Super Rugby - The Future
-
"2022 Ardie Savea played 22 games, 11 Super Rugby and 11 tests"
i think thats what bugs me, and i know it doesnt bother other so no worries if thats you...just doesnt feel right if internationals are supposed to be but guys are playing just as many all black games as clubs games, i feel it should be a showpiece, something special rather than their main job and the clubs games fit in around
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2024:
"2022 Ardie Savea played 22 games, 11 Super Rugby and 11 tests"
i think thats what bugs me, and i know it doesnt bother other so no worries if thats you...just doesnt feel right if internationals are supposed to be but guys are playing just as many all black games as clubs games, i feel it should be a showpiece, something special rather than their main job and the clubs games fit in around
throw in AB enforced rest periods for Super Games
and the perception (more like reality) that for core test players Super Rugby form means very little, and you have the issue in a nutshell. If the system itself doesn't take itself seriously, why should we?
I know i harp on about the NRL a lot, but could you imagine the league media if say, Nathan Cleary took a couple of games off to freshen himself up for Origin, or was allowed to cruise as long as he was primed for finals? But rugby fans are fed a constant diet of "well, he has bigger fish to fry later in the year"
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Super Rugby 2024:
"2022 Ardie Savea played 22 games, 11 Super Rugby and 11 tests"
And I guess that ratio is why the top level players feel burned out at the end of every season, it's just a lot of very high intensity test match rugby, all the time.
-
@mariner4life and why it is harder to get dropped from the ABs than to get in (obviously has some merits, but overall not ideal)
-
@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.
-
@taniwharugby said in Super Rugby 2024:
@mariner4life and why it is harder to get dropped from the ABs than to get in (obviously has some merits, but overall not ideal)
yeah the ABs stopped being a "rep" team a long time ago.
-
@mariner4life said in Super Rugby 2024:
I know i harp on about the NRL a lot, but could you imagine the league media if say, Nathan Cleary took a couple of games off to freshen himself up for Origin
But that's also a reflection on who is paying their salaries and wields the power. I don't know what the players get to play SOI but it will be chump change compared to their large club salaries. The same in football where clubs will regularly withhold players from playing during the international break with "injuries" that magically come right before the next club game.
In NZ, the SR salaries are only a small proportion of the top players annual salary, and skewed towards the playing for the ABs. Throw in the NZRPA demands about player welfare and it's obvious which competition gives.
-
@Bovidae might have changed by now but i thought for a long time after going professional English players still only got a match fee (and not a big one in comparison)....the pride of the jersey still played a big part for playing for england
-
you get $30k a game to play Origin. Not too different to your average per game rate for Origin level players.
-
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.
