Where to for Super Rugby?

[hoggy]

In a club based comp, where would our current Super coaches and staff end up? Would we just return to the very poor years of sub-standard coaching leading to diminishing skills in our national team as well?

Don't like, actually hate, the club based system - would be the worst outcome for rugby in this country for many reasons, and would surely see the Wallabies slipping even further down the world rankings. This at a very promising period of the game here otherwise.

What your mistaking (or I should have made clearer) though is the definition of a club, we have five existing Franchises (moving forward you structure them as clubs) you then have to add 3 teams to make an 8 team domestic structure.

 

[Rebels3]

I think this would work best if we're only going to have 3 or 4 professional teams in some kind of revised Super Rugby competition and this was a semi-pro national club competition that ran through the entire season (including the test season). I'd actually go with 12 teams so the double round robin had 22 games per team. You could have a 2nd division with promotion and relegation too.

But if the domestic competition is going to be the top level of professional rugby under the Wallabies (outside of a short state of origin or similar), then I think it'd be better to base the domestic competition around the 5 established professional brands. Even if you rebrand the Waratahs and Reds as Sydney and Brisbane (though I'm with kiap on this, I don't think it's necessary).

It's not a perfect measure but generally the popularity of sports teams seems to correlate reasonably well with social media followers. If you look on Facebook, the biggest shute shield and QLD premier club teams have around 5k or 6k followers. Compare that to the Super Rugby teams and the Force which have between 90k and 188k.

I have played at brothers, Souths, Uni of QLD, there would of been lucky to be a few 100 people there to watch. The majority of the crowd as well was the previous grades staying around for the beers.

Plus a question that never gets asked. What happens to the comps that these teams are dragged from? Suddenly they become weaker, I’m not sure if that’s a good result. If we are going to be serious about having club teams in a national comp as our main offering, they cannot exist in that and also in their existing competitions. Or if they do somehow stay in their comps, won’t that just create another level of haves and have nots. Surely any player of note would play for these clubs and you’d see 60/70pt wins at QLD Prem and SS against all other teams.

 

[Quick Hands]

Good idea if you go that way and people could actually be part of a 'club' as such, be great if all clubs that were part had good clubrooms to male being a member a little special. Maybe one of the things lacking in Super at moment? If a game was played and you could then go back to club for a discussion would add a lot, mean you need arvo games probably but....
Ok just a thought.

And by the way QHs, I didn't need to get fired up as you didn't have Sunnybank as South Brissy club , though I suspect it would be Gold Coast uni!

Exact make-up would be determined by people closer to it.

 

[wamberal]

But barely known in the wider rugby community.

Well, that's their loss. Carn the Central Coast Rays!!!

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I have played at brothers, Souths, Uni of QLD, there would of been lucky to be a few 100 people there to watch. The majority of the crowd as well was the previous grades staying around for the beers.

Plus a question that never gets asked. What happens to the comps that these teams are dragged from? Suddenly they become weaker, I’m not sure if that’s a good result. If we are going to be serious about having club teams in a national comp as our main offering, they cannot exist in that and also in their existing competitions. Or if they do somehow stay in their comps, won’t that just create another level of haves and have nots. Surely any player of note would play for these clubs and you’d see 60/70pt wins at QLD Prem and SS against all other teams.

I'd imagine they would still run teams in these competitions promoting their 2nds to 1st grade.

But I actually don't think we'll see a club based model. What I'd like to see would be something similar to the NRC with both the NSWRU and QRU running two squads. For Sydney that would be Sydney and North Sydney. This could be achieved by lowering the salary cap from $5.5m to $3.5m and redistributing funds to bolster the cap levels for both the NSWRU and QRU.

So then we'd have North Syd, Syd, Bris, Qld2, the Brumbies, Rebels, Force and Drua. This wouldn't reduce the player spend wouldn't change just widened.

You could open up opportunities for other teams but they would require independent backing. But assuming 8 teams home and away for 14 rounds with a top 4 finals series.

Beyond on that we go to a rep based Super Rugby 12. Two pools of 6 playing 5 games. Top 2 from each to the finals. All up 7 weeks. Played leading into and through June. That or a tri-series between NSW/Queensland and a Baabaas squad. Home and away to select the Wallabies.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I have come to the reality that COVID 19 has really accelerated two things to the forefront. First is accelerated the position that 4 country super rugby model is not commercially viable but equally accelerated the view for me that neither is global rapid rugby a commercially viable model with too many new teams and in less established rugby markets.

The answer is for RA and twiggy/ rapid rugby to collaborate but too many egos, mistrust, incompetence and politics means probably will never happen and which is why RA’s super rugby model and indeed the rapid rugby model are both destined for mediocrity.

Both camps have a huge opportunity if they could collaborate. Sorry but whilst was supportive of rapid rugby if could be an alternative - on what I have seen and with covid 19 implications for the region I can’t see rapid rugby being successful running along side a super rugby competition. Equally don’t think of course super rugby the answer. But maybe if both parties collaborate just maybe - and I say maybe - a better answer for professional rugby could be found for all rugby states in australia.

 

[kiap]

I'd like to see would be something similar to the NRC with both the NSWRU and QRU running two squads.

Let them run one squad each. Second teams need other means.

So then we'd have …[8 teams] … the player spend wouldn't change just widened.

It's a big ask when revenue looks shaky to have no dip in spending level, let alone spread it wider. Player payroll widening should be dependent on other money brought in, rather than cutting the small cake into ever thinner slices.

Other money could include a Fijian team. Another team in Sydney - that's fine, but go MLR-style with independent backing providing wherewithall for 4 seasons minimum. … If it has to be 6 teams while no new cash is stumped up, then so be it.

Beyond on that we go to a rep based Super Rugby … All up 7 weeks.

Euro rugby does it better to get a team's season fans in seats for more than three-and-a-half weeks. Put the top 3 Oz teams into the Trans-Tasman/Super Rugby comp. That yields coaching, supporter, organisational, and player cohesion. Other oz teams could play in a challenge comp.

 

[Slim 293]

I can't recall if I proposed the idea here, but I think you can have the best of both worlds with an intertwined separate domestic and tras tasman competition..

Initially take the 4 Super Rugby teams, and the Force to start with (and eventually expand on that - more Aus teams, Fiji, Japan whatever when viable)...........

Each team plays each other twice home and away, and also plays the NZ Super Rugby teams once for competition points.............

The top Australian teams have their own final series with an Australian championship crowned............

The Australian winner then takes on the top NZ team for a TT cup.

 

[kiap]

I can't recall if I proposed the idea here, but I think you can have the best of both worlds with an intertwined separate domestic and tras tasman competition..

I quite like that.

The main differences, I s'pose, with my scenario above are: (a) TT games not interleaved, and (b) splitting the TT/Super Rugby section into champions/challenge comps.

That might be a champ comp of 4-5 NZ + 3 Aus + 0-1 PI; and challenge comp 2 Aus + 1-2 PI + 0-1 NZ … (or whatever mix, maybe even including Japan).

Would prefer your idea, if strength of matchups work out okay.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I can't recall if I proposed the idea here, but I think you can have the best of both worlds with an intertwined separate domestic and tras tasman competition..

Initially take the 4 Super Rugby teams, and the Force to start with (and eventually expand on that - more Aus teams, Fiji, Japan whatever when viable).....

Each team plays each other twice home and away, and also plays the NZ Super Rugby teams once for competition points.....

The top Australian teams have their own final series with an Australian championship crowned....

The Australian winner then takes on the top NZ team for a TT cup.

That would work if we go down the TT route. I'd prefer it to start with 6 teams each. Be it Fiji joining our 5 and a PI or 6th NZ team joining NZs 5. Home and away domestically and one against the NZ 6 for 16 games. Top 6 finals series. I think it would be a lot more interesting and valuable from a broadcast perspective.

I'd always liked the idea of Super Rugby or in this case a TT competition teaming up the Pro 14 with the other 4 SA teams moving north to making it the Pro 18 to have a Championship game between the respective winners. Which I think it could work.

 

[wamberal]

Someone needs to do some sort of spreadsheet with all the options!!

 

[brokendown]

Someone needs to do some sort of spreadsheet with all the options!!

hehe

 

[kiap]

Someone needs to do some sort of spreadsheet with all the options!!

 

[Quick Hands]

I'd imagine they would still run teams in these competitions promoting their 2nds to 1st grade.

Yes

 

[Quick Hands]

Someone needs to do some sort of spreadsheet with all the options!!

Exactly right Wamberal - we're agreeing on a lot lately.

Any new adminstration, including chairman, board and CEO is duty bound to consider/reconsider different options prior to proceeding.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Someone needs to do some sort of spreadsheet with all the options!!

Someone needs to find someone with deep pockets willing to fund any of those options...

 

[Quick Hands]

In a club based comp, where would our current Super coaches and staff end up? Would we just return to the very poor years of sub-standard coaching leading to diminishing skills in our national team as well?

Current Super and NRC coaches will be employed at whatever professional model is adopted.

It doesn't actually matter whether a team in Brisbane is called Brisbane City or Uni of Qld, the players will be centrally contracted and the funding for players, coaches and support staff will come from RA. At the moment RA funds Super Rugby and NRC 'franchises' which in the context of whatever competition emerges is just a modern euphemism for clubs.

And if we're talking substandard coaching; lets talk Richard Graham, Nick Stiles, Phil Mooney, Matt O'Connor, Chris Hickey, Michael Foley, Daryl Gibson, Damien Hill, Tony Magahan and Tony Rae.

Diminishing skills in our national teams? That's been happening for a decade. And let's not forget that one of the stated reasons for the existence of the NRC was to improve the skill level of Super Rugby clubs and the Wallabies.

 

[Quick Hands]

Someone needs to find someone with deep pockets willing to fund any of those options.

Or the game in general. There's no revenue coming in, no broadcast agreement, sponsors aren't paying because there are no games and there's no gate takings.

 

[Quick Hands]

But I actually don't think we'll see a club based model. What I'd like to see would be something similar to the NRC with both the NSWRU and QRU running two squads. For Sydney that would be Sydney and North Sydney. This could be achieved by lowering the salary cap from $5.5m to $3.5m and redistributing funds to bolster the cap levels for both the NSWRU and QRU.

So then we'd have North Syd, Syd, Bris, Qld2, the Brumbies, Rebels, Force and Drua. This wouldn't reduce the player spend wouldn't change just widened.

You could open up opportunities for other teams but they would require independent backing. But assuming 8 teams home and away for 14 rounds with a top 4 finals series.

Beyond on that we go to a rep based Super Rugby 12. Two pools of 6 playing 5 games. Top 2 from each to the finals. All up 7 weeks. Played leading into and through June. That or a tri-series between NSW/Queensland and a Baabaas squad. Home and away to select the Wallabies.

Teams playing in a week to week competition are 'clubs', whether you call them 'franchises' or not.

Whatever competition emerges will be funded the same way - central contracts and funding from RA. At the moment RA finances 4 x Super Rugby clubs/franchises and 7 NRC clubs/franchises.

 

[Quick Hands]

I quite like that.

The main differences, I s'pose, with my scenario above are: (a) TT games not interleaved, and (b) splitting the TT/Super Rugby section into champions/challenge comps.

That might be a champ comp of 4-5 NZ + 3 Aus + 0-1 PI; and challenge comp 2 Aus + 1-2 PI + 0-1 NZ … (or whatever mix, maybe even including Japan).

Would prefer your idea, if strength of matchups work out okay.

The more complicated any competition structure is the less likely that it will work.

Do these suggestions qualify as tiers?