Where to for Super Rugby?

[Joe King]

Wow! This is interesting if there's any merit to it:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/121523112/why-nz-rugby-could-now-rip-up-super-rugby

... can New Zealand even consider a domestic competition that could stand on its own two feet?

Armed with the above figures, we approached sports and media rights expert Colin Smith of Global Sports and Media , who correctly anticipated the bumper Sky deal.
"I think there is an opportunity for New Zealand to retain the five [Super Rugby] franchises but increasing them to a minimum of eight," Smith said.
"And having that a professional competition in itself and then you could have a crossover of the top two, or top three, playing the top two of the Currie Cup.
"If Australia gets its act together it cold also play in that as well.

"It would be a mini Champions League.

The rest of the article explains some of the reasoning.

But imagine if NZR thought they were better off focusing on a domestic model long-term, with a "mini Champions League" as tack-on bonus extra.

You would think it would force Australia to follow suit. Australia would simply have to make it work.

It's all speculation at this stage, but when they said everything was on the table, perhaps they really meant it! Who knows what's going to come from all this?

 

[VassMan]

I don't trust RA to have the guts to go it alone so yes let's hope NZ do it first (and/or SA go to Europe) and then we'd be forced to make it work!

 

[VassMan]

After reading more views on SoO and thinking about it more, I think if we have 4 Super teams as is (or if it shrinks to 3) then I can't see the point. But if we have an 8 team domestic comp with the "Sydney Warahtahs" and the "Brisbane Reds" then I think it would be good idea to act as Wallabies trial.

 

[TheHaydog]

Super Rugby needs bold change we can all agree?. Scrapping the transnational multi-time zone complexity of it can be accomplished whilst maintaining a global playoff series.

Here's how, up the teams from 15 to 30, hear me out it sounds crazy, but let's look at the positives hopefully and go from there.

5 conferences of 6

NZ,SA,AUS,ARG and JPN have their own 6 team conferences

NZ's sixth team is the Pacific Islands who have been ignored for too long

AUS's sixth team is likely Adelaide??? maybe a second NSW team? Depends on your take

SA gets back to the six they had from 2016-2017

JPN has the top 5 Top League teams plus the Sunwolves who will be sold off to be thrown in with them, proven crowd favorite there after all.

ARG has 6 teams, although you potentially give Uruguay one or two, close proximity, new fans etc.

-Each conference is 10 games, a double round-robin (no cross-conference games)

-Conference leader goes through but doesn't get given one of the top 5 spots, 11 best placed wildcards

-Round of 16, Quarters, Semis, Grand Final. Obvious final bracket as usual


The point of this format is to ensure growth in the number of fans while bringing it back to the domestic based consumer, it would be an easy sell to the TV markets, as games would be far better attended, being just a few derbies.

Japan's teams ensure that players that would be leaving Super Rugby are now still in the realm plus the corporate advertisement revenue can not be understated

Argentina/Uruguay is an under rated market in my opinion, Particularly given that the Jaguares drew 18K to a provincial city pre-season against Georgia, they can't get half of that often in Buenos Aires. hence provincial derby growth. uruguay is a wildcard so maybe give them only 2 teams.

Please tell me your thoughts on this format, its flaws its strengths etc. It only means a 10 game season if you don't make the playoffs and a 14 game season if you make the final. The Japanese market along with South America is untapped in this regards. Although based in NZ,my understanding is that the Aussies don't care much for the SA teams and vice-versa. Cut that out entirely keep the teams bring the money and make it a hybrid Champions league domestic round robin frenzy without the dumb format or time zone differences. Less home games could mean increased demand.

 

[kiap]

a hybrid Champions league domestic round robin frenzy without the dumb format or time zone differences.

Haydog, welcome on board!

First, its an OK idea - and it could even be a GOOD idea. A lot of people, including me, have proposed versions of this. … The devil is in the detail.

Your version does stretch a little far in my view (but that's just me).

On the South Africa question, I like their teams but not the timezones - nor the cost of travel to player welfare, fan scheduling and competition revenue.

Anyway, some thoughts - I'll just post a couple below and shelve the rest to try to be brief.

 

[kiap]

NZ,SA,AUS,ARG and JPN have their own 6 team conferences

… Each conference is 10 games, a double round-robin (no cross-conference games)

I suspect many (if not all) of these places want to control their own domestic formats - and probably already have some stuctures in place. Each country adjusts their number of games and teams to suit.

So, Japan might want 8-12 teams for their revamped Top League. NZ maybe 5-8 domestic teams … Australia possibly only 3-5 teams but inviting in Fiji … and so on … (btw, Fiji, Samoa and PI nations more generally are fiercely separate identities).

Anyway - wth no cross-conference games - there's no need to force a "magic number" of 6 teams per comp. At the end of the domestic competition phase, the top X teams (whatever X is from each comp) can qualify for a Champions Cup - it's easier.

Round of 16, Quarters, Semis, Grand Final. Obvious final bracket as usual

One concern here is mismatches in team strength from these 5 conferences. For instance, Argentina can have a very strong pro side if they only field one team … but once you split that 3-5 more ways, it will no longer be so. It is similar with Japan, depending on how heavily their clubs recruit OS players. And there are question marks about Aus and SA losing more depth as well.

One option here might be to start less ambitiously with the number of conferences. Be realistic.

Another option is to copy what they do in European rugby. Play a Champions Cup for top-notch teams from various regions, and have a Challenge Cup for more mid-ranked teams. … Better matchups for more of the knockout games, and with more content to sell.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

It doesn't matter if no where else does it, in the two biggest rugby markets in Australia the RL SoO is the biggest annual sporting event. If a rugby version had a quarter of the interest of the league version it would be a huge asset to the game. If it doesn't work then you'd get rid of it, but you have to try things to find out. I think replicating the biggest sporting event in your major markets is probably worth trying if you're going to try anything.

Some work would have to be done to clearly differentiate between the Waratahs and Reds brands, and the two Origin teams, but this doesn't seem insurmountable to me. As long as we have 4 or 5 teams to pick from (or 6-8 if we go for a domestic option instead of Trans Tasman) then the origin teams would be clearly different and stronger.

Maybe you start by just having 1 Origin game and see how it goes. If that doesn't work for whatever reason maybe some other All Stars or Wallabies trial game type event could work. Another way you could split our players in half that might be interesting would be based on what type of school they went to. Public vs Private.

Spot on OC we have to try things to reinvigorate our game and running say a 1-2 game SOO series in one season as a trial /proof of concept is pretty low risk. To me is no brainer to trial SOO concept as like you say OC after trialing 1-2 SO0 games if post evaluation of this pilot is does not look like viable long term thing to continue to develop and grow - pretty easy to abandon.

 

[kiap]

two biggest rugby markets in Australia the RL SoO is the biggest annual sporting event. If a rugby version had a quarter of the interest of the league version it would be a huge asset

What sort of expectations are on this, OC - say 250k to 300k for TV viewers, 40k+ in seats, ~$1-2m gate?

 

[Quick Hands]

People like watching the Wallabies. They are our one brand that cuts through. Look at the series vs Ireland - packed houses in Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne (albeit at smaller stadiums). Great TV ratings too.

And I think that another related thing which this illustrates is that three test tours by one nation with week to week tests (and possibly a couple of mid-week matches) are more appealing and generate more interest that TRC where the AB matches play in front of big crowds, with big TV audiences, home one-off tests against SA are not quite as good but there's not at lot or interest and Argentina beyond giving Australia a game to win. Overall TRC doesn't generate the interest - particularly in the non-rugby public and media - that for example a 3 test tour by the ABs or SA would.

 

[Omar Comin']

What sort of expectations are on this, OC - say 250k to 300k for TV viewers, 40k+ in seats, ~$1-2m gate?

I think the gate could be >$2m considering corporate and premium seats, even with a crowd closer to 30k. And then you double it if you play 2 games, which I think makes sense.

If it works then in time there may be FTA interest as well so the TV numbers could be a fair bit higher.

 

[wamberal]

I think the gate could be >$2m considering corporate and premium seats, even with a crowd closer to 30k. And then you double it if you play 2 games, which I think makes sense.

If it works then in time there may be FTA interest as well so the TV numbers could be a fair bit higher.

I suppose it is a truism to say that it would pretty much hinge on promotion. And the attitude of the players. One major reason that SOO is so successful is because it caught the public imagination right from the start, when Arty Beetson clocked his club team-mate Mick Cronin.

That showed that it was not just an exhibition series, but had real meaning to the players (particularly the Qlders). Mind you, the fact that Queenslanders had been forced to play for NSW in interstate clashes as soon as they migrated to much richer Sydney clubs was also a big factor in all this.

I mention this because the success of the series is not necessarily replicable in our sport. Queensland born players can choose where they want to play, they are not forced into a binary choice: stay in Queensland and remain poor, or travel south, earn big money, but give up your status as a Queenslander.

Our equivalent game is much closer to being an exhibition match. Maybe entertaining, but not as deeply rooted in ancient grievances. Mind you, there have been some pretty good stinks in our interstate rivalries as well, and also some grievances (the days when a Queenslander could not get an Australian jersey for love nor money, or so it seemed).

 

[Omar Comin']

Our equivalent game is much closer to being an exhibition match. Maybe entertaining, but not as deeply rooted in ancient grievances. Mind you, there have been some pretty good stinks in our interstate rivalries as well, and also some grievances (the days when a Queenslander could not get an Australian jersey for love nor money, or so it seemed).

All your points are valid but I think there's two major factors that would ensure the rugby version wouldn't be more like an exhibition match. The first is that it would effectively double as a Wallabies trial. The second is that all of these players will have grown up watching the league state of origin and I do think some of that history and rivalry will crossover pretty automatically because of that. It's a familiar concept and rivalry for fans too.

 

[KOB1987]

Fox running an article saying that The Sunwolves will be excluded from the domestic comp because they would not be able to make the July 4 start date. Which is a bit ‘no shit Sherlock’, but at least they’re finally making some noise about it.

 

[Quick Hands]

All your points are valid but I think there's two major factors that would ensure the rugby version wouldn't be more like an exhibition match. The first is that it would effectively double as a Wallabies trial. The second is that all of these players will have grown up watching the league state of origin and I do think some of that history and rivalry will crossover pretty automatically because of that. It's a familiar concept and rivalry for fans too.

I think interstate rep games could work (assuming that there is a spot in the calendar).

If this happens though there can't be teams called NSW Waratahs and Qld Reds playing in the domestic competition as some on here have suggested.

 

[Quick Hands]

Wow! This is interesting if there's any merit to it:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/121523112/why-nz-rugby-could-now-rip-up-super-rugby





The rest of the article explains some of the reasoning.

But imagine if NZR thought they were better off focusing on a domestic model long-term, with a "mini Champions League" as tack-on bonus extra.

You would think it would force Australia to follow suit. Australia would simply have to make it work.

It's all speculation at this stage, but when they said everything was on the table, perhaps they really meant it! Who knows what's going to come from all this?

The bit about broadcast money should also have RA very worried.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

After lot of reflection i must say I agree we should try to do something without nz but have a champions league style follow on. As only way trans Tasman would ever work is with more oz teams then 2 to 3 that would be realistic, and only way that could happen is when nz allowing open borders policy. But can’t see nz ever considering that as their over indulgence on their own importance without really facing commercial reality of their small country size / market size they are much more dependent on nations like oz for growth if more collaborative and flexible.

Let them go forward in their own bubble - look at only champions league and Bledisloe.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Fox running an article saying that The Sunwolves will be excluded from the domestic comp because they would not be able to make the July 4 start date. Which is a bit ‘no shit Sherlock’, but at least they’re finally making some noise about it.

At this point I would just be happy hearing there is definitely a domestic comp

 

[COX'S ROUTE]

Fox running an article saying that The Sunwolves will be excluded from the domestic comp because they would not be able to make the July 4 start date. Which is a bit ‘no shit Sherlock’, but at least they’re finally making some noise about it.

I posted this days ago. No SWs.

The powers that be are now in the throws of putting together a Barbarians team. Players & managers have been approached. Some SW players may be involved and probably lots of other un-contracted players. Basically who ever they can get

 

[RugbyReg]

I posted this days ago. No SWs.

The powers that be are now in the throws of putting together a Barbarians team. Players & managers have been approached. Some SW players may be involved and probably lots of other un-contracted players. Basically who ever they can get

yuk

 

[Mr Wobbly]

I posted this days ago. No SWs.

The powers that be are now in the throws of putting together a Barbarians team. Players & managers have been approached. Some SW players may be involved and probably lots of other un-contracted players. Basically who ever they can get

Surely it would be easier to bring in an established SW team and quarantine them, they could be put up somewhere nice with training facilities, than cobble together a whole new team, coaches, support staff etc.