Super Rugby - The Future
-
@nzzp said in Super Rugby 2024:
@mariner4life interesting
I pulled up 2019 Super for comparison as it didn't have any Covid hangovers. Started 15 Feb through to 6 July. It's just too long.
How is it too long? In 2019 there were 16 super games, which is still shorter than every other comp.
@ruggabee said in Super Rugby 2024:
@nzzp said in Super Rugby 2024:
@mariner4life interesting
I pulled up 2019 Super for comparison as it didn't have any Covid hangovers. Started 15 Feb through to 6 July. It's just too long.
How is it too long? In 2019 there were 16 super games, which is still shorter than every other comp.
In 1997 the comp finished in May, before the internationals. That's a good comp length
-
@gt12 said in Super Rugby 2024:
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby 2024:
if you ask a large amount of people of a certain vintage (ie the demographics of this forum) they'll point to somewhere about 1997 as the pinnacle. Super 12 was new and exciting and awesome. ABs played the NPC in front of big crowds and it was awesome. The ABs won heaps, the Tri Nations was new and awesome. So how did they fit it all? I had a quick look
in 1997 the season was broken up like this
Super 12 Feb 28 to May 24th
3 AB tests (Fiji and Argentina x2) in June
3N July 19 to August 23
NPC August 15 to October 26 (9 teams)
AB Tour 4 tests in November (12 tests for the year)In 2022, the season was
Super Rugby February 18 to June 18
3 AB tests in July (Ireland)
Rugby Championship August 6 to September 24
NPC August 5 to Oct 22
AB 4 tests in November (13 for the year)Effectively we have just stretched the same number of games out, and completely removed the top 35-40 players in the country from any tier 2 rugby for half the season (and spread the talent across more teams)
I grabbed one random player, and Andrew Mehrtens played 23 games in 1997 (7 Super Games, 6 tests and all 10 NPC games). In 2022 Ardie Savea played 22 games, 11 Super Rugby and 11 tests.I don't really have a point, other than it is interesting that we have the same basic structure 27 years later, but interpreted differently.
Would take a little more investigation, but i wonder that the difference a year looks like for an AB squad player now as opposed to 97?Really interesting post.
I guess the biggest difference between then and now is the battering that player bodies take, especially if they play in most of the test matches.
My feeling is that the Super / NPC division should be put out to pasture - that is too many teams and not enough focus on having the best players with their squad for most of the year. The way to get around it is to have players with a new competition and the ABs, so we would have Super, then break for ABs, then more Super, then more ABs.
Without really thinking, I wonder whether we should (1) add some Japanese teams to a cross-over super competition that acts as a club Championship / Plate (maybe we might need a bowl) with teams seeded based on their J-League and home competition results. That would be 'Super' rugby in my model and teams would play with their 'home' teams with quite big squads.
In place of NPC, I would (2) add two-three super teams (which would be the shit fight) and play a local competition with our 'super' sides , under which I'd run 'reserve' super sides, and players could go up and down as needed. Australia could do the same thing and I would suggest they take on Moana Pasifika to add teams. This competition would be the qualification for which division you play in for Super rugby club championship.
Mate can you hear the whinging about breaking for test season though? Basically stopping a comp for 2 months or even 6 weeks won't work.
And looking for answers with all due respect, I don't give a f*** what NRL does with Origin etc. This is rugby with a completely different set of rules/values etc. As I said the beauty and curse of our game is test rugby is the high point. Add to that the complexity of the game where yoy can't throw a team together and expect a good performance , it's even more than apples and oranges comparison I think.
-
@ruggabee said in Super Rugby 2024:
@nzzp said in Super Rugby 2024:
@mariner4life interesting
I pulled up 2019 Super for comparison as it didn't have any Covid hangovers. Started 15 Feb through to 6 July. It's just too long.
How is it too long? In 2019 there were 16 super games, which is still shorter than every other comp.
In 1997 the comp finished in May, before the internationals. That's a good comp length
@nzzp said in Super Rugby 2024:
@ruggabee said in Super Rugby 2024:
@nzzp said in Super Rugby 2024:
@mariner4life interesting
I pulled up 2019 Super for comparison as it didn't have any Covid hangovers. Started 15 Feb through to 6 July. It's just too long.
How is it too long? In 2019 there were 16 super games, which is still shorter than every other comp.
In 1997 the comp finished in May, before the internationals. That's a good comp length
But back then League and AFL didn't completely rule the market like they do now.
-
How's the reading comprehension? As I explained it, there would be two competitions for the same team (one club championship, one local).
That sounds like a fair balance to keep the test schedule as is, which we probably can't change.
@gt12 said in Super Rugby 2024:
How's the reading comprehension? As I explained it, there would be two competitions for the same team (one club championship, one local).
That sounds like a fair balance to keep the test schedule as is, which we probably can't change.
You don't want me to read things properly do you gt?? Yep I can see that working, (lol have suggested it fot Aus in a forum there) ,perhaps I just like NPC for all it's problems. But a local super one with proviso it not played at main stadiums wouldn't be that bad,
-
I reckon NZR 'peaked' as such circa 2015, we had several legends of the game, high profile players, role models etc and they stayed in NZ.
Since then, the money pit that is European rugby has continued to pay players (probably close to what they might be worth) more than they can afford and keep pushing values up, meaning we are losing more and more players earlier in thier careers, eroding our once.enviable player depth.
This has started in the past few years (accelerated by covid imo) to stretch our resources at super level, affecting the quality of both players and games.
I wonder what the average age of teams have been over the years, again, I reckon the late 2000s through to 2015 the average age probably rose, but likely back on the way down.
Bit of a mish mash post, but think I made my points.
-
every sporting competition has shit teams in it. What administrators aim for is that those teams have, in the eyes of their fans anyway, a chance to win on any given weekend, and that bad teams can develop in to good teams.
The AFL have got it pretty much right. The NRL a bit less so but with the odd exception, teams have gone up and down the ladder.
For whatever reason Super rugby has not.
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby 2024:
every sporting competition has shit teams in it. What administrators aim for is that those teams have, in the eyes of their fans anyway, a chance to win on any given weekend, and that bad teams can develop in to good teams.
Rugby Union in the Pacific is basically Ice Hockey in North America. If we're to prevent it from dying here you only need to look at the NHL for a template.
Allowing free movements of players in the competition, regardless of nationality, moving away from national identity the Brumbies aren't an Australian team, they're a team from Canberra. Same thing with the Chiefs and Hamilton. The Australian talent pool will never be as good as the NZ talent pool for obvious reasons, how are Australian teams ever supposed to get on NZ's level?
Just look at the NHL example, it's the exact analogue, in the sense that you have two countries, one small that cares a lot about the sport (Canada/NZ) and a big country where the sport is very niche (US/Aus). In the NHL most teams are American and most players are Canadian. A Canadian team hasn't won in decades and yet Canadians are still crazy about it.
-
That's actually really fucking on point
-
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby 2024:
every sporting competition has shit teams in it. What administrators aim for is that those teams have, in the eyes of their fans anyway, a chance to win on any given weekend, and that bad teams can develop in to good teams.
Rugby Union in the Pacific is basically Ice Hockey in North America. If we're to prevent it from dying here you only need to look at the NHL for a template.
Allowing free movements of players in the competition, regardless of nationality, moving away from national identity the Brumbies aren't an Australian team, they're a team from Canberra. Same thing with the Chiefs and Hamilton. The Australian talent pool will never be as good as the NZ talent pool for obvious reasons, how are Australian teams ever supposed to get on NZ's level?
Just look at the NHL example, it's the exact analogue, in the sense that you have two countries, one small that cares a lot about the sport (Canada/NZ) and a big country where the sport is very niche (US/Aus). In the NHL most teams are American and most players are Canadian. A Canadian team hasn't won in decades and yet Canadians are still crazy about it.
@ruggabee said in Super Rugby 2024:
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby 2024:
every sporting competition has shit teams in it. What administrators aim for is that those teams have, in the eyes of their fans anyway, a chance to win on any given weekend, and that bad teams can develop in to good teams.
Rugby Union in the Pacific is basically Ice Hockey in North America. If we are to prevent it from dying out you only need to look at the NHL for a template.
Allowing free movements of players in the competition, regardless of nationality, moving away from national identity the Brumbies aren't an Australian team, they're a team from Canberra. Same thing with the Chiefs and Hamilton. The Australian talent pool will never be as good as the NZ talent pool for obvious reasons, how are the Australian teams ever supposed to get on the NZ level? Just look at the NHL example, it's the exact analogue, in the sense that you have two countries, one small that cares a lot about the sport (Canada/NZ) and a big country where the sport is very niche (US/Aus). In the NHL most teams are American and most players are Canadian. A Canadian team hasn't won in decades and yet Canadians are still crazy about it.
The key difference here though is the club fanatical support. The US Fans support their team first and foremost and don't have too much care factor for the make up of the team. It's the same as the Premier League up here.
I just can't see Australians supporting Australian teams full of Kiwis. I think it would end up with mainly a NZ expat crowd. Perhaps it already is this way in some areas, but can you imagine any support at all from the Sydney money men of a Tahs team full of Kiwis?
Kearns/Waugh and co would never ever let that happens. They'd rather a shit box losing Tahs team full of Aussies over a succesful one full of expats.
-
Weird isn't it?
NRL crowds couldn't give a fuck where their star player comes from, as long as they win
Big Bash teams are made up of people from everywhere
AFL don't give even a tiny shit where their players come from
Basketball? I would cheer a guy from and country on the planet if he brought the Taipans a championshipSo why do rugby fans care so much?
-
Weird isn't it?
NRL crowds couldn't give a fuck where their star player comes from, as long as they win
Big Bash teams are made up of people from everywhere
AFL don't give even a tiny shit where their players come from
Basketball? I would cheer a guy from and country on the planet if he brought the Taipans a championshipSo why do rugby fans care so much?
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby 2024:
Weird isn't it?
NRL crowds couldn't give a fuck where their star player comes from, as long as they win
Big Bash teams are made up of people from everywhere
AFL don't give even a tiny shit where their players come from
Basketball? I would cheer a guy from and country on the planet if he brought the Taipans a championshipSo why do rugby fans care so much?
To be honest, I could be wrong.
I'm basing these thoughts on personal experiences in that I've spent the lions share of my career working with people from the elite schools in Sydney and they are pretty much so all like Kearns. My two visits to SFS to watch teams play the Tahs fully back up and reinforce this point of view.
Part of the reason I really like the Force is they seem to be the polar opposite of this.
-
You're not wrong
It's because, here in Australasia, rugby is a national game
It's kiwis v Aussies
We hate them, they hate us.
That's how it's marketed, that's how it's presentedBut, I reckon if DMac led.the Reds to championship they would love him.
-
Though, as a counter point, the Tahs have won precisely one comp in their existence
Where was their best forward from?
-
@mariner4life Braid at the Reds was another example of acceptance.
@Tim said in Super Rugby 2024:
@mariner4life Braid at the Reds was another example of acceptance.
Different point though. The odd player here/there vs a team chock full.
Tipping point would probably be 3-4 players I reckon. That number is based on absolutely nothing other than a guess.
-
The Force fans seem to support their team even though it's largely made up of players from outside the region and outside the country.
I think fans would get on board, provided the players are actually good. It's tough having a bad local player in your team but it's much tougher having a bad non-local player.
I think the bigger difference between Super and the NHL is the existence of the international scene. NZR are (somewhat understandably) worried that having players based all over APAC will harm the All Blacks, which is not a moot point.
-
@Tim said in Super Rugby 2024:
@mariner4life Braid at the Reds was another example of acceptance.
Different point though. The odd player here/there vs a team chock full.
Tipping point would probably be 3-4 players I reckon. That number is based on absolutely nothing other than a guess.
@MajorRage said in Super Rugby 2024:
@Tim said in Super Rugby 2024:
@mariner4life Braid at the Reds was another example of acceptance.
Different point though. The odd player here/there vs a team chock full.
Tipping point would probably be 3-4 players I reckon. That number is based on absolutely nothing other than a guess.
i dont think you're wrong...i do wonder if it would change if a brumbies/tahs/reds team half full of kiwis...actually won...a lot...i think we'd start seeing what we see with any successful person from this side of the world...terms like "austrilasian" or "ANZAC" would start getting thrown around....i think success trumps all...and if they at least gave a nod to that success helping to develop the next generation of local school boys...the fans would get on board
-
If more Kiwis played for Aussie teams I' d be worried about the Wallabies poaching a player or two.
-
If more Kiwis played for Aussie teams I' d be worried about the Wallabies poaching a player or two.
@Crazy-Horse said in Super Rugby 2024:
If more Kiwis played for Aussie teams I' d be worried about the Wallabies poaching a player or two.
That would have to be a long term strategy and I don't think they've the nous to do that.
8.1 Subject to Regulation 8.2, a Player may only play for the senior fifteen-a-side National Representative Team, the next senior fifteen-a-side National Representative Team and the senior National Representative Sevens Team of the Union of the country with which the Player has a genuine, close, credible and established national link in which:
(a) the Player was born; or
(b) one parent or grandparent was born; or
(c) the Player has completed sixty [1] consecutive months of Residence immediately preceding the time of playing; or
(d) the Player has completed ten years of cumulative Residence preceding the time of playing.
-
If more Kiwis played for Aussie teams I' d be worried about the Wallabies poaching a player or two.
@Crazy-Horse quite possibly, my feeling is a player or two shouldnt be a reason not to do something if it might save franchise/club rugby in the pacific
two things i am more and more feeling...all blacks rugby is at its strongest when the wallabies a strong...competition breeds excellence
if we can make a more competitive and attractive competition then we'll bring through more and more talent to replace people that go overseas, holding on to players because we're afraid of loosing them, and possibly giving AB contracts to people that are getting on...just in case...is possibly also hindering the development of young people coming through so they dont see a future
-
D Duluth referenced this topic on
