Super Rugby - The Future
-
a lot of this discussion could probably be moved to the "state of the game" thread
-
@gt12 said in Super Rugby 2024:
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby 2024:
if you ask a large amount of people of a certain vintage (ie the demographics of this forum) they'll point to somewhere about 1997 as the pinnacle. Super 12 was new and exciting and awesome. ABs played the NPC in front of big crowds and it was awesome. The ABs won heaps, the Tri Nations was new and awesome. So how did they fit it all? I had a quick look
in 1997 the season was broken up like this
Super 12 Feb 28 to May 24th
3 AB tests (Fiji and Argentina x2) in June
3N July 19 to August 23
NPC August 15 to October 26 (9 teams)
AB Tour 4 tests in November (12 tests for the year)In 2022, the season was
Super Rugby February 18 to June 18
3 AB tests in July (Ireland)
Rugby Championship August 6 to September 24
NPC August 5 to Oct 22
AB 4 tests in November (13 for the year)Effectively we have just stretched the same number of games out, and completely removed the top 35-40 players in the country from any tier 2 rugby for half the season (and spread the talent across more teams)
I grabbed one random player, and Andrew Mehrtens played 23 games in 1997 (7 Super Games, 6 tests and all 10 NPC games). In 2022 Ardie Savea played 22 games, 11 Super Rugby and 11 tests.I don't really have a point, other than it is interesting that we have the same basic structure 27 years later, but interpreted differently.
Would take a little more investigation, but i wonder that the difference a year looks like for an AB squad player now as opposed to 97?Really interesting post.
I guess the biggest difference between then and now is the battering that player bodies take, especially if they play in most of the test matches.
My feeling is that the Super / NPC division should be put out to pasture - that is too many teams and not enough focus on having the best players with their squad for most of the year. The way to get around it is to have players with a new competition and the ABs, so we would have Super, then break for ABs, then more Super, then more ABs.
Without really thinking, I wonder whether we should (1) add some Japanese teams to a cross-over super competition that acts as a club Championship / Plate (maybe we might need a bowl) with teams seeded based on their J-League and home competition results. That would be 'Super' rugby in my model and teams would play with their 'home' teams with quite big squads.
In place of NPC, I would (2) add two-three super teams (which would be the shit fight) and play a local competition with our 'super' sides , under which I'd run 'reserve' super sides, and players could go up and down as needed. Australia could do the same thing and I would suggest they take on Moana Pasifika to add teams. This competition would be the qualification for which division you play in for Super rugby club championship.
Mate can you hear the whinging about breaking for test season though? Basically stopping a comp for 2 months or even 6 weeks won't work.
And looking for answers with all due respect, I don't give a f*** what NRL does with Origin etc. This is rugby with a completely different set of rules/values etc. As I said the beauty and curse of our game is test rugby is the high point. Add to that the complexity of the game where yoy can't throw a team together and expect a good performance , it's even more than apples and oranges comparison I think.
-
@Dan54 do the rules or values have much to do with what needed to be done to make a successful business model?
-
I've made the point before, but rugby doesn't know if it is a club/provincial game, or an international game (ie Test/ODI cricket, or soccer?).
We're trying to be international (pays the bills) i get the feeling the North is the opposite.That conflict of identity is the cause of so many issues
-
@mariner4life i would say most of the money in football/soccer is in the club game and the world cup propper...outside of actual competitions and qualifying for them they accept games as "friendlies"
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2024:
@Dan54 do the rules or values have much to do with what needed to be done to make a successful business model?
Yep well rules /laws make for complexity, so you need more trainings etc to play , and each opposition requires differnet playing I think.
Values may of been wrong word, but meant by it for teams to have realsitic chance of playing as they should. -
Rugby elitism cracks me up
-
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby 2024:
I've made the point before, but rugby doesn't know if it is a club/provincial game, or an international game (ie Test/ODI cricket, or soccer?).
We're trying to be international (pays the bills) i get the feeling the North is the opposite.That conflict of identity is the cause of so many issues
In the North, they're even more mixed up, with the VAST majority of the money coming into international teams, but they subsidize their privately owned clubs, which run at a loss. France aside, who make a pretty good club profit, I think
-
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby 2024:
Rugby elitism cracks me up
That's maybe because it an elite game, well I certainly think it superior in abilty and qualities to other sports. Is why it's the sport I chosose to follow!:
meaning of elite:
a select group that is superior in terms of ability or qualities to the rest of a group or society -
@Machpants said in Super Rugby 2024:
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby 2024:
I've made the point before, but rugby doesn't know if it is a club/provincial game, or an international game (ie Test/ODI cricket, or soccer?).
We're trying to be international (pays the bills) i get the feeling the North is the opposite.That conflict of identity is the cause of so many issues
In the North, they're even more mixed up, with the VAST majority of the money coming into international teams, but they subsidize their privately owned clubs, which run at a loss. France aside, who make a pretty good club profit, I think
Same as down here mate, by far vast majority of our money comes from ABs, and then trickles down.
-
I reckon NZR 'peaked' as such circa 2015, we had several legends of the game, high profile players, role models etc and they stayed in NZ.
Since then, the money pit that is European rugby has continued to pay players (probably close to what they might be worth) more than they can afford and keep pushing values up, meaning we are losing more and more players earlier in thier careers, eroding our once.enviable player depth.
This has started in the past few years (accelerated by covid imo) to stretch our resources at super level, affecting the quality of both players and games.
I wonder what the average age of teams have been over the years, again, I reckon the late 2000s through to 2015 the average age probably rose, but likely back on the way down.
Bit of a mish mash post, but think I made my points.
-
@nzzp said in Super Rugby 2024:
@mariner4life interesting
I pulled up 2019 Super for comparison as it didn't have any Covid hangovers. Started 15 Feb through to 6 July. It's just too long.
How is it too long? In 2019 there were 16 super games, which is still shorter than every other comp.
-
@ruggabee said in Super Rugby 2024:
@nzzp said in Super Rugby 2024:
@mariner4life interesting
I pulled up 2019 Super for comparison as it didn't have any Covid hangovers. Started 15 Feb through to 6 July. It's just too long.
How is it too long? In 2019 there were 16 super games, which is still shorter than every other comp.
In 1997 the comp finished in May, before the internationals. That's a good comp length
-
-
@nzzp said in Super Rugby 2024:
@ruggabee said in Super Rugby 2024:
@nzzp said in Super Rugby 2024:
@mariner4life interesting
I pulled up 2019 Super for comparison as it didn't have any Covid hangovers. Started 15 Feb through to 6 July. It's just too long.
How is it too long? In 2019 there were 16 super games, which is still shorter than every other comp.
In 1997 the comp finished in May, before the internationals. That's a good comp length
But back then League and AFL didn't completely rule the market like they do now.
-
@gt12 said in Super Rugby 2024:
How's the reading comprehension? As I explained it, there would be two competitions for the same team (one club championship, one local).
That sounds like a fair balance to keep the test schedule as is, which we probably can't change.
You don't want me to read things properly do you gt?? Yep I can see that working, (lol have suggested it fot Aus in a forum there) ,perhaps I just like NPC for all it's problems. But a local super one with proviso it not played at main stadiums wouldn't be that bad,
-
-
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby 2024:
every sporting competition has shit teams in it. What administrators aim for is that those teams have, in the eyes of their fans anyway, a chance to win on any given weekend, and that bad teams can develop in to good teams.
Rugby Union in the Pacific is basically Ice Hockey in North America. If we're to prevent it from dying here you only need to look at the NHL for a template.
Allowing free movements of players in the competition, regardless of nationality, moving away from national identity the Brumbies aren't an Australian team, they're a team from Canberra. Same thing with the Chiefs and Hamilton. The Australian talent pool will never be as good as the NZ talent pool for obvious reasons, how are Australian teams ever supposed to get on NZ's level?
Just look at the NHL example, it's the exact analogue, in the sense that you have two countries, one small that cares a lot about the sport (Canada/NZ) and a big country where the sport is very niche (US/Aus). In the NHL most teams are American and most players are Canadian. A Canadian team hasn't won in decades and yet Canadians are still crazy about it.
-
That's actually really fucking on point
-
@ruggabee said in Super Rugby 2024:
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby 2024:
every sporting competition has shit teams in it. What administrators aim for is that those teams have, in the eyes of their fans anyway, a chance to win on any given weekend, and that bad teams can develop in to good teams.
Rugby Union in the Pacific is basically Ice Hockey in North America. If we are to prevent it from dying out you only need to look at the NHL for a template.
Allowing free movements of players in the competition, regardless of nationality, moving away from national identity the Brumbies aren't an Australian team, they're a team from Canberra. Same thing with the Chiefs and Hamilton. The Australian talent pool will never be as good as the NZ talent pool for obvious reasons, how are the Australian teams ever supposed to get on the NZ level? Just look at the NHL example, it's the exact analogue, in the sense that you have two countries, one small that cares a lot about the sport (Canada/NZ) and a big country where the sport is very niche (US/Aus). In the NHL most teams are American and most players are Canadian. A Canadian team hasn't won in decades and yet Canadians are still crazy about it.
The key difference here though is the club fanatical support. The US Fans support their team first and foremost and don't have too much care factor for the make up of the team. It's the same as the Premier League up here.
I just can't see Australians supporting Australian teams full of Kiwis. I think it would end up with mainly a NZ expat crowd. Perhaps it already is this way in some areas, but can you imagine any support at all from the Sydney money men of a Tahs team full of Kiwis?
Kearns/Waugh and co would never ever let that happens. They'd rather a shit box losing Tahs team full of Aussies over a succesful one full of expats.
