Sixth South African team will be introduced in 2016

This way we have a least 4 1/2 teams in the comp.

 

If they don't split Super Rugby into two conferences, this is a joke.

As a 6th team in NZ would also be. And as a 5th team in Australia already is.

I'm less concerned if they end up heading down a conference system as I'm deadset against any increase in the fixture list.

 

Argentina and Japan are looking reasonably likely, I think - with a two-conference system to keep the season manageable and the travel costs down.

 

That probably makes more sense than what is likely to eventuate. I cannot imagine the ARU agreeing to the Force being in an RSA conference. Which will inevitably mean either the loss of an Australian team or unbalanced conferences or additional teams in South Africa.

6 RSA + 2 ARG
5 AUS + 5 NZ + Japan

A USA/Canada team has been alluded to as well, but that'd make travel ridiculous and putting Japan in with RSA + ARG is non-sensical.

 

Need national competitions as the elite level, like real sports.

 

Yours is the worst idea of the lot.

Most of the money made is between two local teams. Gates are higher, TV audiences are higher.

Higher costs are incurred in matches between non-local teams.

Therefore, Profit is maximised in matches between local teams. Plus, as an added benefit, player burn out is less likely.

So, making any potential Conferences geographically based is a no-brainer.

They will not split the three countries 50/50. That'd be ridiculous on so many levels.

From my point of view, they're just milking every possible cent out of Super Rugby, despite ever increasing levels of rugby fatigue amongst traditional fanbases, there will be no appetite at the highest level to actually reduce the amount of rugby played in order to maximise the quality.

 

You don't have to agree with me on a personal basis. In fact, I don't necessarily agree with it on a personal basis, but it's a statistical fact which was used to underpin the existing (ridiculous) model for Super Rugby.