had a long tradition and legacy; then we created another, which now has it's own traditions and legacies.
Hard to argue with that in hindsight, but we now have an established Super competition and that's where the primary professional revenue comes from. We should have Super and reserve sides playing across the year.
I know we have a bunch of very engaged (older) fans who love the NPC; I can't see why they wouldn't equally enjoy that competition if it was focused on local amateur players who have come through the club competition.
This feels like an opportunity of separating the dollars for what different organizations do best - the pro teams for revenue and pathways to the ABs, while the local clubs and provinces focus on key metrics such as the number of local club players and competing for trophies that have traditional meaning. The Ranfurley shield, for example, should stay in this (mostly) amateur system.
i was/am one of those that really love the NPC, i have more of a connection to that that the super teams with their 90's logos, tacky names, sanitised colours/jerseys and branding......but....have come around to that the one that has to be promoted
if super rugby was made longer and as a results players generally didnt play both in the same season, and the NPC became a pure club rep comp...i feel they should do something where each franchice had to keep x number of spots open each year and stand outs were picked up on one year contracts (with an option to extend), make it an event at the end of the NPC season along with an awards night where super coaches annouced who they were taking
-
@gt12 said in Super Rugby 2026:
@mohikamo said in Super Rugby 2026:
I've said it before on here; it was a big mistake to form the SR comp when the game went pro back in the 90's.
Now we have a situation where a pro player can play for four different teams, on four different tiers, in one season (National/Super/NPC/club); no other pro football code does this.
Most pro codes have just one main level, with a small all-star level added.
And some dont even do that (AFL, NFL).We already had a competition which in parts was quite professionally run; and had a long tradition and legacy; then we created another, which now has it's own traditions and legacies.
Hard to argue with that in hindsight, but we now have an established Super competition and that's where the primary professional revenue comes from. We should have Super and reserve sides playing across the year.
I know we have a bunch of very engaged (older) fans who love the NPC; I can't see why they wouldn't equally enjoy that competition if it was focused on local amateur players who have come through the club competition.
This feels like an opportunity of separating the dollars for what different organizations do best - the pro teams for revenue and pathways to the ABs, while the local clubs and provinces focus on key metrics such as the number of local club players and competing for trophies that have traditional meaning. The Ranfurley shield, for example, should stay in this (mostly) amateur system.
i was/am one of those that really love the NPC, i have more of a connection to that that the super teams with their 90's logos, tacky names, sanitised colours/jerseys and branding......but....have come around to that the one that has to be promoted
if super rugby was made longer and as a results players generally didnt play both in the same season, and the NPC became a pure club rep comp...i feel they should do something where each franchice had to keep x number of spots open each year and stand outs were picked up on one year contracts (with an option to extend), make it an event at the end of the NPC season along with an awards night where super coaches annouced who they were taking
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
@gt12 said in Super Rugby 2026:
@mohikamo said in Super Rugby 2026:
I've said it before on here; it was a big mistake to form the SR comp when the game went pro back in the 90's.
Now we have a situation where a pro player can play for four different teams, on four different tiers, in one season (National/Super/NPC/club); no other pro football code does this.
Most pro codes have just one main level, with a small all-star level added.
And some dont even do that (AFL, NFL).We already had a competition which in parts was quite professionally run; and had a long tradition and legacy; then we created another, which now has it's own traditions and legacies.
Hard to argue with that in hindsight, but we now have an established Super competition and that's where the primary professional revenue comes from. We should have Super and reserve sides playing across the year.
I know we have a bunch of very engaged (older) fans who love the NPC; I can't see why they wouldn't equally enjoy that competition if it was focused on local amateur players who have come through the club competition.
This feels like an opportunity of separating the dollars for what different organizations do best - the pro teams for revenue and pathways to the ABs, while the local clubs and provinces focus on key metrics such as the number of local club players and competing for trophies that have traditional meaning. The Ranfurley shield, for example, should stay in this (mostly) amateur system.
i was/am one of those that really love the NPC, i have more of a connection to that that the super teams with their 90's logos, tacky names, sanitised colours/jerseys and branding......but....have come around to that the one that has to be promoted
if super rugby was made longer and as a results players generally didnt play both in the same season, and the NPC became a pure club rep comp...i feel they should do something where each franchice had to keep x number of spots open each year and stand outs were picked up on one year contracts (with an option to extend), make it an event at the end of the NPC season along with an awards night where super coaches annouced who they were taking
I think it would naturally align if they were two separate competitions - there could be a set number of spaces that go to NPC players as in my proposed idea Super franchises would likely need to contract more players.
NPC / Super system means that a bunch of players more from one center to another for half the year - that's not ideal and should be addressed as well.
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
@gt12 said in Super Rugby 2026:
@mohikamo said in Super Rugby 2026:
I've said it before on here; it was a big mistake to form the SR comp when the game went pro back in the 90's.
Now we have a situation where a pro player can play for four different teams, on four different tiers, in one season (National/Super/NPC/club); no other pro football code does this.
Most pro codes have just one main level, with a small all-star level added.
And some dont even do that (AFL, NFL).We already had a competition which in parts was quite professionally run; and had a long tradition and legacy; then we created another, which now has it's own traditions and legacies.
Hard to argue with that in hindsight, but we now have an established Super competition and that's where the primary professional revenue comes from. We should have Super and reserve sides playing across the year.
I know we have a bunch of very engaged (older) fans who love the NPC; I can't see why they wouldn't equally enjoy that competition if it was focused on local amateur players who have come through the club competition.
This feels like an opportunity of separating the dollars for what different organizations do best - the pro teams for revenue and pathways to the ABs, while the local clubs and provinces focus on key metrics such as the number of local club players and competing for trophies that have traditional meaning. The Ranfurley shield, for example, should stay in this (mostly) amateur system.
i was/am one of those that really love the NPC, i have more of a connection to that that the super teams with their 90's logos, tacky names, sanitised colours/jerseys and branding......but....have come around to that the one that has to be promoted
if super rugby was made longer and as a results players generally didnt play both in the same season, and the NPC became a pure club rep comp...i feel they should do something where each franchice had to keep x number of spots open each year and stand outs were picked up on one year contracts (with an option to extend), make it an event at the end of the NPC season along with an awards night where super coaches annouced who they were taking
I think it would naturally align if they were two separate competitions - there could be a set number of spaces that go to NPC players as in my proposed idea Super franchises would likely need to contract more players.
NPC / Super system means that a bunch of players more from one center to another for half the year - that's not ideal and should be addressed as well.
@gt12 agreed, i think it generally always happens....we should just make it a thing, use somethign that normally naturally happens as some off season hype and a high profile carrot...but also have it in writing so team done lock in whole squads early
-
The NPC conversation continues here:
https://www.forum.silverfern.rugby/topic/7059/npc-2025/435 -
@Yeetyaah said in Super Rugby 2026:
Any signing rumours or whispers? Feel it's been a little quiet.
Just a couple I can confirm that I’ve also posted in team threads that are yet to be announced by super franchises.
Xavier Tito-Harris - Highlanders - 2 year deal.
Jone Rova - Hurricanes - 2 year deal.Highlanders working on something with Nic Shearer but still up in the air with already having 3 halfbacks signed.
-
Have heard some rumours that they are looking at introducing a more formal Super Rugby B competition from next season onwards.
I suspect in its infancy this will look like the five NZ sides playing each other home and away, largely in double ups with the Super teams - though this is just a guess.
This might explain why there is so many squad rumours flying about, as seems WTGs are making a formal return.
Expect to see them formally announced alongside the 38 man full squads
-
i find this kind of weird, dont think any of the teams are rolling in money and this has to be more expensive to run....surely leaning on the local NPC teams to develop players is the more sustainable model
-
i find this kind of weird, dont think any of the teams are rolling in money and this has to be more expensive to run....surely leaning on the local NPC teams to develop players is the more sustainable model
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
i find this kind of weird, dont think any of the teams are rolling in money and this has to be more expensive to run....surely leaning on the local NPC teams to develop players is the more sustainable model
Nah.
NPC unions are hard up financially as well.
Provincial contracts run from about July through to the end of September. There is limited ability to influence players from a high performance perspective when Super is being held.If the contracts are centrally held, it allows rugby in NZ to maintain a playing pool that previously went overseas and have less of a reliance on very young players should there be injuries in Super Rugby.
This makes complete sense.
-
Have heard some rumours that they are looking at introducing a more formal Super Rugby B competition from next season onwards.
I suspect in its infancy this will look like the five NZ sides playing each other home and away, largely in double ups with the Super teams - though this is just a guess.
This might explain why there is so many squad rumours flying about, as seems WTGs are making a formal return.
Expect to see them formally announced alongside the 38 man full squads
@frugby said in Super Rugby 2026:
Have heard some rumours that they are looking at introducing a more formal Super Rugby B competition from next season onwards.
I suppose this move is better than nothing, especially if the teams include some U20/NDC players to aid their development.
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
i find this kind of weird, dont think any of the teams are rolling in money and this has to be more expensive to run....surely leaning on the local NPC teams to develop players is the more sustainable model
Nah.
NPC unions are hard up financially as well.
Provincial contracts run from about July through to the end of September. There is limited ability to influence players from a high performance perspective when Super is being held.If the contracts are centrally held, it allows rugby in NZ to maintain a playing pool that previously went overseas and have less of a reliance on very young players should there be injuries in Super Rugby.
This makes complete sense.
@SouthernMann said in Super Rugby 2026:
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
i find this kind of weird, dont think any of the teams are rolling in money and this has to be more expensive to run....surely leaning on the local NPC teams to develop players is the more sustainable model
Nah.
NPC unions are hard up financially as well.
Provincial contracts run from about July through to the end of September. There is limited ability to influence players from a high performance perspective when Super is being held.If the contracts are centrally held, it allows rugby in NZ to maintain a playing pool that previously went overseas and have less of a reliance on very young players should there be injuries in Super Rugby.
This makes complete sense.
of course it makes sense from an actual development angle....just not sure where the money is coming from....and the NPC teams / unions are still operating so thats not an additional cost like running a B comp will be
-
@SouthernMann said in Super Rugby 2026:
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
i find this kind of weird, dont think any of the teams are rolling in money and this has to be more expensive to run....surely leaning on the local NPC teams to develop players is the more sustainable model
Nah.
NPC unions are hard up financially as well.
Provincial contracts run from about July through to the end of September. There is limited ability to influence players from a high performance perspective when Super is being held.If the contracts are centrally held, it allows rugby in NZ to maintain a playing pool that previously went overseas and have less of a reliance on very young players should there be injuries in Super Rugby.
This makes complete sense.
of course it makes sense from an actual development angle....just not sure where the money is coming from....and the NPC teams / unions are still operating so thats not an additional cost like running a B comp will be
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
@SouthernMann said in Super Rugby 2026:
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
i find this kind of weird, dont think any of the teams are rolling in money and this has to be more expensive to run....surely leaning on the local NPC teams to develop players is the more sustainable model
Nah.
NPC unions are hard up financially as well.
Provincial contracts run from about July through to the end of September. There is limited ability to influence players from a high performance perspective when Super is being held.If the contracts are centrally held, it allows rugby in NZ to maintain a playing pool that previously went overseas and have less of a reliance on very young players should there be injuries in Super Rugby.
This makes complete sense.
of course it makes sense from an actual development angle....just not sure where the money is coming from....and the NPC teams / unions are still operating so thats not an additional cost like running a B comp will be
It is an additional cost if we want to keep the players in a high performance setting during the Super season.
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
@SouthernMann said in Super Rugby 2026:
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
i find this kind of weird, dont think any of the teams are rolling in money and this has to be more expensive to run....surely leaning on the local NPC teams to develop players is the more sustainable model
Nah.
NPC unions are hard up financially as well.
Provincial contracts run from about July through to the end of September. There is limited ability to influence players from a high performance perspective when Super is being held.If the contracts are centrally held, it allows rugby in NZ to maintain a playing pool that previously went overseas and have less of a reliance on very young players should there be injuries in Super Rugby.
This makes complete sense.
of course it makes sense from an actual development angle....just not sure where the money is coming from....and the NPC teams / unions are still operating so thats not an additional cost like running a B comp will be
It is an additional cost if we want to keep the players in a high performance setting during the Super season.
@SouthernMann said in Super Rugby 2026:
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
@SouthernMann said in Super Rugby 2026:
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
i find this kind of weird, dont think any of the teams are rolling in money and this has to be more expensive to run....surely leaning on the local NPC teams to develop players is the more sustainable model
Nah.
NPC unions are hard up financially as well.
Provincial contracts run from about July through to the end of September. There is limited ability to influence players from a high performance perspective when Super is being held.If the contracts are centrally held, it allows rugby in NZ to maintain a playing pool that previously went overseas and have less of a reliance on very young players should there be injuries in Super Rugby.
This makes complete sense.
of course it makes sense from an actual development angle....just not sure where the money is coming from....and the NPC teams / unions are still operating so thats not an additional cost like running a B comp will be
It is an additional cost if we want to keep the players in a high performance setting during the Super season.
thats not what i was suggesting
i was suggetsing a comprmise to use the existing system to delevop the next acps off the rank better in the super off season
not as good as having a whole second squad ready during....but also not as expenisve to run when teams generally arent making money and i doubt a B comp will generate more money than it spends
-
@SouthernMann said in Super Rugby 2026:
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
@SouthernMann said in Super Rugby 2026:
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
i find this kind of weird, dont think any of the teams are rolling in money and this has to be more expensive to run....surely leaning on the local NPC teams to develop players is the more sustainable model
Nah.
NPC unions are hard up financially as well.
Provincial contracts run from about July through to the end of September. There is limited ability to influence players from a high performance perspective when Super is being held.If the contracts are centrally held, it allows rugby in NZ to maintain a playing pool that previously went overseas and have less of a reliance on very young players should there be injuries in Super Rugby.
This makes complete sense.
of course it makes sense from an actual development angle....just not sure where the money is coming from....and the NPC teams / unions are still operating so thats not an additional cost like running a B comp will be
It is an additional cost if we want to keep the players in a high performance setting during the Super season.
thats not what i was suggesting
i was suggetsing a comprmise to use the existing system to delevop the next acps off the rank better in the super off season
not as good as having a whole second squad ready during....but also not as expenisve to run when teams generally arent making money and i doubt a B comp will generate more money than it spends
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
@SouthernMann said in Super Rugby 2026:
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
@SouthernMann said in Super Rugby 2026:
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
i find this kind of weird, dont think any of the teams are rolling in money and this has to be more expensive to run....surely leaning on the local NPC teams to develop players is the more sustainable model
Nah.
NPC unions are hard up financially as well.
Provincial contracts run from about July through to the end of September. There is limited ability to influence players from a high performance perspective when Super is being held.If the contracts are centrally held, it allows rugby in NZ to maintain a playing pool that previously went overseas and have less of a reliance on very young players should there be injuries in Super Rugby.
This makes complete sense.
of course it makes sense from an actual development angle....just not sure where the money is coming from....and the NPC teams / unions are still operating so thats not an additional cost like running a B comp will be
It is an additional cost if we want to keep the players in a high performance setting during the Super season.
thats not what i was suggesting
i was suggetsing a comprmise to use the existing system to delevop the next acps off the rank better in the super off season
not as good as having a whole second squad ready during....but also not as expenisve to run when teams generally arent making money and i doubt a B comp will generate more money than it spends
So your compromise is the status quo?
Where the problem is a lot of the guys miss out due to non All Black super players start each week and the layer under who are Super contracted don't get meaningful gametime? Often NPC doesn't develop next cab off the rank. There are a lot of guys who don't get opportunities due to log jams at their particular unions.
If NZR think this is affordable. It will be a very good step. Keeps players in NZ. Gives them meaningful games. Maintains them in a high performance setting.
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
@SouthernMann said in Super Rugby 2026:
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
@SouthernMann said in Super Rugby 2026:
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
i find this kind of weird, dont think any of the teams are rolling in money and this has to be more expensive to run....surely leaning on the local NPC teams to develop players is the more sustainable model
Nah.
NPC unions are hard up financially as well.
Provincial contracts run from about July through to the end of September. There is limited ability to influence players from a high performance perspective when Super is being held.If the contracts are centrally held, it allows rugby in NZ to maintain a playing pool that previously went overseas and have less of a reliance on very young players should there be injuries in Super Rugby.
This makes complete sense.
of course it makes sense from an actual development angle....just not sure where the money is coming from....and the NPC teams / unions are still operating so thats not an additional cost like running a B comp will be
It is an additional cost if we want to keep the players in a high performance setting during the Super season.
thats not what i was suggesting
i was suggetsing a comprmise to use the existing system to delevop the next acps off the rank better in the super off season
not as good as having a whole second squad ready during....but also not as expenisve to run when teams generally arent making money and i doubt a B comp will generate more money than it spends
So your compromise is the status quo?
Where the problem is a lot of the guys miss out due to non All Black super players start each week and the layer under who are Super contracted don't get meaningful gametime? Often NPC doesn't develop next cab off the rank. There are a lot of guys who don't get opportunities due to log jams at their particular unions.
If NZR think this is affordable. It will be a very good step. Keeps players in NZ. Gives them meaningful games. Maintains them in a high performance setting.
@SouthernMann sorry, didnlt realise we were only allowed to praise stuff...fairly clearly said "do better" implying a more offical "NPC us a Super B comp" rather than the half breed we currently have, you say the NPC doesnt often develop the next cap?....true....so let do better rather than starting something new
this just feel like more complexity to our system school>Club>NPC>Super B>Super WTC>Super>international
but almost all of those overlap is multiple ways and ive long want to simplify things, but thats my say, as you were
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
@SouthernMann said in Super Rugby 2026:
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
@SouthernMann said in Super Rugby 2026:
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
i find this kind of weird, dont think any of the teams are rolling in money and this has to be more expensive to run....surely leaning on the local NPC teams to develop players is the more sustainable model
Nah.
NPC unions are hard up financially as well.
Provincial contracts run from about July through to the end of September. There is limited ability to influence players from a high performance perspective when Super is being held.If the contracts are centrally held, it allows rugby in NZ to maintain a playing pool that previously went overseas and have less of a reliance on very young players should there be injuries in Super Rugby.
This makes complete sense.
of course it makes sense from an actual development angle....just not sure where the money is coming from....and the NPC teams / unions are still operating so thats not an additional cost like running a B comp will be
It is an additional cost if we want to keep the players in a high performance setting during the Super season.
thats not what i was suggesting
i was suggetsing a comprmise to use the existing system to delevop the next acps off the rank better in the super off season
not as good as having a whole second squad ready during....but also not as expenisve to run when teams generally arent making money and i doubt a B comp will generate more money than it spends
So your compromise is the status quo?
Where the problem is a lot of the guys miss out due to non All Black super players start each week and the layer under who are Super contracted don't get meaningful gametime? Often NPC doesn't develop next cab off the rank. There are a lot of guys who don't get opportunities due to log jams at their particular unions.
If NZR think this is affordable. It will be a very good step. Keeps players in NZ. Gives them meaningful games. Maintains them in a high performance setting.
@SouthernMann said in Super Rugby 2026:
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
@SouthernMann said in Super Rugby 2026:
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
@SouthernMann said in Super Rugby 2026:
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
i find this kind of weird, dont think any of the teams are rolling in money and this has to be more expensive to run....surely leaning on the local NPC teams to develop players is the more sustainable model
Nah.
NPC unions are hard up financially as well.
Provincial contracts run from about July through to the end of September. There is limited ability to influence players from a high performance perspective when Super is being held.If the contracts are centrally held, it allows rugby in NZ to maintain a playing pool that previously went overseas and have less of a reliance on very young players should there be injuries in Super Rugby.
This makes complete sense.
of course it makes sense from an actual development angle....just not sure where the money is coming from....and the NPC teams / unions are still operating so thats not an additional cost like running a B comp will be
It is an additional cost if we want to keep the players in a high performance setting during the Super season.
thats not what i was suggesting
i was suggetsing a comprmise to use the existing system to delevop the next acps off the rank better in the super off season
not as good as having a whole second squad ready during....but also not as expenisve to run when teams generally arent making money and i doubt a B comp will generate more money than it spends
So your compromise is the status quo?
Where the problem is a lot of the guys miss out due to non All Black super players start each week and the layer under who are Super contracted don't get meaningful gametime? Often NPC doesn't develop next cab off the rank. There are a lot of guys who don't get opportunities due to log jams at their particular unions.
If NZR think this is affordable. It will be a very good step. Keeps players in NZ. Gives them meaningful games. Maintains them in a high performance setting.
if it is affordable it has to be a good step to keeping players within the system and development of young players .
NPC doesn't always help the young players it helps some but you are right some are sitting behind SR players, this idea gives a wider pool of players a chance for better development. -
Have heard some rumours that they are looking at introducing a more formal Super Rugby B competition from next season onwards.
I suspect in its infancy this will look like the five NZ sides playing each other home and away, largely in double ups with the Super teams - though this is just a guess.
This might explain why there is so many squad rumours flying about, as seems WTGs are making a formal return.
Expect to see them formally announced alongside the 38 man full squads
@frugby said in Super Rugby 2026:
Have heard some rumours that they are looking at introducing a more formal Super Rugby B competition from next season onwards.
I suspect in its infancy this will look like the five NZ sides playing each other home and away, largely in double ups with the Super teams - though this is just a guess.
This might explain why there is so many squad rumours flying about, as seems WTGs are making a formal return.
Expect to see them formally announced alongside the 38 man full squads
Considering the Aussies are using their SR teams to run another short competition after SR, it seems daft to me to do the same and not simply extend the SR season.
-
@SouthernMann sorry, didnlt realise we were only allowed to praise stuff...fairly clearly said "do better" implying a more offical "NPC us a Super B comp" rather than the half breed we currently have, you say the NPC doesnt often develop the next cap?....true....so let do better rather than starting something new
this just feel like more complexity to our system school>Club>NPC>Super B>Super WTC>Super>international
but almost all of those overlap is multiple ways and ive long want to simplify things, but thats my say, as you were
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
@SouthernMann sorry, didnlt realise we were only allowed to praise stuff...fairly clearly said "do better" implying a more offical "NPC us a Super B comp" rather than the half breed we currently have, you say the NPC doesnt often develop the next cap?....true....so let do better rather than starting something new
this just feel like more complexity to our system school>Club>NPC>Super B>Super WTC>Super>international
but almost all of those overlap is multiple ways and ive long want to simplify things, but thats my say, as you were
You've completely lose me.
In terms of system. Often for some players it ends up being NPC>overseas contract and back to NPC. This means we lose them. Expanding the squads keeps them in country.
When do you plan on running this NPC to ensure it has players ready and available for Super? During the club season? Who has oversight and input around player development? The NPC unions? Who funds the extended season? Is it an extended season?
All this does is add another dozen players to the playing group. Keep the next layer in the country and ensure there is depth.
What is being proposed does simplify things. Playing group of 50ish at each Super base. Play half a dozen games.
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2026:
@SouthernMann sorry, didnlt realise we were only allowed to praise stuff...fairly clearly said "do better" implying a more offical "NPC us a Super B comp" rather than the half breed we currently have, you say the NPC doesnt often develop the next cap?....true....so let do better rather than starting something new
this just feel like more complexity to our system school>Club>NPC>Super B>Super WTC>Super>international
but almost all of those overlap is multiple ways and ive long want to simplify things, but thats my say, as you were
You've completely lose me.
In terms of system. Often for some players it ends up being NPC>overseas contract and back to NPC. This means we lose them. Expanding the squads keeps them in country.
When do you plan on running this NPC to ensure it has players ready and available for Super? During the club season? Who has oversight and input around player development? The NPC unions? Who funds the extended season? Is it an extended season?
All this does is add another dozen players to the playing group. Keep the next layer in the country and ensure there is depth.
What is being proposed does simplify things. Playing group of 50ish at each Super base. Play half a dozen games.
@SouthernMann it doesnt feel like you WANT to try and understand
not arguing at all that this should make for better depth...we can put that aside
its not just adding a dozen players though is it (although that seems like a lot for teams losing money)...its flying a whole second squad around to play games and all the support for those game
