Super Rugby - The Future
-
This comp is doomed
We've had our "isn't super rugby so great and even this year" rounds, and now the good teams are starting to put the foot down, and the shit teams (most of the comp) are falling away
-
@Machpants said in Blues v Force:
@ruggabee said in Blues v Force:
@Kirwan said in Blues v Force:
@Machpants said in Blues v Force:
@ruggabee said in Blues v Force:
How can anyone watch that display and still be opposed to open eligibility & salary cap across SRP?
Easy. I don't want the All Blacks being part of teams that play like that. Winning and playing well breeds winning and playing well
Fuck the aussies,
I really don't think that's an option - we kind of need their sporting market and Japan to survive going forward...
They need to lift, not us need to go down to their level by spreading our talent (which is thinning) even further
We also lose talent because there's only 5 professional teams and limited opportunities for players.
The Hurricanes have 2nd and 3rd choice options who are as good or better than their 1st choice, like Harry Godfrey for example who could be starting at 10 and playing 80 minutes every week for an Australian side right now.
Isn't it better for our talent - ultimately to be playing in the SRP competition, which is aiming to become the strongest in the world, rather than the alternative of going to play in Japan or Europe?
@ruggabee said in Super Rugby 2024:
@Machpants said in Blues v Force:
@ruggabee said in Blues v Force:
@Kirwan said in Blues v Force:
@Machpants said in Blues v Force:
@ruggabee said in Blues v Force:
How can anyone watch that display and still be opposed to open eligibility & salary cap across SRP?
Easy. I don't want the All Blacks being part of teams that play like that. Winning and playing well breeds winning and playing well
Fuck the aussies,
I really don't think that's an option - we kind of need their sporting market and Japan to survive going forward...
They need to lift, not us need to go down to their level by spreading our talent (which is thinning) even further
We also lose talent because there's only 5 professional teams and limited opportunities for players.
The Hurricanes have 2nd and 3rd choice options who are as good or better than their 1st choice, like Harry Godfrey for example who could be starting at 10 and playing 80 minutes every week for an Australian side right now.
Isn't it better for our talent - ultimately to be playing in the SRP competition, which is aiming to become the strongest in the world, rather than the alternative of going to play in Japan or Europe?
The only way that works for NZ is for us to own the competition, much like they own the NRL.
-
@Kirwan said in Super Rugby 2024:
No, that’s just a quick way to have our players turning out for Oz. And at the same time diluting our depth.
I wouldn't mind that at all, in fact I would welcome both of those things, we should be doing everything we can to ensure the future of the professional game in the Australasia/Pacific region, rather than caring exclusively about what's best for All Blacks.
@ruggabee said in Super Rugby 2024:
@Kirwan said in Super Rugby 2024:
No, that’s just a quick way to have our players turning out for Oz. And at the same time diluting our depth.
I wouldn't mind that at all, in fact I would welcome both of those things, we should be doing everything we can to ensure the future of the professional game in the Australasia/Pacific region, rather than caring exclusively about what's best for All Blacks.
You want less depth in NZ and Kiwis playing for Australia?
That weakens the All Blacks, makes the brand less valuable and results in the opposite of what you say you want.
To safeguard Rugby in this neck of the woods we can’t have all our eggs in the Aussie basket. Japan, the island nations and Australia all need to grow (with their own players).
At least one less Aussie team, at least one Japanese team (I’d prefer two of each there) and keep the progress of the Drua and Pasifika.
-
I think tonight's result and Hurricanes against the Rebels illustrates everything that is wrong with this competition, every home fixture against MP/Drua/Rebels/Force becomes a targeted game to boost the confidence and provide exposure for some 3rd string guys and is nothing but a frantic race to see how many tries you can run in before the clock goes red. As much as I personally find these high scoring games entertaining it doesn't do much for the credibility of SRP, predictablility is the enemy & before tonight's game I predicted the Chiefs might crack 70 points against Moana and they finished a single missed conversion by McKenzie from getting there.
-
@ruggabee said in Super Rugby 2024:
@Kirwan said in Super Rugby 2024:
No, that’s just a quick way to have our players turning out for Oz. And at the same time diluting our depth.
I wouldn't mind that at all, in fact I would welcome both of those things, we should be doing everything we can to ensure the future of the professional game in the Australasia/Pacific region, rather than caring exclusively about what's best for All Blacks.
You want less depth in NZ and Kiwis playing for Australia?
That weakens the All Blacks, makes the brand less valuable and results in the opposite of what you say you want.
To safeguard Rugby in this neck of the woods we can’t have all our eggs in the Aussie basket. Japan, the island nations and Australia all need to grow (with their own players).
At least one less Aussie team, at least one Japanese team (I’d prefer two of each there) and keep the progress of the Drua and Pasifika.
@Kirwan said in Super Rugby 2024:
@ruggabee said in Super Rugby 2024:
@Kirwan said in Super Rugby 2024:
No, that’s just a quick way to have our players turning out for Oz. And at the same time diluting our depth.
I wouldn't mind that at all, in fact I would welcome both of those things, we should be doing everything we can to ensure the future of the professional game in the Australasia/Pacific region, rather than caring exclusively about what's best for All Blacks.
You want less depth in NZ and Kiwis playing for Australia?
That weakens the All Blacks, makes the brand less valuable and results in the opposite of what you say you want.
To safeguard Rugby in this neck of the woods we can’t have all our eggs in the Aussie basket. Japan, the island nations and Australia all need to grow (with their own players).
At least one less Aussie team, at least one Japanese team (I’d prefer two of each there) and keep the progress of the Drua and Pasifika.
@Kirwan said in Super Rugby 2024:
@ruggabee said in Super Rugby 2024:
@Kirwan said in Super Rugby 2024:
No, that’s just a quick way to have our players turning out for Oz. And at the same time diluting our depth.
I wouldn't mind that at all, in fact I would welcome both of those things, we should be doing everything we can to ensure the future of the professional game in the Australasia/Pacific region, rather than caring exclusively about what's best for All Blacks.
You want less depth in NZ and Kiwis playing for Australia?
That weakens the All Blacks, makes the brand less valuable and results in the opposite of what you say you want.
To safeguard Rugby in this neck of the woods we can’t have all our eggs in the Aussie basket. Japan, the island nations and Australia all need to grow (with their own players).
At least one less Aussie team, at least one Japanese team (I’d prefer two of each there) and keep the progress of the Drua and Pasifika.
Aust need to sort themselves out. The obvious way to do this is to reduce the number of teams. If NZ step into help ARU won't do this (reduce the number of teams) so it will forever reduce our playing numbers
If NZ helps anyone it shouldn't ever be Aust. They need to learn how to stand on their own feet. But what about MP. They need help. Starting with a decent head coach. Not coaches who have been shown to be not really up to it. Maybe the NZR could help financially to encourage a top coach to take over as one example.
-
The worst thing about the competition structure atm is the 8 team playoff. When there are only 12 teams taking part, the comp is always cooked from the get go. Just make it top four and be done with it. This would then mean there is always more to lose on every game so to speak so when the stronger teams come up against the weaker teams they are less likely to rest and rotate key players.
Other alternative is have a top 6 and no byes during the round robin. Top two teams get a week off at the quarter final stage while teams 3-6 battle it out for a semi spot. Top 8 to me is just ridiculous.
-
@Canes4life i always like the top five structure with a reward of a week off for 1st place
@Kirwan whatever way it's spun I just don't think a top 8 does this competition any favours.
-
-
The worst thing about the competition structure atm is the 8 team playoff. When there are only 12 teams taking part, the comp is always cooked from the get go. Just make it top four and be done with it. This would then mean there is always more to lose on every game so to speak so when the stronger teams come up against the weaker teams they are less likely to rest and rotate key players.
Other alternative is have a top 6 and no byes during the round robin. Top two teams get a week off at the quarter final stage while teams 3-6 battle it out for a semi spot. Top 8 to me is just ridiculous.
@Bovidae said in Super Rugby 2024:
The best compromise would be to use the McIntyre final eight system where finishing in the top 4 still has an advantage in the event of an early upset.
Now that would be pretty cool to have actually.
-
An interesting Big Sky idea
https://www.rugbypass.com/news/a-radical-merger-for-super-rugby-to-save-the-competition/
@Machpants the strong Super Rugby teams will dominate the Japanese teams though so I guess there has to be some thinking around how best to spread talent so we aren't getting more one-sided fixtures than we already are. I can see the upside to it.
-
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.
-
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 i think its lots of things, but a big thing in the fan engagement, AFL and NRL started as local club comps and so there are all these local rivalries and derbies with teams just down the road...they make it the expected thing to go to games even if your team is shit...because its not about watching "the best" footie...its about backing your team...so its a double edged sword with rugbys concentration on only the best quality is acceptable
-
Super Rugby is like 30 years old now, there are dudes with families who don't know anything but.
I think a problem with fan engagement, certainly in regional areas, is, who do you support? Us guys of a certain age generally follow the teams we were handed at the start with the break up of the provinces. Those lines got blurred when the drafts all got shafted off. Why the fuck would someone kid in Tauranga support a team based in Hamilton today? And why travel to go watch them play?
It's fine if you live in Auckland, Hamilton, Wellington etc, you get a team to go watch. Everyone else? why bother to get really involved for 5 months?
-
on the equalisation question, a thought occurred. Is it difficult for teams to climb the ladder as they only get the players for half a year? Then they all go back to their provinces (or America) who have varying standards or facilities, or they go to their main job, the ABs.
It must be incredibly difficult to develop a culture and a system and get wholesale buy-in when you lose access to your guys for half the year. Worse still if they go back to half a dozen provinces, rather than a couple.
-
on the equalisation question, a thought occurred. Is it difficult for teams to climb the ladder as they only get the players for half a year? Then they all go back to their provinces (or America) who have varying standards or facilities, or they go to their main job, the ABs.
It must be incredibly difficult to develop a culture and a system and get wholesale buy-in when you lose access to your guys for half the year. Worse still if they go back to half a dozen provinces, rather than a couple.
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby 2024:
on the equalisation question, a thought occurred. Is it difficult for teams to climb the ladder as they only get the players for half a year? Then they all go back to their provinces (or America) who have varying standards or facilities, or they go to their main job, the ABs.
It must be incredibly difficult to develop a culture and a system and get wholesale buy-in when you lose access to your guys for half the year. Worse still if they go back to half a dozen provinces, rather than a couple.
Culture and just general cohesion from playing together.
Having a dozen games at a high level is great, but in amateur days guys like Tim Horan and Jason Little played preaseason + 20-odd club games + finals + preseason + State + Test footy.
Players in Australia who don't get Wallaby duty go back to cowshed rugby in Sydney or Brisbane. Local stalwarts can talk it up all they want, but it isn't distant from full amateur rugby. Worse in Perth or Melbourne, and everyone in Canberra is playing for silver.
-
there is also cost of living, season ticket for my football team in the UK is like 500 quid....for 46 league games plus whatever cup comps there are...a swans membership is less than $300 for 11 home games and you get a whole bag of merch as well as tickets....and theyve spent decades establishing that as the norm....i think a highlander was over $300 for 6 games....its just so expensive
). The best compromise would be to use the McIntyre final eight system where finishing in the top 4 still has an advantage in the event of an early upset.
