Back to the future.

[Rebels3]

I think there's a lot to be said for Rebels and Force adopting the Connacht Rugby model.

Strip their budgets back and really allow them to sign locals without risk, sign young players deemed 'not ready yet' elsewhere, and really encourage them to sign foreign players who could one day play for Australia. Surround these youngsters with a couple of savvy vets (your Tim Davidson types). The key thing is, all of their KPIs must become about 'producing future stars' and not 'winning now' (but of course 'winning now' would be a bonus).

Would this improve the Tahs, Brumbies, and Reds? Yes, it would mean that each of them would have a couple more starter calibre mid-career players.

Would this improve the Force and Rebels? Well, arguably on recent form they couldn't get worse.

Note: This is just a thought, it's not perfect. I am not presenting a business case for what SHOULD happen.

Connacht should be the case study the ARU should be looking at with regards to dropping teams or not. A great listen on the Rugby Dungeon podcasts a few months ago.

 

[wamberal]

The biggest problem is that the money is where the conservatives are, by and large.


The young fogeys of the northern hemisphere are quite happy to watch stodge. The only thing that galvanises them into a bit of on-field action is that they know that attack is the only way to beat the Darkness.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I like the idea's some people put forward, however i cannot see the Pro12 ever combining with Super Rugby. The money on offer in the Champions Cup is too great. I suspect that they will look to break into conferences to encourage more derbies (which are the only high rating matches they have) and look for expansion into new markets without cannibalizing their own

Rugby is in a very interesting phase atm, its trying to get through a phase of balancing the conservative past with the brash future.

Certainly brash. No doubting that. There's a fair amount of movement regarding future professional franchises and leagues at present. The Georgians backed by a Billionaire wanting to enter a franchise in either the Pro 12 or Super Rugby (it's actually a shorter trip from Tbilisi to Cape Town than it is from Cape Town to BA), the Germans again backed by a Billionaire also eyeing up the Pro 12 and who knows maybe even Super Rugby next (it's an even shorter flight from Frankfurt which would be the closest airport to Heidelberg). Then there's this mooted Euroepan franchise league.

Treviso looks likely to replaced by the Dogi which is a Venetian representative sides (the region has four Excellenza clubs within it) and Zebre likely to be moved to Rome.

With PRO Rugby likely buried with little chance of return we now have a much more ambitious league that apparently has 90% of its operation and funding sorted. Including building of stadiums, sponsorship and broadcast in Major League Rugby.

Seriously, if we think the Rugby world is hectic now. Post 2019 is looking insane.

 

[NTT]

I like the idea to go back to 5 teams each from Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. Argentina should be looking to build an Americas tournament with America and Canada. They are in that timezone, it makes more sense. Japan and the pacific islands should be playing in a stand alone Oceania tournament with a view to intergrate into Super Rugby down the path, say by 2030. And to my own surprise, i find myself agreeing with J. O'Neill that the ARU should grow some balls and stand up for Australian rugby and whays best for Australian rugby. The speculation and innuendo around cutting an Australian team is tiresome. Its pissweak that the ARU is considering axing an Australian franchise to fix South Africas misguided political shenanigans. The ARU's position should be Australia first not bend over and take whats given. Australia was forced into this mess, Australia shouldn't have to sacrifice anything to fix it.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I like the idea to go back to 5 teams each from Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. Argentina should be looking to build an Americas tournament with America and Canada. They are in that timezone, it makes more sense. Japan and the pacific islands should be playing in a stand alone Oceania tournament with a view to intergrate into Super Rugby down the path, say by 2030. And to my own surprise, i find myself agreeing with J. O'Neill that the ARU should grow some balls and stand up for Australian rugby and whays best for Australian rugby. The speculation and innuendo around cutting an Australian team is tiresome. Its pissweak that the ARU is considering axing an Australian franchise to fix South Africas misguided political shenanigans. The ARU's position should be Australia first not bend over and take whats given. Australia was forced into this mess, Australia shouldn't have to sacrifice anything to fix it.

I actually thought what JON suggested made sense. Revert back to the S15 model. It worked quite well. The problem is, Argentina sits in a part of the world where Rugby is still developing and is still years away from being ready to be truly competitive. They already have the structures in place with the Campenato Argentino and could look to have a Uruguayan, Chilean and Brazilian team enter it to formca Sth American league. But it would take a lot of work for those teams to become competitive and for Argentina to break away from its staunch amateurism.

Looking to pair up with Nth America is unlikely outside some form of potential post season Championship in the future.

Japan could go it alone but we should really be looking to court the Asian market.

 

[Rebels3]

Certainly brash. No doubting that. There's a fair amount of movement regarding future professional franchises and leagues at present. The Georgians backed by a Billionaire wanting to enter a franchise in either the Pro 12 or Super Rugby (it's actually a shorter trip from Tbilisi to Cape Town than it is from Cape Town to BA), the Germans again backed by a Billionaire also eyeing up the Pro 12 and who knows maybe even Super Rugby next (it's an even shorter flight from Frankfurt which would be the closest airport to Heidelberg). Then there's this mooted Euroepan franchise league.

Treviso looks likely to replaced by the Dogi which is a Venetian representative sides (the region has four Excellenza clubs within it) and Zebre likely to be moved to Rome.

With PRO Rugby likely buried with little chance of return we now have a much more ambitious league that apparently has 90% of its operation and funding sorted. Including building of stadiums, sponsorship and broadcast in Major League Rugby.

Seriously, if we think the Rugby world is hectic now. Post 2019 is looking insane.

The more professional leagues the merry i say, as i believe one of the best prospects we have of gaining any traction down here again is continued globalisation of the sport.

As for the Georgian billionaire, it got me thinking the other day. We have one gap to be filled in the end of year tour. How about we get this billionaire to splash some serious cash for us to venture to Tbilsi on that weekend? It's a win/win we get the desperately needed cash, the Georgians finally get that big name travelling to their country which will help push the 6 nations claim. A bit of good will in rugby goes a long way as well and would be a good story for the media to focus on for a few days.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

The more professional leagues the merry i say, as i believe one of the best prospects we have of gaining any traction down here again is continued globalisation of the sport.

As for the Georgian billionaire, it got me thinking the other day. We have one gap to be filled in the end of year tour. How about we get this billionaire to splash some serious cash for us to venture to Tbilsi on that weekend? It's a win/win we get the desperately needed cash, the Georgians finally get that big name travelling to their country which will help push the 6 nations claim. A bit of good will in rugby goes a long way as well and would be a good story for the media to focus on for a few days.

The Georgians have zero to no chance of getting into the 6N unfortunately. But the likes of Scotland and Wales are looking to play Tests against them in the next year or so. And Italy is in their sights for 2018. So they are beginning too get the bigger nations.

I'm all for these new leagues. Signs of a growing game. I actually forgot one in the Spanish clubs looking to form an Iberian League with some of the Portugese clubs.

 

[mst]

Fair point about the willing investor for soccer in Oz.

Am I right in guessing you already have some thoughts re your 2nd para? I'd be keen to hear them if you have.

If Super Rugby can’t be made to fill the domestic void for rugby in Oz, then we need another option.

The NRC is a good start, but it lacks the star-player appeal to be much more than a player development comp (which is its main purpose IMO, and which it does well). Doesn’t mean it won’t grow, but it will be tough going without the test players available for it.

The only other option I can think of is finishing Super Rugby before June, playing the inbounds in June as is the case currently, play the RC over July-August, and then play the NRC (or a new version of it) over September-October, with all the test-stars available for it.


With all the test-stars available, the NRC might start to gain a bit more traction and maybe even a bit of revenue to off-set some of the loss of revenue from a shorter Super Rugby. It would be the same for the domestic comps in NZ and SA.

One of the draw cards of the NRC is its closer to the grassroots than the stars.

Also whats a star? Does that include the likes of an SBW or a Owen Farrell for example - so maybe down the path of the BBL rather than our over exposed supposed stars? Won't our stars be providing us with another draw card wearing gold so be care not to rob Peter to pay Paul and we end up with to much of a good thing we get sick of quickly.

The wheel is invented - lets find one that fits our cart. Plenty to choose from if you are willing to look with an open mind!

I bet if we had a round robin series of modified Super Rugby teams (minus Wallabies) and either 1 or 3 barbarian teams to balance the competition numbers you would get a crowd.

As far as opportunity and timing, the global calendar may be our best friend.

Food for thought!

 

[TOCC]

The real shame in all this, is at a time when we should be excited about the start of the super Rugby season we are instead discussing the culling of a team...

It's absolutely absurd and indicative of how archaic, disorganised, inefficient and out of touch SANZAAR actually are. It's made even more ludicrous that this would all occur only 12 months after this format was introduced.. what's changed? Because they haven't had a change in the board members at the SARU/ARU/NZRU.. how did they screw this up so badly and which one of them will get sacked for this debacle??

Get rid of Super Rugby, it had its purpose and served it well up until 2005-2010.. since then it's been on a gradual decline..time to reinvigorate Rugby Union in this country.

 

[Omar Comin']

Another Super Rugby alternative I haven't seen mentioned would be to have a short Super Rugby that included all the current teams, and any number of additional teams from around the globe, that ran for either 6 or 9 weeks including finals, and that was completely separate from domestic or regional leagues that participating clubs, provinces or franchises were in for the rest of the season.

So for example, take the current 18 teams and add a couple more to make 20, split into 5 pools of 4, then have quarter finals (winner of each pool plus the 3 best 2nd place getters), semis and final. The pool matches could either be a single round robin or home and away. This model easily expands all the way up to 32 teams. And alternative formats could expand further in the really long term (say if professional rugby really takes off in the US at some point).

It'd either go for 6 or 9 weeks, and because it's not a champions league you wouldn't have clubs twiddling their thumbs for weeks, or participating in 2nd level tournaments that wouldn't generate any revenue (thus you'd be less likely to create super clubs that were always at the top and others always at the bottom, which is what happens with champions league type structures).

The participating unions could then do whatever they like for the rest of their domestic or regional season. In Australia we could have either a domestic competition (our 5 teams playing home and away, with a final) or a Trans-Tasman or Pacific comp, or whatever).

 

[TOCC]

Another Super Rugby alternative I haven't seen mentioned would be to have a short Super Rugby that included all the current teams, and any number of additional teams from around the globe, that ran for either 6 or 9 weeks including finals, and that was completely separate from domestic or regional leagues that participating clubs, provinces or franchises were in for the rest of the season.

So for example, take the current 18 teams and add a couple more to make 20, split into 5 pools of 4, then have quarter finals (winner of each pool plus the 3 best 2nd place getters), semis and final. The pool matches could either be a single round robin or home and away. This model easily expands all the way up to 32 teams. And alternative formats could expand further in the really long term (say if professional rugby really takes off in the US at some point).

It'd either go for 6 or 9 weeks, and because it's not a champions league you wouldn't have clubs twiddling their thumbs for weeks, or participating in 2nd level tournaments that wouldn't generate any revenue (thus you'd be less likely to create super clubs that were always at the top and others always at the bottom, which is what happens with champions league type structures).

The participating unions could then do whatever they like for the rest of their domestic or regional season. In Australia we could have either a domestic competition (our 5 teams playing home and away, with a final) or a Trans-Tasman or Pacific comp, or whatever).

Yeah that model has been suggested quite a few times..and is my preference

But I think the domestic tournament should go Feb-April and Super Rugby Apr-Jul

 

[wamberal]

Another Super Rugby alternative I haven't seen mentioned would be to have a short Super Rugby that included all the current teams, and any number of additional teams from around the globe, that ran for either 6 or 9 weeks including finals, and that was completely separate from domestic or regional leagues that participating clubs, provinces or franchises were in for the rest of the season.

Who would administer it? We can see how complex and clunky SANZAAR's deliberations are, imagine the sheer difficulty of getting a much more complicated model up and running, not to mention selling it to sponsors and broadcasters, and working out the revenue distribution model. The mind boggles.

The participating unions could then do whatever they like for the rest of their domestic or regional season. In Australia we could have either a domestic competition (our 5 teams playing home and away, with a final) or a Trans-Tasman or Pacific comp, or whatever).

Again, sponsors and broadcasters? Would it be financially viable? Local derbies are valuable, but maybe part of that value is directly related to the bigger competition prizes that await the successful franchises the chance to meet and hopefull best the best of New Zealand, South Africa, etc. in a finals series.

 

[TOCC]

Who would administer it? We can see how complex and clunky SANZAAR's deliberations are, imagine the sheer difficulty of getting a much more complicated model up and running, not to mention selling it to sponsors and broadcasters, and working out the revenue distribution model. The mind boggles.



Again, sponsors and broadcasters? Would it be financially viable? Local derbies are valuable, but maybe part of that value is directly related to the bigger competition prizes that await the successful franchises the chance to meet and hopefull best the best of New Zealand, South Africa, etc. in a finals series.

Is it really that difficult? it would actually appear to be a simplification of negotiations and provide each national union some form of autonomy and independence for their portion of the domestic competition. It would give Australian control over the state teams and how they are marketed to the Australian public for the first time in 2 decades.

It would boost the value to FTA Broadcasters by providing a domestic product tailored to prime time tv for Australian markets, also consistency in the scheduling of the draw, something which can't happen under the current super Rugby construct.

 

[Omar Comin']

Yeah that model has been suggested quite a few times..and is my preference

But I think the domestic tournament should go Feb-April and Super Rugby Apr-Jul

Fair enough, I've only ever seen it suggested as a champions league involving the top 2 or 3 teams from each country rather than a tournament including all the current teams and potentially others.

I think that kind of scheduling makes sense. Another option would be for Super Rugby to be played concurrently with the domestic or regional tournaments, with the pool rounds played say 1 weekend in ever 3 or 4 (similar to what happens in Europe).

 

[TOCC]

Fair enough, I've only ever seen it suggested as a champions league involving the top 2 or 3 teams from each country rather than a tournament including all the current teams and potentially others.

I think that kind of scheduling makes sense. Another option would be for Super Rugby to be played concurrently with the domestic or regional tournaments, with the pool rounds played say 1 weekend in ever 3 or 4 (similar to what happens in Europe).

The only reason I like a 2 tier champions league format over an all inclusive tournament is that it means more competitive matches. In my opinion Super Rugby is already 2 tiers, some matches aren't worth watching because they aren't competitive(hurricanes vs Sunwolves).. it's demoralising for the fans, at least a 2 tier champions league gives the teams in the 2nd tier something to play for.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Fair enough, I've only ever seen it suggested as a champions league involving the top 2 or 3 teams from each country rather than a tournament including all the current teams and potentially others.

I think that kind of scheduling makes sense. Another option would be for Super Rugby to be played concurrently with the domestic or regional tournaments, with the pool rounds played say 1 weekend in ever 3 or 4 (similar to what happens in Europe).

I actually think a two phased Super Rugby would be more valuable overall. Phase one beinga 10 week 'domestic' phase and then a 5 week 'international' phase two to qualify for finals.

This model wouldn't add any more length to the season. In fact it likely could be run and won in 18 weeks and be completed before the June test window. But it will offer more games as a whole for broadcasts internationally and domestically. It satisfies the needs of everyone with both phases.

 

[Omar Comin']

I actually think a two phased Super Rugby would be more valuable overall. Phase one beinga 10 week 'domestic' phase and then a 5 week 'international' phase two to qualify for finals.

This model wouldn't add any more length to the season. In fact it likely could be run and won in 18 weeks and be completed before the June test window. But it will offer more games as a whole for broadcasts internationally and domestically. It satisfies the needs of everyone with both phases.

Wouldn't this essentially be the same as the Super 15 format (or the 18 team format with 3 groups of 6), just without mixing in the international games with the domestic games?

 

[Omar Comin']

The only reason I like a 2 tier champions league format over an all inclusive tournament is that it means more competitive matches. In my opinion Super Rugby is already 2 tiers, some matches aren't worth watching because they aren't competitive(hurricanes vs Sunwolves).. it's demoralising for the fans, at least a 2 tier champions league gives the teams in the 2nd tier something to play for.

Yeah those are good points. The problem is that it tends to lock in teams as being tier 1 or tier 2 and you get little movement between the tiers even over long periods of time. You see this in European rugby and soccer. The other complication is that in Super Rugby we have two nations with 1 team and this doesn't really fit into a champions league type model. And I think it's good to include these teams, especially in a shorter super rugby model. The Sunwolves for instance could evolve into a Top League rep side. And in future rep teams from other smaller unions could easily be added, e.g. South America or the US, maybe even Georgia.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Wouldn't this essentially be the same as the Super 15 format (or the 18 team format with 3 groups of 6), just without mixing in the international games with the domestic games?

It's similar but different. The two distinct phases are different as with the S15 format mixed derbies with games against 4 teams from each of the other conference. The first phase is purely domestic based.

In the second phase instead of the competition you get to play a better mix of teams instead of 4 from this conference and 4 from the other. In this format you'll get to play at least one team from each of the other 4 conferences. It would offer a more diverse mix.

Importantly, it's fair. After the 2nd phase the top 6 teams would have qualified regardless of which conference they orginated from.

 

[Omar Comin']

It's similar but different. The two distinct phases are different as with the S15 format mixed derbies with games against 4 teams from each of the other conference. The first phase is purely domestic based.

In the second phase instead of the competition you get to play a better mix of teams instead of 4 from this conference and 4 from the other. In this format you'll get to play at least one team from each of the other 4 conferences. It would offer a more diverse mix.

Importantly, it's fair. After the 2nd phase the top 6 teams would have qualified regardless of which conference they orginated from.

So what are the other 4 conferences? Do you need an equal number of teams in each? What determines who plays who in the 2nd phase? And do points gained during the first phase count towards the 2nd? (if they do you won't necessarily get the best 6 teams).