'Super Rugby' 2021
-
@Stargazer said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Hooroo It won't generate enough income to replace SR though.
That comparison may no longer be valid
-
@Stargazer said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Hooroo It won't generate enough income to replace SR though.
Absolutely agree but it may be the new way.
I can't see Super Rugby being the same again now that SA is pretty much pulling pin.
At best it may be a ANZ comp
-
@Stargazer said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
We don't have the depth for 6 teams at the moment. If fewer players leave for overseas clubs over the next few years, we may have enough for 6 teams, but not now. More than 6 is riduculous.
Oh, and hands off the NPC. No provinces to be dropped to Heartland.
A counter argument would be that in a trans Ta$man comp - making the NZ teams weaker might make the comp more competitive.
I think the real issue with the 6th NZ team is the $ funding it/making it financially viable.
-
Just for fun, if there were 8 teams, what would they be?
Current 5
Plus
Taniwha (Northland/NH plays at Albany)
Bays (Bay/Hawkes plays at Tauranga)
Cowpokes (Taranaki/Manawatu plays at New Plymouth)
If it were only one in an ANZ competition, I imagine that a team based in Labany would be easiest.
-
@gt12 said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
Just for fun, if there were 8 teams, what would they be?
Current 5
Plus
Taniwha (Northland/NH plays at Albany)
Bays (Bay/Hawkes plays at Tauranga)
Cowpokes (Taranaki/Manawatu plays at New Plymouth)
If it were only one in an ANZ competition, I imagine that a team based in Labany would be easiest.
Bays is actually quite a good name. For a tricky divide. Hawkes Bay is the hardest to incorporate.
- North Auckland (revive the historic name)
- Bays (BOP. Poverty Bay, East Coast, Hawkes Bay
- Lower North Island (or LNI) - (Taranaki, Wanganui, Manawatu)
Hurricanes retain Howowhenua and Wairarapa in their franchise catchment.
Chiefs retain Thames Valley and King Country, but loose Counties.Blues, Chiefs, Hurricances, Highlanders, Crusaders - regain their original georgraphical monikers.
Big stuffs to Southlanders and Tasmaners moaning about their names. Southlanders have put up with in cricket for a century ....
-
-
"Southerns" sounds better to me, ive kind of got over the "creative" franchise names to be honest, hence my avatar, a combo of Otago and southland logos
real simple summary of my thoughts, i'd like a more simple comp and so making the existing unions fully profession makes sense to me...
But i understand its not as easy as that and so will accept almost anything as long as there is some logic and inclusion of the smaller unions in it, away jerseys being one of the other unions colours for example
Using the Highlanders as an example, Gold is a common colour between Otago, North otago and Southland so maybe we should have used it more
i follow Otago boy high, Dunedin RFC, Otago, Highlanders and obviously the AB's...when ive had to explain that to people in the UK or Aus and how there is very little connection between those all anymore it makes me realise the system is a bit broke and we should try and align things a bit more
-
-
We don’t have the depth to dilute the current 5 teams and maintain the high performance he talks about in that article. Introducing more teams will be a disaster. Poorer quality in the name of expansion does not make for a more entertaining product. We saw that with the endless expansion of super rugby.
If the saffa’s are gone and a NZ only comp is not an option then an ANZ comp with the quality of teams kept as high as possible is the only option.
-
@gt12 said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
I like it that the fanciest name you can come up for the NZ’s forgotten lands is LNI; that’s an exciting name for a franchise
They would probably use "Central".
I wouldn't, it's too vague.
Worse names in sport for me are Western Force, and probably even worse the new A League team Western United.
LNI, like GWS, may be a bit clunky. But , like OBU, MSP in welly club rugby, or PIC back in the day in netball. Doesn't seem that strange to me.
-
fulling expecting to be flamed for this, but is there not an argument for expanding slightly to give opportunities to the few guys that might be good enough to step up but are behind others? give them more opportunity to shine
We're not aussie where they expanded with little more than a few elite schools providing new blood, our highschool/club/NPC are all stronger than aussie and dont have the same drain of NRL and ARL
-
@Kiwiwomble said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
fulling expecting to be flamed for this, but is there not an argument for expanding slightly to give opportunities to the few guys that might be good enough to step up but are behind others? give them more opportunity to shine
We're not aussie where they expanded with little more than a few elite schools providing new blood, our highschool/club/NPC are all stronger than aussie and dont have the same drain of NRL and ARL
As long as costs can be covered, I think this would be a benefit as well.
Auckland, Northland and Counties area should be split into two teams. It’s a huge population base for just one team.
-
@Kirwan said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Kiwiwomble said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
fulling expecting to be flamed for this, but is there not an argument for expanding slightly to give opportunities to the few guys that might be good enough to step up but are behind others? give them more opportunity to shine
We're not aussie where they expanded with little more than a few elite schools providing new blood, our highschool/club/NPC are all stronger than aussie and dont have the same drain of NRL and ARL
As long as costs can be covered, I think this would be a benefit as well.
Auckland, Northland and Counties area should be split into two teams. It’s a huge population base for just one team.
on paper that makes sense...but other than this year the blues havent been as dominant as that population base would suggest...need to work out how to hamstring the saders
-
It’s not so much about the results, many factors contribute to that side of it, it’s the player numbers and fan base potential and availability of another stadium.
Northland plus Harbour based at Albany, and Auckland plus Counties at Eden Park covers those both off.
Should have enough support to be viable financially without being hugely disruptive.
Only real alternative is maybe basing one in Tauranga, somewhere where the population is increasing.
-
@Kirwan said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
It’s not so much about the results, many factors contribute to that side of it, it’s the player numbers and fan base potential and availability of another stadium.
Northland plus Harbour based at Albany, and Auckland plus Counties at Eden Park covers those both off.
Should have enough support to be viable financially without being hugely disruptive.
Only real alternative is maybe basing one in Tauranga, somewhere where the population is increasing.
You've made me think about this a little harder. For your scenario to work you would need to do away with the Blues and completely rebrand the two new franchises (IMO) otherwise the new team would struggle for audience as fans generally don't just change the team they support because of location.
It doesn't make sense to add extra teams and for one of them not be in amongst 1.5m people when the whole country is just 5m
-
@Kirwan all good points, im just concerned about those bases loosing support if results don't come
@Hooroo said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Kirwan said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
It’s not so much about the results, many factors contribute to that side of it, it’s the player numbers and fan base potential and availability of another stadium.
Northland plus Harbour based at Albany, and Auckland plus Counties at Eden Park covers those both off.
Should have enough support to be viable financially without being hugely disruptive.
Only real alternative is maybe basing one in Tauranga, somewhere where the population is increasing.
You've made me think about this a little harder. For your scenario to work you would need to do away with the Blues and completely rebrand the two new franchises (IMO) otherwise the new team would struggle for audience as fans generally don't just change the team they support because of location.
It doesn't make sense to add extra teams and for one of them not be in amongst 1.5m people when the whole country is just 5m
I think such a new comp should have all the teams re branded
-
@Kiwiwomble said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Kirwan all good points, im just concerned about those bases loosing support if results don't come
@Hooroo said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Kirwan said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
It’s not so much about the results, many factors contribute to that side of it, it’s the player numbers and fan base potential and availability of another stadium.
Northland plus Harbour based at Albany, and Auckland plus Counties at Eden Park covers those both off.
Should have enough support to be viable financially without being hugely disruptive.
Only real alternative is maybe basing one in Tauranga, somewhere where the population is increasing.
You've made me think about this a little harder. For your scenario to work you would need to do away with the Blues and completely rebrand the two new franchises (IMO) otherwise the new team would struggle for audience as fans generally don't just change the team they support because of location.
It doesn't make sense to add extra teams and for one of them not be in amongst 1.5m people when the whole country is just 5m
I think such a new comp should have all the teams re branded
I don't. Canes/Crusaders/Chiefs/Highlanders won't really be splitting their allegiance in two like the Blues would be if they added another Auckland Franchise.
Maybe the Chiefs would if BOP and Hawkes aligned but I think BOP punters would happily switch allegiance away from the Waikato HQ aspect of the Chiefs.
-
