The Pulverisation of Australian Rugby

[TOCC]

I agree, too much test rugby and not enough 'club rugby', in saying that though I don't think super rugby in its current format is the answer to more 'club rugby'..

 

[Brendan Hume]

The problem in Australia is that rugby is just not popular enough to create the sort of revenue required if it is primarily drawing from domestic interest with our population. NZ has the same problem except the increased popularity is offset by a much lower population.

For Super Rugby to generate substantially more revenue it would require greater interest from Europe, USA, China etc. Part of the phenomenal financial success of the major sporting leagues around the world is that they generate so much revenue from countries outside of where they are based which is primarily driven by the most popular few teams in each league.

Yeah, I agree partly - the problem is the cupboard is bare in terms of being able to establish the interest in the game. I think Australia and New Zealand could support a competition that was basically a blend of the NRC and ITM Cup. Doesn't need to replace Super Rugby - in fact it should enhance it. Generating an additional $20M in the game per annum would be enough to get it back to a reasonable financial position.

It's a pity John O'Neill's legacy at Football Australia was to create the model that would have been a good one for Rugby in this country - something a bit out of season with not the highest standard of players, but still good enough to create a good show and attract a TV audience on an FTA platform...

 

[TOCC]

What i want to see is 'Super Rugby' to become the equivalent of the European Rugby Champions Cup formerly known as the Heineken Cup.

Each country runs its own domestic league, Aus-NZ could have the trans-tasman league if they wanted, South African could expand to as many teams as they please and Super Rugby would stand as a separate round robin - knock out tournament.

Qualification for Super Rugby would be the 4 or 5 highest placed teams from each countries domestic comp, Super Rugby is divided into 4 pools of 4, each team plays each other twice in the pool and then proceeds onto a knockout finals system.

Similar to the Heineken Cup, the 'super rugby' matches would be interlaced into the domestic rugby season, so you have 4 weeks of domestic rugby followed by 2 weeks of 'super rugby' recurring from Feb through to July, try to have the Super Rugby finals in May and then domestic finals in July.

6 x Super Rugby pool matches
2 x Super Rugby finals matches
10 x domestic rugby regular season matches
2 x domestic rugby finals matches

20 game season, add in 2 byes and its a 22 week domsetic season.

 

[TOCC]

It would have been easier to give a visual representation of what i described but I'm computer illiterate, but i think what the competition allows is for maximum local derby matches but it also maintains the prestige of playing the international teams, and in reality it should be an easier system to expand from in the future, you could technically go to 5 pools of 4 and continually expand without much significant disruption to the domestic competitions.

It also offers each country their own domestic finals series, which is great for tv ratings and crowds.

 

[Quick Hands]

Rightly or not, super rugby isn't moving along those lines. NZ have repeatedly said that they want regular matches against SA teams and seem perfectly happy with the new and current arrangements.

 

[papabear]

TBH I agree with what omar is selling, less is more.

It works for the NFL.

IMO the NRL could do with chopping their season down by 3 or 4 rounds and if they need the fixtures for tv cash add more teams.

The difficulty with rugby is I am not sure that there is certainty behind where they need to go with regards to the break up of provincial rugby and test rugby.

 

[Braveheart81]

Is the NFL so successful because their season is short of is it successful because it is just so popular?

Sunday Night Football on NBC was averaging 21.8 million viewers halfway through this season and is the most watched show on US TV.

ESPN Monday Night Football averages 14 million viewers each week and it's a cable channel.

With a 16 game regular season, NFL is pretty much the same as Super Rugby except the finals are a week longer.

 

[TOCC]

Rightly or not, super rugby isn't moving along those lines. NZ have repeatedly said that they want regular matches against SA teams and seem perfectly happy with the new and current arrangements.

Perhaps, though there is a divide already forming from 2016 with seperate conferences and regional groups. Based off the the model i proposed above it would actually see some New Zealand/Australin teams playing South African teams 4 times as opposed to 3 times in the newly proposed 2016 draw.

I haven't done the math but i don't believe their would be any change in the overall number of matches played between South African and Australia/New Zealand teams..

Whilst slightly fragmented i don't believe its any more so then the recently proposed format, and for me it has a large number of benefits. Its obviously not happening in this broadcast agreement, but given the way the competition has evolved i believe its only inevitable and it makes a lot of practical sense as well.

 

[Quick Hands]

Is the NFL so successful because their season is short of is it successful because it is just so popular?

Sunday Night Football on NBC was averaging 21.8 million viewers halfway through this season and is the most watched show on US TV.

ESPN Monday Night Football averages 14 million viewers each week and it's a cable channel.

With a 16 game regular season, NFL is pretty much the same as Super Rugby except the finals are a week longer.

NFL is light years ahead of the next most popular football code in the US, which as you say is the main reason for its success.

 

[Braveheart81]

NFL is light years ahead of the next most popular football code in the US, which as you say is the main reason for its success.

The next most popular football code would be college football.

I wouldn't be surprised if the third most popular was high school football before we get down to Major League Soccer.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Perhaps, though there is a divide already forming from 2016 with seperate conferences and regional groups. Based off the the model i proposed above it would actually see some New Zealand/Australin teams playing South African teams 4 times as opposed to 3 times in the newly proposed 2016 draw.

I haven't done the math but i don't believe their would be any change in the overall number of matches played between South African and Australia/New Zealand teams..

Whilst slightly fragmented i don't believe its any more so then the recently proposed format, and for me it has a large number of benefits. Its obviously not happening in this broadcast agreement, but given the way the competition has evolved i believe its only inevitable and it makes a lot of practical sense as well.

Interesting thoughts. I think that Super Rugby could be morphed into something similar. But it would take a great deal of vision and grit to do so. However, the implementation of the conference system would greatly facilitate such movements.

I agree, it should be based on national "conferences" in the form of the ITM, Currie and the NRC (have the current Super Rugby teams integrate into the NRC). With the inclusion of both a Japanese and Argentine squad both nations could be integrated more easily on a larger scale. The Top League and Compenato could both be structured to align with the new structure.

Aim for 14 domestic rounds. Plus two week finals. Sixteen in total. So ideally each "conferences" would consist on 8 teams each but it would be up to the individual Unions. As long as they fit to the new schedule.

On top of that, have a two tier Euro like championship. The top four from each national conference go through to the top tier while the next four go to the second tier.

To limit the time frame. These will be primary mid week games which will place great emphasis on squad depth and development. Of course it will be highly dependent on the number of conferences.

The aim should be to limit to no more than 20 weeks total.

On top of that SANZAR need to investigate their broadcast platforms and weigh up the subscription vs as revenue side if the argument. Do you rely on the current to drive revenue via a subscription base or do you sell the opportunity of max exposure to advertisers by providing the product free of charge into all markets.

Either way, the model above satisfies both the desire to have a domestic championship as well as maintaining an international flavour.

 

[TOCC]

The key is to obviously tailor a package which suits both the fans and the broadcasters and right now i don't think that is quite been achieved. Broadcasters would much prefer to be presented a package which can guarantee a finals series in a local time slot featuring local teams, Super Rugby Grand Finals can and do rate very highly for Foxtel when played in the AEST time slot yet its not a regularly occurrence nor a guarantee for the broadcasters..

Super Rugby would still be the penultimate challenge and presents a more prestigious competition but the increased focus on the domestic competition connects better with the fans.

 

[HighPlainsDrifter]

Have any ARU board members or key executives of the ARU and or State Unions / Super Franchises conducted any study trips to visit either successful Rugby operations offshore and or visit any other Iconic sporting codes or successful franchises within those codes internationally ? Meeting with groups like the NBA , NHL , Baseball , PGA , European Basketball etc covering aspects like sponsorship , marketing , grass roots development of their games , operational hierarchy, Fan engagement , planning for growth and any lessons from any restructures they had undertaken . Whilst there talk to major advertisers of sport on a global scale (usually consumer discretionary , financials , Telco's ) to discuss what they look for from a particular sport as a product and their degree of input-interaction to reach their goals or mutual goals with the code or team in question . It may be worthwhile to look at a sporting club approach as is seen in Europe & South America to boost overall memberships by adding sports such as netball , basketball , swimming etc - Its not so stupid at a Super 15 Level ....refer to Boca Juniors , Real Madrid etc ... There are prominent Australians who could possibly be tapped for a view of the current positioning and state of rugby in this country eg. David Hill (Fmr USA head of Fox Sports , Packer's World Series Cricket and current head of Nat Geo USA ) , Media buying Icon Harold Mitchell (Ex Rebels Chair) , Singleton - would probably drop a large pile on the ARU , but that could be a cathartic
process etc . There is no denying Australian Sport is a tough , overcrowded market in a country with limited carrying capacity .... I just want to know the debate that may or not be occurring in the lofty towers of the ARU would encompass some or all of the abovementioned initiatives as a matter of due process,and, for gods sake some meaningful input from all levels of the game ! RANT OVER !!

 

[Omar Comin']

I don't mind the European style model you guys are talking about. But the problem I have with it is that the teams that don't qualify for the international 'Super Rugby' part at the end would be at such a huge disadvantage financially. No one would care about the 2nd level tournament. You'd get the situation they have in Europe where the same teams are always at the top.

I think SANZAR is thinking more along the line of the NFL model. And the NFL model probably has the potential to make greater revenues per team than the European model and also provide a more equitable competition.

For those not familiar, in the NFL there are two 16 team conferences that each have 4 divisions. Every team plays 16 regular season games.
- Six against the three teams in their own division - home and away.
- Four against one other division within their conference.
- Four against teams in a division from the other conference.
- Two against teams within their conference who finished in the same place in their respective divisions the previous season.

Then there is a playoff between the top 6 teams in each conference (4 division winners plus 2 wildcards). And the conference winners play each other in the Super Bowl.

I think it more likely Super Rugby will evolve to something similar.

Two larger conferences - Asia-Pacific and Africa/Americas. Each with multiple divisions (and the exact number, and number of teams in each could change as it expands).

This would allow for a focus on regional/national rivalries and regional finals matches, while still providing some international cross-conference games during the regular season. And at the end you'd have a "Super Bowl" style final.

 

[Brendan Hume]

Have any ARU board members or key executives of the ARU and or State Unions / Super Franchises conducted any study trips...

I would imagine so. Cheika just had Trent Whatshisname from the Roosters on the Wallaby tour. This sort of thing happens all the time in professional sport from a team perspective, and I would think it happens both within Australia and internationally... It'd be nice if the people engaged in community rugby by these groups (ARU, states) would do a study tour of the clubs and regions that they represent and get an idea of what services they require, and assist with making contacts across communities to share best practice and develop the game further - pretty novel idea I know, but...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[HighPlainsDrifter]

Thanks Brendan , yes the top down to grass roots should be a given , they have had 15 years or so in the professional era to properly engage .... I'm just making the point that there are plenty of other sports doing it far better overseas than our guys have and I fear they are not looking at the proven models , too proud or self involved in their own world to really think about the term "Adapt or Perish" .... I'd like to think that from the educated posts on this site from the grass roots it appears the ARU are failing to listen to their constituents maybe due to its current one way spin to the masses approach. We need to KNOW what these guys are doing on a timely basis , if they send Players/Coaches to a school or junior club / Visit other sports , sponsors etc the ARU should post it AHEAD of time so the Rugby community can engage and a press opportunity can be garnered (free advertising for the code in local and regional rags as well as the internet and possible media grabs . If we have guys meeting with other bodies flag it and expand on it a little , the crowd will become more engaged and feel they have a stake in the initiatives . Invite parents to help at school or club initiatives with rep players and coaches so they feel they have a stake (the parents buy the tickets !). Its all about positive reinforcement these guys can't possibly give from the boardroom . Many of the most successful CEO's I've met regularly "walk the shop floor" and talk to staff and customers alike ...why cant our guys do the same in a sport where many of the fans are in one form or another servants of the game . The lack of an ARU rep at the baseball media op in Sydney was a shocker !

 

[Brendan Hume]

Couldn't agree more.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Omar Comin']

I think the ARU would benefit from bringing more administrators in from other sports. Too much confirmation bias in Australian rugby.

Look at how well the Reds have done since Jim Carmichael came in! More guys from an AFL background might be a decent idea.

 

[Brendan Hume]

[quote="Omar Comin', post: 701621, member: 3000"
Look at how well the Reds have done since Jim Carmichael came in! More guys from an AFL background might be a decent idea.[/quote]

Jim Carmichael is the architect of the new National Participation Fee. The serendipitous success of the Reds needs to be treated separately to the overall health of Queensland Rugby.
The QRU favour a corporatised model where they 'control' rugby in all areas of the state, just like the AFL model. Maybe that is the right model - AFL has certainly been successful. I don't think so though...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Omar Comin']

Serendiptious is not the word I'd use.

All of Queensland Rugby's numbers - participation figures, Reds memberships, the bottom line - all of them have improved considerably under Carmichael.

From the grassroots to the marketing of the Reds (as well a the two NRC teams for that matter) they are blowing everyone else out of the water.