Super Rugby News
-
The Tuggeranong Viking product has progressed through the Brumbies’ ACT Junior Representative grades and Academy structure and will join fellow junior internationals Noah Lolesio and Nick Frost in the squad for 2020.
So after a year or so in the Crusaders academy, Frost hasn't only played for Australia U20 but he also got a Brumbies' contract.
-
I can't really see what huge "extras" Jordie has been given. Essentially signed a 1 year contract with Canes and put them on notice that he might move. Oh whoop de Doo. Wasn't it his 3rd year of super rugby this year? Sounds very fair to me.
I moved country to play rugby with my brother before I got too old and I wasn't getting paid for it. With a 6 year age difference I didn't get to do it much growing up. What's the age difference between him and Beauden?
-
@Tim can't see a downside if we keep them in NZ
IMO, one downside is that frachises want to build a team for the future, not just for one season. Some players will be key cogs in the plans for the future and the uncertainty that results from contracts like Jordie's is that they cannot include those players in their mid- to long-term plans. To a degree this is similar to players on one-year contracts, but some of the players on one-year contracts (like Ryan Crotty, for example), have such short-term contract because they're considering a move overseas after a long career, while others - rookies - have short-term contracts because they still have to prove that they are good enough for SR level. Neither of these players will be part of mid- to long-term plans, unlike established SR players who are not yet at that stage in their career/life that they'll be considering a move offshore (like Jordie).
Another thing is that each team will have its own intelectual property. If players can switch teams this easily, that intellectual property can get easily lost (and will be known to other squads soon).
From a fan perspective, players who are on a contract like Jordie's can also be seen as having limited loyalty to their current franchise. Players being able to swap SR franchises due to this kind of contract will not attract the same kind of support as players who are seen as loyal team players.
Edited to add that I also don't like one possible consequence of this kind of contract: that franchises try to lure other franchises' players to their squad. If one squad is richer than another, they can basically buy their squad instead of developing it. It may lead to poaching, favouring richer franchises. It also adds another question mark to NZR's involvement in the Blues, the only squad in which they have a stake.
-
IMO, one downside is that frachises want to build a team for the future, not just for one season. Some players will be key cogs in the plans for the future and the uncertainty that results from contracts like Jordie's is that they cannot include those players in their mid- to long-term plans. To a degree this is similar to players on one-year contracts, but some of the players on one-year contracts (like Ryan Crotty, for example), have such short-term contract because they're considering a move overseas after a long career, while others - rookies - have short-term contracts because they still have to prove that they are good enough for SR level. Neither of these players will be part of mid- to long-term plans, unlike established SR players who are not yet at that stage in their career/life that they'll be considering a move offshore (like Jordie).
Another thing is that each team will have its own intelectual property. If players can switch teams this easily, that intellectual property can get easily lost (and will be known to other squads soon).
From a fan perspective, players who are on a contract like Jordie's can also be seen as having limited loyalty to their current franchise. Players being able to swap SR franchises due to this kind of contract will not attract the same kind of support as players who are seen as loyal team players.
Edited to add that I also don't like one possible consequence of this kind of contract: that franchises try to lure other franchises' players to their squad. If one squad is richer than another, they can basically buy their squad instead of developing it. It may lead to poaching, favouring richer franchises. It also adds another question mark to NZR's involvement in the Blues, the only squad in which they have a stake.
@Stargazer IMO none of that really matters when we are talking about Super Rugby, which is a professional rugby league with teams that are "franchises" anyway, with manufactured supporter bases.
-
IMO, one downside is that frachises want to build a team for the future, not just for one season. Some players will be key cogs in the plans for the future and the uncertainty that results from contracts like Jordie's is that they cannot include those players in their mid- to long-term plans. To a degree this is similar to players on one-year contracts, but some of the players on one-year contracts (like Ryan Crotty, for example), have such short-term contract because they're considering a move overseas after a long career, while others - rookies - have short-term contracts because they still have to prove that they are good enough for SR level. Neither of these players will be part of mid- to long-term plans, unlike established SR players who are not yet at that stage in their career/life that they'll be considering a move offshore (like Jordie).
Another thing is that each team will have its own intelectual property. If players can switch teams this easily, that intellectual property can get easily lost (and will be known to other squads soon).
From a fan perspective, players who are on a contract like Jordie's can also be seen as having limited loyalty to their current franchise. Players being able to swap SR franchises due to this kind of contract will not attract the same kind of support as players who are seen as loyal team players.
Edited to add that I also don't like one possible consequence of this kind of contract: that franchises try to lure other franchises' players to their squad. If one squad is richer than another, they can basically buy their squad instead of developing it. It may lead to poaching, favouring richer franchises. It also adds another question mark to NZR's involvement in the Blues, the only squad in which they have a stake.
@Stargazer so better he leaves NZ all together than 'mess with the canes plans'' for the future?
-
@Stargazer so better he leaves NZ all together than 'mess with the canes plans'' for the future?
@taniwharugby said in Super Rugby News:
@Stargazer so better he leaves NZ all together than 'mess with the canes plans'' for the future?
Did he say that?
Better he just goes to the blues a year early, seeing as he’s planning on doing so anyway.
-
@taniwharugby said in Super Rugby News:
@Stargazer so better he leaves NZ all together than 'mess with the canes plans'' for the future?
Did he say that?
Better he just goes to the blues a year early, seeing as he’s planning on doing so anyway.
-
@Stargazer so better he leaves NZ all together than 'mess with the canes plans'' for the future?
-
@SammyC not what he said but has said that jordies plans (or lack thereof) affect the canes.
Sure an extreme way if looking at it, but it is still valid.
@taniwharugby said in Super Rugby News:
@SammyC not what he said but has said that jordies plans (or lack thereof) affect the canes.
Sure an extreme way if looking at it, but it is still valid.
It’s a stupid way of looking at it.
You asked him for the downsides of the current arrangement and he gave them. You then suggested that the other option is that he goes overseas.
Surely the more plausible other option is that he just signs for the blues for 3 seasons.
-
@taniwharugby Did you just make that up, because I didn't say that! You said you didn't see downsides. I just summed up what I see as downsides.
IMO, one downside is that frachises want to build a team for the future, not just for one season.
So you are saying it is bad...I am saying worse would be him leaving NZ all together...which was probably not gonna happen anyway given him wanting to play alongside his bros, but if he doesn't get flexibility he wants, maybe he looks off shore.
-
@taniwharugby said in Super Rugby News:
@SammyC not what he said but has said that jordies plans (or lack thereof) affect the canes.
Sure an extreme way if looking at it, but it is still valid.
It’s a stupid way of looking at it.
You asked him for the downsides of the current arrangement and he gave them. You then suggested that the other option is that he goes overseas.
Surely the more plausible other option is that he just signs for the blues for 3 seasons.
-
IMO, one downside is that frachises want to build a team for the future, not just for one season.
So you are saying it is bad...I am saying worse would be him leaving NZ all together...which was probably not gonna happen anyway given him wanting to play alongside his bros, but if he doesn't get flexibility he wants, maybe he looks off shore.
@taniwharugby said in Super Rugby News:
IMO, one downside is that frachises want to build a team for the future, not just for one season.
So you are saying it is bad...I am saying worse would be him leaving NZ all together...which was probably not gonna happen anyway given him wanting to play alongside his bros, but if he doesn't get flexibility he wants, maybe he looks off shore.
Or maybe he would have committed to one franchise for three years (Canes, Blues or another one).
I summed up some downsides. I didn't say there can't be upsides. You're making assumptions ("So you are saying it is bad") about what I think based on things I haven't said.
-
@SammyC I never ASKED anything...I said I didn't see any downside, it was a statement.
I honestly don't care what NZ side he plays for, I just like keeping our players in NZ.
@taniwharugby said in [Super Rugby News](/post/352283
I honestly don't care what NZ side he plays for, I just like keeping our players in NZ.
@taniwharugby said in Super Rugby News:
I honestly don't care what NZ side he plays for, I just like keeping our players in NZ.
Isn’t the whole reason for moving that he wants to play with his brothers?
How would that happen if he moved overseas? I still don’t see your logic.
-
Nobody forced the Canes to sign Jordie did they? Not sure why people are getting their knickers in a twist over this. Like TR said, I am just happy he hasn't buggered off overseas.
-
Nobody forced the Canes to sign Jordie did they? Not sure why people are getting their knickers in a twist over this. Like TR said, I am just happy he hasn't buggered off overseas.
@Crazy-Horse said in Super Rugby News:
Nobody forced the Canes to sign Jordie did they?
When did anyone on here imply that was the case?
-
Nobody forced the Canes to sign Jordie did they? Not sure why people are getting their knickers in a twist over this. Like TR said, I am just happy he hasn't buggered off overseas.
@Crazy-Horse I'm sure the Canes rather have Jordie for one more season than that they have to start searching for a replacement straight away (relatively late in the year), but reading the reactions of the Hurricanes CEO in the media, he doesn't seem too happy with this arrangement.
-
@Crazy-Horse said in Super Rugby News:
Nobody forced the Canes to sign Jordie did they?
When did anyone on here imply that was the case?
@SammyC maybe I am reading it wrong but I get the impression some people are thinking the Canes have somehow been shafted.
