Super Rugby 2023
-
@Nepia said in Super Rugby 2023:
@nzzp said in Super Rugby 2023:
Hore nails the issue I reckon. And incredible figures comparing NRL to Super; $100M vs $16M in '96, and now NRL has gone from 16 to more than $400M. Compared to NRL and NH comps, Super has gone backwards bigtime.
Hore's been very impressive at the Blues; hope this gets a discussion started inside NZR because if they keep going down this road they will lose. If NRL was prime time in NZ, I think you'd lose a huge number of viewers to it; it's demonstrably a better, more enjoyable product (that I'm not interested in, to be clear)
I don't think it makes sense to look at those figures and impart anything on what's happening today. Super Rugby now is not the Super Rugby of back then, and neither for that matter is the NRL.
Super Rugby today is essentially a new comp struggling to find it's feet, I'll return to this point. Back then it was set up as part of a war between rival broadcasters, also, the big money in league came after a similar style war and has led to their huge broadcast deals of today. Back in the 90s Aussie league was based more on pokies than broadcast deals.
But, of course the NRL is going to pull in bumper money today, it's huge in two states with two urban areas that both alone have more people or the same as NZ. Because the Saffas left (and the cowardly WR let them) Super Rugby is essentially running on the money that NZ can provide. Comparing NRL with Super Rugby isn't really apples with apples.
As I noted above SRP is a new comp. One that grew out of necessity due to a once in a lifetime event. Also, I know the narrative is to blame NZR for the Saffas leaving, but, we all know that is pure bullshit. Throughout the entirety of SR they were always threatening to leave to the NH. They took their chance when a pandemic hit. They could still be playing SR, that they're not is entirely on them.
On league, it is on life support as a domestic sport in NZ. The numbers have been dropping even in Auckland and they've made a point to specifically not to even blame Covid for it (it's so dead in Hawkes Bay that it didn't even rate a mention in the districts section of the NZRL annual report - I don't think the comp I played in even exists anymore). I don't think it's the slam dunk in NZ that the Warriors having good form this year suggests.
Not sure Hore nailed it, the comp his team plays and his team exists because of the international top down model. From what I can parse out he wants to create a long running NRL style comp run by the privatised "clubs". But, he needs to be focussing on how to make Super work better considering the constraints that do exist. The NZ rugby model likely breaks in its entirety if Super teams become fully private, but some of his ideas can still work within those constraints.
I'm currently watching the Warriors bumble around so wont comment on the "product" aside from to say the hype the NRL, Oz media etc generate is way better than anything rugby comes up with - they can make a game between the two bottom teams in the comp seem like an origin match.
isn't the fact that super rugby is currently effectively a new comp...yet again kind of the point? NRL and AFL have committed to growing where as super rugby has kept reinventing itself and ignored lessons learnt by other sports, determined that international games are the only thing that matter despite the biggest sports in the world generally having a string club/domestic comp and the international versions of those just being a spectacle
are we happy for them to keep hitting reset and using that as an excuse for poor attendances, financial losses and having to look for external investment?
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Nepia said in Super Rugby 2023:
@nzzp said in Super Rugby 2023:
Hore nails the issue I reckon. And incredible figures comparing NRL to Super; $100M vs $16M in '96, and now NRL has gone from 16 to more than $400M. Compared to NRL and NH comps, Super has gone backwards bigtime.
Hore's been very impressive at the Blues; hope this gets a discussion started inside NZR because if they keep going down this road they will lose. If NRL was prime time in NZ, I think you'd lose a huge number of viewers to it; it's demonstrably a better, more enjoyable product (that I'm not interested in, to be clear)
I don't think it makes sense to look at those figures and impart anything on what's happening today. Super Rugby now is not the Super Rugby of back then, and neither for that matter is the NRL.
Super Rugby today is essentially a new comp struggling to find it's feet, I'll return to this point. Back then it was set up as part of a war between rival broadcasters, also, the big money in league came after a similar style war and has led to their huge broadcast deals of today. Back in the 90s Aussie league was based more on pokies than broadcast deals.
But, of course the NRL is going to pull in bumper money today, it's huge in two states with two urban areas that both alone have more people or the same as NZ. Because the Saffas left (and the cowardly WR let them) Super Rugby is essentially running on the money that NZ can provide. Comparing NRL with Super Rugby isn't really apples with apples.
As I noted above SRP is a new comp. One that grew out of necessity due to a once in a lifetime event. Also, I know the narrative is to blame NZR for the Saffas leaving, but, we all know that is pure bullshit. Throughout the entirety of SR they were always threatening to leave to the NH. They took their chance when a pandemic hit. They could still be playing SR, that they're not is entirely on them.
On league, it is on life support as a domestic sport in NZ. The numbers have been dropping even in Auckland and they've made a point to specifically not to even blame Covid for it (it's so dead in Hawkes Bay that it didn't even rate a mention in the districts section of the NZRL annual report - I don't think the comp I played in even exists anymore). I don't think it's the slam dunk in NZ that the Warriors having good form this year suggests.
Not sure Hore nailed it, the comp his team plays and his team exists because of the international top down model. From what I can parse out he wants to create a long running NRL style comp run by the privatised "clubs". But, he needs to be focussing on how to make Super work better considering the constraints that do exist. The NZ rugby model likely breaks in its entirety if Super teams become fully private, but some of his ideas can still work within those constraints.
I'm currently watching the Warriors bumble around so wont comment on the "product" aside from to say the hype the NRL, Oz media etc generate is way better than anything rugby comes up with - they can make a game between the two bottom teams in the comp seem like an origin match.
isn't the fact that super rugby is currently effectively a new comp...yet again kind of the point? NRL and AFL have committed to growing where as super rugby has kept reinventing itself and ignored lessons learnt by other sports, determined that international games are the only thing that matter despite the biggest sports in the world generally having a string club/domestic comp and the international versions of those just being a spectacle
are we happy for them to keep hitting reset and using that as an excuse for poor attendances, financial losses and having to look for external investment?
Super Rugby is only a new comp because of Covid. The NRL and AFL did not have to reconfigure their comps due to Covid. SR did as the Saffas used it as an excuse to leave.
-
@Nepia they both did change their comps quite a bit, teams having to be away for months, whilst melbourne was locked down the melbourne teams all played away, they had hubs and super rounds etc....rugby just kind of said..."too hard"
I think what i have taken from above is an independent board running the comp might have worked a way to do it rather than 5 independent nations trying to nut it out and failing
-
@Nepia said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Nepia said in Super Rugby 2023:
@nzzp said in Super Rugby 2023:
Hore nails the issue I reckon. And incredible figures comparing NRL to Super; $100M vs $16M in '96, and now NRL has gone from 16 to more than $400M. Compared to NRL and NH comps, Super has gone backwards bigtime.
Hore's been very impressive at the Blues; hope this gets a discussion started inside NZR because if they keep going down this road they will lose. If NRL was prime time in NZ, I think you'd lose a huge number of viewers to it; it's demonstrably a better, more enjoyable product (that I'm not interested in, to be clear)
I don't think it makes sense to look at those figures and impart anything on what's happening today. Super Rugby now is not the Super Rugby of back then, and neither for that matter is the NRL.
Super Rugby today is essentially a new comp struggling to find it's feet, I'll return to this point. Back then it was set up as part of a war between rival broadcasters, also, the big money in league came after a similar style war and has led to their huge broadcast deals of today. Back in the 90s Aussie league was based more on pokies than broadcast deals.
But, of course the NRL is going to pull in bumper money today, it's huge in two states with two urban areas that both alone have more people or the same as NZ. Because the Saffas left (and the cowardly WR let them) Super Rugby is essentially running on the money that NZ can provide. Comparing NRL with Super Rugby isn't really apples with apples.
As I noted above SRP is a new comp. One that grew out of necessity due to a once in a lifetime event. Also, I know the narrative is to blame NZR for the Saffas leaving, but, we all know that is pure bullshit. Throughout the entirety of SR they were always threatening to leave to the NH. They took their chance when a pandemic hit. They could still be playing SR, that they're not is entirely on them.
On league, it is on life support as a domestic sport in NZ. The numbers have been dropping even in Auckland and they've made a point to specifically not to even blame Covid for it (it's so dead in Hawkes Bay that it didn't even rate a mention in the districts section of the NZRL annual report - I don't think the comp I played in even exists anymore). I don't think it's the slam dunk in NZ that the Warriors having good form this year suggests.
Not sure Hore nailed it, the comp his team plays and his team exists because of the international top down model. From what I can parse out he wants to create a long running NRL style comp run by the privatised "clubs". But, he needs to be focussing on how to make Super work better considering the constraints that do exist. The NZ rugby model likely breaks in its entirety if Super teams become fully private, but some of his ideas can still work within those constraints.
I'm currently watching the Warriors bumble around so wont comment on the "product" aside from to say the hype the NRL, Oz media etc generate is way better than anything rugby comes up with - they can make a game between the two bottom teams in the comp seem like an origin match.
isn't the fact that super rugby is currently effectively a new comp...yet again kind of the point? NRL and AFL have committed to growing where as super rugby has kept reinventing itself and ignored lessons learnt by other sports, determined that international games are the only thing that matter despite the biggest sports in the world generally having a string club/domestic comp and the international versions of those just being a spectacle
are we happy for them to keep hitting reset and using that as an excuse for poor attendances, financial losses and having to look for external investment?
Super Rugby is only a new comp because of Covid. The NRL and AFL did not have to reconfigure their comps due to Covid. SR did as the Saffas used it as an excuse to leave.
I seem to remember the geniuses at NZR kicking out Argentina, SA, and 3 of 5 Ozzie teams too
-
@Crucial said in Super Rugby 2023:
May as well put this here after the comment about resting over the last 5 games.
The run home for the NZ contenders...with opportunities to rest players in bold
Chiefs: Highlanders (A), Reds (H), Hurricanes (H), Brumbies (A), Force (A)
Hurricanes: Drua (A), Moana (H), Chiefs (A), Blues (A), Crusaders (H)
Blues: Moana (H), Crusaders (A), Reds (A), Hurricanes (H), Highlanders (H)
Crusaders: Force (H), Blues (H), Moana (A), Tahs (H), Hurricanes (A)Laying that out you can see that with only 4 points separating places 2-5 on the table and four NZ teams being in that group there is likely to be some shuffling of positions .
Blues and Crusaders have both the draw and ability to come home with a wet sail. Chiefs have a nice 8 point table lead so can plan a run to the finals with no big concerns if they drop a game.
Canes have a hard last three weeks.Rough table points for NZ sides at end of RR?
Chiefs 60
Crusaders 50
Blues 50
Canes 44Brumbies 52
My crystal ball tells me that we will have a Chiefs v Blues and Brumbies v Crusaders semis
Still a lot of rugby to be played yet. If the Hurricanes can get things right they can quite easily win any of those games in the last three weeks, especially if they can get the likes of Ruben Love back into the fray.
I think the standings will end up as 1. Chiefs 2. Brumbies 3. Crusaders and then the Canes / Blues will fight it out for 4th/5th seedings.
No other side will get close to the top 5 IMO.
-
@Canes4life said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Crucial said in Super Rugby 2023:
May as well put this here after the comment about resting over the last 5 games.
The run home for the NZ contenders...with opportunities to rest players in bold
Chiefs: Highlanders (A), Reds (H), Hurricanes (H), Brumbies (A), Force (A)
Hurricanes: Drua (A), Moana (H), Chiefs (A), Blues (A), Crusaders (H)
Blues: Moana (H), Crusaders (A), Reds (A), Hurricanes (H), Highlanders (H)
Crusaders: Force (H), Blues (H), Moana (A), Tahs (H), Hurricanes (A)Laying that out you can see that with only 4 points separating places 2-5 on the table and four NZ teams being in that group there is likely to be some shuffling of positions .
Blues and Crusaders have both the draw and ability to come home with a wet sail. Chiefs have a nice 8 point table lead so can plan a run to the finals with no big concerns if they drop a game.
Canes have a hard last three weeks.Rough table points for NZ sides at end of RR?
Chiefs 60
Crusaders 50
Blues 50
Canes 44Brumbies 52
My crystal ball tells me that we will have a Chiefs v Blues and Brumbies v Crusaders semis
Still a lot of rugby to be played yet. If the Hurricanes can get things right they can quite easily win any of those games in the last three weeks, especially if they can get the likes of Ruben Love back into the fray.
I think the standings will end up as 1. Chiefs 2. Brumbies 3. Crusaders and then the Canes / Blues will fight it out for 4th/5th seedings.
No other side will get close to the top 5 IMO.
I think that part is a given. The Canes/Blues game could even things up if the Canes win but Blues having Moana, Reds and Landers in the last 5 games is advantage to them. Canes will need to beat two of Blues, Saders, Chiefs to get top four IMO and then will have to beat whoever they pushed down (likely Blues) in the 'quarterfinals'. Hard ask.
Wherever you end up in the top 3 doesn't matter too much (game wise) as Tahs, Rebels, Highlanders or Reds are the likely quarters opponents and they are all on a similar level. Placing for home advantage may be important come the semis though. Looks like someone will have to go to Canberra then back again.
-
@Crucial said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Canes4life said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Crucial said in Super Rugby 2023:
May as well put this here after the comment about resting over the last 5 games.
The run home for the NZ contenders...with opportunities to rest players in bold
Chiefs: Highlanders (A), Reds (H), Hurricanes (H), Brumbies (A), Force (A)
Hurricanes: Drua (A), Moana (H), Chiefs (A), Blues (A), Crusaders (H)
Blues: Moana (H), Crusaders (A), Reds (A), Hurricanes (H), Highlanders (H)
Crusaders: Force (H), Blues (H), Moana (A), Tahs (H), Hurricanes (A)Laying that out you can see that with only 4 points separating places 2-5 on the table and four NZ teams being in that group there is likely to be some shuffling of positions .
Blues and Crusaders have both the draw and ability to come home with a wet sail. Chiefs have a nice 8 point table lead so can plan a run to the finals with no big concerns if they drop a game.
Canes have a hard last three weeks.Rough table points for NZ sides at end of RR?
Chiefs 60
Crusaders 50
Blues 50
Canes 44Brumbies 52
My crystal ball tells me that we will have a Chiefs v Blues and Brumbies v Crusaders semis
Still a lot of rugby to be played yet. If the Hurricanes can get things right they can quite easily win any of those games in the last three weeks, especially if they can get the likes of Ruben Love back into the fray.
I think the standings will end up as 1. Chiefs 2. Brumbies 3. Crusaders and then the Canes / Blues will fight it out for 4th/5th seedings.
No other side will get close to the top 5 IMO.
I think that part is a given. The Canes/Blues game could even things up if the Canes win but Blues having Moana, Reds and Landers in the last 5 games is advantage to them. Canes will need to beat two of Blues, Saders, Chiefs to get top four IMO and then will have to beat whoever they pushed down (likely Blues) in the 'quarterfinals'. Hard ask.
Wherever you end up in the top 3 doesn't matter too much (game wise) as Tahs, Rebels, Highlanders or Reds are the likely quarters opponents and they are all on a similar level. Placing for home advantage may be important come the semis though. Looks like someone will have to go to Canberra then back again.
Yeah it will either make them battle hardened or they will run out of puff. Player management is going to be key in those final weeks.
-
@Canes4life said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Crucial said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Canes4life said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Crucial said in Super Rugby 2023:
May as well put this here after the comment about resting over the last 5 games.
The run home for the NZ contenders...with opportunities to rest players in bold
Chiefs: Highlanders (A), Reds (H), Hurricanes (H), Brumbies (A), Force (A)
Hurricanes: Drua (A), Moana (H), Chiefs (A), Blues (A), Crusaders (H)
Blues: Moana (H), Crusaders (A), Reds (A), Hurricanes (H), Highlanders (H)
Crusaders: Force (H), Blues (H), Moana (A), Tahs (H), Hurricanes (A)Laying that out you can see that with only 4 points separating places 2-5 on the table and four NZ teams being in that group there is likely to be some shuffling of positions .
Blues and Crusaders have both the draw and ability to come home with a wet sail. Chiefs have a nice 8 point table lead so can plan a run to the finals with no big concerns if they drop a game.
Canes have a hard last three weeks.Rough table points for NZ sides at end of RR?
Chiefs 60
Crusaders 50
Blues 50
Canes 44Brumbies 52
My crystal ball tells me that we will have a Chiefs v Blues and Brumbies v Crusaders semis
Still a lot of rugby to be played yet. If the Hurricanes can get things right they can quite easily win any of those games in the last three weeks, especially if they can get the likes of Ruben Love back into the fray.
I think the standings will end up as 1. Chiefs 2. Brumbies 3. Crusaders and then the Canes / Blues will fight it out for 4th/5th seedings.
No other side will get close to the top 5 IMO.
I think that part is a given. The Canes/Blues game could even things up if the Canes win but Blues having Moana, Reds and Landers in the last 5 games is advantage to them. Canes will need to beat two of Blues, Saders, Chiefs to get top four IMO and then will have to beat whoever they pushed down (likely Blues) in the 'quarterfinals'. Hard ask.
Wherever you end up in the top 3 doesn't matter too much (game wise) as Tahs, Rebels, Highlanders or Reds are the likely quarters opponents and they are all on a similar level. Placing for home advantage may be important come the semis though. Looks like someone will have to go to Canberra then back again.
Yeah it will either make them battle hardened or they will run out of puff. Player management is going to be key in those final weeks.
Tactically it could be smart to just settle for 5th and gear up for the quarters. Don't make a 6 game hard run to win the comp, make it 3.
-
@Crucial said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Canes4life said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Crucial said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Canes4life said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Crucial said in Super Rugby 2023:
May as well put this here after the comment about resting over the last 5 games.
The run home for the NZ contenders...with opportunities to rest players in bold
Chiefs: Highlanders (A), Reds (H), Hurricanes (H), Brumbies (A), Force (A)
Hurricanes: Drua (A), Moana (H), Chiefs (A), Blues (A), Crusaders (H)
Blues: Moana (H), Crusaders (A), Reds (A), Hurricanes (H), Highlanders (H)
Crusaders: Force (H), Blues (H), Moana (A), Tahs (H), Hurricanes (A)Laying that out you can see that with only 4 points separating places 2-5 on the table and four NZ teams being in that group there is likely to be some shuffling of positions .
Blues and Crusaders have both the draw and ability to come home with a wet sail. Chiefs have a nice 8 point table lead so can plan a run to the finals with no big concerns if they drop a game.
Canes have a hard last three weeks.Rough table points for NZ sides at end of RR?
Chiefs 60
Crusaders 50
Blues 50
Canes 44Brumbies 52
My crystal ball tells me that we will have a Chiefs v Blues and Brumbies v Crusaders semis
Still a lot of rugby to be played yet. If the Hurricanes can get things right they can quite easily win any of those games in the last three weeks, especially if they can get the likes of Ruben Love back into the fray.
I think the standings will end up as 1. Chiefs 2. Brumbies 3. Crusaders and then the Canes / Blues will fight it out for 4th/5th seedings.
No other side will get close to the top 5 IMO.
I think that part is a given. The Canes/Blues game could even things up if the Canes win but Blues having Moana, Reds and Landers in the last 5 games is advantage to them. Canes will need to beat two of Blues, Saders, Chiefs to get top four IMO and then will have to beat whoever they pushed down (likely Blues) in the 'quarterfinals'. Hard ask.
Wherever you end up in the top 3 doesn't matter too much (game wise) as Tahs, Rebels, Highlanders or Reds are the likely quarters opponents and they are all on a similar level. Placing for home advantage may be important come the semis though. Looks like someone will have to go to Canberra then back again.
Yeah it will either make them battle hardened or they will run out of puff. Player management is going to be key in those final weeks.
Tactically it could be smart to just settle for 5th and gear up for the quarters. Don't make a 6 game hard run to win the comp, make it 3.
Yeah but I don't think Holland will think like that. He's the type of guy that will run our guys into the ground and then wonder why they didn't perform when it mattered.
-
@chimoaus said in Super Rugby 2023:
We really do need to look at the AFL and figure out how they have some of the highest attendance figures on a regular basis.
Because unlike NRL, it's a game that doesn't translate to TV well - you don't get a concept of the space available for AFL teams to exploit. NRL is tailormade for TV; simple to understand and easy to capture given it's so one dimensional.
-
@Canes4life said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Crucial said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Canes4life said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Crucial said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Canes4life said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Crucial said in Super Rugby 2023:
May as well put this here after the comment about resting over the last 5 games.
The run home for the NZ contenders...with opportunities to rest players in bold
Chiefs: Highlanders (A), Reds (H), Hurricanes (H), Brumbies (A), Force (A)
Hurricanes: Drua (A), Moana (H), Chiefs (A), Blues (A), Crusaders (H)
Blues: Moana (H), Crusaders (A), Reds (A), Hurricanes (H), Highlanders (H)
Crusaders: Force (H), Blues (H), Moana (A), Tahs (H), Hurricanes (A)Laying that out you can see that with only 4 points separating places 2-5 on the table and four NZ teams being in that group there is likely to be some shuffling of positions .
Blues and Crusaders have both the draw and ability to come home with a wet sail. Chiefs have a nice 8 point table lead so can plan a run to the finals with no big concerns if they drop a game.
Canes have a hard last three weeks.Rough table points for NZ sides at end of RR?
Chiefs 60
Crusaders 50
Blues 50
Canes 44Brumbies 52
My crystal ball tells me that we will have a Chiefs v Blues and Brumbies v Crusaders semis
Still a lot of rugby to be played yet. If the Hurricanes can get things right they can quite easily win any of those games in the last three weeks, especially if they can get the likes of Ruben Love back into the fray.
I think the standings will end up as 1. Chiefs 2. Brumbies 3. Crusaders and then the Canes / Blues will fight it out for 4th/5th seedings.
No other side will get close to the top 5 IMO.
I think that part is a given. The Canes/Blues game could even things up if the Canes win but Blues having Moana, Reds and Landers in the last 5 games is advantage to them. Canes will need to beat two of Blues, Saders, Chiefs to get top four IMO and then will have to beat whoever they pushed down (likely Blues) in the 'quarterfinals'. Hard ask.
Wherever you end up in the top 3 doesn't matter too much (game wise) as Tahs, Rebels, Highlanders or Reds are the likely quarters opponents and they are all on a similar level. Placing for home advantage may be important come the semis though. Looks like someone will have to go to Canberra then back again.
Yeah it will either make them battle hardened or they will run out of puff. Player management is going to be key in those final weeks.
Tactically it could be smart to just settle for 5th and gear up for the quarters. Don't make a 6 game hard run to win the comp, make it 3.
Yeah but I don't think Holland will think like that. He's the type of guy that will run our guys into the ground and then wonder why they didn't perform when it mattered.
I'm not suggesting that you wave the white flag, just that if anyone needs a freshen up, do so without worrying about potential consequences.
Still baffles me why super coach Razor rates Holland unless he plans to keep him strictly in a box. -
@antipodean said in Super Rugby 2023:
@chimoaus said in Super Rugby 2023:
We really do need to look at the AFL and figure out how they have some of the highest attendance figures on a regular basis.
Because unlike NRL, it's a game that doesn't translate to TV well - you don't get a concept of the space available for AFL teams to exploit. NRL is tailormade for TV; simple to understand and easy to capture given it's so one dimensional.
i dont think i agree because all the pubs around me are also packed with people watching, most have a tipping comp running for locals etc
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Nepia they both did change their comps quite a bit, teams having to be away for months, whilst melbourne was locked down the melbourne teams all played away, they had hubs and super rounds etc....rugby just kind of said..."too hard"
I think what i have taken from above is an independent board running the comp might have worked a way to do it rather than 5 independent nations trying to nut it out and failing
There's a big difference between changing a domestic comp (+1) and changing a comp played over 5 different countries, again, it's apples and oranges. Also, I highly doubt that the three main Sanzar nations didn't look to see if hubs etc were feasible.
@Machpants said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Nepia said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Nepia said in Super Rugby 2023:
@nzzp said in Super Rugby 2023:
Hore nails the issue I reckon. And incredible figures comparing NRL to Super; $100M vs $16M in '96, and now NRL has gone from 16 to more than $400M. Compared to NRL and NH comps, Super has gone backwards bigtime.
Hore's been very impressive at the Blues; hope this gets a discussion started inside NZR because if they keep going down this road they will lose. If NRL was prime time in NZ, I think you'd lose a huge number of viewers to it; it's demonstrably a better, more enjoyable product (that I'm not interested in, to be clear)
I don't think it makes sense to look at those figures and impart anything on what's happening today. Super Rugby now is not the Super Rugby of back then, and neither for that matter is the NRL.
Super Rugby today is essentially a new comp struggling to find it's feet, I'll return to this point. Back then it was set up as part of a war between rival broadcasters, also, the big money in league came after a similar style war and has led to their huge broadcast deals of today. Back in the 90s Aussie league was based more on pokies than broadcast deals.
But, of course the NRL is going to pull in bumper money today, it's huge in two states with two urban areas that both alone have more people or the same as NZ. Because the Saffas left (and the cowardly WR let them) Super Rugby is essentially running on the money that NZ can provide. Comparing NRL with Super Rugby isn't really apples with apples.
As I noted above SRP is a new comp. One that grew out of necessity due to a once in a lifetime event. Also, I know the narrative is to blame NZR for the Saffas leaving, but, we all know that is pure bullshit. Throughout the entirety of SR they were always threatening to leave to the NH. They took their chance when a pandemic hit. They could still be playing SR, that they're not is entirely on them.
On league, it is on life support as a domestic sport in NZ. The numbers have been dropping even in Auckland and they've made a point to specifically not to even blame Covid for it (it's so dead in Hawkes Bay that it didn't even rate a mention in the districts section of the NZRL annual report - I don't think the comp I played in even exists anymore). I don't think it's the slam dunk in NZ that the Warriors having good form this year suggests.
Not sure Hore nailed it, the comp his team plays and his team exists because of the international top down model. From what I can parse out he wants to create a long running NRL style comp run by the privatised "clubs". But, he needs to be focussing on how to make Super work better considering the constraints that do exist. The NZ rugby model likely breaks in its entirety if Super teams become fully private, but some of his ideas can still work within those constraints.
I'm currently watching the Warriors bumble around so wont comment on the "product" aside from to say the hype the NRL, Oz media etc generate is way better than anything rugby comes up with - they can make a game between the two bottom teams in the comp seem like an origin match.
isn't the fact that super rugby is currently effectively a new comp...yet again kind of the point? NRL and AFL have committed to growing where as super rugby has kept reinventing itself and ignored lessons learnt by other sports, determined that international games are the only thing that matter despite the biggest sports in the world generally having a string club/domestic comp and the international versions of those just being a spectacle
are we happy for them to keep hitting reset and using that as an excuse for poor attendances, financial losses and having to look for external investment?
Super Rugby is only a new comp because of Covid. The NRL and AFL did not have to reconfigure their comps due to Covid. SR did as the Saffas used it as an excuse to leave.
I seem to remember the geniuses at NZR kicking out Argentina, SA, and 3 of 5 Ozzie teams too
That's mostly B/S as I alluded to above.
Covid forced NZR to act, it was either create a competition quickly so that teams could play or just let things wither on the vine and have no sport. The Sunwolves were already leaving for financial reasons so unsure how that can be laid at NZ's feet.
The Saffas voted to leave Super Rugby before the end of 2020, yet despite every article (sourced from the South African CEO) blaming NZ it was their decision to leave, and as well all know they've been threatening to do it for years.
Ironically NZ wanted to limit the Oz teams in a new comp due to competitiveness, which is what most of the complaints about the new comp are now.
-
@Nepia and both Oz and SA domestic rugby (ie their Super Teams) have weakened due to allowing top players to ply their trade elsewhere..
I think NZR were on the right path to 'own' Super Rugby themselves and invite other franchises in on a commercial basis.
Andrew Hore is also correct that NZR need to stop at the point of being the overall comp owner and let franchises do their own thing. NZR can always put some rules around numbers of NZ based/eligible players which should keep the pathways in place.
The comp desperately needs a quality uplift outside of the 5 current quality teams. We aren't achieving that from the NZ/PI/Oz pool so need to look wider. -
-
@Dan54 said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Crucial It simply has too many teams to get quality with the depth in some areas.
To build the strength and not weaken teams to even it out you would have to cut team, and I not sure anyone wants to go there.No. I can see the Oz view as they have proved with their womens comp that if they keep the comp in house the quality doesn't matter. Ozzies just don't like going and watching games that either their own team won't win or no Oz team will win overall.
Maybe we need to ditch Super and rebrand the NPC. Allow overseas players and put a system in place initially to spread the talent back out of the franchise hubs. -
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2023:
@antipodean said in Super Rugby 2023:
@chimoaus said in Super Rugby 2023:
We really do need to look at the AFL and figure out how they have some of the highest attendance figures on a regular basis.
Because unlike NRL, it's a game that doesn't translate to TV well - you don't get a concept of the space available for AFL teams to exploit. NRL is tailormade for TV; simple to understand and easy to capture given it's so one dimensional.
i dont think i agree because all the pubs around me are also packed with people watching, most have a tipping comp running for locals etc
I was also going to mention there's nothing else to do in Melbourne.
