Super Rugby - The Future
-
we've tried nothing and we are all out of ideas
-
Apparently ABs, Super players and the Black ferns are getting a pay increase next year. I can only assume it's a crap increase if all these players are still leaving...
One of my good mates plays at a shit club in the URC and gets around €200k (400k NZD). Compared to the 185k players are paid here, which is only for the top players, it's a no-brainer financially for mid-tier players to leave if they aren't making ABs.
-
@hikastags said in Exodus:
Apparently ABs, Super players and the Black ferns are getting a pay increase next year. I can only assume it's a crap increase if all these players are still leaving...
One of my good mates plays at a shit club in the URC and gets around €200k (400k NZD). Compared to the 185k players are paid here, which is only for the top players, it's a no-brainer financially for mid-tier players to leave if they aren't making ABs.
Well there you have it. Lets us Taina Fox-Matamua, who was a bit part player for Ta$man who ended up spending a few seasons at Zebre in the URC. He was nowhere near Super Rugby level yet if he can demand that sort of money (in that ballpark), then it's not only mid tier players that are going to be targetted by overseas clubs, we'll end up with fringe NPC players taking up super rugby spots going forward like we're already seeing happen (Mason Tupaea and Hamdahn Tuipulotu at the Blues being an example of that last season). This isn't even taking into account the MLR which is diluting the depth in this country.
So yes, our contract model is broken and as @mariner4life pointed out, the NPC is part of the problem (sadly).
-
@African-Monkey said in Exodus:
@hikastags said in Exodus:
Apparently ABs, Super players and the Black ferns are getting a pay increase next year. I can only assume it's a crap increase if all these players are still leaving...
One of my good mates plays at a shit club in the URC and gets around €200k (400k NZD). Compared to the 185k players are paid here, which is only for the top players, it's a no-brainer financially for mid-tier players to leave if they aren't making ABs.
Well there you have it. Lets us Taina Fox-Matamua, who was a bit part player for Ta$man who ended up spending a few seasons at Zebre in the URC. He was nowhere near Super Rugby level yet if he can demand that sort of money (in that ballpark), then it's not only mid tier players that are going to be targetted by overseas clubs, we'll end up with fringe NPC players taking up super rugby spots going forward like we're already seeing happen (Mason Tupaea and Hamdahn Tuipulotu at the Blues being an example of that last season). This isn't even taking into account the MLR which is diluting the depth in this country.
So yes, our contract model is broken and as @mariner4life pointed out, the NPC is part of the problem (sadly).
Hamdahn isn't super standard, but he was also used as a fourth / fifth choice due to an injury crisis. I'll add there's only a handful of super standard kiwi props playing overseas, Ainsley and Kaivelata? Bit rough on Tupaea by the way, he's fine as a third option, in this case he's a fourth option.
-
@mariner4life said in Exodus:
Also, the financials might make a little more sense if we had better product to sell.
That's a point a lot of people don't understand. They keep speaking like any changes will just shuffle the same amount of cash around. There's ways of making a much more compelling competition which would increase the revenue
-
@WoodysRFC said in Exodus:
@African-Monkey said in Exodus:
@hikastags said in Exodus:
Apparently ABs, Super players and the Black ferns are getting a pay increase next year. I can only assume it's a crap increase if all these players are still leaving...
One of my good mates plays at a shit club in the URC and gets around €200k (400k NZD). Compared to the 185k players are paid here, which is only for the top players, it's a no-brainer financially for mid-tier players to leave if they aren't making ABs.
Well there you have it. Lets us Taina Fox-Matamua, who was a bit part player for Ta$man who ended up spending a few seasons at Zebre in the URC. He was nowhere near Super Rugby level yet if he can demand that sort of money (in that ballpark), then it's not only mid tier players that are going to be targetted by overseas clubs, we'll end up with fringe NPC players taking up super rugby spots going forward like we're already seeing happen (Mason Tupaea and Hamdahn Tuipulotu at the Blues being an example of that last season). This isn't even taking into account the MLR which is diluting the depth in this country.
So yes, our contract model is broken and as @mariner4life pointed out, the NPC is part of the problem (sadly).
Hamdahn isn't super standard, but he was also used as a fourth / fifth choice due to an injury crisis. I'll add there's only a handful of super standard kiwi props playing overseas, Ainsley and Kaivelata? Bit rough on Tupaea by the way, he's fine as a third option, in this case he's a fourth option.
But that's my point, that guys like Hamdahn Tuipulotu are now this close to Super Rugby selection when he couldn't even crack the Auckland side and it's by no means a dig at Mason Tupaea, but he ended up playing about 8 games for the Blues last season, over half the regular season games when he wasm't even an established NPC player.
This will continue to happen going forward under our current model and these types of players are only gonna end up overseas themselves after a year or 2 as they know they've gone further than they thought they would have.
I remember when they were on the paddock when we played the Crusaders and lost late because of the scrum which was hammered by Fletcher Newell. People were waxing lyrical about how amazing Fletcher Newell was, but I was more concerned about the standard of props he was coming up against, and sure enough, he wasn't dominating anywhere near as much at the very top level of international rugby. Maybe our ABs are being ill advised as to how good they really are due to our domestic comp getting weaker and weaker?
-
That's a point a lot of people don't understand. They keep speaking like any changes will just shuffle the same amount of cash around. There's ways of making a much more compelling competition which would increase the revenue
One thing I think NZR has really got its head around, is the financials.
If there is any spare revenue floating around in the NZ economy, they'll be on to it in a flash.
Looks like NZR have kinda written off domestic pro rugby.
If there was any possibility of making a meaningful change, they'd have done it.
It is a just a drain on their line.It was compelling in olden times; 40 or 50,000 at a Ranfurly shield game; world class players all over the field . . . great days.
-
Professional rugby in NZ is essentially made up of three groups. All Blacks, fringe All Blacks and U26s.
The U26s either become established and push to the AB/fringe level or they go overseas. The timing of going overseas will also likely match the OEs of their non-rugby playing mates.
The ABs get paid huge salaries, so it isn't a major sacrafice to stay in NZ financially.
Living in Italy for a Super squad member (squaddie 28) would be much more enticing than splitting your time between New Plymouth/Invercargill and Dunedin/Hamilton.
We should be expecting to see fringe guys leave each year who have given it a shot ans just haven't quite made it.
-
So, what's the solution?
We're basically a vertically integrated company with three divisions - two of which run at a loss.
What can you do? One solution would be to sell off the loss makers to someone who can run them better, but lock them into a supply agreement.
Could we do this?
Well, maybe we could can Super rugby and convince the more wealthy Japanese to turn their League 1 into a version of the IPL where they have access to the best NZ and Oz players from January to June.
They get a much stronger competition and we get to shed a loss-making part of our development programme while still getting our players involved in good quality rugby - at probably higher salaries. And, as fans, we got to align ourselves with Wild Knights, Brave Lupus, etc....
-
They get a much stronger competition and we get to shed a loss-making part of our development programme while still getting our players involved in good quality rugby - at probably higher salaries. And, as fans, we got to align ourselves with Wild Knights, Brave Lupus, etc....
-
@mariner4life I think it was Chris Pringle who, when some Aussie in the crowd called him a sheep shagger replied, "Don't knock it till you've tried it".
If the problem is that we haven't got enough cash and there's no hope of making more ourselves from our non-internationals, we've probably got to look a bit further outside the box.
I'll tell you one of the things that worried me the most last year.
Remember the good old days when NZ and Fiji shared the rugby sevens crown - if we didn't win, they did - pretty much.
Last year we came seventh - miles behind Argentina - and well behind fucking Spain!!!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024–25_SVNS
Our decline is happening pretty much across the board.
-
look, while i applaud the outside the box thinking, this isn't like soccer where it's gonna be rugby and nothing else. if NZ's best players spend most of the year outside the country, and play in NZ 4-6 times a year, then you are just laying down, lubing up, and spreading your cheeks for the NRL.
The Kiwis would be fucking good though
-
The lengths people will go to to keep the NPC.
This is it.
Having 20 semi professional/professional teams across two competitions is stupid.
We will always export rugby players. What is disappointing is that we spend so much time developing players and some overseas union gets the benefits of our hard work.
-
The lengths people will go to to keep the NPC.
Yep, I want to keep the NPC. Why? Because it probably the best and enjoyable comp in the country. Does it cost NZR money, yep, but I only looking at it as what I want.
We stuck with trying to have a pro comp in a country of 5.5 mill people that's down the other side of world , so it's not going to be great and work for everyone, especially those who reside outside of the country. Super ain't going to run for longer , as we not only country in it, and both countries(as do most world wide) like it or not make most of their money from their test teams. And during July to September we play most tests etc to fund the game. So we got what we got, and we will lose the odd player overseas, but so be it.
The irony is a lot who are talking of exodus on forums have joined the exodus of the country anyway!
I -
The lengths people will go to to keep the NPC.
Yep, I want to keep the NPC. Why? Because it probably the best and enjoyable comp in the country. Does it cost NZR money, yep, but I only looking at it as what I want.
We stuck with trying to have a pro comp in a country of 5.5 mill people that's down the other side of world , so it's not going to be great and work for everyone, especially those who reside outside of the country. Super ain't going to run for longer , as we not only country in it, and both countries(as do most world wide) like it or not make most of their money from their test teams. And during July to September we play most tests etc to fund the game. So we got what we got, and we will lose the odd player overseas, but so be it.
The irony is a lot who are talking of exodus on forums have joined the exodus of the country anyway!
IAustralia would be keen to make more out of Super. They are now running domestic Super during our NPC.
A consistent international window that allows a longer domestic season and is one product would be the right fit.
International windows. Two. Have one domestic competition that runs from March - September. With an international window.
Your views on the NPC are well known and regularly stated. I generally like it. It just isn't viable to have 20 semi/professional sides.
While making changes would create a clear and consistent product. It won't stop players leaving for a more money and experiencss overseas.
-
@SouthernMann said in Exodus:
What is disappointing is that we spend so much time developing players and some overseas union gets the benefits of our hard work.
whats worse, is we are no longer developing players properly as they move to Super & AB rugby and they still leave....
-
@SouthernMann said in Exodus:
We will always export rugby players. What is disappointing is that we spend so much time developing players and some overseas union gets the benefits of our hard work.
We need to start demanding a transfer fee as not all players are off-contract when they leave. There are enough examples of players being granted an early release (usually from a PU contract) without any compensation.
-
@SouthernMann said in Exodus:
The lengths people will go to to keep the NPC.
Yep, I want to keep the NPC. Why? Because it probably the best and enjoyable comp in the country. Does it cost NZR money, yep, but I only looking at it as what I want.
We stuck with trying to have a pro comp in a country of 5.5 mill people that's down the other side of world , so it's not going to be great and work for everyone, especially those who reside outside of the country. Super ain't going to run for longer , as we not only country in it, and both countries(as do most world wide) like it or not make most of their money from their test teams. And during July to September we play most tests etc to fund the game. So we got what we got, and we will lose the odd player overseas, but so be it.
The irony is a lot who are talking of exodus on forums have joined the exodus of the country anyway!
IAustralia would be keen to make more out of Super. They are now running domestic Super during our NPC.
A consistent international window that allows a longer domestic season and is one product would be the right fit.
International windows. Two. Have one domestic competition that runs from March - September. With an international window.
Your views on the NPC are well known and regularly stated. I generally like it. It just isn't viable to have 20 semi/professional sides.
While making changes would create a clear and consistent product. It won't stop players leaving for a more money and experiencss overseas.
Yep mate, not saying I right, but genuinely don't believe Aus is interested in expanding super at all, the domestic super is just a glorified NPC with a different name, and (probably rightfully) using the names of existing teams etc to have a 3rd tier comp. It being used exactly as NPC, as way to blend in youngsters with experienced heads rather than ust going from academies to super.. Not saying it right or wrong, but as with NZ if you had full season super season, not only stuffs mid year tests, but bumps up pay etc.
-
@mariner4life said in Exodus:
look, while i applaud the outside the box thinking, this isn't like soccer where it's gonna be rugby and nothing else. if NZ's best players spend most of the year outside the country, and play in NZ 4-6 times a year, then you are just laying down, lubing up, and spreading your cheeks for the NRL.
The Kiwis would be fucking good though
In more out-of-the-box thinking, given that league was only created to allow players in Northern England to get paid - maybe now everyone is professional, it's time for the two codes to merge again?
The leaguies can't be that attached to their stupid fucking play the ball and shit scrums - and I wouldn't mind seeing possession having to be handed over after a certain number of phases.
Wouldn't the Kiwis be populated with showponies, surrender monkeys and guys who can't take the high ball?!!
