clevermike: yes I know but the articles I was trying to post are the latest info on this. They would not copy paste so I have put the links instead. Apparently this is not a dead issue at all.
Very bad idea IMO for SA rugby. Seems most likely result is a SA / Arg conference and then a NZ / Aus conference. Which means Super Rugby becomes a glorified Currie Cup. Would get rid of everything that made Super Rugby so interesting, handicap SA's competitive advantage of routinely playing teams from the Top 3 in the world. If this is the end result of SARU's six team insistence then put it on SARU's scorebard in the stupid column.
Would much rather see two nine or ten team conferences - 1st Division and 2nd Division with bottom 2 / top 2 demotions and promotions. Shortens the season, creates something to play for and is inclusive. The log positions from the year preceding the switchover to the new format would dictate which teams start in which division. All new teams would be in 2nd Division.
I like the core concept of six South African teams/regions/unions if it means that the rest of the smaller unions merge with one of the six. Would free up a ton of cash for the Springboks.
i like the idea of a two tier conferences with relegation and promotional incentives too, but i also think SANZAR should take a look at how the heinken cup is run, with 4 pools and everyone in their pool players each other twice both home and away.
for this happen, there would have to be a 16th team and IMO that would be best served if its from SA, not argentina.
i dont know if argentina getting a club is what they need for them to progress, but rather the spXV franchises across the SANZAR countries should start recruiting as many puma players as possible.
this will help strengthen conferences like australia who are using NZs super rugby scrap heap to prop up their credentials and SA who have since the beginning of super rugby been responsible for 50% of all the bottom 3 teams as a whole.
using the 2013 spXV ladder as a positional template,,,
A
chiefs (1), reds (5), waratahs (9), force (13)
B
bulls (2), cheetahs (6), blues (10), highlanders(14)
C
brumbies (3), storm (7), hurricanes (11), kings (15)
D
crusaders (4), sharks (8), rebels (12), lions (16)
every team in their respective pools play each twice both home and away.
also throw in inter-conference matches as well, like each home conferences respective leaders also play each other in a home and away eg the 2013 conference leaders chiefs v bulls v brumbies, the conference No2s crusaders v reds v cheetahs
this gives the lower tier teams a chance as they are guaranteed to face each other while the top dogs like bulls and chiefs will ensure many eyes glued to the tv for the higher ups coveted ratings.
then the top 2 teams in every pool go into a quarter final play off with a week off in between the quarters, semifinals and finals to avoid traveling snafus.
that means the most any team can play is 15 games, which 4 games less then what any team playing in the finals in the current format had to play like the chiefs and brumbies this year.
obviously a rough draft that needs to be polished, but its less games for our already overworked players and we still get the much loved NZ vs OZ vs SA battles.
