Northern | US

The elephant in the room with New Zealand's professional rugby model

WELLINGTON, NEW ZEALAND - JULY 12: Codie Taylor of New Zealand leads the haka during the International Test Match between New Zealand All Blacks and France at Sky Stadium on July 12, 2025 in Wellington, New Zealand. (Photo by Hagen Hopkins/Getty Images)
Comments
2 comments

Super Rugby can work, provided everyone’s happy to take a significant haircut.

We pay athletes too much money. Not just here, but lots of places too.

I read with interest comments from Hurricanes chairman Malcolm Gillies, in recent days. In a nutshell, he says New Zealand’s Super Rugby Pacific franchises are stuffed and we need private owners with more money than sense to bail everyone out.

ADVERTISEMENT

Like private equity firm Silver Lake, who were going to save New Zealand Rugby (NZR).

Private equity firms sound great. Take the one who bought Premier League football club Chelsea and are about to embark on a massive firesale of their playing staff once they miss Champions League qualification.

Video Spacer

Will the Crusaders keep Fainga’anuku at 7? | RP

The Aotearoa Rugby Pod crew breakdown what Leicester Fainga’anuku’s role was at 7 for the Crusaders and ask if they’ll continue to experiment against the competition leading Hurricanes.

Watch now

Video Spacer

Will the Crusaders keep Fainga’anuku at 7? | RP

The Aotearoa Rugby Pod crew breakdown what Leicester Fainga’anuku’s role was at 7 for the Crusaders and ask if they’ll continue to experiment against the competition leading Hurricanes.

Player wages mean the club’s already haemorrhaging money, which would only become worse when revenue gets slashed next season. The bottom line here is the asset they paid billions for is becoming increasingly distressed.

New Zealand Cricket can’t pay its way. Ah, but private investment will fix that. Yes, foreign owners – preferably Indian – will buy Twenty20 teams in this country and save our unsustainable financial model.

Why is Moana Pasifika on the skids? The costs outweigh the earnings.

And what do teams spend money on? Players. Coaches and support staff, to an extent, but ostensibly players.

ADVERTISEMENT

Why was NZR needing to raise capital, when it possesses the greatest brand in world rugby? They pay players too much.

Why do we send guys on sabbatical to Japan and severely deplete Super Rugby? To satisfy those players’ hunger for money.

Let’s go back to Moana Pasifika. This time last year they were the darlings of this competition, boasting a star player who would be crowned MVP of Super Rugby Pacific well before the last balls were kicked.

This time around Ardie Savea is in Japan and Moana Pasifika is headed for oblivion.

ADVERTISEMENT

Unless, of course, someone who’s happy to lose money hand over fist arrives at the eleventh hour to prop them back up.

Others better versed than me will explain what happened to say, Wasps, in English premiership rugby. They’ll tell me why professional rugby in Wales faces a potential crisis.

And I’ll ask them what the revenues of those clubs are and how much they’re paying to players.

Rugby needs a rationalisation here. Toyota can afford to bankroll a professional rugby team, but how many other private owners, equity firms or governing bodies across the globe are in the same boat?

When the Private Investment Fund of Saudi Arabia announces they’re significantly scaling back their spend on sports leagues and teams, it behoves the rest of us to take notice.

Ask the ratepayers of Christchurch how much they need the Crusaders to remain a going concern. One NZ Stadium looks magnificent, but it didn’t come cheap.

Yes, it’ll host events and concerts – and it’ll need to, in order to wash its face. But professional rugby is the week-to-week banker for that stadium.

Well, rather than crossing our fingers that sovereign wealth funds or philanthropic billionaires will sustain our teams and competitions, we actually have to look at how much we’re spending on them and whether that’s sensible.

I worked in Wellington for a long time, where the local union cut funding to its NPC team. Development and community staff went too.

No-one ever takes a scalpel to the part of the game that soaks up all the money.

I’ve heard all the arguments about New Zealand needing to pay its players to stay. For a while, there was probably an element of truth to them.

But, realistically, where are they all going to go? Which clubs could afford to pay dozens of elite New Zealand players, should they all turn their backs on this country?

I want Super Rugby to succeed. We need professional rugby in this part of the world. But before we worry about asking South Africa or Japan back, we have to look at how much we spend on players and whether that’s worth it?

We’re always looking for new revenue streams, we’re always trying to tap new markets, we’re always hoping to attract new investors, but we’re never prepared to live within our means.

That’s where I’d start.

Watch Super Rugby Pacific live and free on RugbyPassTV in the USA! 

ADVERTISEMENT
Play Video
LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

2 Comments
S
SB 36 mins ago

The thing is NZR contracts have to be relatively competitive in comparison to overseas offers, everyone has a price. One day NZ will be forced to pick anyone from anywhere though, it’s only a matter of time this happens.

J
JW 1 hr ago

Super Rugby can work, provided everyone’s happy to take a significant haircut.

What is “Super Rugby”?

which would only become worse when revenue gets slashed next season.

Just the lose of CL revenue you mean?


Obviously this is a garbage article (NZR spend %37 on players lowest of most sources, though the governance model is different everywhere) but I really do think NZRs expenditure needs to be better used to keep rugby at the top in NZ (or get there, w/e). I don’t think the All Blacks need 5 players (SR spots) of international standard in every position, I would reduce NZRs payment pool down to three regional teams (your “super rugby” teams or w/e). That will still provide great depth for the ABs, while saving a chunk of money.


Obviously this is a two part idea, less teams means a much smaller window, and so to fill the season out is where you bring in this ‘sustainable’ model that this article hints at. It’s irrelevant to me if that is a union spending most of it’s money on it’s provincial team, or on its grass roots/development base. It is a organic market where whatever works works. If having the biggest budget team keeps rugby popular in your province, and the foundation of it’s future teams remains strong because of it, so be it. If instead it’s spent on staff or facilities and the team has better players coming through as a result, great, but I don’t by the current argument that a union like Northland is going to be worse off at NPC level because its put its funds into kids participation etc. I think that’s nonsense.


That is of course with a holistic view, one of perpetuality. I don’t doubt short term measures would be in order if things were to change competition wise (and even still from the various NPC restructures.


But I would like NZR to try a different model, far more niche star focused model, one based on bring players back to NZ than holding onto them, and then below that and organic and sustainable game where club rugby is pitted against provincial rugby, and you can even have wealthy owners funding clubs teams good enough to enter Super Rugby, or NPC sides where the unions players want to represent their home so much that they also end up better than most SR sides.

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Long Reads

Comments on RugbyPass

Close Panel
Close Panel

Edition & Time Zone

{{current.name}}
Set time zone automatically
{{selectedTimezoneTitle}} (auto)
Choose a different time zone
Close Panel

Editions

Close Panel

Change Time Zone

Close
ADVERTISEMENT
Copied to clipboard

Share Article close