NZR review
-
@Kiwiwomble said in NZR review:
how british football works below the premier league
The British football model is an interesting comparison. London has a population of 10 million people, plus or minus some loose change. It has seven Premier League teams and three Championship teams. That's 10 teams for twice the population of New Zealand. It is also one of the most international cities in the world. Due to the sheer number of people promotion relegation can be managed reasonably well. Being in the promotion relegation zone is also highly disruptive to sponsors and fans.
The geographic spread of New Zealand would likely make it quite difficult. You'd see players drift to the safer sides (similar to what they already do now, but to a more enhanced degree). Guys would need to up sticks regularly. It wouldn't be fair to expect guys to constantly move around with the fear that their wages will be cut.
Certain locations will also have the correct level of academies set up. It will jut cement Canterbury and Auckland at the top. Those sides in the promotion/relegation zone will also try to work around the salary cap and spend more to save themselves. Creating a cycle of over spending, potentially under delivering to save themselves from being relegated.
-
@taniwharugby They should do something similar to what the French do: set financial and administrative standards, and if a club doesn't meet them, relegate that club to a lower division. They usually get a preliminary decision first and get the chance to fix things; if they don't, the decision becomes final. It has happened to several French clubs over the years, especially Pro D2 clubs. The highest ranked team in the lower division that meets those standards is allowed to move to the higher division to take the relegated club's place.
Players contracted to the club relegated for these reasons have the right to break their contract if they don't want to play in the lower division and try to get a contract elsewhere.
-
The report made it clear that 20 pro teams in NZ is impossible. There's some terrible ways you could reduce that number
I think the starting point should be working out how many pro sides NZ can support and what sort of population base is required. I suspect it's 8-10.
One point worth remembering is that the Drua is also a NZ licensed team. The Drua should be able to generate enough support and sponsorship in Fiji to be viable without competing against NZ franchises for resources. So that would be 8 to 10 + 1
Moana Pasifika is more complex. Perhaps an extension of world rugby money is needed and they should really play their home games in the islands. Can they ever be self funding?
-
@SouthernMann said in NZR review:
@Kiwiwomble said in NZR review:
how british football works below the premier league
Being in the promotion relegation zone is also highly disruptive to sponsors and fans.
as someone who supports one of the few teams that has played at all the levels of the football pyramid....i feel thats a half truth, it can also be awesome, the excitement of promotion or just avoiding relegation, the fun you can have winning some game in a new league after losing the year before
-
I don't mind a 8-9 team pro comp from NZ, extend with 5 from Australia, 2 from Japan. Like an 15-16 team pro comp.
Weakened NZ top teams means likely Aus teams more competitive (and fewer kiwis having to play for them), should mean more viewers in Aus because (Aussies tend to only watch winners) and then bring more income
Brings in Japanese viewers
8-9 NZ teams allows for better geographical spread, won't appease everyone but better than now in terms of something that would suit both old and new, this could keep some key provincial rivalries going as well. Likely to also appease unions with higher player bases and income. Brings back some tribalism which in turn should also help revenue -
They probably aren't going to do away with super rugby so they might as well add a few more NZ teams and look at options to add Japan. Maybe the fully pro guys being paid by the Super team only and not by the province with the players selected from club rugby getting paid by the province.
Have 3 to 4 divisions with pro-reg with the option of sub unions starting at the bottom as new provinces.
-
lol promotion relegation does nothing but make the poor teams live even further beyond their means
In the English Championship for football, Birmingham City are 4th. They lost 25 million pounds for the 2023FY, on 17 million pounds of revenue.
The romanticism of provincial ruby will kill the game in NZ. It's not 1996 any more people, let it fucking go
And as someone said earlier, they aren't provinces any more, they are clubs, signing players from anywhere for the NPC.
-
@mariner4life I think nzr have allowed things to fester too long to have a genuine shot at saving things too.
-
-
@taniwharugby said in NZR review:
@mariner4life I think nzr have allowed things to fester too long to have a genuine shot at saving things too.
i fear you are correct, i think whatever we end up wit is going to have huge faults that might have been avoided if we had more slowly evolved the whole structure over time taking the fans along for the ride
-
How would these big teams in NPC go without their super rugby players. If Super was longer and NPC had the use of only a few of the Super players needing gametime.
There must be Heartland teams that wonder how they would go against the bottom Bunnings NPC team.
-
@mikedogz said in NZR review:
How would these big teams in NPC go without their super rugby players. If Super was longer and NPC had the use of only a few of the Super players needing gametime.
There must be Heartland teams that wonder how they would go against the bottom Bunnings NPC team.
SR needs to be longer, a proper season, taking over the NPC season. a full home and away with the teams, plus finals. The level below would have to play at the same time, non pro, and be based on clubs and maybe regional after? England has a county championship which is amateur as far as I know. SR players wouldn't play for anything but SR and international teams. I guess that is the way we are going
-
@Machpants agreed, it is not beyond repair, but the repair is going to significantly change the landscape.
-
@taniwharugby said in NZR review:
@mariner4life I think nzr have allowed things to Foster too long to have a genuine shot at saving things too.
FIFY
-
The only way it's going to work is if the NPC becomes non-professional and solely focused on the grass roots development of the game.
What this will do to our player base (and the law of unintended consequences) however is that literally hundreds of players (anyone not in a super rugby squad) would choose to leave NZ and play anywhere else in the world where they'd get paid.
-
@Machpants said in NZR review:
@mikedogz said in NZR review:
How would these big teams in NPC go without their super rugby players. If Super was longer and NPC had the use of only a few of the Super players needing gametime.
There must be Heartland teams that wonder how they would go against the bottom Bunnings NPC team.
SR needs to be longer, a proper season, taking over the NPC season. a full home and away with the teams, plus finals. The level below would have to play at the same time, non pro, and be based on clubs and maybe regional after? England has a county championship which is amateur as far as I know. SR players wouldn't play for anything but SR and international teams. I guess that is the way we are going
NPC can't survive as it is, with Super players. I really think they need to rebuild NPC as a feeder comp for Super; very very semi-pro at best, with enough match payments to keep the wolf from the door. Something like 15-20k/season/player gives you something like 500-600k player budget.
Then you take out the issue of fulltime professionals (Super) trying to compete directly with semi-amateur players. It's just that unions really want to run high performance programmes I think.
By the way, this doesn't solve the Club to NPC to Super quandry; you have to play a long enough Super season to make it worthwhile, and then you have the issue of matching up Club and NPC. Personally, I'd run Super - AB - Super - AB, and in parallel Club then NPC.
Then you have to figure out if you pull the Super centres out of NPC - which has headaches of its own. Maybe you don't; you play NPC during the day at smaller grounds, and Super at primetime night slots; Friday evening, Saturday afternoon/evening and Sunday late afternoon if neeeded. Leaves Club/NPC space for afternoon kickoffs Sat/Sun - but limited TV, multiple games simultaneously, and intentionally fan/family friendly venues and prices.
-
I doubt an amateur national competition would exist. TV interest would be low and the gate (if any, could you charge for this?) would be minimal. Travel costs are high in a national comp.
Maybe an amateur comp with regional pools? More likely ad hoc regional contests and friendlies. Similar to pre 1976 but with much less interest. -
@Duluth said in NZR review:
I think you can give up on promotion relegation. The report made it clear the number of pro teams is way too high. You are trying to suggest ways of keeping a similar number of teams.
Agree. But the report is not the word of God. Although NZR will likely treat it as such. And don't these reports usually just say what the paying organization wants. For example, if NZR wants to follow an unpopular or difficult path. Then get in the so-called experts and pay them good money to have a report to back their 'future' recommendations up.
-
@Duluth i think youre probably right, management/admin would become largely volunteer and teams might put together rep teams to recognise the best club players that might just be on paper (all australian aussie rules teams) or at most do a little tour, maybe ranfurly shield challenges, would look for sponsors for specific things like that
