Can we replace Super Rugby?
-
-
@stargazer said in Can we replace Super Rugby?:
@tim Maybe, but Nelson and Pukekohe arent'.
Population of Counties Manukau is over 500,000. Dunedin is 120,000.
-
-
@stargazer said in Can we replace Super Rugby?:
@kirwan Well, they also sign players from outside Auckland, so why not?
In one post you complain about your province potentially losing local players, but you are happy for the same to happen to Auckland.
If I was uncharitable I’d call that hypocritical.
-
-
-
You can't convince me. Population size isn't everything. If they'd pull the Highlanders in favour of another franchise in the Auckland area, that would kill off rugby in the south of the South Island. All local rugby talent would move north. You can see what's happening in Southland. That would also happent in Otago. I don't see any justification for that.
-
@crucial said in Can we replace Super Rugby?:
SJK is correct in one thing. The provincialism aspect is a huge thing to draw on. This thread already shows that. First time in ages we have had partisan debate on rugby (instead of religion, politics etc) and the replies are coming thick and fast.
Always cared more about Auckland rugby than the Blues. Same with posters like TR and Hooroo for their teams.
Byproduct of the manufactured nature of SR teams and the draft designed to weaken Aucklands dominance.
-
@duluth The obvious adjustment to make is to remove the Highlanders and have two Auckland based teams: Counties-Manukau/Auckland, and North Harbour/Northland. About 1,800,000 people in the Auckland and Northland regions, with Auckland growing at 45,000 per year.
-
@kirwan said in Can we replace Super Rugby?:
@stargazer said in Can we replace Super Rugby?:
@kirwan Well, they also sign players from outside Auckland, so why not?
In one post you complain about your province potentially losing local players, but you are happy for the same to happen to Auckland.
If I was uncharitable I’d call that hypocritical.
You're confusing Super Rugby and NPC.
-
@stargazer said in Can we replace Super Rugby?:
@kirwan said in Can we replace Super Rugby?:
@stargazer said in Can we replace Super Rugby?:
@kirwan Well, they also sign players from outside Auckland, so why not?
In one post you complain about your province potentially losing local players, but you are happy for the same to happen to Auckland.
If I was uncharitable I’d call that hypocritical.
You're confusing Super Rugby and NPC.
It’s the main topic of this thread genius.
-
@stargazer New Zealand needs to maximise the value of its domestic competitions. The best way to do that is to concentrate on the largest populations. The investment of a franchise for 300,000 people just can't be justified.
-
-
-
@kirwan said in Can we replace Super Rugby?:
@crucial said in Can we replace Super Rugby?:
SJK is correct in one thing. The provincialism aspect is a huge thing to draw on. This thread already shows that. First time in ages we have had partisan debate on rugby (instead of religion, politics etc) and the replies are coming thick and fast.
Always cared more about Auckland rugby than the Blues. Same with posters like TR and Hooroo for their teams.
Byproduct of the manufactured nature of SR teams and the draft designed to weaken Aucklands dominance.
Same with me. Counties is my Team. Chiefs are a pro rugby set up that I follow.
-
@stargazer More people will watch if they have a team representing them, if they're being intensely marketed too. The Blues have never represented the North Shore, Rodney, or Northland.
-
NPC populations were mentioned
Teams Population Auckland 872,600 Waikato 350,900 Otago 146,400 Canterbury 512,900 Wellington 416,700 Hawkes Bay 164,000 Taranaki 130,800 BOP 252,200 Counties 468,700 Ta$man 152,500 Northland 175,400 Southland 98,400 Manawatu 132,600 North Harbour 315,900 -
@stargazer said in Can we replace Super Rugby?:
@tim Again, revenue from games doesn't come from crowd numbers but from sponsors and broadcasting deals.
Who care about the number of consumers they can reach, which obviously follows population.
Rugby is dying in the south of the South Island. Look at the trouble Southland have putting a competitive team together.
The population drift north has weakened rugby in the area. And we can’t afford to artificially prop up regions for fun.
Ironically Sir Johns proposal is the closest we’d get to a lifeline in that area.
