Where to for Super Rugby?

[hoggy]

You cannot really compare what is happening in UK / Ireland / Europe with respect to revenue and so on with us. Much easier to have bolder plans with a much larger revenue pot from broadcasting (just for starters) and minimal logistic issues (compared to a comp over a dozen time zones or more and so on). PE more likely to tip in money when they see an easier pathway to develop the comp and see real returns.
The notion that we just go Aus / NZ / PI and / or Japan sounds good, in theory. But who will pay? Broadcasters won't pay more; FTA is unrealistic - why would they put low-rating rubbish (from their POV) on prime-time - they just won't. PE are not likely to throw huge money into a building a comp with unknown prospects.
I don't see an easy fix, sadly.

Look it really is a catch 22 situation, but the issue is where is the planning, they should have dealt with this in the in 2008, then 2012, then 2105, now were already faced with another 5yr deal come 2021 with a Super competition as appealing as a fart in an elevator to the marketplace.

So what do we do in 2025, just sign up again with whatever they come up with, because hey they have the money. But will any one in Aus still be left watching, NZ have already signed a 5yr agreement, so pretty much F___k Aus we're okay.

Yes Super rugby may pay the bills, but it will as it is, destroy the game in Australia.

Sooner or later the code here is going to have to learn to walk on its own two feet. Like some desperate drug addict, just another hit then we'll be okay, but be careful that money may end up killing the game eventually.

 

[Dan54]

Cutting SA out is such a narrow, Australia-centric approach. I'm sure I've written this elsewhere, but there are two major flaws here:

NZ tend to view SA as the old enemy, not Australia - particularly given the recent weakness of Australian squads; and

SuperSport is the largest source of revenue in the current agreement.

Can we be careful about putting up such sensible post TOD??

 

[Lorenzo]

I'm not sure there's been a lack of planning. There may very well have been 50 proposals drawn up for a more accessible and consistent broadcast product but none of them are feasible.

I would hazard a guess that any new comp or materially changed comp will necessitate a short to medium term belt tightening. Perhaps we need to embrace overseas options for our very expensive players and just pay them to play test matches? Instead paying someone 100k a month for 11 months of the year, we pay him 15k per test?

I suspect that a watchable product - and by that I mean one that is broadcast (on whatever platform) at (Sydney time) 5, 7 and 9 every Friday and 3,5 7 and 9 every Saturday - full of guys on 100k a year is more likely to catch on than the current thing.

Sure, it means we'd have to open up selection to guys playing OS, but do what? It's not the late 90s anymore when the NH leagues were a lower standard.

 

[qwerty51]

Cutting SA out is such a narrow, Australia-centric approach. I'm sure I've written this elsewhere, but there are two major flaws here:

NZ tend to view SA as the old enemy, not Australia - particularly given the recent weakness of Australian squads; and

SuperSport is the largest source of revenue in the current agreement.

Who gives a shit what NZ view? We hold the leverage, not them. They can't do a deal with only SA.

I don't know why we need SA? Does the NRL and AFL need SA? Our best chances of competing in the Aus market is replicating the NRL/AFL and driving down their dominance. The game isn't the issue, rugby is hugely more popular than those sports outside Australia. It's pretty simple what Australia needs and how to achieve it:

Trans-Tasman competition:

-More local teams
-Every game is time-zone friendly
-Significantly reduced travel
-Free movement between NZ/Aus
-Longer competition, 20+ rounds going from March -> September

NZ has 12 teams, we have 8. This competition replaces Super Rugby, the NRC, Mitre10. Every club has it's own junior pathways. Free movement means Aus teams could be full of Kiwi players so forget about complaining about Aus teams being weak. Could even host an annual Bledisloe on ANZAC day like the NRL do (except on the actual day not the following weekend). Comp could pause of NH sides to tour in June and the normal Spring tour after the GF in November like usual.

Of course the comp would lose money initially, but short-sighted continuance of the SANZAAR partnership has got the game no where for Australia. Time to look after ourselves.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Cutting SA out is such a narrow, Australia-centric approach. I'm sure I've written this elsewhere, but there are two major flaws here:

NZ tend to view SA as the old enemy, not Australia - particularly given the recent weakness of Australian squads; and

SuperSport is the largest source of revenue in the current agreement.

The question is, how much of that value is tied to Super Rugby?

 

[cyclopath]

Who gives a shit what NZ view? We hold the leverage, not them. They can't do a deal with only SA.

I don't know why we need SA? Does the NRL and AFL need SA? Our best chances of competing in the Aus market is replicating the NRL/AFL and driving down their dominance. The game isn't the issue, rugby is hugely more popular than those sports outside Australia. It's pretty simple what Australia needs and how to achieve it:

Trans-Tasman competition:

-More local teams
-Every game is time-zone friendly
-Significantly reduced travel
-Free movement between NZ/Aus
-Longer competition, 20+ rounds going from March -> September

NZ has 12 teams, we have 8. This competition replaces Super Rugby, the NRC, Mitre10. Every club has it's own junior pathways. Free movement means Aus teams could be full of Kiwi players so forget about complaining about Aus teams being weak. Could even host an annual Bledisloe on ANZAC day like the NRL do (except on the actual day not the following weekend). Comp could pause of NH sides to tour in June and the normal Spring tour after the GF in November like usual.

Of course the comp would lose money initially, but short-sighted continuance of the SANZAAR partnership has got the game no where for Australia. Time to look after ourselves.

How exactly do we hold the leverage? Genuinely curious to hear your reasoning on this one.
And good luck with the NZRU even listening to such a proposal, let alone countenancing it. They have plenty of cash. They don't need to do anything. And they would never do something that downgrades their provincial comp. Too much history.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Who gives a shit what NZ view? We hold the leverage, not them. They can't do a deal with only SA.

I don't know why we need SA? Does the NRL and AFL need SA? Our best chances of competing in the Aus market is replicating the NRL/AFL and driving down their dominance. The game isn't the issue, rugby is hugely more popular than those sports outside Australia. It's pretty simple what Australia needs and how to achieve it:

Trans-Tasman competition:

-More local teams
-Every game is time-zone friendly
-Significantly reduced travel
-Free movement between NZ/Aus
-Longer competition, 20+ rounds going from March -> September

NZ has 12 teams, we have 8. This competition replaces Super Rugby, the NRC, Mitre10. Every club has it's own junior pathways. Free movement means Aus teams could be full of Kiwi players so forget about complaining about Aus teams being weak. Could even host an annual Bledisloe on ANZAC day like the NRL do (except on the actual day not the following weekend). Comp could pause of NH sides to tour in June and the normal Spring tour after the GF in November like usual.

Of course the comp would lose money initially, but short-sighted continuance of the SANZAAR partnership has got the game no where for Australia. Time to look after ourselves.

A simpler option would be NZ 6 and us 4. Home and away would give us 18 rounds. OR them 7 and us 5 for 22 rounds.

 

[qwerty51]

How exactly do we hold the leverage? Genuinely curious to hear your reasoning on this one.
And good luck with the NZRU even listening to such a proposal, let alone countenancing it. They have plenty of cash. They don't need to do anything. And they would never do something that downgrades their provincial comp. Too much history.

Because what are they going to do without us? Go at it alone with SA? Good luck having half your matches at 4-6am and insane travel every weekend. They might be flush now but someone needs to set them straight. Super Rugby is doing worse every year financially, crowds are getting and ratings going down. Not to mention NZ rugby has passed it's peak. They're no longer 20s champs, the All Blacks aren't unbeatable. They'll still be very good but their brand isn't as strong as it was.

There's currently 14 Mitre10 Cup teams. Get rid of two (probably Southland & Northland) and then they can keen their history. We have 7 NRC teams and maybe a PI or Jap team can be our 8th.

 

[Slim 293]

They could certainly manage if we left them, but we couldn't possibly survive on our own.........

We have no leverage.

 

[cyclopath]

Because what are they going to do without us? Go at it alone with SA? Good luck having half your matches at 4-6am and insane travel every weekend. They might be flush now but someone needs to set them straight. Super Rugby is doing worse every year financially, crowds are getting and ratings going down. Not to mention NZ rugby has passed it's peak. They're no longer 20s champs, the All Blacks aren't unbeatable. They'll still be very good but their brand isn't as strong as it was.

There's currently 14 Mitre10 Cup teams. Get rid of two (probably Southland & Northland) and then they can keen their history. We have 7 NRC teams and maybe a PI or Jap team can be our 8th.

Err, OK.
Usually, if you're going to bluff, it helps if you occasionally have some decent cards.
We don't.

 

[kiap]

The question is, how much of that value is tied to Super Rugby?

With a name like Super, you'd think its value would be soaring amongst the eagles … or at least with a few birdies.

In truth, it can't be up to par. Surely this warmed-over soup is worth no more than two rolled-up green bogeys – or a double bogey, really.

This is my deeply held fear.

 

[dru]

Err, OK.
Usually, if you're going to bluff, it helps if you occasionally have some decent cards.
We don't.

You presume a bluff. We have been well pushed into this situation (and pushed ourselves) based on Aus having nothing important to offer. So each negotiation we detune what what we have thinking that hell, we're still with the Kiwis.

Time to split was a couple of years ago. It isn't too late.

 

[kiap]

SuperSport is the largest source of revenue in the current agreement.

How much of that revenue is for Super club games? – Question one.

Is Supe a big generator of revenue, or is it a bit of loss leader?

Would a less expensive international club comp with watchable games have a similar non-productive net revenue?

Perhaps drain away less of the main revenue from test rugby.

Playing the Boks – how good. Watching the Bulls in the same time slot – not so much (no offence to the praetorian guard).

 

[cyclopath]

You presume a bluff. We have been well pushed into this situation (and pushed ourselves) based on Aus having nothing important to offer. So each negotiation we detune what what we have thinking that hell, we're still with the Kiwis.

Time to split was a couple of years ago. It isn't too late.

"Presume"? We have next to nothing. To try to tell the Kiwis what to do (to which I was responding) is, by definition, a bluff. Because everyone knows we have next to nothing.
On our own we will have, at best, with fuck all broadcast money (already drying up from subscription sources, and zero interest from FTA avenues anyway), a semi-pro comp and will settle quietly to being a mid-Tier 2 team. Maybe we already are?
Before someone blathers on about "Oh, so just keep the status quo because that works.........", no, that is not a sequitur to what I said.
As I've said a few times, I don't know what will be the best options. But right now, pissing the Kiwis off as we try to negotiate some broadcast money would seem foolhardy.
We have a chance of a decent payday or two in 2025 (Lions) and quite likely 2027 (RWC). Between now and then, I don't know.

 

[Lorenzo]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjAAegQIAhAF&usg=AOvVaw0qhtWxGtg5C6qmTmmqKzxm

Kinda interesting document (no financial numbers in it)

 

[Teh Other Dave]

I don't know why we need SA? Does the NRL and AFL need SA? Our best chances of competing in the Aus market is replicating the NRL/AFL and driving down their dominance.

Fairly sure the Shute Shield added teams from Canberra, Newcastle, and the 'gong in 90s.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

You cannot really compare what is happening in UK / Ireland / Europe with respect to revenue and so on with us. Much easier to have bolder plans with a much larger revenue pot from broadcasting (just for starters) and minimal logistic issues (compared to a comp over a dozen time zones or more and so on). PE more likely to tip in money when they see an easier pathway to develop the comp and see real returns.
The notion that we just go Aus / NZ / PI and / or Japan sounds good, in theory. But who will pay? Broadcasters won't pay more; FTA is unrealistic - why would they put low-rating rubbish (from their POV) on prime-time - they just won't. PE are not likely to throw huge money into a building a comp with unknown prospects.
I don't see an easy fix, sadly.

I definitely agree no easy fix but got to look at anything and everything to attempt to revitalise. Not seeing any of that.
we need to change something to make it more appealing - there are other ideas that surely should be tabled eg allow more open borders and marquee players, something else, something else...any innovation they can bring into a stale product should be on the table.

I just don’t see any effort like GRR to attempt innovation...

 

[Dismal Pillock]

This is my deeply held fear.

Kiap is a bloke you can trust. https://spraguedawley.com/japan-is-safety-radioactive-leak-power-plant-owner/

 

[Teh Other Dave]

I'd argue that attempts at innovation, particularly in devaluing 'derby' matches and rewarding mediocre teams is what landed us in this mess.

 

[wamberal]

Fairly sure the Shute Shield added teams from Canberra, Newcastle, and the 'gong in 90s.

Not sure about the 'Gong? The Newcastle Wildfires had a few years in the SS, but by the end they had virtually no local support. My wife and I attended their last home game, which was against the mighty Woods, and the Wildfires absolutely thrashed us. That was the year we won our first first grade premiership, by the way.


The Vikings had a season or two, but I was overseas and only saw one home game against them at Millner, and we thrashed them, Giteau, Henjak and all.