'Super Rugby' 2021
-
@barbarian said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@antipodean Six years ago. How long did that take to find?
What difference does that make?
Got 30k to Ireland a few years ago, I'd reckon that's decent enough. Boosted by expats, sure, but that's why the city has potential to sustain a team. The interest is there.
So a test a year that they can't sell out?
-
@nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Rapido said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
I do mind watching a diluted 10 team league when of 4 of the teams are from 1 country as they're spread too thin and Phil Kearns is commentating and 90% of the supporters from that 1 country appear to have just given up.
4 of the teams are bringing in as much money as the other 6, and potential cash up the wazoo. I think trans Ta$man is important, not for the now (as frankly most of the Aus sides are pretty average), but for what they could be. If their quality improves, and it certainly can, then we'll be delighted to be in partnership with them and the rivers of gold.
I'm talking the 5-5 split. But 4 of one contributor's 5 are weak.
Anyway, the 4 or 5 currently are most definitely not bringing in as much money as the other 6 (or 5).
It is defintitely all about the 'potential'
-
@nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Rapido said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
I do mind watching a diluted 10 team league when of 4 of the teams are from 1 country as they're spread too thin and Phil Kearns is commentating and 90% of the supporters from that 1 country appear to have just given up.
4 of the teams are bringing in as much money as the other 6, and potential cash up the wazoo. I think trans Ta$man is important, not for the now (as frankly most of the Aus sides are pretty average), but for what they could be. If their quality improves, and it certainly can, then we'll be delighted to be in partnership with them and the rivers of gold.
What rivers of gold that would be more than if we “owned” the comp?
Rugby Union in Oz is, at most, the number three code in Oz. It doesn’t command either crowds or tv revenue of any greatness.
Even when healthy they only bring a six pack of VB to a party. -
@nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@barbarian I think I've slowly come around to your (and RA's) point of view. There's also a really important point in here about the 'now' versus the future. There is not chance to get better if you're not regularly playing the best, and the trans Ta$man comp provides that.
NZRU have handled this terribly. I think they will be boxed into a corner by their own statements, and wind up eating a bunch of humble pie.
Definitely. Astonishing incompetence.
-
@Crucial said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
What rivers of gold that would be more than if we “owned” the comp?
Broadcasting rights, by way of comparison, where they have 5 times our population and 20% higher GDP per person.
There is just no way to compete financially. Rugby is 3rd (well, probably 4th overall if you consdier cricket), so why aren't we helping them grow their game and the market?
-
@nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
There is just no way to compete financially. Rugby is 3rd (well, probably 4th overall if you consdier cricket), so why aren't we helping them grow their game and the market?
New Zealand has been, for over thirty years.
-
@antipodean said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
There is just no way to compete financially. Rugby is 3rd (well, probably 4th overall if you consdier cricket), so why aren't we helping them grow their game and the market?
New Zealand has been, for over thirty years.
so do you think we should stop?
Also, as an aside, did you see how many Australians used to pop over for the Bledisloe's here in NZ? It was amazing- so many supporters wandering around spending foreign currency.
-
@nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Crucial said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
What rivers of gold that would be more than if we “owned” the comp?
Broadcasting rights, by way of comparison, where they have 5 times our population and 20% higher GDP per person.
There is just no way to compete financially. Rugby is 3rd (well, probably 4th overall if you consdier cricket), so why aren't we helping them grow their game and the market?
How far away would those rivers be?
For decades Rugby in Australia has been propped up by the overall SANZAR broadcasting rights hasn't it?
They struggle with gaining traction on pay tv avenues and keep shifting around FTA ones as they lose interest.
If they did get really popular then they have the issue of having to show games FTA (under the sports broadcasting laws)I think we should be taking this opportunity to reset the model entirely. Look at setting up a comp that sells the product to streaming services (e.g. Amazon). If Oz Rugby wants to buy in to that and add a couple of franchises then good. If they would rather have their own comp that's fine as well, we need to have the better product. If they want to come together and have a playoff at the end of the season that works as well.
Comps like EPL, NBA, NFL etc are all based in one country with timezones awkward for the rest of the world. That hasn't stopped them being the pinnacle TV comps of the codes with franchise marketing popularity.
It would be just as long a road to build that than it would be to get Australia into a financial position to contribute. -
@Crucial said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
Comps like EPL, NBA, NFL etc are all based in one country with timezones awkward for the rest of the world. That hasn't stopped them being the pinnacle TV comps of the codes with franchise marketing popularity.
It would be just as long a road to build that than it would be to get Australia into a financial position to contribute.I'm just going to go ahead and assume you are exaggerating for effect
-
@Crucial said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Crucial said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
What rivers of gold that would be more than if we “owned” the comp?
Broadcasting rights, by way of comparison, where they have 5 times our population and 20% higher GDP per person.
There is just no way to compete financially. Rugby is 3rd (well, probably 4th overall if you consdier cricket), so why aren't we helping them grow their game and the market?
How far away would those rivers be?
So I did some googling.
Under the old Super 12, Aus seem to get 29% of the revenue (for a quarter of the teams), while SA got 38% and NZ 32% (obviously some rounding). https://bleacherreport.com/articles/183199 In 2009 that article says it changed to a straight three way split.
Maybe we should be collaborating with Australia to send players, coaches and administrators over and still be eligible for the ABs? I mean, rugby growth there has to be good for us.
But @antipodean is right, it's been a long time and rugby in Australia hasn't prospered. @NTA and @barbarian can no doubt comment futher on what would help. No matter what, I'd sooner not leave them in the lurch
.
-
@mariner4life said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Crucial said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
Comps like EPL, NBA, NFL etc are all based in one country with timezones awkward for the rest of the world. That hasn't stopped them being the pinnacle TV comps of the codes with franchise marketing popularity.
It would be just as long a road to build that than it would be to get Australia into a financial position to contribute.I'm just going to go ahead and assume you are exaggerating for effect
I am.
But I am also trying to get some better thinking on the future going here (with little traction
)Everything else is being viewed through a lens of the old comps that have been proven to degrade and be difficult to sustain.
My ideas may be pushing it but surely we can come up with something better than a re-hash of the old while we have this opportunity to do so?
-
@nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Crucial said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
What rivers of gold that would be more than if we “owned” the comp?
Broadcasting rights, by way of comparison, where they have 5 times our population and 20% higher GDP per person.
There is just no way to compete financially. Rugby is 3rd (well, probably 4th overall if you consdier cricket), so why aren't we helping them grow their game and the market?
I Thought i heard it was 5th now after the A-league
-
@nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@antipodean said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
There is just no way to compete financially. Rugby is 3rd (well, probably 4th overall if you consdier cricket), so why aren't we helping them grow their game and the market?
New Zealand has been, for over thirty years.
so do you think we should stop?
I'm of the opinion that missionary work is great as long as it isn't to your own detriment.
Also, as an aside, did you see how many Australians used to pop over for the Bledisloe's here in NZ? It was amazing- so many supporters wandering around spending foreign currency.
So all it requires is Australia to win again and the economy can have a small shot in the arm.
-
@Crucial said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@mariner4life said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Crucial said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
Comps like EPL, NBA, NFL etc are all based in one country with timezones awkward for the rest of the world. That hasn't stopped them being the pinnacle TV comps of the codes with franchise marketing popularity.
It would be just as long a road to build that than it would be to get Australia into a financial position to contribute.I'm just going to go ahead and assume you are exaggerating for effect
I am.
But I am also trying to get some better thinking on the future going here (with little traction
)Everything else is being viewed through a lens of the old comps that have been proven to degrade and be difficult to sustain.
My ideas may be pushing it but surely we can come up with something better than a re-hash of the old while we have this opportunity to do so?
I'm totally on board with a bit of a revolution. BUT
5 teams isn't enough. I can't see any other mooted teams actually adding to the spectacle.
In order to make any money out of rugby, we need eyeballs. The only other people who give a fuck about rugby live on the other side of the world. And they already have their own comps they are passionately wedded to. And Super rugby is the 2nd tier. No one is going out of their way to watch the G-League.
Your solution has a danger of over-valuing our worth, and losing big in the process. Australia are in the same boat. Barb may be happy to watch his domestic comp, but if the rest of the world isn't, then it dies. Both countries just do not have enough fans. Economics are a bitch.
-
@antipodean said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@antipodean said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
There is just no way to compete financially. Rugby is 3rd (well, probably 4th overall if you consdier cricket), so why aren't we helping them grow their game and the market?
New Zealand has been, for over thirty years.
so do you think we should stop?
I'm of the opinion that missionary work is great as long as it isn't to your own detriment.
Also, as an aside, did you see how many Australians used to pop over for the Bledisloe's here in NZ? It was amazing- so many supporters wandering around spending foreign currency.
So all it requires is Australia to win again and the economy can have a small shot in the arm.
nah, this was pre-covid ... even when losing, good contingents of fans came over for the weekends. It's no surprise that the Bled got scheduled in Auckland for about 8 years in a row
-
@antipodean said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@antipodean said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
There is just no way to compete financially. Rugby is 3rd (well, probably 4th overall if you consdier cricket), so why aren't we helping them grow their game and the market?
New Zealand has been, for over thirty years.
so do you think we should stop?
I'm of the opinion that missionary work is great as long as it isn't to your own detriment.
I don't see too much of a downside frankly. We dilute the comp quality short term, but give players a physical break. Provide a benchmark for Aus teams, and access a market we need - the only major market near our timezone in our season.
-
@nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
Maybe we should be collaborating with Australia to send players, coaches and administrators over and still be eligible for the ABs? I mean, rugby growth there has to be good for us.
@nzzp said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
I don't see too much of a downside frankly. We dilute the comp quality short term, but give players a physical break. Provide a benchmark for Aus teams, and access a market we need - the only major market near our timezone in our season.
I keep coming back to the point we've done this before. And yet here we all are. Sending players over is a short term fix and no AB is going to jeopardise their representative career being coached by and playing with journeymen.
The reaction over here to foreign coaches (particularly New Zealand ones) faces a barrage of criticism by a stablemate of the broadcaster and apparently the CEO of their RWC bid.
The reality is there's no market if they aren't competitive.
There's no upside to this. NZR has to recognise that it's a case of playing five Australian teams, there will be some dross and stipulate finals appearances are merit based.
-
@antipodean said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
NZR has to recognise that it's a case of playing five Australian teams, there will be some dross and stipulate finals appearances are merit based.
I agree with this. It's the way it's going to be I fear.
Optimistically though, how the hell do you collaborate with an organisation that isn't interested to lift quality and participation? I mean, rugby here is suffering from a dropoff in player numbers too. Get people playing, build interest, build a market and reap the rewards.
-
@mariner4life said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
Your solution has a danger of over-valuing our worth, and losing big in the process. Australia are in the same boat. Barb may be happy to watch his domestic comp, but if the rest of the world isn't, then it dies. Both countries just do not have enough fans. Economics are a bitch.
It doesn't die, it just becomes the A-League - a product for the local tragics, filled with has-beens and youngsters trialling for an overseas contract.
Ultimately the issue facing both NZ and Australia is that overseas $$$ kills our player base. Australia is still producing world class players, but sadly about half of those players ply their trade in Japan or Europe. Get a few of them back and all of a sudden the Rebels and Force start to look competitive.
So both of us are caught in a bit of a catch 22. We need to chase dollars to keep our best players on-shore (and even entice some home), but that means accepting a less-than-ideal competition that may suit sponsors and TV execs more than fans.
-
@barbarian said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@mariner4life said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@Kiwiwomble said in 'Super Rugby' 2021:
@mariner4life you think it will damage NZ? will it be much worse than previous comps?
I mean if both teams go it alone. Australia need our quality, (sorry Aussies, it's arrogant but it's true);
I'm not sure we do. I agree NZ sides are generally better (though not by as much as some here seem to think), but nobody I know has had any issues with the quality of rugby in SuperAU. Sure there's been a few stinkers, but you will get that in any competition.
There's a world where we have 5 Aussie teams, the Fiji Drua (already involved in NRC), and one more team from Asia (Sunwolves?) and it's a pretty tidy little comp. Yeah it may not be world beating and I still prefer TT but I think it probably ends up a more solid commercial proposition than what NZ could muster. Not by a huge amount, but a little bit.
Just to clarify this - in order to avoid having to ditch one of your second rate Australian teams, you will set up a comp with two third rate teams from the Pacific and Asia, one team propped up by a billionaire for the time being, and one team in a state where no one gives even half a shit about rugby. :face_with_stuck-out_tongue:
