A Proposal For A New Third Tier Competition In Australia

[It is what it is]

The current clubs will become feeder clubs to the Uni comp.
Each Uni competing will be assigned a group of SS clubs.

 

[Sully]

Bond has just announced an affiliation with the GC breakers.

 

[It is what it is]

The current clubs will become feeder clubs to the Uni comp.
Each Uni competing will be assigned a group of SS clubs.

Sorry, this will be for the Sydney based Uni's.

 

[kiap]

I'd add Griffith Uni as the 3rd Qld University but QUT might be interested too. It will be interested to see if any Uni's are associated with rugby programs currently, apart from Sydney Uni and UQ.

I guess with a CEO that has a strong history in University Sport this was going to be an option for RUPA.

Norths in Brisbane are actually still named Norths QUT - I don't know how strong the link is to the uni these days but it goes back a long time to the old Teachers-Norths days when there was a Teacher's College at Kelvin Grove. The ovals and sports science facilities are still there, AFAIK.

If student numbers are a factor (i.e. for potential fan base) then UQ, QUT, and Griffith all have 22k+ undergraduate students compared with Bond at just over 3k.

UQ is an obvious choice covering the Inner West clubs in Brisbane, and perhaps QUT makes sense for Northern suburbs and Sunshine Coast clubs.

Griffith and Bond could be options for Southern suburbs and Gold Coast clubs. Sully mentioned a tie-up between Bond and the Gold Coast Breakers which may be a pointer (but in saying that, Bond is a small university and the GC is a known graveyard for sports teams needing fans).

 

[kiap]

Not really.
over 23's who still want to play rugby but aren't yet at super rugby level would still play club rugby.

There's probably only room to focus on one semi-pro comp for the 3rd-tier. Varsity teams do offer some advantages but if we go down that path then some traditional clubs will inevitably lose some influence. In this case, having an under-23 age limit is a real disadvantage.

What will probably be needed is an allowance to play a certain number of over-23 players in the Varsity teams, similar to what's done for Olympic soccer. Perhaps allow 6-7 players of each 25-man squad to be older than 23. You need those older, harder players to have a proper 3rd-tier, IMO.

 

[No4918]

There's probably only room to focus on one semi-pro comp for the 3rd-tier. Varsity teams do offer some advantages but if we go down that path then some traditional clubs will inevitably lose some influence. In this case, having an under-23 age limit is a real disadvantage.

What will probably be needed is an allowance to play a certain number of over-23 players in the Varsity teams, similar to what's done for Olympic soccer. Perhaps allow 6-7 players of each 25-man squad to be older than 23. You need those older, harder players to have a proper 3rd-tier, IMO.

Agreed.

Uni's may have money and be able to help out with other aspects but a true 3rd tier comp should not have an age barrier. I'd be happier to have an 18yo up and comer running around against seasoned 30 somethings. Depth will be built from playing the best on a regular basis, if a 35 yo is good enough then i want them playing even if they are not a chance for further honours. If this is the framework for the 3rd tier then possibly having a minimum 15 of the 25 in the squad below a certain age to ensure opportunity for young guys will be better. This will see them play against the best of the seasoned players available.

 

[p.Tah]

25 players in a squad, 9 teams. Do we have 225 players under the age of 23 who are of sufficient quality for a third tier? Perhaps out of necessity they'll need to go above 23 years.

Perhaps RUPA suggested the u23 because it still leaves Premier rugby with a role to play in development (i.e. those older than u23). May be they thought this proposal was more likey to get the backing of clubland if a 3rd tier was definitely on the cards.

 

[kiap]

Perhaps RUPA suggested the u23 because it still leaves Premier rugby with a role to play in development (i.e. those older than u23). May be they thought this proposal was more likey to get the backing of clubland if a 3rd tier was definitely on the cards.

Could be. Wayne Smith's story had this:

[RUPA Chief Greg] Harris has addressed the reservations of the clubs by proposing that clubs align themselves with the nearest competing university - a Sunnybank-Griffith University partnership, for instance, would provide a natural fit - and by also recommending that a formal six-week Australian Club Championship immediately follow the National Universities competition.​

​

The clubs initially would compete within their own cities before two clubs from Sydney, Brisbane and Canberra would head to the knockout stage to be joined from the top club from Melbourne and Perth.​

​

Okay, so it's only a 6-week period of play-offs to start with. It will need to fit in and work with the existing clubs to get off the ground. But, perhaps clubs regularly appearing in these 6-week ACC playoffs will tend to consolidate the best player rosters amongst themselves over time.

After a few years, a clear-cut top-8 may emerge. The 6-week tournament could be bumped up to 10 or 12 weeks and so on. This would then be the real 3rd-tier comp, rather than the Varsity U23 comp.

 

[Jets]

Norths in Brisbane are actually still named Norths QUT - I don't know how strong the link is to the uni these days but it goes back a long time to the old Teachers-Norths days when there was a Teacher's College at Kelvin Grove. The ovals and sports science facilities are still there, AFAIK.

If student numbers are a factor (i.e. for potential fan base) then UQ, QUT, and Griffith all have 22k+ undergraduate students compared with Bond at just over 3k.

UQ is an obvious choice covering the Inner West clubs in Brisbane, and perhaps QUT makes sense for Northern suburbs and Sunshine Coast clubs.

Griffith and Bond could be options for Southern suburbs and Gold Coast clubs. Sully mentioned a tie-up between Bond and the Gold Coast Breakers which may be a pointer (but in saying that, Bond is a small university and the GC is a known graveyard for sports teams needing fans).

This is from the Norths website in regards to the links with QUT

Norths then formed an alliance in 2001 with Queensland University of Technology (QUT) adding to the list of changes over the course of our history. QUT had previously competed as QIT (Queensland Institute of Technology) with little success, winning only a U19 Premiership in 1974.

This alliance has delivered less than what was originally anticipated with QUT moving away from an emphasis on sport, resulting in Norths deciding in 2008 to sever their alliance and stand alone as the North Brisbane Rugby Club.

I'm not sure if QUT would be part of this as UQ would take one spot, I think Griffith Uni would be very interested in another (and they currently have links with Sunnybank) and Bond would be a good chance for the 3rd. While Bond don't have as big a student base they have just purchased the GC Titans Centre of Excellence and had an agreement with the ARU over use of the facility for the IRB 7's last year. Also the Vice-chancellor is a former QRU board member.

http://www.goldcoast.com.au/article/2012/10/10/439528_rugby-sport.html

 

[kiap]

This is from the Norths website in regards to the links with QUT

I'm not sure if QUT would be part of this as UQ would take one spot, I think Griffith Uni would be very interested in another (and they currently have links with Sunnybank) and Bond would be a good chance for the 3rd. While Bond don't have as big a student base they have just purchased the GC Titans Centre of Excellence and had an agreement with the ARU over use of the facility for the IRB 7's last year. Also the Vice-chancellor is a former QRU board member.

http://www.goldcoast.com.au/article/2012/10/10/439528_rugby-sport.html

Ah, that probably seals it for Bond and Griffith then! Ta. Wasn't aware that Norths were no longer associated with QUT. Shows how much I know from here in WA. QUT are walking distance from Ballymore too, a bit like UNSW and SFS/Moore Park in Sydney (not that that's new or relevant )

 

[Jets]

QUT at one stage were very closely linked to QRU but that has changed. They seemed to have moved away from any sporting focus to my knowledge.

Bond sponsor the Reds from memory so that may be another link.

Griffith had a very strong Athlete focus for a while but I'm not sure if it is still as strong.

I am one who would like the comp to be U23. As a RUPA idea it's all about creating chances for players to become Pro's so the age limit makes sense. Also it will be interesting to see what links are required for the players with the Universities. Do they need to be students to participate?
As for paying them I wouldn't be. The major problem with the ARC was the cost and it's just not something that is needed. If guys want an opportunity to play they will make it happen. Offering scholarships to players and flexible learning options to fit in their playing and training commitments would be a much better option.

 

[kiap]

I am one who would like the comp to be U23. As a RUPA idea it's all about creating chances for players to become Pro's so the age limit makes sense. Also it will be interesting to see what links are required for the players with the Universities. Do they need to be students to participate?

As for paying them I wouldn't be. The major problem with the ARC was the cost and it's just not something that is needed. If guys want an opportunity to play they will make it happen. Offering scholarships to players and flexible learning options to fit in their playing and training commitments would be a much better option.

That's all well and good, and this Varsity idea is a good one, but if it is: (i) strictly U23; (ii) tertiary students only; and (iii) unpaid; then it's not a genuine 3rd-tier comp.

The 8-team formal Australian Club Championship shouldn't be neglected in that case. Perhaps it could be incrementally developed and expanded in duration after a few years into the 3rd-tier comp that Aus rugby needs.

 

[fatprop]

seems to be about de-powering the clubs and the states.

the ARC failed partly because of the lack of buy in from the clubs - they were programming matches in direct competition

I don't see how this will be any different

 

[wamberal]

We need a third tier competition, we need more FTA exposure (a lot more) and we also need genuine district rugby clubs, whose mission it is to provide local opportunities for junior players (in particular) as well as something like the current grade competitions.

Greg Harris played for Sydney University. I wonder how much he cares about the district clubs?

 

[Torn Hammy]

Really, what is in it for the universities?

USyd is a great club, but it is a SS team, not a university team. Ask yourself how many of the 30,000 students give a toss as to how they go. Their whole commendable sporting program, is a negative in the balance sheet and could disappear in a flash at the discretion of the VC. Just ask Jack Clark from UC Berkeley.

US College Football (gridiron) is successful because it unites the whole campus and more importantly, provides finances to the college. When you're paying players $17,000 and they are generating $50 million a season you get a lot of support from the college. In business terms, the most valuable college program was valued at $750 million.

US Rugby by comparison is mostly anonymous and unfunded, ranking behind hockey and cheerleading, despite century long traditions at many colleges. It generates no income or interest from the student or faculty body. Why should it be any different here in Australia. Which uni is being held back now due to lack of opportunity. Where are the student protests demanding a team like USyd and why aren't the VCs throwing half a mill into their rugby teams? University rugby as a third tier is pure folly.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Really, what is in it for the universities?

USyd is a great club, but it is a SS team, not a university team. Ask yourself how many of the 30,000 students give a toss as to how they go. Their whole commendable sporting program, is a negative in the balance sheet and could disappear in a flash at the discretion of the VC. Just ask Jack Clark from UC Berkeley.

US College Football (gridiron) is successful because it unites the whole campus and more importantly, provides finances to the college. When you're paying players $17,000 and they are generating $50 million a season you get a lot of support from the college. In business terms, the most valuable college program was valued at $750 million.

US Rugby by comparison is mostly anonymous and unfunded, ranking behind hockey and cheerleading, despite century long traditions at many colleges. It generates no income or interest from the student or faculty body. Why should it be any different here in Australia. Which uni is being held back now due to lack of opportunity. Where are the student protests demanding a team like USyd and why aren't the VCs throwing half a mill into their rugby teams? University rugby as a third tier is pure folly.

I'd argue that they fail to market the team to the student population of the Uni as do others. For this to work it will require intensive internal marketing to garner support. I think with some effort you could capture a percentage of the student population who will get behind a program.

It's also why I think that someone like Sydney Uni shouldn't participate in such a concept. Look to new a fresh brands to spearhead this initiative in terms of participants. Another thing will the the scheduling of games. Looking to schedule games at times when you can draw as many students to the games would be essential.

 

[p.Tah]

Looking to schedule games at times when you can draw as many students to the games would be essential.

just offer free beer and the stands will be full

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

just offer free beer and the stands will be full

That's one way of doing it. Creating an environment around the game that would be appealing to students is what would be needed. It actually offers the Uni's several opportunities for students not involved in the program such as sports science, marketing majors and such.

 

[Orange Peeler]

Are we heading towards the American NFL model.
Will the varsity competition grow into a feeder system for a National Conference style Professional Club Competition (3rd Tier)
Does this also mean that a player draft is on the horizon.

 

[Jets]

I don't understand why guys have to be paid for a 3rd tier comp. If that's the case it will never work as there is no interest from the commercial world for this to go ahead and lack of interest from the public. We will never have a NPC level comp in Australia as rugby isn't and never will be the number 1 game here.

The other massive issue is that everyone has an idea about a 3rd tier comp and if it isn't exactly what they think then they wont support it.

I think this idea has merit. Aligning to Universities opens up options for funding and it also shifts the power away from clubs who are focused on their self interest. Also they can use the facilities that are already in place. If they played the games on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday nights then they could attract a following on TV as they wouldn't be going head to head with other sports.
I've seen inter college games at UQ that attract more support than many Premier games so they could potentially harness these people to build a fan base.