Super Rugby - The Future
-
@ploughboy said in Super Rugby - The Future:
opps should muti task
moana pasifika should relocate to melborneDo you really think Melbourne will support MP when they can't even get behind their own team?
-
@canefan the point was it never REALLY was their own team...little too no connection to the local rugby scene above age grade, from day one they tried to buy people in, the suburbs are full of kiwi and PI expats...would take a really deliberate campaign including signing local guys, given them a shot....would still be a huge uphill slog but MP are currently 11th and all but homeless....so im not sure it would be worse
-
you have to be realistic though
The Storm are 25 years old, have won 6 Grand Finals, lost a few more, and are a perennial top 4 side, and they average 20k at home. Now, that's twice what the Rebels pull, i get that, but it's still not huge.
The Melbourne A-League clubs don't pull much more than the Rebels.
Just because you will get 80k to an AFL regular season game in Melbourne does not mean there is a huge untapped market just waiting there.
The Rebels will never pull enough support in Melbourne to be sustainable, and the ARU doesn't make enough to subsidise the Club enough to pay the kind of salaries they throw around.
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@canefan the point was it never REALLY was their own team...little too no connection to the local rugby scene above age grade, from day one they tried to buy people in, the suburbs are full of kiwi and PI expats...would take a really deliberate campaign including signing local guys, given them a shot....would still be a huge uphill slog but MP are currently 11th and all but homeless....so im not sure it would be worse
was kind of my point but to lazy to write.
MP havnt really got a home and have to fight the blues for traction.plenty of good rugby guys in melborne to lock in to. -
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby - The Future:
you have to be realistic though
just undermine everything we do here why dont you?
i do wonder how melbourne keeps three professional A-league teams, its not the crowds, is the broadcast deal that much better? or are they propped up by the A-League? do football players just get paid a lot less than rugby players? i would be surprised
-
-
@canefan but how does money get into these pro teams if not through the crowds?....so yeah, there are loads of clubs (south Melbourme is still pushing for their own A-League spot).....but theyre not bank rolling the pro clubs
-
yeah i don't know the A-League math
A quick google tells me Victory and City have wage bills of about $5.6m for 18 players, or an average of a little over $300k. I had a look at Victory's financials, and they have about $20m in revenue but lose a couple of million a year.
-
jesus the A-league's broadcast deal is dogshit! it makes the ARU look loaded.
Where the fuck is their money coming from?
-
actually Melbourne city is owned by the city group isnt it, Machester city, one of the MLS teams...so bankrolled by the middle east
also smaller squads will help, fewer truly specialist positions, i defender can play up front if they have too, keeper pretty much the only one
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@canefan but how does money get into these pro teams if not through the crowds?....so yeah, there are loads of clubs (south Melbourme is still pushing for their own A-League spot).....but theyre not bank rolling the pro clubs
One of them is owned by a petro-state.
-
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
-
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby - The Future:
you have to be realistic though
The Storm are 25 years old, have won 6 Grand Finals, lost a few more, and are a perennial top 4 side, and they average 20k at home. Now, that's twice what the Rebels pull, i get that, but it's still not huge.
The Melbourne A-League clubs don't pull much more than the Rebels.
Just because you will get 80k to an AFL regular season game in Melbourne does not mean there is a huge untapped market just waiting there.
The Rebels will never pull enough support in Melbourne to be sustainable, and the ARU doesn't make enough to subsidise the Club enough to pay the kind of salaries they throw around.
That's a point I've made before. Rugby competes with league in Melbourne and it's a non-contest when the league team is so successful.
Doesn't help that for the odd enquiring mind that turns up to see what the fuss is about that it's a vastly easier game to understand and watch.
-
@Billy-Tell said in Super Rugby - The Future:
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
Some idiot wanted a conference system so as to keep interest into the finals. Then either the same idiot or another one wanted more teams involved in the hope that meant more equitable revenue share...
After a while it became apparent that the rugby was no longer "super", just professional.
-
@antipodean said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@Billy-Tell said in Super Rugby - The Future:
As someone living in the NH, it becomes harder and harder to remain enthusiastic about Super Rugby. I think I’ve watched 2 or 3 games this season. Why they couldn’t be happy with Super 12 when it was 5 NZ sides, 4 from SA and 3 from Aussie…it’s been through so many iterations and now we are, at least for the moment, down to 11 sides. I imagine TV rights for Super in the NH are vanishingly small compared to the heydays of the late 90s. Cue more players leaving Aussie shores and even weaker teams. Not to mention the NZ rugby infighting that is currently playing out.
Some idiot wanted a conference system so as to keep interest into the finals. Then either the same idiot or another one wanted more teams involved in the hope that meant more equitable revenue share...
After a while it became apparent that the rugby was no longer "super", just professional.
It’s been a total shemozzle. Not just NZRU, the 3 unions. Japan in Japan out. Argentina in Argentina out. SA bigger and bigger. Then out. Force in then out then in again. Rebels in now out.
It’s hard to remain enthusiastic and optimistic about rugby in Australia and NZ. I just don’t care for super rugby anymore. 12 teams with 8 finalists…I’ll probably watch the final and maybe the semis.
-
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby - The Future:
you have to be realistic though
The Storm are 25 years old, have won 6 Grand Finals, lost a few more, and are a perennial top 4 side, and they average 20k at home. Now, that's twice what the Rebels pull, i get that, but it's still not huge.
The Melbourne A-League clubs don't pull much more than the Rebels.
Just because you will get 80k to an AFL regular season game in Melbourne does not mean there is a huge untapped market just waiting there.
The Rebels will never pull enough support in Melbourne to be sustainable, and the ARU doesn't make enough to subsidise the Club enough to pay the kind of salaries they throw around.
I can see why rugby would hope that the Rebels could work, though.
Melbourne has pretty close to the same population as NZ - concentrated - and with similar competition from League and football.
Unfortunately it'an AFL city, while the Storm have dominated the NRL and the Rebs have been a basket case. Who wants to watch their team with almost zero history lose every week?!
-
@Chris-B said in Super Rugby - The Future:
I can see why rugby would hope that the Rebels could work, though.
John O'Neill hoped it would work
5 teams was a stupid idea back then and still was when SRP was introduced. Thankfully the Rebels gave Aust an out.
-
@Chris-B said in Super Rugby - The Future:
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby - The Future:
you have to be realistic though
The Storm are 25 years old, have won 6 Grand Finals, lost a few more, and are a perennial top 4 side, and they average 20k at home. Now, that's twice what the Rebels pull, i get that, but it's still not huge.
The Melbourne A-League clubs don't pull much more than the Rebels.
Just because you will get 80k to an AFL regular season game in Melbourne does not mean there is a huge untapped market just waiting there.
The Rebels will never pull enough support in Melbourne to be sustainable, and the ARU doesn't make enough to subsidise the Club enough to pay the kind of salaries they throw around.
I can see why rugby would hope that the Rebels could work, though.
Melbourne has pretty close to the same population as NZ - concentrated - and with similar competition from League and football.
Unfortunately it'an AFL city, while the Storm have dominated the NRL and the Rebs have been a basket case. Who wants to watch their team with almost zero history lose every week?!
I think one of the problems was how quickly Aus expanded at the start.
Aus had 3 team in 2005 then 5 teams in 2011. They only had 5 seasons with 4 teams.
They would have been better off waiting to expand to Melbourne rather than rushing it - which ended up fucking all the Aus teams as it diluted their depth.
