NPC 2025
-
To put it bluntly. It isn't fit for purpose because provincial unions are in the red. With high performance rugby being their biggest output for the lowest return. They are basically paying to decorate the shop window with limited return.
Where did I say scrap club rugby? You said one comp running from March to September. My point was clubs have a major role in the governing of PUs. They won't want the club season running parallel to the next step up.
-
Sure, but if you cut player remuneration in half over a 5 year period it'll happen more
Or you cut the number of players getting remunerated; like Wales is doing.
Fuck I dread the affect of the ABs dropping to 9 or 10 in the world rankings; ending up like Australia or Wales F that.
-
@SouthernMann said in NPC 2025:
The NPC is here to stay. The PUs tail that wags the NZR dog will ensure that. As a small nation with diverse interests we just can't afford to sustain 19 professional football teams. The operational costs must be out the gate. Flying 30 staff from Invercargill to Rotorua for example must cost over 15k.
It's not really 19 pro teams.
It is 5 + 9 equals 14.
If both comps ran at the same time it would be 19.
The French rugby union has 30 professional teams in the two concurrent NLR comps (T14/PD2). -
@SouthernMann said in NPC 2025:
To put it bluntly. It isn't fit for purpose because provincial unions are in the red. With high performance rugby being their biggest output for the lowest return. They are basically paying to decorate the shop window with limited return.
Where did I say scrap club rugby? You said one comp running from March to September. My point was clubs have a major role in the governing of PUs. They won't want the club season running parallel to the next step up.
Sorry for taking so long to reply, I was watching a NPC/Shield game. So I take it you don't want super, because they mostly in red? Not all PUs are in red either, but anyway, I know you are picking up some that are struggling, and will be without NPC . Take my word for it, without NPC teams to run doesn't stop your costs, just some of them, but also stops a lot of sponsorship. I assure you that when I have been on PU board, there are a f***en sight more costs than just running a rep team. Especially with it on FTA, sponsorship will be worth more.
You can't run NPC and club rugby concurrently, as you just both after same players, same as NPC and super etc, that's why I asked about killing club rugby etc.
Anyway we agree we see it differently huh? -
@SouthernMann said in NPC 2025:
The NPC is here to stay. The PUs tail that wags the NZR dog will ensure that. As a small nation with diverse interests we just can't afford to sustain 19 professional football teams. The operational costs must be out the gate. Flying 30 staff from Invercargill to Rotorua for example must cost over 15k.
It's not really 19 pro teams.
It is 5 + 9 equals 14.
If both comps ran at the same time it would be 19.
The French rugby union has 30 professional teams in the two concurrent NLR comps (T14/PD2).To be fair to Southern man it is 19 teams, though 5 are fully pro and 14 can only be considered 14. Noone make a living playing NPC.
And France has a poulation of 68 mill to support their 2 comps and 4-5 times as many rugby players registered than us,
We do alright here in NZ. -
@SouthernMann said in NPC 2025:
@Duluth Once again I apologise , I was under impression that you thought the NPC should be canned. I actually would love the idea of super being canned and a 10 team NPC etc, just know it's not going to happen because of money. Just all the talk of less interest etc , that is across all levels of rugby (and sport probably). I don't follow Super as mush as used too either, but just think we need these steps up for rugby, and can't see with test schedules we will ever be able to have one comp going from March to September etc.
The flow on of tails wagging dogs mean clubs would not want provincial rugby being played when the club season is on.
Super Rugby is here to stay. The buck each was philosophy needs to be canned. A proper decent comp. Which aligns international windows as well.
The other issue with a hypothetical 10 team comp. Is you end up having the same shitty conversations with the likes of Northland, Counties, North Harbour, Manawatu and Southland. Sorry guys. You don't make the cut. Then who pays for four more fully professional NZ teams?
As Duluth mentioned a change to the salary cap will be massive. It will become a comp for guys under 22s, Super players and other lads who bugger off for MLR (which is on the fritz).
I fully understand you are steadfast in your support of the near 50-year-old competition. It just isn't fit for purpose.
Combined population of North Harbour and Manawatu is about a million, it'd be a pretty stupid decision from a commercial POV to cut those two PU's. Would make most sense to cut Taranaki and Ta$man, if that's the route we're going.
-
Yes
Even if the NPC goes, the PU's will still be there; some one still has to look after the amateurs and juniors.
I cant see SR or NZR wanting to be doing that!
The PU's are not allowed to be in the red; you'd never hear the end of it if they were, and if a smaller NPC union fucked up their books, they'd be back into the Heartland champ so quick.
I think I remember some PU's running up serious red ink in the immediate period after the game went pro.
That is not allowed to happen any more.
I think the point is that the NZR make a profit on their ops, but all the rest of NZ rugby is non-profit.
Can the rest of NZ rugby ever do anything else other than cover their current costs; I dont think so.I think we are doing alright here too.
And I dont think getting rid of one of SR or NPC will make any real dif.
Maintaining the AB/NZR brand at world class, or even world leading, is far more important.
But cant see the rest of NZ rugby amounting too much more than it does right now.SR and NPC are fulltime/part time comps if you know what I mean.
When they run they are fulltime; but they only run part of the time.
If you have a nice paying job you are not taking time off to play NPC; must be a lot of players in that category.
So it must naturally attract younger players (more likely to be not so gainfully employed) which in that respect is good, for rugby.
Your average player playing both SR and NPC (no national contract) would be on average pay you'd think?Fuck, must have been so easy in the amateur days when administrators didn't have to pay the players!
-
I think we are doing alright here too.
And I dont think getting rid of one of SR or NPC will make any real dif.
Maintaining the AB/NZR brand at world class, or even world leading, is far more important.
But cant see the rest of NZ rugby amounting too much more than it does right now.Isn't one of the problems that if you get rid of the NPC then what fills that void from a fan engagement perspective?
This past weekends NPC was very good and a great bridge between the 2nd and 3rd tests in the rugby championship which in itself has served up 4 very exciting matches.
If you get rid of 70 games of rugby content (about 90 hours of rugby) people will fill that void with something and if that thing is not of a rugby orientation then rugby ultimately loses out.
Its like having a shop, and reducing your hours of operation. People will still spend money when your shop is closed just not on your products and because you are giving customers less opportunities to give you their business, it will inevitably contract.
-
-
This post is deleted!
