Super Rugby - The Future
-
I mean this isn't rocket science - the main thrust of the financial savings is basically not having the NPC.
It's saving their salaries and those of the support staff intertwined with them.
What are all those people going to do? Do it for free?
No they're going to leave.
How disastrious (or not) this is - I guess we'll find out.
@Windows97 said in NZR review:
I mean this isn't rocket science - the main thrust of the financial savings is basically not having the NPC.
It's saving their salaries and those of the support staff intertwined with them.
What are all those people going to do? Do it for free?
No they're going to leave.
How disastrious (or not) this is - I guess we'll find out.
Which is basically the Australian system with nothing in the middle between club and SR,That is not working out to well.
-
@Windows97 said in NZR review:
I mean this isn't rocket science - the main thrust of the financial savings is basically not having the NPC.
It's saving their salaries and those of the support staff intertwined with them.
What are all those people going to do? Do it for free?
No they're going to leave.
How disastrious (or not) this is - I guess we'll find out.
Which is basically the Australian system with nothing in the middle between club and SR,That is not working out to well.
@Chris said in NZR review:
@Windows97 said in NZR review:
I mean this isn't rocket science - the main thrust of the financial savings is basically not having the NPC.
It's saving their salaries and those of the support staff intertwined with them.
What are all those people going to do? Do it for free?
No they're going to leave.
How disastrious (or not) this is - I guess we'll find out.
Which is basically the Australian system with nothing in the middle between club and SR,That is not working out to well.
that i 100% agree with....but people are convinced NZ is different...so i just want to see something...anything done to stop the slow painful limp into obscurity
@Windows97 said in NZR review:
I mean this isn't rocket science - the main thrust of the financial savings is basically not having the NPC.
It's saving their salaries and those of the support staff intertwined with them.
What are all those people going to do? Do it for free?
No they're going to leave.
How disastrious (or not) this is - I guess we'll find out.
i mean...thats literally how clubs are run, on the back of volunteers...and alot before the game went professional
-
@Windows97 said in NZR review:
I mean this isn't rocket science - the main thrust of the financial savings is basically not having the NPC.
It's saving their salaries and those of the support staff intertwined with them.
What are all those people going to do? Do it for free?
No they're going to leave.
How disastrious (or not) this is - I guess we'll find out.
Which is basically the Australian system with nothing in the middle between club and SR,That is not working out to well.
@Chris said in NZR review:
@Windows97 said in NZR review:
I mean this isn't rocket science - the main thrust of the financial savings is basically not having the NPC.
It's saving their salaries and those of the support staff intertwined with them.
What are all those people going to do? Do it for free?
No they're going to leave.
How disastrious (or not) this is - I guess we'll find out.
Which is basically the Australian system with nothing in the middle between club and SR,That is not working out to well.
My feeling is that we should develop the super development teams as this level, so that the professional players are still within the same organizations.
So the Bravehearts, Hunters, etc could be the place for us to fill that middle layer and we would be replicating the Oz league model.
-
you guys are right, the NPC can't go anywhere without also expanding and extending Super Rugby. Because the current structure makes no sense without it.
We're what, a month from the end of Super Rugby? At which point the best 35-odd players will piss off and be full-time international players, playing 14 games in 5 months. What do you do with the rest of them for that time?
In Australia it is even worse, it's back to club land.
-
@Chris said in NZR review:
@Windows97 said in NZR review:
I mean this isn't rocket science - the main thrust of the financial savings is basically not having the NPC.
It's saving their salaries and those of the support staff intertwined with them.
What are all those people going to do? Do it for free?
No they're going to leave.
How disastrious (or not) this is - I guess we'll find out.
Which is basically the Australian system with nothing in the middle between club and SR,That is not working out to well.
My feeling is that we should develop the super development teams as this level, so that the professional players are still within the same organizations.
So the Bravehearts, Hunters, etc could be the place for us to fill that middle layer and we would be replicating the Oz league model.
@gt12 said in NZR review:
So the Bravehearts, Hunters, etc could be the place for us to fill that middle layer and we would be replicating the Oz league model
welcome, brother, to my church
-
@gt12 said in NZR review:
So the Bravehearts, Hunters, etc could be the place for us to fill that middle layer and we would be replicating the Oz league model
welcome, brother, to my church
@mariner4life said in NZR review:
@gt12 said in NZR review:
So the Bravehearts, Hunters, etc could be the place for us to fill that middle layer and we would be replicating the Oz league model
welcome, brother, to my church
Amen.
Cost efficiencies, next league to have players available for Super, develop it as a TV product (maybe make an age limit for a certain number of players so it is primarily young talent), try to start a relationship for crossovers with League 2/3 in Japan - lots of opportunities but still within the franchise system
-
@mariner4life said in NZR review:
@gt12 said in NZR review:
So the Bravehearts, Hunters, etc could be the place for us to fill that middle layer and we would be replicating the Oz league model
welcome, brother, to my church
Amen.
Cost efficiencies, next league to have players available for Super, develop it as a TV product (maybe make an age limit for a certain number of players so it is primarily young talent), try to start a relationship for crossovers with League 2/3 in Japan - lots of opportunities but still within the franchise system
@gt12 said in NZR review:
@mariner4life said in NZR review:
@gt12 said in NZR review:
So the Bravehearts, Hunters, etc could be the place for us to fill that middle layer and we would be replicating the Oz league model
welcome, brother, to my church
Amen.
Cost efficiencies, next league to have players available for Super, develop it as a TV product (maybe make an age limit for a certain number of players so it is primarily young talent), try to start a relationship for crossovers with League 2/3 in Japan - lots of opportunities but still within the franchise system
Big fan of this. The only couple question is around the timing and limiting the impact on community rugby. What is the timings of the secondary competition/games and will it also allow for the Super U20s to be played as well. Would the second tier teams play at the same time as Super. Do we allow our Super players, who aren't All Blacks to go overseas for a three-month stint late in the year?
-
so making things "smaller" doesnt work as it doesnt provide the full rugby picture to develop players....this is why i would have loved too hear more about making the current structure or a version of it more popular so we have more income
killing off the NPC and all its history to replace it with academies just makes me a bit sad
-
@gt12 said in NZR review:
@mariner4life said in NZR review:
@gt12 said in NZR review:
So the Bravehearts, Hunters, etc could be the place for us to fill that middle layer and we would be replicating the Oz league model
welcome, brother, to my church
Amen.
Cost efficiencies, next league to have players available for Super, develop it as a TV product (maybe make an age limit for a certain number of players so it is primarily young talent), try to start a relationship for crossovers with League 2/3 in Japan - lots of opportunities but still within the franchise system
Big fan of this. The only couple question is around the timing and limiting the impact on community rugby. What is the timings of the secondary competition/games and will it also allow for the Super U20s to be played as well. Would the second tier teams play at the same time as Super. Do we allow our Super players, who aren't All Blacks to go overseas for a three-month stint late in the year?
@SouthernMann said in NZR review:
@gt12 said in NZR review:
@mariner4life said in NZR review:
@gt12 said in NZR review:
So the Bravehearts, Hunters, etc could be the place for us to fill that middle layer and we would be replicating the Oz league model
welcome, brother, to my church
Amen.
Cost efficiencies, next league to have players available for Super, develop it as a TV product (maybe make an age limit for a certain number of players so it is primarily young talent), try to start a relationship for crossovers with League 2/3 in Japan - lots of opportunities but still within the franchise system
Big fan of this. The only couple question is around the timing and limiting the impact on community rugby. What is the timings of the secondary competition/games and will it also allow for the Super U20s to be played as well. Would the second tier teams play at the same time as Super. Do we allow our Super players, who aren't All Blacks to go overseas for a three-month stint late in the year?
For me, it runs at the same time as an extended super rugby competition, likely with games filling in the spaces left by super (e.g., daytime rugby). We would have most of our best players in one structure across the professional year, with some players going up to the All Blacks.
Professionally, there would likely be three levels - Super, development, U20s, with all players in the same academy / franchise, so essentially copying the league model. I would make movements to allow Super franchises to compete with league for youngsters somehow.
I would consider having super rugby going on while All Blacks are absent, or having no rugby during international windows with three rep teams out (ABs, ABXV, NZ Maori with extended eligibility) to make sure there is still enough product.
Another option to have Super rugby and international rugby at the same time would be to have a year-end tournament so that super teams can keep playing while ABs are on duty. Japan has an interesting model here that could be copied - its a separate competition with the same sides.
During all of this, amateur players would play club and PU rugby in some format (essentially NPC becomes heartland rugby). Super rugby could still scout here for anything they've missed, but NPC/heartland would be participation-focused.
-
so making things "smaller" doesnt work as it doesnt provide the full rugby picture to develop players....this is why i would have loved too hear more about making the current structure or a version of it more popular so we have more income
killing off the NPC and all its history to replace it with academies just makes me a bit sad
@Kiwiwomble said in NZR review:
so making things "smaller" doesnt work as it doesnt provide the full rugby picture to develop players....this is why i would have loved too hear more about making the current structure or a version of it more popular so we have more income
killing off the NPC and all its history to replace it with academies just makes me a bit sad
Funnily enough, I think there is still a domestic TV market for NPC as an amateur competition. If the PUs could get enough money to fund their costs it would be great to see amateur players vying for the Ranfurly shield.
-
@Chris said in NZR review:
@Windows97 said in NZR review:
I mean this isn't rocket science - the main thrust of the financial savings is basically not having the NPC.
It's saving their salaries and those of the support staff intertwined with them.
What are all those people going to do? Do it for free?
No they're going to leave.
How disastrious (or not) this is - I guess we'll find out.
Which is basically the Australian system with nothing in the middle between club and SR,That is not working out to well.
My feeling is that we should develop the super development teams as this level, so that the professional players are still within the same organizations.
So the Bravehearts, Hunters, etc could be the place for us to fill that middle layer and we would be replicating the Oz league model.
@gt12 said in NZR review:
@Chris said in NZR review:
@Windows97 said in NZR review:
I mean this isn't rocket science - the main thrust of the financial savings is basically not having the NPC.
It's saving their salaries and those of the support staff intertwined with them.
What are all those people going to do? Do it for free?
No they're going to leave.
How disastrious (or not) this is - I guess we'll find out.
Which is basically the Australian system with nothing in the middle between club and SR,That is not working out to well.
My feeling is that we should develop the super development teams as this level, so that the professional players are still within the same organizations.
So the Bravehearts, Hunters, etc could be the place for us to fill that middle layer and we would be replicating the Oz league model.
Yeah that makes a lot of sense fills that middle tier.
-
@Kiwiwomble said in NZR review:
so making things "smaller" doesnt work as it doesnt provide the full rugby picture to develop players....this is why i would have loved too hear more about making the current structure or a version of it more popular so we have more income
killing off the NPC and all its history to replace it with academies just makes me a bit sad
Funnily enough, I think there is still a domestic TV market for NPC as an amateur competition. If the PUs could get enough money to fund their costs it would be great to see amateur players vying for the Ranfurly shield.
@gt12 said in NZR review:
@Kiwiwomble said in NZR review:
so making things "smaller" doesnt work as it doesnt provide the full rugby picture to develop players....this is why i would have loved too hear more about making the current structure or a version of it more popular so we have more income
killing off the NPC and all its history to replace it with academies just makes me a bit sad
Funnily enough, I think there is still a domestic TV market for NPC as an amateur competition. If the PUs could get enough money to fund their costs it would be great to see amateur players vying for the Ranfurly shield.
i hope so, as someone overseas i would hope the PU's would just do somethign like build/buy an on line service to sell direct (as i do for my football team in the UK) id pay to stream Otago games, definitely if they included it in some sort of overseas membership, give me a cap or beanie like the AFL teams do
-
@SouthernMann said in NZR review:
@gt12 said in NZR review:
@mariner4life said in NZR review:
@gt12 said in NZR review:
So the Bravehearts, Hunters, etc could be the place for us to fill that middle layer and we would be replicating the Oz league model
welcome, brother, to my church
Amen.
Cost efficiencies, next league to have players available for Super, develop it as a TV product (maybe make an age limit for a certain number of players so it is primarily young talent), try to start a relationship for crossovers with League 2/3 in Japan - lots of opportunities but still within the franchise system
Big fan of this. The only couple question is around the timing and limiting the impact on community rugby. What is the timings of the secondary competition/games and will it also allow for the Super U20s to be played as well. Would the second tier teams play at the same time as Super. Do we allow our Super players, who aren't All Blacks to go overseas for a three-month stint late in the year?
For me, it runs at the same time as an extended super rugby competition, likely with games filling in the spaces left by super (e.g., daytime rugby). We would have most of our best players in one structure across the professional year, with some players going up to the All Blacks.
Professionally, there would likely be three levels - Super, development, U20s, with all players in the same academy / franchise, so essentially copying the league model. I would make movements to allow Super franchises to compete with league for youngsters somehow.
I would consider having super rugby going on while All Blacks are absent, or having no rugby during international windows with three rep teams out (ABs, ABXV, NZ Maori with extended eligibility) to make sure there is still enough product.
Another option to have Super rugby and international rugby at the same time would be to have a year-end tournament so that super teams can keep playing while ABs are on duty. Japan has an interesting model here that could be copied - its a separate competition with the same sides.
During all of this, amateur players would play club and PU rugby in some format (essentially NPC becomes heartland rugby). Super rugby could still scout here for anything they've missed, but NPC/heartland would be participation-focused.
@gt12 said in NZR review:
@SouthernMann said in NZR review:
@gt12 said in NZR review:
@mariner4life said in NZR review:
@gt12 said in NZR review:
So the Bravehearts, Hunters, etc could be the place for us to fill that middle layer and we would be replicating the Oz league model
welcome, brother, to my church
Amen.
Cost efficiencies, next league to have players available for Super, develop it as a TV product (maybe make an age limit for a certain number of players so it is primarily young talent), try to start a relationship for crossovers with League 2/3 in Japan - lots of opportunities but still within the franchise system
Big fan of this. The only couple question is around the timing and limiting the impact on community rugby. What is the timings of the secondary competition/games and will it also allow for the Super U20s to be played as well. Would the second tier teams play at the same time as Super. Do we allow our Super players, who aren't All Blacks to go overseas for a three-month stint late in the year?
For me, it runs at the same time as an extended super rugby competition, likely with games filling in the spaces left by super (e.g., daytime rugby). We would have most of our best players in one structure across the professional year, with some players going up to the All Blacks.
Professionally, there would likely be three levels - Super, development, U20s, with all players in the same academy / franchise, so essentially copying the league model. I would make movements to allow Super franchises to compete with league for youngsters somehow.
I would consider having super rugby going on while All Blacks are absent, or having no rugby during international windows with three rep teams out (ABs, ABXV, NZ Maori with extended eligibility) to make sure there is still enough product.
Another option to have Super rugby and international rugby at the same time would be to have a year-end tournament so that super teams can keep playing while ABs are on duty. Japan has an interesting model here that could be copied - its a separate competition with the same sides.
During all of this, amateur players would play club and PU rugby in some format (essentially NPC becomes heartland rugby). Super rugby could still scout here for anything they've missed, but NPC/heartland would be participation-focused.
You have me sold on this model. From a community model (Otago perspective), it will probably mean fewer capable players in club footy and may mean an Otago/Southland/Central Otago club competition. The travel would be shitty, but would ensure the best games taking out Highlanders/Bravehearts and potentially U20 players.
-
@gt12 said in NZR review:
@Kiwiwomble said in NZR review:
so making things "smaller" doesnt work as it doesnt provide the full rugby picture to develop players....this is why i would have loved too hear more about making the current structure or a version of it more popular so we have more income
killing off the NPC and all its history to replace it with academies just makes me a bit sad
Funnily enough, I think there is still a domestic TV market for NPC as an amateur competition. If the PUs could get enough money to fund their costs it would be great to see amateur players vying for the Ranfurly shield.
i hope so, as someone overseas i would hope the PU's would just do somethign like build/buy an on line service to sell direct (as i do for my football team in the UK) id pay to stream Otago games, definitely if they included it in some sort of overseas membership, give me a cap or beanie like the AFL teams do
@Kiwiwomble said in NZR review:
@gt12 said in NZR review:
@Kiwiwomble said in NZR review:
so making things "smaller" doesnt work as it doesnt provide the full rugby picture to develop players....this is why i would have loved too hear more about making the current structure or a version of it more popular so we have more income
killing off the NPC and all its history to replace it with academies just makes me a bit sad
Funnily enough, I think there is still a domestic TV market for NPC as an amateur competition. If the PUs could get enough money to fund their costs it would be great to see amateur players vying for the Ranfurly shield.
i hope so, as someone overseas i would hope the PU's would just do somethign like build/buy an on line service to sell direct (as i do for my football team in the UK) id pay to stream Otago games, definitely if they included it in some sort of overseas membership, give me a cap or beanie like the AFL teams do
Yep, dramatically cut costs, have one or two cameras streaming, and maybe have regional competitions followed by finals so travel costs are greatly reduced. You would still likely have Waikato or BOP come out of a regional tournament involving BOP, King Country, Swamp Foxes, Waikato but it would be a great way of getting locals to games if everyone was actually amateur.
So, regions such as:
Northern
Northland
North Harbour
Auckland
CountiesCentral North
BOP
King Country
Thames Valley
WaikatoCentral West
Taranaki
Wanganui
Horowhenua / Manawatu
WellingtonCentral East
Poverty Bay
East Coast
Hawkes Bay
WairarapaSouth Central
Ta$man (split?)
Buller
West Coast
CanterburySouthern
Mid-Canterbury
South CanterburyNorth Otago
Otago
Southland -
#bringbacknelsonbays
-
@Kiwiwomble said in NZR review:
ou've literally just said NZ doesnt have the depth for more than 5 super teams...so how "good" can those players be
NPC is certainly a level down from super rugby. Blackwell for example was fine at NPC level but clearly not SR level
But take out all of the super rugby players and it would hardly be worth watching. But 16 teams are still far too many.
@Winger said in NZR review:
But take out all of the super rugby players and it would hardly be worth watching.
Au contraire. It could have a genuine relationship with its province again and hence a real demonstration of which province is best identifying and developing talent.
@Windows97 said in NZR review:
@mariner4life said in NZR review:
as it should. make it a rep comp for club players. it will have genuine meaning again
The only probelm with that is union would want to win it and spend all their $ on it (and not developing the grass roots) as they are now.
So it doesn't really achieve much.
I'd say making the NPC achieves precisely what we're asking of it; representing the province and not becoming a millstone around the professional game.
I've said this before but I think the best solution is NPC becomes an amateur tier, and SR in NZ expands to about 10 teams. That way you keep four Oz SR teams and the Drua to make a proper competition.
As for worrying about a competition being impeded by inbound tours, I think that's an opportunity for teams to carry some depth in their squads and NZR to ensure a couple of teams aren't stockpiling talent.
-
@Winger said in NZR review:
But take out all of the super rugby players and it would hardly be worth watching.
Au contraire. It could have a genuine relationship with its province again and hence a real demonstration of which province is best identifying and developing talent.
@Windows97 said in NZR review:
@mariner4life said in NZR review:
as it should. make it a rep comp for club players. it will have genuine meaning again
The only probelm with that is union would want to win it and spend all their $ on it (and not developing the grass roots) as they are now.
So it doesn't really achieve much.
I'd say making the NPC achieves precisely what we're asking of it; representing the province and not becoming a millstone around the professional game.
I've said this before but I think the best solution is NPC becomes an amateur tier, and SR in NZ expands to about 10 teams. That way you keep four Oz SR teams and the Drua to make a proper competition.
As for worrying about a competition being impeded by inbound tours, I think that's an opportunity for teams to carry some depth in their squads and NZR to ensure a couple of teams aren't stockpiling talent.
@antipodean said in NZR review:
I've said this before but I think the best solution is NPC becomes an amateur tier, and SR in NZ expands to about 10 teams. That way you keep four Oz SR teams and the Drua to make a proper competition.
my biggest question with this is how to break it into the 10 teams, we talking 5 new ones slotted in around the existing ones? 10 "new" teams (maybe ditch the slightly dated 90's monikers) distributed across the current rugby landscape?
-
Taniwha (Northland/North Harbour)
Blues (Auckland/Counties)
Chiefs (Waikato/Bay of Plenty)
Bulls (Taranaki)
Vikings (Hawke's Bay/Manawatu)
Hurricanes (Wellington)
Crusaders ( Ta$man/Canterbury)
Highlanders (Otago/Southland)Plus Moana Pasifika, Fijian Drua and the four remaining Australian sides.
-
There is no way we can justify 10 teams at the level of Super Rugby. Seven or eight would be an absolute maximum. Already we are seeing young guys in there who aren't up to it, yet or just not capable enough. Two extra teams for a premier competition will be manageable. Make it 10 and they would need at least 100 top level players. With probably 12 million in salaries, for just the players.
-
Taniwha (Northland/North Harbour)
Blues (Auckland/Counties)
Chiefs (Waikato/Bay of Plenty)
Bulls (Taranaki)
Vikings (Hawke's Bay/Manawatu)
Hurricanes (Wellington)
Crusaders ( Ta$man/Canterbury)
Highlanders (Otago/Southland)Plus Moana Pasifika, Fijian Drua and the four remaining Australian sides.
@Mr-Fish said in NZR review:
Taniwha (Northland/North Harbour)
Blues (Auckland/Counties)
Chiefs (Waikato/Bay of Plenty)
Bulls (Taranaki)
Vikings (Hawke's Bay/Manawatu)
Hurricanes (Wellington)
Crusaders ( Ta$man/Canterbury)
Highlanders (Otago/Southland)Plus Moana Pasifika, Fijian Drua and the four remaining Australian sides.
thats not a bad mix, i would say that MP would have to be based in the Islands though, or that franchise becomes one of the other new ones
whenever i see this lists though, and i know it seems less of a problem given how this year has gone, were going to dilute the catchment of pretty much everyone except the crusaders....
