S18 on its way

[TOCC]

I love the conference system and believe it would be a mistake to get rid of it, I don't see why we can just continue to expand within the conferences.

If all the team don't play each other then it doesn't really matter, it happens in the NFL, some teams don't at each other for years at a time.

I wonder how the finals system might work, I tend to think It should be a 6 team finals series with 2 teams from each conference, maybe they could just make it the two top teams from each countries conference/'s.

 

[wamberal]

A couple of comments on the article in today's Oz. Firstly, if there is an Asian team, it will be Japan. That's where the big money is, not to mention the 2019 RWC. They need a kick along.

Secondly, I hope it happens, or something like it. We need to tap into new television markets.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I find this quite interesting. Four or five years ago I read an article detailing what the writer claimed to be insider information on the future of Super Rugby looking 20 years into the future from that point. The addition of a Argentine and possible Asian team seems to suggest that even if it was idol speculation the author could be closer to the facts than we think.

Basically, Super Rugby would evolve to become a 6 conference, multi-continental championship with 7 or 8 teams a conference. The three current conferences would in time be joined by an Asian, South American and a North American conferences. The competition would draw talent from all across the globe.

I'm not saying it will happen but these tentative first steps sure are interesting.

 

[Scoey]

I wonder how much bigger super rugby would need to get before the champions could be called world champions a la, most of the American sports. ;-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RugbyFuture]

I think with the NRC being setup and the number of clubs for south africa approaching the same as in the currie cup premier division, it should be investigated having a heinekin, AFC or FA cup type situation rather than continual expansion of a single league.

 

[ChargerWA]

I suspect the conference system is only popular with Australians and the people paying for it. One of my kiwi work mates has dropped off his sport package until the finals start leading into the internationals.

He would much prefer the old home/away format as it is more exciting to see the international teams play. He reckons if he wanted to watch kiwi derby's he would watch the NPC and I do wonder how many South Africans feel the same with the Currie cup?

I personally also enjoy a home/away format better, but with how much the Force already travel I can see the reason for the conference system.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

Argentina team to join expanded Super Rugby
MARC HINTONFeb 20, 2014

Super Rugby's expansion beyond 2015 will include a team from Argentina, as well as a sixth South African side, Sanzar confirmed tonight.

Sanzar chief executive Greg Peters described the meeting of the group’s executive committee in Sydney as "another important step in deciding the future of Super Rugby".

The Southern Hemisphere rugby collective, representing New Zealand, South Africa and Australia, is working on a model to take to broadcasters as part of negotiations for the next TV deal.

"Encouraging progress was made and we now have a preferred model that involves six teams from South Africa and a new team from Argentina," Peters said.

"The model will now be taken to the national unions for approval before Sanzar presents its final position to broadcasters and fans in due course."

Chief interest will now lie in what format the new competition takes, and whether there will be any further changes to the lineup of teams.

NZRU boss Steve Tew, a member of the executive, has described it as a difficult process to come up with a compromise that satisfies both the rugby and financial needs of all three member countries.

The Australian Rugby Union wants more product to take to their market, the NZRU believes it's imperative that the new competition occupies no more of a window than the current one, and South African just wanted that sixth team.

One of the three has had their desires met. Further discussions and announcements will tell us whether the other two member nations emerge equally content.


© Fairfax NZ News

 

[No.8]

Does this mean the International Season will take a hit and be cut short? Hope not because currently that is the only reason Aus in surving and thats really the only rugby the general public watch in Australia - does anyone really care about the Super Rugby anymore?

- New Zealand use it as a huge All Blacks trial - all their development is done at an ITM cup level

- South Africa do the same and use it f**k people up (haha) - again alot of their development is done at a Currie Cup level (not to the extent as NZ)

- Australia use it as the be all and end all - as it is the only thing we have to develop players - and due to the number of team Aus has its already paper thin in regards to development and the players we have in the comp i.e we have to many teams.

If anything the comp needs to be cut down.

 

[oztimmay]

Does this mean the International Season will take a hit and be cut short? Hope not because currently that is the only reason Aus in surving and thats really the only rugby the general public watch in Australia - does anyone really care about the Super Rugby anymore?

- New Zealand use it as a huge All Blacks trial - all their development is done at an ITM cup level

- South Africa do the same and use it f**k people up (haha) - again alot of their development is done at a Currie Cup level (not to the extent as NZ)

- Australia use it as the be all and end all - as it is the only thing we have to develop players - and due to the number of team Aus has its already paper thin in regards to development and the players we have in the comp i.e we have to many teams.

If anything the comp needs to be cut down.

I thin you will find there is a lot of passionate Aussie super rugby in these forum, who are members of their respective franchise and turn up regularly to the teams match (both he and away).

With the new 3rd tier comp starting we will use this for development opportunities, but it won't replace the entertainment you get from super rugby. Development comps don't get large TV deals either, so I can't see why they would cut it back. Why do you think it will be cut back?

 

[No.8]

I totally agree mate - there are fans out there (I am one of them) but Super Rugby over the last X amount of years (pretty much since they started to expand) has taken a dive within Australia and I think the other nations (def New Zealand) - Union has always be a test match sport at heart unlike NRL, AFL where the comp in the main attraction and the tests are just an add on - union is the other way around.

They need to make the comp short, sharp and exciting - if they are expanding then 1 Aus team needs to go to strengthen the underlying 3rd tier comp - some of these aussie players in Super Rugby sides would struggle to make an ITM cup side - why do you think we have had such a huge influx of South African and New Zealand players since we have expanded super rugby in Australia?

 

[oztimmay]

I totally agree mate - there are fans out there (I am one of them) but Super Rugby over the last X amount of years (pretty much since they started to expand) has taken a dive within Australia and I think the other nations (def New Zealand) - Union has always be a test match sport at heart unlike NRL, AFL where the comp in the main attraction and the tests are just an add on - union is the other way around.

They need to make the comp short, sharp and exciting - if they are expanding then 1 Aus team needs to go to strengthen the underlying 3rd tier comp - some of these aussie players in Super Rugby sides would struggle to make an ITM cup side - why do you think we have had such a huge influx of South African and New Zealand players since we have expanded super rugby in Australia?

To me its a simple equation:

• ARU wants/needs to grow the game, both in traditional and non-traditional locations. Clearly their growth and junior development programs are nothing on the AFL (Auskick) or the NRL equivalent.
• On the laws of economics the ARU has to sell something. You will only make a certain amount of tests and EOYT tours to the northern nations. World cups are few and far between, therefore you need to sell rights to another competition. At least in Australia, Super Rugby offers a good balance between quality viewing and hometown parochialism. The third tier may achieve this, but I don't think the quality will be the same.
• Since we do have a shortfall in players we need to either buy-in players from other countries or carefully recruit from markets. The Rebels have done the latter with Toby Smith, Max Lahiff, Tox Sexton (all Wallaby eligible).
• With the increase success of the local Super franchise you will have more youngsters wanting to have a go at Rugby. With that you not only generate more interest but bigger revenue streams in terms of local club memberships, merchandise and match attendance.

The Aussie teams are at various stages of this cycle and I have hopes the increased interest (and success) of Aussie teams will inject more revenue, more interest and a greater television rights deal when it is negotiated this year for 2016 and beyond.

 

[No4918]

It is debatable that the constantly changing of the Super Rugby format has done the code any good in Australia. The best thing to come out of it is the increased local derbies. As a fan the changes are annoying and many generalist sports fans find it frustrating as well. Please no more changes after this SANZAR. If SA don't like it they can leave, I really think an Aus/NZ comp would be better for the game in this country.

 

[Scoey]

It is debatable that the constantly changing of the Super Rugby format has done the code any good in Australia. The best thing to come out of it is the increased local derbies. As a fan the changes are annoying and many generalist sports fans find it frustrating as well. Please no more changes after this SANZAR. If SA don't like it they can leave, I really think an Aus/NZ comp would be better for the game in this country.

Not saying you're wrong but rather I'll add the opinion of another Australian Rugby fan. I like the changes that have been made, each one creating a better product than we had previously and I'm enthusiastic about the broadening of the comp once more. I also think that the Sth African conference being a part of it adds so much to the tournament. Simply from a cultural point of view through to the challenges that are created by the physical distance. These are challenges that form part of the drama of the comp evidenced by the inevitable chat each Aus franchises fans have at some stage, when the topic of the daunting "South African Tour" comes up.

 

[No4918]

Not saying you're wrong but rather I'll add the opinion of another Australian Rugby fan. I like the changes that have been made, each one creating a better product than we had previously and I'm enthusiastic about the broadening of the comp once more. I also think that the Sth African conference being a part of it adds so much to the tournament. Simply from a cultural point of view through to the challenges that are created by the physical distance. These are challenges that form part of the drama of the comp evidenced by the inevitable chat each Aus franchises fans have at some stage, when the topic of the daunting "South African Tour" comes up.

I agree with most of this. My point about a Aus/NZ comp being better for the game is one from a growth view. Yes, most or all current fans are happy with SA in the comp for the reasons you mention, myself included. BUT, if they were not in the comp, IMHO the game would attract a bigger fan base and be more likely to find itself on FTA. Most normal sports fans don't care about having SA involved and these are the people that need to be targeted. I would not call for them to leave. They just seem to be doing a lot of worrying about there own interests and have the clout to pull it off, unfortunately this may not be what is best for the other two parties involved and I would like this to change. It can't be easy to have to decide between giving the broadcaster what they want and possibly alienating part-time fans by doing it.

The product is definitely good enough compete - Crusaders v Chiefs & Brumbies v Reds on FTA with the right marketing should be huge. It frustrates me that it is lost on the sporting populous and I may just be clutching at straws looking for reasons as to why this may be.

 

[boyo]

The product is definitely good enough compete - Crusaders v Chiefs & Brumbies v Reds on FTA with the right marketing should be huge. It frustrates me that it is lost on the sporting populous and I may just be clutching at straws looking for reasons as to why this may be.

This.

 

[No4918]

Uh-oh

http://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/s...ises-financially/story-e6frf4qu-1226834066798

 

[oztimmay]

Uh-oh

http://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/s...ises-financially/story-e6frf4qu-1226834066798

Nup, bugger that! Leave my Derbys alone! The saffas got their way with another team, we want to keep the derbys. Fair compromise greg peters?

 

[No4918]

Peters can't possibly be daft enough to think less local derbies is going to help us qard off league and rules. His only interest is getting more money out of broadcasters. I bet he can see the fat bonus coming his way when he can sell the game to asia. Meanwhile we go backwards.

 

[oztimmay]

Sadly the battles we have with AFL and loig are not really his concerns, the size of the TV deal is. I can't see the ARU signing up for less derbies, unless they wanna fly the flag to the other codes and concede defeat.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

Uh-oh

http://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/s...ises-financially/story-e6frf4qu-1226834066798

But then there's this from AAP:

An expanded Super 17 rugby series looks set to include the first side from Argentina and a sixth team from South Africa after bosses approved a “preferred model” on Thursday.
The changes got the nod at a meeting of the South African, New Zealand and Australian Rugby (SANZAR) executive committee in Sydney, and will now be taken to national unions for approval.
Should the proposal be accepted, it would take effect from the 2016 season as the current broadcast deal expires at the end of 2015.
“Today’s meeting was another important step in deciding the future of Super rugby,” SANZAR CEO Greg Peters said in a statement.
“Encouraging progress was made and we now have a preferred model that involves six teams from South Africa and a new team from Argentina.
“The model will now be taken to the national unions for approval before SANZAR presents its final position to broadcasters and fans in due course.”
The southern hemisphere provincial competition currently includes five teams from each of Australia, New Zealand and South Africa.
In 2012, SANZAR expanded the former Tri-Nations competition to include Argentina and rebranded it as the Rugby Championship.
Previous reports have said the Super rugby competition was at risk of splintering if South Africa, who currently run a promotion-relegation system, were not allowed a sixth team.
© AAP 2014

Suggests to me 7-team Atlantic & 10-team Tasman conferences with either no cross-conf matches until the playoffs or at best only 3 or 4 cross-conf per team. Assuming the Arg side would have to be SA-based or travel would be a killer.