Rugby 7s general chat

[RedsHappy]

It would be a fair assessment to say that a fair chunk of the best rugby players in this country are within the 33man Wallabies squad..

Ok i should have clarified, the best and highest profile players. BBL leverages marquee players extensively.. As unfortunate as it is, having Ed Jenkins in a team isn't going to get the turnstiles turning or tens of thousands tuning in.

If what you're talking about it a commercialised and self-funding tournament which will get people tuning in and turning up to watch, then the reality is you need players like Folau, Kerevi, Speight, DHP, McMahon, Kuridrani and Hooper playing.

Of course I get your point, to an extent.

But I think it's both easier and better than that, if one is assessing how to get a proper domestic 7s tournament off the ground.

Just for example: When the Reds' crowds started to really build in 2010, it was not at all due to seeing lots of high-profile Wallabies running in the team.

Rather, it was that as punters we were seeing a combination of talented, fast, effective, 'entertaining' attacking rugby that was winning lots of games vs good opposition and this was based on some wonderfully talented individual players that hitherto were far from national household names. Much of that was induced by good coaching, not just star players. It's the quality of the total product that matters.

My point is that attendance and televisual success in sports competitions is not by any means solely built on 'today's high profile players'.

 

[Scrubber2050]

What happens now for the men's 7s. What's the process. Will players be cut ? When and where are the trials held ? And when officially does the season start ? Cheers

Who knows - they are all on the piss now

 

[Strewthcobber]

Reports that the Hockey teams will be losing funding given their disappointing performance.

Presumably losing quarter finalists mean that the Men's Sevens team will lose funding too.

Might make expansion plans more difficult.

 

[RugbyReg]

Whereas, as I mentioned in my article last week, the women's program should get a huge boost for winning gold.

 

[barbarian]

Not sure how much funding Men's Sevens would have received. Winning Edge ties funding to results, and our team never had any results really.

Unlike the Hockey teams who had a long pedigree of Olympic achievement, and our men were World Champs and our Women were #2 in the world.
.

 

[Strewthcobber]

After a little investigation it appears the ASC gave rugby 7s $1,040,000 for high performance and $660,000 for participation last year.

Compares with nearly $6m that hockey receives.

The ARU spent $3.5m on the sevens' teams last year.

So yeah - despite the poor performance of the men (their target was top 7, women top 4). it shouldn't make too much difference to the funding from the ASC.

 

[RedsHappy]

I thought this was interesting from the GAGR men's 7s comments section following Barbarian's front page article of a few days back....I have also heard from own contacts in international rugby that it's assumed from the 2016-17 World Rugby 7s on that total sponsorship $s into World Rugby for this series post -Olympics will increase by at least 30%

Owen McCaffrey:

The way Sevens works is it is the series itself is very profitable for World Rugby who keeps half the money for investment in its long term initiatives and distributes the rest to participating national unions along with paying their full costs of participating in the World Series.

This means the ARU as one of the 16 World series teams gets somewhere in the region of (guessing) $1-2 million per season to cover player and coach payments which has significantly increased in recent years.

On top of this, richer nations like NZ and AUS will add sponsors and IOC funding to increase this to $3-4million per year.

But remember this is not player payments it is total team costs except tournament costs and lot of the funding has gone into facilities, recruiting and coaching.

Players and coaches might see 60% of $10millonover a4 year cycle,or $6million and that will be divided between approximately 20full time roles from a 16 man squad to 4 man coaching team.

Conservatively you can say an average pay of $500,000 over 4 years which is $125k per year. Realistically the coach and top performers may be on double that while new recruits and assistant coaches also.

 

[RedsHappy]

Whereas, as I mentioned in my article last week, the women's program should get a huge boost for winning gold.

Yes! One of the many reasons we need a radical restructure of the men's 7s program is that its comparatively weak performances and thus profile will be a drag on building governmental funding momentum and 7s-wide sponsorship.

Plus don't forget: the AOC is another source of income now the game is in the Olympics and if we have half a brain in the ARU we'll get significant 2017-18 funding increases there just for national Aussie 7s.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Players and coaches might see 60% of $10millon over a 4 year cycle,or $6million and that will be divided between approximately 20 full time roles from a 16 man squad to 4 man coaching team.

Conservatively you can say an average pay of $500,000 over 4 years which is $125k per year. Realistically the coach and top performers may be on double that while new recruits and assistant coaches also.

?

ave pay = 60% x $10m / 4 years / 20 players = $75k

Seems a bit more realistic.....

Seen other reports - the ARU spends $3.5m on the sevens program which includes approx 40 mens and womens players and coaches.

 

[I like to watch]

The ARU spent $3.5m on the sevens' teams last year.

So yeah - despite the poor performance of the men (their target was top 7, women top 4). it shouldn't make too much difference to the funding from the ASC.

How could our target be top 7?
Our fucking target!
That, added to previous poster advising we extended the coach, just before the Olympics, just illustrates there is absolutely no requirement for high performance in any respect for this group.
No wonder they are not excelling, it's not even a fucking goal!

 

[Strewthcobber]

How could our target be top 7?
Our fucking target!
That, added to previous poster advising we extended the coach, just before the Olympics, just illustrates there is absolutely no requirement for high performance in any respect for this group.
No wonder they are not excelling, it's not even a fucking goal!

To be fair that was the target for level of funding from the ASC based on previous results - not the ARU or Sevens team's target for themselves

 

[I like to watch]

That would be a relief, if they had waited to reappoint the coach unil his performance could be judged.
Clearly the focus of the year was the Olympics.
It's not like they needed to move quickly to secure his services.

 

[RugbyReg]

Nup, the ARU target was spelled out in their 5 year plan released earlier this year:

*Olympic (2016 & 2020) and Commonwealth Games (2018) Medals for men’s and women’s Sevens teams

So the men failed dismally and the Gold Coast Games won't be any easier, although I guess we won't have to play France or Spain.

 

[Highlander35]

Canada, England, Fiji, Kenya, New Zealand, Samoa, Scotland, South Africa and Wales should all be at the Comm games. No Argies, States, Frenchies or Japanese yes, but it's the best part of a leg in and of itself.

 

[Brumby Runner]

^^^^^^ Aus missing out?

 

[Highlander35]

For you guys to beat

 

[Rugbynutter39]

If we want to get better our 'national comp' would need a few teams from the pacific to compete against.

Like the idea but commercially tough stretch to include a few teams from the pacific island nations..

 

[TOCC]

After a little investigation it appears the ASC gave rugby 7s $1,040,000 for high performance and $660,000 for participation last year.

Compares with nearly $6m that hockey receives.

The ARU spent $3.5m on the sevens' teams last year.

So yeah - despite the poor performance of the men (their target was top 7, women top 4). it shouldn't make too much difference to the funding from the ASC.

Overall funding from the ASC will likely increase on the back of the women's performance, when winning edge set funding and medal expectations 4 years ago the womens were considered possible medal contenders but weren't favourites for gold.

They stand as the only gold medalist team sport at this Olympics, and someone mentioned they are the first gold medalist 'team' sport since Athens jn 2004, that doesn't sound true?

But in either case the women's team has at least exceeded expectations and should get greater grants from the ASC

 

[RedsHappy]

There are tweets from UK rugby sites overnight that it looks as though the FRU will grant the Top 14 clubs no less than €28m (A$41m) in total funding for the development of 7s both within each club and for an upgraded pair of national teams.

Above not fully verified as yet, and the period is uncertain, but interesting none the less.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

There are tweets from UK rugby sites overnight that it looks as though the FRU will grant the Top 14 clubs no less than €28m (A$41m) in total funding for the development of 7s both within each club and for an upgraded pair of national teams.

Above not fully verified as yet, and the period is uncertain, but interesting none the less.

Much of that money will go to establishing a 3rd division of professional rugby. The tweet I saw did mention the establishment of a 7s league.