SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) 2023 General Chat

[liquor box]

The Aus teams have same cap to each spend on the playing budget, but the Rugby Australia top ups are where it distorts things. You could have a rough guess to who receives more or less from Rugby Australia, but there isn’t any real information out there to say what the differences are.

The top ups skew the competition, I think RA need to encourage players seeking a top up to play for the team that RA thinks will given them the best chance for game time.

Why do some players get a top up to be on the bench when other teams struggle to have decent starting players?

 

[Dan54]

To be honest, I don't know what Salary cap is in NZ, but thought it was pretty equivilant to Aussie's, but to be honest haven't chased any official figures.

 

[liquor box]

From a QLD perspective, I’m genuinely worried about how the Reds can regain relevance in Brisbane. The Broncos and Dolphins are pulling major crowds in QLD, the Lions are still a premiership contender team for the next few years.

Club rugby in Brisbane is keeping blokes in the game, not a desire to play for the Reds.

I think that the Reds are stuck in the mindset that the Rabbitohs were in League prior to Russel Crowe buying them, they still think that they are a sporting club and try to be loyal to their development pathways to the point where they seem to prefer signing a local talent rather than recruiting externally to get the best players to put on the park.

They need to realise that they are a business, like it or not professional sport is a business and to be successful you need to be in the game to win.

As a Reds fan I get frustrated that we never seem to get high profile signings to our team, if RA is willing to pay such extraordinary amounts for NRL players to switch, would it be asking too much for them to sign him to someone other than the Tahs? I have no idea if he wants to leave Sydney but surely the question has to be asked would he consider it.

 

[Rebel man]

How are budgets for clubs ever equal in AFL or any sport, are you genuinely saying teams with better sponsors or more members etc don't have a more money then smaller clubs , I would be very surprised if that is case, do they remove their earnings . I know you have salary cap etc, but how do you stop better run clubs having more money?

Other question is, do Brumbies have a bigger budget than other Aussie teams, or are they just better run/coached and develop players better? Because they seem to be almost unbeatable by other Aus teams at moment.

And I will add I have no idea what any super club's budget is.

Because the AFL distributes the TV revenue in an equitable way for a start. So say Collingwood gets close on 20m a year less from the AFL than the Suns. That is equalisation.

Also there is a salary cap and a football department cap. Meaning that a club can only spend up to the cap on football operations.

If they really wanted to they could spend over the cap but there is a very prohibitive football department tax so no club does go over it. But if they were to the tax that they would have to pay would be distributed to the poorer clubs.

So everything is equal.

 

[PhilClinton]

So you don't have one. Cool story.

A competition where the Australian fans are so far disconnected to half of the teams in the comp isn’t the answer.

I couldnt name more than a dozen players from the NZ franchises, I’ve got no interest in their local derbies and a fleeting interest when they play Aussie teams. And that goes for majority of rugby fans in my circles. These are the guys who are still playing or coaching their sons/daughters teams down at the local club. They want to be engaged with the game, but it isn’t happening.

It seems pretty clear the powers at RA didn’t look at the ‘health’ and engagement of the Super Rugby Pacific comp as the main reason for going at it long term, it more about the Wallabies and trying to keep up with the NZ sides.

Negotiating a ‘champions league’ comp from the outset would have been better. Play Super Rugby AU with both the main team and a curtain raiser ‘A’ team each week. The A team provides a link for the fans at grassroots level and keep engagement with the next generation of supporters/players who see their compatriots converting from clubland to a professional environment

Then the top 4 sides from AU comp, NZ comp and Japanese comp play in a knockout tournament to end the season. Short and sharp, random draw, every game is do or die, all wrapped up in 4 weeks.

 

[RebelYell]

The reality is that Super Rugby, for 95% of fans, is only really of interest when the team which they support are playing.

 

[Ignoto]

A competition where the Australian fans are so far disconnected to half of the teams in the comp isn’t the answer.

The scheduling is all over the shop this year from a Reds perspective as well.

They understandably want to grow the game across Queensland so 2 out of the 7 home games are up in Townsville this year.

Meaning, the Reds had essentially played for a month (March 19) before having their first home game in Brisbane. Then, their last home game will be in the middle of May where they won't play again until February/March next year.

Compare that to the Broncos who's first home game was on March 10 and last game is August 31.

I've got no idea how SANZAR or RA think 3 months worth of games a year and 9 without works at all.

 

[Wallaby Man]

A competition where the Australian fans are so far disconnected to half of the teams in the comp isn’t the answer.

I couldnt name more than a dozen players from the NZ franchises, I’ve got no interest in their local derbies and a fleeting interest when they play Aussie teams. And that goes for majority of rugby fans in my circles. These are the guys who are still playing or coaching their sons/daughters teams down at the local club. They want to be engaged with the game, but it isn’t happening.

It seems pretty clear the powers at Rugby Australia didn’t look at the ‘health’ and engagement of the Super Rugby Pacific comp as the main reason for going at it long term, it more about the Wallabies and trying to keep up with the NZ sides.

Negotiating a ‘champions league’ comp from the outset would have been better. Play Super Rugby AU with both the main team and a curtain raiser ‘A’ team each week. The A team provides a link for the fans at grassroots level and keep engagement with the next generation of supporters/players who see their compatriots converting from clubland to a professional environment

Then the top 4 sides from AU comp, NZ comp and Japanese comp play in a knockout tournament to end the season. Short and sharp, random draw, every game is do or die, all wrapped up in 4 weeks.

Problem is this wouldn’t provide enough matches to be commercially viable or for a broadcaster to provide meaningful cash. Current Super Rugby must already be a tough sell for Stan to keep subscriptions on beyond the current short season as it is, because of a lack of content elsewhere.

Rugby really is an amateur sport with cash in mentality.

This isn’t a reflection of your comment but more a thought process I have, as much as I find it interesting that a guy can go from amateur club to professional in as little as 12 months, I also find that highly concerning it can be achieved in a professional sport in 2023. It can happen in other sports but seems to be far more prevalent in rugby. It’s charming but I’m not sure it screams that you are getting the elite athletic talent or the standard between amateur and professional is as big of a gulf as it should be in a modern era.

 

[PhilClinton]

Problem is this wouldn’t provide enough matches to be commercially viable or for a broadcaster to provide meaningful cash. Current Super Rugby must already be a tough sell for Stan to keep subscriptions on beyond the current short season as it is, because of a lack of content elsewhere.

Yeh I mean I’m not sure how much influence the broadcaster is having on the Super Rugby tournament this year, the Reds play the Moana at 2pm Australia time this Friday, how many viewers do they expect for that??

I don’t think Nine would be losing out on too much if they instead invested in the Super Rugby AU concept, they’d get 10-12 weeks of round robin play (pending Drua inclusion) + 3 weeks of finals and hopefully 4-5 weeks of the Champs comp. Plus if we managed to get the club ‘A’ team competition sorted, those games would be broadcast as well. I know heaps of people who tune into the club rugby stuff on Saturdays and would tune into an ‘A’ comp which would just be an extension on that.

 

[Dan54]

To be honest though Ig, Stan/9 doesn't get only 3 months of rugby anyway, I would guess the reason they really want is the rugby that is played from June anyway to really haul in big numbers of viewers, it's called test rugby, and that like it or not where most interest is. Stan/9 have still got some of their biggest viewing in normal years until Nov/Dec. Like it or not Stan probably doesn't have a hell of a lot of interest in super rugby as such, and main interest is International game where you get cross over viewers?

 

[Rebel man]

To be honest though Ig, Stan/9 doesn't get only 3 months of rugby anyway, I would guess the reason they really want is the rugby that is played from June anyway to really haul in big numbers of viewers, it's called test rugby, and that like it or not where most interest is. Stan/9 have still got some of their biggest viewing in normal years until Nov/Dec. Like it or not Stan probably doesn't have a hell of a lot of interest in super rugby as such, and main interest is International game where you get cross over viewers?

Super rugby is crap not enough games. Done the break down before

 

[Dan54]

Super rugby is crap not enough games. Done the break down before

Wasn't suggesting it was, but super has to fit into window so that test rugby is played, and what I suggesting is I bet Stan/9 prefer it that way. Test rugby is what they would be more interested in, as it will bring in more advertisers etc.
I not saying there is enough games etc, just looking at how I think TV would look at it. I wouldn't mind betting Sky tv here in NZ is same, they pay biggest money for AB tests, and super and NPC etc are good add ons that give good rugby content until test rugby is played.

 

[hoggy]

A competition where the Australian fans are so far disconnected to half of the teams in the comp isn’t the answer.

I couldnt name more than a dozen players from the NZ franchises, I’ve got no interest in their local derbies and a fleeting interest when they play Aussie teams. And that goes for majority of rugby fans in my circles. These are the guys who are still playing or coaching their sons/daughters teams down at the local club. They want to be engaged with the game, but it isn’t happening.

It seems pretty clear the powers at Rugby Australia didn’t look at the ‘health’ and engagement of the Super Rugby Pacific comp as the main reason for going at it long term, it more about the Wallabies and trying to keep up with the NZ sides.

Negotiating a ‘champions league’ comp from the outset would have been better. Play Super Rugby AU with both the main team and a curtain raiser ‘A’ team each week. The A team provides a link for the fans at grassroots level and keep engagement with the next generation of supporters/players who see their compatriots converting from clubland to a professional environment

Then the top 4 sides from AU comp, NZ comp and Japanese comp play in a knockout tournament to end the season. Short and sharp, random draw, every game is do or die, all wrapped up in 4 weeks.

It seems pretty clear the powers at Rugby Australia didn’t look at the ‘health’ and engagement of the Super Rugby Pacific comp as the main reason for going at it long term, it more about the Wallabies and trying to keep up with the NZ sides.

And that in a nutshell has been the issue with Rugby in Australia for the last 20 years.

 

[hoggy]

Wasn't suggesting it was, but super has to fit into window so that test rugby is played, and what I suggesting is I bet Stan/9 prefer it that way. Test rugby is what they would be more interested in, as it will bring in more advertisers etc.
I not saying there is enough games etc, just looking at how I think TV would look at it. I wouldn't mind betting Sky tv here in NZ is same, they pay biggest money for AB tests, and super and NPC etc are good add ons that give good rugby content until test rugby is played.

Well if that is how the TV exec's & RA view the game then we might as well stick up the Surrender Sign.

The big money may ultimately be Test rugby but without a supporter base you eventually lose that viewng audience.

Which is exactly what has happened since the start of Super Rugby, ffs one minute it was taking over the world wth global conferences spead across continents of the world.

And now is okay to be an add on for an internet streaming service in Australia

 

[PhilClinton]

Which is exactly what has happened since the start of Super Rugby, ffs one minute it was taking over the world wth conferences spead across continents of the world.

Yep, again I can really only comment on QLD, but during the 2010s a Reds membership and corporate box were the big ticket items for sports fans in Brisbane.

I consult with a lot of QLD based law firms for work (you know the type, private school, raised on rugby, Queen St cowboys etc.) and over the past 5 years they've been trading in their Reds boxes for Bronco's ones, simply because their clients don't give a shit about rugby anymore.

I even know of a firm who used to be a major sponsor and involved with QLD rugby who are entering into an agreement with the Dolphins! They're planning to shuttle a bus full of lawyers and clients out for a day at Redcliffe stadium in a few weeks.

 

[LeCheese]

Yep, again I can really only comment on QLD, but during the 2010s a Reds membership and corporate box were the big ticket items for sports fans in Brisbane.

I consult with a lot of QLD based law firms for work (you know the type, private school, raised on rugby, Queen St cowboys etc.) and over the past 5 years they've been trading in their Reds boxes for Bronco's ones, simply because their clients don't give a shit about rugby anymore.

I even know of a firm who used to be a major sponsor and involved with QLD rugby who are entering into an agreement with the Dolphins! They're planning to shuttle a bus full of lawyers and clients out for a day at Redcliffe stadium in a few weeks.

I must be in a minority given the crowd numbers, but after going to a few games over the past couple of years, I find league crowds absolutely unbearable.

Would probably be nice in a box though.

 

[Dan54]

Well if that is how the TV exec's & Rugby Australia view the game then we might as well stick up the Surrender Sign.

The big money may ultimately be Test rugby but without a supporter base you eventually lose that viewng audience.

Which is exactly what has happened since the start of Super Rugby, ffs one minute it was taking over the world wth global conferences spead across continents of the world.

And now is okay to be an add on for an internet streaming service in Australia

Unfortunately the realism of professional sport. And to be real honest whether we like it or not the supporter base is same, rugby was incredibly popular in Aus on the back of a couple of WC wins, and WC in Aus (and Lions tour). Well that's how I found it while there anyway, Most rugby supporters were seeming aligned to Wallabies etc, and that flowed on to super which was great, I don't think it ever really flowed the other way.

 

[JRugby]

For those interested, this is how Super Rugby and Wallabies games stack up against other major programs and rival winter codes in terms of ratings in 2022. Paints a grim picture when Friday night football on seven beats the Wallabies Bledisloe cup games:

Sadly, super rugby doesn't do a lot for the game either.

(disclaimer: the entertainment programs are cherry picked and there definitely are higher rating entertainment programs, also average means the average rating for programs across the season ie: all super rugby pacific games on GEM for the 2022 season. Stan/9 doesn't make audience data available all the time so that's not included either).

 

[Slim 293]

Paints a grim picture when Friday night football on seven beats the Wallabies Bledisloe cup games:

It's to be expected with it being the average for Friday Night Football across the year, which will include some blockbuster matches.

But those numbers are significantly greater in Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth.

 

[JRugby]

It's to be expected with it being the average for Friday Night Football across the year, which will include some blockbuster matches.

But those numbers are significantly greater in Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth.

Absolutely - I suppose I'm looking at it from the perspective of Friday night AFL being more run of the mill sport programming for the code whereas the home Bledisloe is rugby's marquee fixture (akin to the AFL and NRL GF's or State of Origin)