• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Having no NRC is better how?

WorkingClassRugger

WorkingClassRugger

David Codey (61)
The Ghost of Raelene said:
That’s a good point. I guess I was purely looking at it from a U20s RWC downwards view but they definitely benefit from playing open age more than purely in their bracket.

There is a small recruitment aspect it can benefit as you can put a young kid from QLD straight into a Reds uniform instead of saying go play club and we’ll see how you go. There was a lot of appeal of the NRL 20s was these boys getting the gear and into the facilities
Click to expand...

Why not go with U23s? It's actually similar to the system used by the likes of American Football which is College Football were the vast majority of the talent are U23. NSW and QLD could run two teams with the Brumbies, Melbourne and the Force one a piece. Get Fiji involved run it alongside Super Rugby home and away for 14 games.

Once the age out they can go play Club Rugby where a hybrid NRC featuring the Top 3 from Sydney and Brisbane qualify plus a rep squad from each alongside the winner of the JiD and a rep squad from Canberra, Melbourne and Perth will be held in the Sept-December window.
 
The Ghost of Raelene

The Ghost of Raelene

Andrew Slack (58)
I like it but when it doesn’t line up with World Rugby and the U20s RWC unfortunately which is the reason you would run it to start with.

It would definitely help Tight 5 development but I think a lot of Backs and Back Rowers have debuted by then.
 
WorkingClassRugger

WorkingClassRugger

David Codey (61)
The Ghost of Raelene said:
I like it but when it doesn’t line up with World Rugby and the U20s RWC unfortunately which is the reason you would run it to start with.

It would definitely help Tight 5 development but I think a lot of Backs and Back Rowers have debuted by then.
Click to expand...

From my perspective it would be more about a continuation of the fledgling JNRC pathway and a means of preparing the best emerging talent by providing as many as 4 seasons (assuming you graduate from say NSW U19s to the U23s. I know it doesn't perfectly align with WR (World Rugby) but feeding the U20s would only be one of it's objectives. These squads would train at in the case of NSW Daceyville alongside the Tahs themselves as part of the organisation. So if someone is good enough to graduate to the senior squad then awesome.
 
WorkingClassRugger

WorkingClassRugger

David Codey (61)
WorkingClassRugger said:
From my perspective it would be more about a continuation of the fledgling JNRC pathway and a means of preparing the best emerging talent by providing as many as 4 seasons (assuming you graduate from say NSW U19s to the U23s. I know it doesn't perfectly align with WR (World Rugby) (World Rugby) but feeding the U20s would only be one of it's objectives. These squads would train at in the case of NSW Daceyville alongside the Tahs themselves as part of the organisation. So if someone is good enough to graduate to the senior squad then awesome.
Click to expand...

What I'm suggesting here is essentially copying the Scottish Super 6 format but with one extra team.
 
WorkingClassRugger

WorkingClassRugger

David Codey (61)
The Ghost of Raelene said:
Nervous about copying anything Scotland does in their youth teams at the moment. Google the U20s 6 nations for the last 4 years and whatever they are doing ain’t working
Click to expand...

Not their youth system obviously. There U20s results have a lot to do with the current state of their schools and club scene. I think we're onto something with the JNRC and should be looking into bolstering it with more opportunities to compete and develop. Like introducing more age grades and more potential games.

I'm more referring to senior footy. Which would use something similar to what you've suggested in taking the A squads of the current Super Rugby franchises and looking to have NSW and Qld run a 2nd squad a piece and run a proper competitive structure underneath Super Rugby that allows for the best U20s and above to get good game time while exposed to professional training environments.
 
Highlander35

Highlander35

Andrew Slack (58)
I think if you could get it going, the Super 6 model (i.e. existing clubs formally separate a high performance team from a community club) would work really well over here, and existing partnerships (e.g. Rebels & Wests) would make any required formal alignment easier, if you don't want to inflate the strength of any particular side by running near full professional "A" teams into slightly elevated clubs.

My gut call however is that the difficult decisions required to do it "right" (I'm thinking in the sense of sustainable over ambitious) would require exclusion of regions (see in the super 6, where no side is North of the central belt in the Super 6) and clubs (see both Glasgow bids rejected and only one borders bid being successful) that the significantly stronger "political will" against it from the non-national bodies will win out (compared to the Glasgow Hawks, who were unsuccessful in their bid for a side and then whipped together a motion to abolish it altogether).
 
R

RuggaLuva03

Bob McCowan (2)
Late to the chat, but I do believe the NRC had potential. It allowed amateur players to mingle and learn from professional players. It was a step-up towards rather than leap into professional rugby removing pressure. The NRC was starting to fruit before it was unfortunately axed. The Reds and Brumbies benefited the most from the semi-professional competition.
 
Jagman

Jagman

Trevor Allan (34)
RuggaLuva03 said:
Late to the chat, but I do believe the NRC had potential. It allowed amateur players to mingle and learn from professional players. It was a step-up towards rather than leap into professional rugby removing pressure. The NRC was starting to fruit before it was unfortunately axed. The Reds and Brumbies benefited the most from the semi-professional competition.
Click to expand...
More than seven years is a long time to wait to see something start to bear fruit. almost twice as long as the average super rugby career. Reds were a better outfit pre-2014.
 
Mr Pilfer

Mr Pilfer

Bob Loudon (25)
Ignoring cost one of the other main issues around the NRC is that the smaller rugby states (WA and VIC) were happy to get on board because they had the Force and Rebels to barrack for but the bigger states were not keen to support a manufactured team and you lose that tribalism.

Then on the flip side the issue is that if you just did a national comp with club teams then there would be high quality players that miss out if they were attached to a club that didn't qualify.

To make it work I think you would need to do a combination of the above and have either a player draft or a couple of barbarians teams.

e.g.

1. Force
2. Rebels
3. Top 4 from NSW (Norths, Randwick, Eastwood, Manly)
4. Top 4 from QLD (Bond, Wests, Easts, Brothers)
5. Top 2 from Canberra (Gungahlin, Tuggeranong)
6. South Australian Barbarians team (any players who miss out above can apply as well as SA locals)
7. Another barbarians team for all other contracted super rugby players and leftovers

Gives a 14 team comp. Sure a lot of teams would be annoyed to miss out and have their players in Barbarians teams but that gives them more incentive to make the top 4 for the following years. You could even have a QLD Barbarians and a NSW Barbarians and they share the games across the other clubs

The risk is that the Force and Rebels would be too strong so you would need to make sure some of their players (Hamish Stewart, Cabous Eloff etc) go back to their Club Side.

Of course I can see that this would be very expensive to run but we have to come up with something.
 
R

RuggaLuva03

Bob McCowan (2)
Jagman said:
More than seven years is a long time to wait to see something start to bear fruit. almost twice as long as the average super rugby career. Reds were a better outfit pre-2014.
Click to expand...
Yeah. I was referring more to the players that came up out of the competition that have gone on to become consistent starters for Super Rugby and make appearances for the Wallabies.
 
Jimmy_Crouch

Jimmy_Crouch

Ken Catchpole (46)
I've made the argument about this a number of times but if the QPR/SS clubs align to an NRC team then staff and players should only be picked from the aligned clubs. Ideally this helps equalise the talent in QPR/SS also.

From a QLD perspective North of the River (Brothers, GPS, Norths, UQ, Wests) and South of the River (Easts, Souths, Sunnybank, Bond) - cut this QLD country rubbish.

As a supporter of a club I am much more likely to attend and support the team that my club has players at. I'd utalise the club grounds in rotation (so the clubs will then support it - bigger support more beer/food sales etc).
 
P

Putmeoncoach

Allen Oxlade (6)
Let’s just align with the youth programs and have 3rd tier teams know as the following;
QLD Grey
QLD White
NSW White
NSW Blue
WA Gold
ACT Gold
Etc..
 
N

NSWelshman in London

Frank Row (1)
Mr Pilfer said:
Ignoring cost one of the other main issues around the NRC is that the smaller rugby states (WA and VIC) were happy to get on board because they had the Force and Rebels to barrack for but the bigger states were not keen to support a manufactured team and you lose that tribalism.

Then on the flip side the issue is that if you just did a national comp with club teams then there would be high quality players that miss out if they were attached to a club that didn't qualify.

To make it work I think you would need to do a combination of the above and have either a player draft or a couple of barbarians teams.

e.g.

1. Force
2. Rebels
3. Top 4 from NSW (Norths, Randwick, Eastwood, Manly)
4. Top 4 from QLD (Bond, Wests, Easts, Brothers)
5. Top 2 from Canberra (Gungahlin, Tuggeranong)
6. South Australian Barbarians team (any players who miss out above can apply as well as SA locals)
7. Another barbarians team for all other contracted super rugby players and leftovers

Gives a 14 team comp. Sure a lot of teams would be annoyed to miss out and have their players in Barbarians teams but that gives them more incentive to make the top 4 for the following years. You could even have a QLD Barbarians and a NSW Barbarians and they share the games across the other clubs

The risk is that the Force and Rebels would be too strong so you would need to make sure some of their players (Hamish Stewart, Cabous Eloff etc) go back to their Club Side.

Of course I can see that this would be very expensive to run but we have to come up with something.
Click to expand...
Really like this but I feel to better align the clubs and to keep some sort of tribalism alive (apologies as I only know Shute Shield, but I assume could be similar for QLD etc) is to have 4 teams from NSW but Team 1 is North Harbour (Norths, Manly, Rats, Gordon) South Harbour (Uni, Randwick, Easts, Southern Districts) and West Harbour (Eastwood, Two Blues, West Harbour, Penrith) and 1 country team or Newcastle based team supported by Wildfires. This way teams get selected from the players in each squad and coaches also are selected across these teams. If say, Nth Harbour you are the centre for Gordon and behind Bury and Davis for selection here then you may consider moving to another club for better chances of making this comp, thus helping to strengthen all clubs across the comp... Just a thought
 
R

RuggaLuva03

Bob McCowan (2)
Ideally, a national competition (NC) should be played outside of Super Rugby (not at the same time). This way it would not be drowned out by Super Rugby and gain more public awareness; spectators wouldn't have to choose between tickets for the Super Rugby or NC matches if they fell on the same weekend; Super Rugby players that don't get selected will still continue playing, and non-Super Rugby players will have a better opportunity to grow their game from exposure to Super Rugby players.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top