Southland Rugby
-
@Cyclops said in Southland Rugby:
Rather than a salary cap what about a draft? Each year all eligible players (uncapped and 18 plus) can enter and the teams pick in reverse finishing order. Give each pick a 2 year deal with a two year team option then let them hit 'free agency'. Some of the details probably need tinkering but seems a more reliable way to spread talent.
I think that would work for the NPC and solve a number of issues.
But it would likely adversely impact club rugby as we know it.
-
@ACT-Crusader I would think it is even less likely to work for NPC given the low salaries of players needing to move for a 10 week NPC contract.
-
A draft, again, could result in players not being given the choice to play for their own province or another province of their choice. I just don't believe in forcing a player to play for a team he doesn't want to play for, if the only other option is not playing at all.
-
@Stargazer The real problem is (or was when I was checking things out about five or six years back) is that players are not able to play as amatuers in the Premiership or Championship. The players agreement specifically makes payment mandatory thus players cannot hope to stay in their home province and play NPC for free if they are unable to be accomodated under the salary cap.
-
@Hooroo said in Southland Rugby:
@Stargazer said in Southland Rugby:
@Hooroo Why would I have the answer, if even NZRU doesn't seem to have one?
I don't think the NZRU is looking for an answer to this. I'm just interested in your thoughts as you seem to know why it won't work
It is a monumentally shit idea. Would artificially benefit low population areas. You would have the chiefs with 4 unions at a massive artificial disadvantage to unions in the Saders and and Landers.
It is up to Southland to pull themselves out of the shit not force players to live Southland if they want a central contract.
Would also prob hurt the Highlanders, as they would quickly become a least favourite destination for 'free agents' want a contract there.. gotta love in Invercargill or Dunedin nearly year round...fuck that. Almost as bad as being stuck in Chch. -
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Southland Rugby:
@Hooroo said in Southland Rugby:
@Stargazer said in Southland Rugby:
@Hooroo Why would I have the answer, if even NZRU doesn't seem to have one?
I don't think the NZRU is looking for an answer to this. I'm just interested in your thoughts as you seem to know why it won't work
It is a monumentally shit idea. Would artificially benefit low population areas. You would have the chiefs with 4 unions at a massive artificial disadvantage to unions in the Saders and and Landers.
It is up to Southland to pull themselves out of the shit not force players to live Southland if they want a central contract.
Would also prob hurt the Highlanders, as they would quickly become a least favourite destination for 'free agents' want a contract there.. gotta love in Invercargill or Dunedin nearly year round...fuck that. Almost as bad as being stuck in Chch.Boom! I'll take the bait from someone who's province proudly boasts dumps like Rotorua (the absolute king of dumps), Tauranga and Whakatane.
-
I think the Southland netball team shows you can be successful down there. They're in a slump, there's a good chance they come out of it - although on a personal level I have no sympathy, those b'stards consigned us to the wasteland of 2nd division rugby for years.
As a Hawkes Bay fan I definitely don't want to go back to the old system of within franchise border contracting - we'll lose a bunch of our players - and it just makes the franchise bases stronger.
-
@Nepia The Southland Sharks basketball team are a better example as they sign up players from all over the country and have been at or near the top for a few years now. Obviously it's easier to throw money at 12 players than a squad of 30+ so I assume the corporates aren't as interested in rugby.
-
@Bovidae said in Southland Rugby:
@Nepia The Southland Sharks basketball team are a better example as they sign up players from all over the country and have been at or near the top for a few years now. Obviously it's easier to throw money at 12 players than a squad of 30+ so I assume the corporates aren't as interested in rugby.
I thought that was what the netball team did as well? (I know nothing about the NZ basketball league these days).
-
@Nepia said in Southland Rugby:
@Bovidae said in Southland Rugby:
@Nepia The Southland Sharks basketball team are a better example as they sign up players from all over the country and have been at or near the top for a few years now. Obviously it's easier to throw money at 12 players than a squad of 30+ so I assume the corporates aren't as interested in rugby.
I thought that was what the netball team did as well? (I know nothing about the NZ basketball league these days).
The Netball team does have locals but is the equivalent of the Highlanders as the Southern Steel is Otago/Southland.
-
@shark said in Southland Rugby:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Southland Rugby:
@Hooroo said in Southland Rugby:
@Stargazer said in Southland Rugby:
@Hooroo Why would I have the answer, if even NZRU doesn't seem to have one?
I don't think the NZRU is looking for an answer to this. I'm just interested in your thoughts as you seem to know why it won't work
It is a monumentally shit idea. Would artificially benefit low population areas. You would have the chiefs with 4 unions at a massive artificial disadvantage to unions in the Saders and and Landers.
It is up to Southland to pull themselves out of the shit not force players to live Southland if they want a central contract.
Would also prob hurt the Highlanders, as they would quickly become a least favourite destination for 'free agents' want a contract there.. gotta love in Invercargill or Dunedin nearly year round...fuck that. Almost as bad as being stuck in Chch.Boom! I'll take the bait from someone who's province proudly boasts dumps like Rotorua (the absolute king of dumps), Tauranga and Whakatane.
Canterbury has plenty of dumps... Only difference is our dumps are on stable land.
-
-
@Duluth said in Southland Rugby:
@Tim said in Southland Rugby:
Chop the NPC down to 11 teams - 10 round robin games, less squad weakness.
Three mergers? A lower SI side, North Auckland and the Central Vikings?
Bro! You’re striking some nerves there.
Never actually minded the name North Auckland, it’s what I remember as a little kid. But a merger with Harbour.. No thanks. Imagine it, a bunch of dreaded sun drenched pot heads driving Mercedes convertibles.
-
@Duluth said in Southland Rugby:
@Tim said in Southland Rugby:
Chop the NPC down to 11 teams - 10 round robin games, less squad weakness.
Three mergers? A lower SI side, North Auckland and the Central Vikings?
We need to expand from upvotes to reactions, including one that looks like this
-
@Duluth said in Southland Rugby:
@Tim said in Southland Rugby:
Chop the NPC down to 11 teams - 10 round robin games, less squad weakness.
Three mergers? A lower SI side, North Auckland and the Central Vikings?
Don't stop there. I reckon what we should do is form a lower SI side, upper SI side, lower NI side, central NI side and upper NI side. Now two games a week and a team having a bye every third week or so isn't much fun so we should pit these 'Super provinces' against Australian and South African teams. Who knows, maybe one day we could include a team from South America and/or an Asian side. Brilliant!!!
-
-
@Duluth I just assumed you meant NH would have to merge into Northland, which I didnt see any problems with...I mean having 2 teams seperated by a silly little bridge is, well, silly.
-
Nah you would keep the name, the history, the uniform and in return you just need to give up the home ground
