NRC onwards and upwards

[Dave Beat]

Hey Dave, I know you're a passionate club man and a good bloke, but many, many sports run their development pathway like a narrowing funnel as you move up the ranks. Premier grades, into NRC, into Super Rugby, into Wallabies makes sense.

It isn't "shrinking to greatness". As an aside - why do rugby fans suddenly love the term "shrinking to greatness" so much?

Amrite, cheers man.

I hate the term shrinking to greatness.

Also understand as you climb through the ranks it does thin out.

What frustrates me is the lack of feeding growth to ensure quality is there for the future. Instead of that we are removing a soup team. What frustrates me even more is that the 2 teams in doubt are probably working harder at growth than any of the others.

Where as in Sydney NSW have Private Schools, Randwick & Sydney Uni - as a very shallow minded approach.

If we look at rugby league clubs as an example, I'm guessing > 60% of those kids come from the public high school, so talent is there. But you need to work to improve - so I ask what work is being done here?

So this references the thread, we loose a soup team, will we lose an NRC team - i dont want to shrink like that.

 

[amirite]

I think there's a view the ARU look after the private schools and ditch the public ones.

In reality the private schools look after themselves (because they like rugby and have the cash) and the ARU don't really look after any schools very well.

The Game On program is a good step in expanding what they were doing though, so it's at least trending in the right direction.

 

[Dave Beat]

1. I think there's a view the ARU look after the private schools and ditch the public ones.In reality the private schools look after themselves (because they like rugby and have the cash) and the ARU don't really look after any schools very well.
2. The Game On program is a good step in expanding what they were doing though, so it's at least trending in the right direction.

1. Really scary that we are starting to see AFL in Private schools now because the ARU maybe taking things for granted.

2. I've been spending considerable time researching and working in the Junior Space over the last 18 months and i understand the views may vary in each state - but;

Game on.

• The ARU or NSWRU presenting the Game on Program it sounds like a great concept, however.
• From the primary schools, I have had feed back from a few that they don't like it, they see it that the only reason it is being done is to make money for the NSWRU and not to benefit the kids and the game.

When that is the message that is being shared around through primary schools it makes it very difficult to grow.

 

[amirite]

1. Really scary that we are starting to see AFL in Private schools now because the ARU maybe taking things for granted.

2. I've been spending considerable time researching and working in the Junior Space over the last 18 months and i understand the views may vary in each state - but;

Game on.

• The ARU or NSWRU presenting the Game on Program it sounds like a great concept, however.
• From the primary schools, I have had feed back from a few that they don't like it, they see it that the only reason it is being done is to make money for the NSWRU and not to benefit the kids and the game.

When that is the message that is being shared around through primary schools it makes it very difficult to grow.

I've heard good things about Game On, but I suppose it's dependant on the coach. It's very similar to what's being run by other sports and an expansion of what's been done in the past, so IDK if it's seen as a cash cow. They money comes from the government anyway - I think it's come out of what AASC used to be.

I disagree with the issues a few have mentioned about Aussie Rules in Rugby schools to be honest.

There's more Rugby in Victorian Aussie Rules stronghold schools in Vic then there's Aussie Rules in Rugby stronghold schools in NSW. By numbers of teams, schools, and athletes.

It's as simple as looking at which sport has the nicer ovals, more scholarships, more expensive coaches, and more player numbers.

 

[Dave Beat]

There's more Rugby in Victorian Aussie Rules stronghold schools in Vic then there's Aussie Rules in Rugby stronghold schools in NSW. By numbers of teams, schools, and athletes.

That's why Rebels need to stay, and I'd say the same about the Force to.

Gameon - I like the concept, I was only sharing feedback from the schools. Yes it is government grants.

I'm not disagreeing with your posts at all - they are on the money.

 

[amirite]

That's why Rebels need to stay, and I'd say the same about the Force to.

Gameon - I like the concept, I was only sharing feedback from the schools. Yes it is government grants.

I'm not disagreeing with your posts at all - they are on the money.

Yeah, it's just interesting feedback.

Because of the shitty times and short shifts the coaches of Game On are paid pretty well per hour. Then there's the organisation cost, equipment, etc., IDK if the margins would be that good.

Lets say the government grant is $1k per school for 8 weeks of coaching. You minus $200 of equipment (that's generous, but it would be used more than once), that's $800 or $100 per week.

From there, there's around $40 per week wages for the coach, so that's $60 per week left.

Then there's hours the Development Officer spent booking and managing the particular school (let's generously say 1hr per week at $25 per hour). So that's $35 per week per school left.

Then you'd have to consider advertising costs and the admin that goes with being considered a program that merits government funding and you're sitting at maximum $20 per week per school, or $160 per school per term.

These numbers are all speculation, but I'm just trying to make a point.

 

[Scrubber2050]

Great debate

Guys, I am fairly in the dark re NRC

Someone said it doesn't cost the ARU anything for the comp. That's great.

How is it funded ? How much is it's budget ?

 

[amirite]

Great debate

Guys, I am fairly in the dark re NRC

Someone said it doesn't cost the ARU anything for the comp. That's great.

How is it funded ? How much is it's budget ?

I think state unions stomach a bit, but Foxtel pays the ARU to make it cost neutral.

From there they're clever with facilities used, back-to-back events (like with the women's 7s stuff this year) and stuff like that.

I think you should be careful about saying stuff like "NRC is a lame duck, and an expensive one to boot" if you're uninformed. Nothing wrong with being uninformed but there is something wrong with spreading misinformation, particularly when you're in the dark like you said.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I think state unions stomach a bit, but Foxtel pays the ARU to make it cost neutral.

From there they're clever with facilities used, back-to-back events (like with the women's 7s stuff this year) and stuff like that.

I think you should be careful about saying stuff like "NRC is a lame duck, and an expensive one to boot" if you're uninformed. Nothing wrong with being uninformed but there is something wrong with spreading misinformation, particularly when you're in the dark like you said.

Well said, mate. Should also be noted that the NRC apparently turned a profit this year.

I'm not against evolution of the concept. If clubs were keen and able to meet strict financial and competitive criteria I can see space for them replacing a few of the teams in the future to form a hybrid structure but only if the likes of the Rams, Rising, Spirit and Vikings were to remain.

 

[joeyjohnz]

Personally, I don't think the NRC can make a dent in the Australian market place in it's current format. It needs a complete rebranding and the cutting of a NSW team so that the competition has an even amount of teams.

I don't think that that many casual rugby followers would be interested in UC Vikings vs. Perth Spirit. Considering we've spent the last 20 years promoting our Super Franchises, anything short of "Brumbies vs Force" isn't worth watching. (Then there's the fact that half of Canberra hate the Vikings brand anyway)

Whilst QLD Country & QLD City is admirable, I don't think Country being a travelling roadshow helps in establishing any sort of supporter base. Everywhere from Toowoomba to Townsville should be QLD Reds territory. The second QLD Team should be a "Souths" team, which is everywhere south of the Brisbane River. At least one or two of their games should be in Sunnybank/Logan/QEII in addition to the GC. (This, btw gives the two QLD teams an even smattering of Clubs. Norths, GPS, Brothers, Uni, Wests, SC make up "Reds", Souths, Easts, Sunnybank, Logan, GC make up "Soufside")

In Sydney, the same reasoning can be applied. 2 teams, Western Sydney & the Tahs.

Seriously, which league looks more attractive to the average Joe?
Rebels, Reds, Tahs, Brumbies, Force, Fiji, Western Sydney Rams, Soufside.
or
Rising, Rays, Rams, City, QLD Country, Fiji, Spirit, Country Eagles, Vikings

In short: Keep Super branding in the NRC for when Super Rugby inveitably goes tits up. I daresay broadcasters would find the product a lot more appealing.

 

[chibimatty]

I must admit, I've never understood why the two WA or Melbourne sides have different branding. Ironic considering "Rebels" was the name of the old domestic championship team, and also that the WA "second" team was once known as the Force Gold.

 

[Highlander35]

I think they initially wanted different branding for all the NRC teams, so that they were independent (at least on the surface) of both the Clubs and the Super Sides.

Rebels 2nd side was the Rebels Rising, so it never seemed too separate in the first place, albeit I loved that Pink in the first two seasons.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[amirite]

Personally, I don't think the NRC can make a dent in the Australian market place in it's current format. It needs a complete rebranding and the cutting of a NSW team so that the competition has an even amount of teams.

I don't think that that many casual rugby followers would be interested in UC Vikings vs. Perth Spirit. Considering we've spent the last 20 years promoting our Super Franchises, anything short of "Brumbies vs Force" isn't worth watching. (Then there's the fact that half of Canberra hate the Vikings brand anyway)

Whilst QLD Country & QLD City is admirable, I don't think Country being a travelling roadshow helps in establishing any sort of supporter base. Everywhere from Toowoomba to Townsville should be QLD Reds territory. The second QLD Team should be a "Souths" team, which is everywhere south of the Brisbane River. At least one or two of their games should be in Sunnybank/Logan/QEII in addition to the GC. (This, btw gives the two QLD teams an even smattering of Clubs. Norths, GPS, Brothers, Uni, Wests, SC make up "Reds", Souths, Easts, Sunnybank, Logan, GC make up "Soufside")

In Sydney, the same reasoning can be applied. 2 teams, Western Sydney & the Tahs.

Seriously, which league looks more attractive to the average Joe?
Rebels, Reds, Tahs, Brumbies, Force, Fiji, Western Sydney Rams, Soufside.
or
Rising, Rays, Rams, City, QLD Country, Fiji, Spirit, Country Eagles, Vikings

In short: Keep Super branding in the NRC for when Super Rugby inveitably goes tits up. I daresay broadcasters would find the product a lot more appealing.

The NRC is a cost neutral development competition. Viewership and patronage is just gravy.

The Spirit and Rising are given different names but connected branding because they're what they are, a seperate but connected team that are part of the pathway.

If we want to sell the idea of Super Rugby teams being a prestige brand, why dilute?

Uneven team numbers creates a BYE. There's nothing wrong with that.

The NRC is arguably the only tier of Australian Rugby that's serving it's brief perfectly, why fuck with it?

 

[joeyjohnz]

The NRC is arguably the only tier of Australian Rugby that's serving it's brief perfectly, why fuck with it?

I would have agreed with you 3 months ago but things have really changed.

There's a 50% chance that Melbourne will never see the Reds or Tahs play again. Instead, it'll be treated to Rising vs. Rams/City/Spirit.

I think with one team on the chopping block and our number of professional places diminishing by %20, the RUPA wage guarantee could be spent on three semi-professional teams (Western Sydney, South QLD, Rebels/Force) - keeping a level of professional Rugby in the State that loses Super Rights.

I agree with Brendan Cannon, disbanding the Force or Rebels brand really makes the years of hard work in these states equate to nothing.

You're right when we're in a unique position where we've got a competition that is cost-neutral, but that's something to leverage off. We've established a competition in a window when most winter sports are finished and cricket hasn't started. Now we're in a position to at least semi-professionalize it and by capitalizing on the already established Reds/Rebels/Force/Brumbies/Tahs/Fiji Rugby brands there is every chance a FTA broadcaster could be interested (even if we have to pay for the first few years ALA Shute Shield).
We could have Rugby on FTA TV whilst simultaneously establishing a Western Sydney team(as the Tahs have never heard of the place anyway) and a QLD South team (which could leverage off the huge Poly population from everywhere between GC, Ipswich & Sunnybank).
I take the view of the Brisbane Roar boss, when questioned about the new "Brisbane City" team, who said a cross town rival will strengthen their brand and supporter base.

In 3 years time; this competition would easily eclipse the 100k(as low as 51k) that tune in for Super Rugby on Foxsports. Hell, I'd say within the first year; with a few games broadcast on FTA a week, and some midweek fixtures during the Rugby Championship to maximize Wallaby player availability; the competition would have already eclipsed Super Rugby in the Australian market.

This makes 5 super + 2 expansion sides + Fiji. A 9 week Round Robin with Semi's & Final.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

It's not shrinking to greatness. The local club game would still continue. If a club competition developed it would by necessity be a new separate competition beyond the current club competitions. Cluns could still run teams in those competitions as essentially reserve grades.

If it ran post season as the NRC does it really wouldn't matter.

I think many old rugby diehards think we can just sustain rugby with state based club rugby competitions. We have moved on from the 80s and today's sport fan wants a national competition above the state based club competitions that is of higher quality and better entertainment value, which you get by creating an invitation for limited number of teams to be involved to not dilute the talent and appeal and attract broad cast dollars to support.

Even papworth has come out in support of national club competition and that if has to be nrc to better market it. I accept we may want to create a revised nrc that perhaps even offers a promotion relegation system that better connects with state club rugby competitions as it needs strong connections back to club land, which perhaps could have been done better.

But seriously you would be delusional if you thought we could go back to the 80s and have state club competitions as only level below the wallabies and not shrink to being even more irrelevant.

Why do you think the afl and league evolved out of their state based competitions into national competions.

Great to see club rugby supporters passionate about shute shield or premier rugby but seriously stop the delusional thinking that we just need strong state based competitions as only thing that is needed below the wallabies. Club rugby has its role but below a national domestic semi pro club competition that can attract broadcast dollars.

As this is just retarded 80s thinking that really does not help.

Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Personally, I don't think the NRC can make a dent in the Australian market place in it's current format. It needs a complete rebranding and the cutting of a NSW team so that the competition has an even amount of teams.

I don't think that that many casual rugby followers would be interested in UC Vikings vs. Perth Spirit. Considering we've spent the last 20 years promoting our Super Franchises, anything short of "Brumbies vs Force" isn't worth watching. (Then there's the fact that half of Canberra hate the Vikings brand anyway)

Whilst QLD Country & QLD City is admirable, I don't think Country being a travelling roadshow helps in establishing any sort of supporter base. Everywhere from Toowoomba to Townsville should be QLD Reds territory. The second QLD Team should be a "Souths" team, which is everywhere south of the Brisbane River. At least one or two of their games should be in Sunnybank/Logan/QEII in addition to the GC. (This, btw gives the two QLD teams an even smattering of Clubs. Norths, GPS, Brothers, Uni, Wests, SC make up "Reds", Souths, Easts, Sunnybank, Logan, GC make up "Soufside")

In Sydney, the same reasoning can be applied. 2 teams, Western Sydney & the Tahs.

Seriously, which league looks more attractive to the average Joe?
Rebels, Reds, Tahs, Brumbies, Force, Fiji, Western Sydney Rams, Soufside.
or
Rising, Rays, Rams, City, QLD Country, Fiji, Spirit, Country Eagles, Vikings

In short: Keep Super branding in the NRC for when Super Rugby inveitably goes tits up. I daresay broadcasters would find the product a lot more appealing.

And yes then top two teams get to play in rebranded super rugby champions league. Apparently this champions league concept works well in other codes and rugby in the northern hemisphere. But what could we learn from the northern hemisphere......

Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[Crashy]

Anyone know what the 2017 nrc fixture list looks like? Or when it will become available?

 

[kiap]

Anyone know what the 2017 nrc fixture list looks like? Or when it will become available?

Dates are rumoured to be 2 Sep to 11 Nov 2017

With the addition of the Fiji Warriors, that would be a single round-robin for 9 teams (each team with 4 home matches and 4 away matches + 1 bye) followed by semis and final.

But that was before the Super team "chop or cut" was announced. If there are only 4 Super teams then chances are there will only be 8 NRC teams (one of which is not Australian).

Who knows when official fixtures will appear … it's the ARU innit.

 

[RugbyReg]

The draw is done with venues being confirmed. Those start and end dates are correct.

But, yeah, the whole super team being cut thing is a bit of a wrinkle in the process.

 

[Brumby Runner]

A wrinkle Reg? I'd have thought a potential tsunami that threatens to derail the competition as players are shuffled elsewhere or take off for greener pastures overseas.