Super Rugby 2023
-
@mariner4life never agreed with you more than right now...maybe you're not all bad
lets not forget the football world cup is still HUGE making FIFA billions....they just spend four years building hype so everyone is gagging for it rather than several small competitions or trophies that just results in people going...oh well, we'll just win the next one
-
@kiwi_expat said in Super Rugby 2023:
The Chiefs & Blues have just as many All Blacks in their squads, so why the emphasis on the Crusaders?
Because the Crusaders have a very understrength team this week (for them), I was discussing it with a Cantab, so it was an easy comparison to make.
-
Giving some franchises more money than others is just as stupid as a draft. Why would SR franchises with a good academy develop players if other franchises can just pick those players up in a draft or sign them on higher paid contracts because they have more money to offer? I'm with @Dan54 on that one. A draft could also lead to players leaving NZ, because they'd end up playing for a franchise they don't want to play for; some players are loyal to the bone. If more money for some franchises would end up in an influx of more foreign players, that would also totally send the wrong message to NZ players. More would leave the country and our depth would only shrink.
About an alternative comp, which has already been discussed to death in the past without much agreement:
NPC is the main reason why I watch rugby. If it was my province being cut from a new comp of 10 teams, I'd probably not watch that new comp. I like to watch 1st XV rugby, to see which players will progress to NPC. I watch Super Rugby, to watch my province's players at a higher level. It's the provincial connection that makes rugby more interesting, because basically I follow many players from the start to the end of their careers. If that provincial connection is lost, then rugby will just compete more with other things. I'd lose a lot of passion for the sport. I'd probably only watch 1st XV (as club rugby isn't streamed). If my province would be playing in the new comp, it would depend entirely on the format. -
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Dan54 the national organisations may have to focus on the international game for money...but looking at the UK, the domestic teams are independent of that, not controlled by the RU like NZR controls SR
Of course they do, but domestic teams are independant at pro level. But not sure your point even your post forgets that RA also controls super rugby , but even in England they have rules about international players that are brought in by RU, no comp can be totally independant of governing body . The games are controlled by Referees that are part of RU etc too.
Are you suggesting that NZR and RA should just wipe their hands and let super die? -
Just out of interest if I was a bigwig in NZR or RA I would like 2 super comps tried, 1 a league where all results count towards winner, none of this finals, and then follow it with a knockout cup with every team involved, would suit me to the ground a little similar to soccer in Pommy land, with the championship and the FA cup but not exactly the same .
-
@Winger said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Dan54 said in Super Rugby 2023:
Once again encourages teams that aren't going to win comp to not show interest as lower they are more money they get?
Don't think this would happen.
But I believe they have got to try something. This is just one option. Give more money to a small number of teams (NZ conference would include MP - a lot - and Highlanders less) and see how it goes
Mate it happened overseas, I believe there was talk in AFL when I first went to Aus that some teams didn't really want to win games at end of season, there was certainly a stink in NFL years back about same thing. I want every team to want to win every game they play and not get more money for losing.
-
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Dan54 100% missing the point
of course every sport has a top level. I am dumb but i'm not retarded
But every sport has a pretty significant distinction between which is the most importnat
Soccer, by far the biggest sport, is a club game, where aside from international tournaments for 6 weeks every two years, the International game is an unwelcome distraction
Basketball is a club game where the pinnacle is the NBA and quite frankly the international game is irrelevant.
Cricket is an international game where domestic cricket is watched by 8 people who probably wandered in to the ground by accident (incidentally T20 is probably the reverse)
League is a club game where internationals are an after-thought.Rugby is still trying to make both Internationals constantly relevant, while also trying to maintain the club game is as well. A season where a player will play as often for the ABs as the Chiefs has its priorities all over the shop.
Understand your points Mariner, so what is your answer , do you want less tests (and less money for grassroots etc) or scrap super ? Of course 10-12 tests is too many, but the game is pro and why that many are played, the bills have to be paid. As I said if ABs etc don't bring in money our kids etc will be paying a lot to play.
I enjoy super rugby, watch it all the time and go to games a fair amount of time, same as tests. So obviously I find it still a good comp, although improvements could be made. -
@Stargazer said in Super Rugby 2023:
About an alternative comp, which has already been discussed to death in the past without much agreement:
NPC is the main reason why I watch rugby. If it was my province being cut from a new comp of 10 teams, I'd probably not watch that new comp. I like to watch 1st XV rugby, to see which players will progress to NPC. I watch Super Rugby, to watch my province's players at a higher level. It's the provincial connection that makes rugby more interesting, because basically I follow many players from the start to the end of their careers. If that provincial connection is lost, then rugby will just compete more with other things. I'd lose a lot of passion for the sport. I'd probably only watch 1st XV (as club rugby isn't streamed). If my province would be playing in the new comp, it would depend entirely on the format.and there we go
-
@mariner4life Yes, and ...?
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2023:
@kiwi_expat said in Super Rugby 2023:
The Chiefs & Blues have just as many All Blacks in their squads, so why the emphasis on the Crusaders?
why does it matter? its the example that sparked @Nepia 's thought, it could have been one of the other teams but it obviously occurred to him watching that game
Well It's a pretty simplistic view in my opinion, I mean 10 years ago Highlanders brought in multiple All Blacks from other franchises before the 2013 season and finished 14th that year. After that dismal season Joseph Brown Dermody put a greater emphasis on developing players into All Blacks instead of signing them from other franchises - this yielded some of their most successful seasons in recent times (2014-2018) where Sopoaga, Naholo, Dixon, Squire, Coltman, Fekitoa, Evans, & Hemepo, were all developed into All Blacks.
-
@Stargazer said in Super Rugby 2023:
@mariner4life Yes, and ...?
I believe it's an example of why NZ Rugby are stuck between a rock and a hard place.
5-6 teams is too few (Super)
14 teams is too many (NPC)
Any attempt in between will alienate supporters who miss out.
-
@KiwiMurph said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Stargazer said in Super Rugby 2023:
@mariner4life Yes, and ...?
I believe it's an example of why NZ Rugby are stuck between a rock and a hard place.
5-6 teams is too few (Super)
14 teams is too many (NPC)
Any attempt in between will alienate supporters who miss out.
Yep and why I think we got the best of what we can do. I understand when people say there is quite a gulf between top and bottom, I would say much the same in any rugby (or most sports I have seen over years). NZ have 3-4 strong teams with Clan not to far off, Aus have a couple of teams that are capable of going deep in comp. Watch any comp. the premiership, top 14 etc all have got 4-6 teams stronger than rest, have a lot of players from certain clubs that play the best part of 8-12 tests a year, iin rugby it's a fact, Test rugby is peak and I actually like we got another level right behind it. But even in EPL soccer etc, there is only 3-4 teams in it with occasional upset. NBA basketball have the big teams usually near the top, and they have the top players and most money etc to pay them. We live in a world where professional sport is not about fair, but who can get best set up together.And anyway I enjoy it myself, and happy to admit it, while saying as any sport improvements can always be made.
-
@kiwi_expat said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2023:
@kiwi_expat said in Super Rugby 2023:
The Chiefs & Blues have just as many All Blacks in their squads, so why the emphasis on the Crusaders?
why does it matter? its the example that sparked @Nepia 's thought, it could have been one of the other teams but it obviously occurred to him watching that game
Well It's a pretty simplistic view in my opinion, I mean 10 years ago Highlanders brought in multiple All Blacks from other franchises before the 2013 season and finished 14th that year. After that dismal season Joseph Brown Dermody put a greater emphasis on developing players into All Blacks instead of signing them from other franchises - this yielded some of their most successful seasons in recent times (2014-2018) where Sopoaga, Naholo, Dixon, Squire, Coltman, Fekitoa, Evans, & Hemepo, were all developed into All Blacks.
Long term success is developed from the bottom up. Like the Crusaders. Sometimes teams like the Landers get lucky, such as 2015. The Highlanders have now given up in bringing in players, as a general rule. They are doing wjat other franchises are. Starting from the bottom. Next year about 16 of the squad will be 25 or under. For the most part that will assist in building culture and continuity.
-
@kiwi_expat said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2023:
@kiwi_expat said in Super Rugby 2023:
The Chiefs & Blues have just as many All Blacks in their squads, so why the emphasis on the Crusaders?
why does it matter? its the example that sparked @Nepia 's thought, it could have been one of the other teams but it obviously occurred to him watching that game
Well It's a pretty simplistic view in my opinion, I mean 10 years ago Highlanders brought in multiple All Blacks from other franchises before the 2013 season and finished 14th that year. After that dismal season Joseph Brown Dermody put a greater emphasis on developing players into All Blacks instead of signing them from other franchises - this yielded some of their most successful seasons in recent times (2014-2018) where Sopoaga, Naholo, Dixon, Squire, Coltman, Fekitoa, Evans, & Hemepo, were all developed into All Blacks.
That’s a hell of a tact change…no one is arguing what Joseph et al did after 2013…I was replying to you seemingly being offended on behalf of the crusaders
Couple of things…we brought in 2 all blacks, whilst technically “multiple”…we didn’t buy a whole squad
-
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/7887763/All-Black-laden-Highlanders-squad-named
"The squad, to be captained by All Blacks hooker Andrew Hore, assisted by fellow international, winger Hosea Gear, as vice captain has famous faces such as Tony Woodcock, Brad Thorn, Ben Smith, Aaron Smith, Tamati Ellison and Ma'a Nonu in its ranks."
-
@Dan54 said in Super Rugby 2023:
@KiwiMurph said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Stargazer said in Super Rugby 2023:
@mariner4life Yes, and ...?
I believe it's an example of why NZ Rugby are stuck between a rock and a hard place.
5-6 teams is too few (Super)
14 teams is too many (NPC)
Any attempt in between will alienate supporters who miss out.
NZ have 3-4 strong teams with Clan not to far off
lol @ hesitating to call the Hurricanes strong, they have arguably their best crop of players coming through in a decade, straight off the back of Wellington's first Premiership in 22 years, enviable depth across most positions, with a bunch from U20's like Harry Godfrey still yet to stamp their mark.
-
@kiwi_expat said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Dan54 said in Super Rugby 2023:
@KiwiMurph said in Super Rugby 2023:
@Stargazer said in Super Rugby 2023:
@mariner4life Yes, and ...?
I believe it's an example of why NZ Rugby are stuck between a rock and a hard place.
5-6 teams is too few (Super)
14 teams is too many (NPC)
Any attempt in between will alienate supporters who miss out.
NZ have 3-4 strong teams with Clan not to far off
lol @ hesitating to call the Hurricanes strong, they have arguably their best crop of players coming through in decades, straight off the back of Wellington's first Premiership in 22 years, enviable depth across most positions, with a bunch from U20's like Harry Godfrey still yet to stamp their mark.
Well I a Canes man, so have to be positive lol, and even then I put 3-4 teams don't want to get ahead of myself..
-
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby 2023:
And the odds reflect that. Four NZ teams paying between $3 and $6.50 to win the comp. The Brumbies at $11. The Highlanders at $34 (massive unders), Everyone else is three figures.
This weekend the Highlanders, Crusaders and Hurricanes are almost unbackable favourites, and two of them are playing away.
This is why many of us would like to see NZ players allowed to play for Australian teams and still eligible for All Black selection, yes it probably wouldn't be overly beneficial for us (a sacrifice I'd be willing to make as a fan...) but it's ultimately what needs to happen in order to optimally engage the Australian market. Look at the percentage of the top NRL players who are Kiwis, obviously NZ players are fully integrated within all NRL sides and our players have an enormous influence across every team - It's really what makes the comp isn't it?
It's a professional game, there should be complete open slather between NZ & Aus franchises, it's a no brainer.
-
@kiwi_expat Not a too dissimilar situation with Kiwi players being unable to play Origin in League. If hypothetically this law was changed from now, it would actually benefit the depth of players the All Blacks could select. Tonight's game between the Tahs and the Ponies would be a good example of that, each side probably fielding five or so players each. The Rebels are also playing reasonably well and have a descent Kiwi contingent, you could also include the Force, Reds and Drua.
-
I am most likely completely wrong, but it feels to me that using betting odds for different sports with power bases in two different countries is rather flawed.
Betting agency odds are designed to cater to an audience and make the betting agency money aren't they? I can't really buy them as an official ranking system.
I will make zero effort to think of a better way though.
