3rd tier is back in 2014 [Discontinued]
- Thread starter Bowside
- Start date
- Status
dangerousdave
Frank Nicholson (4)
Looks like they've left lots of wriggle room on who will actually make up the teams. Any predictions?
Personally I can see:
1. Sydney University
2. Eastwood / Macquarie Uni
3. Randwick / UNSW
4. Balmain? (Funded by Warren Livingstone)
5. Melbourne (associated with Rebels and one or more Melbourne Unis)
6. Perth (associated with Force and UWA)
7. Brumbies Runners / Uni of Canberra
8. Uni of Queensland
9. Brothers
10. GPS
I have pretty much no idea about who has the money and supporter base in Queensland for this.
I'm also unsure about the financial positions of Randwick and Eastwood. Maybe we could see a combined 'NOT Sydney Uni / Tahs Academy' team in Sydney.
Personally I can see:
1. Sydney University
2. Eastwood / Macquarie Uni
3. Randwick / UNSW
4. Balmain? (Funded by Warren Livingstone)
5. Melbourne (associated with Rebels and one or more Melbourne Unis)
6. Perth (associated with Force and UWA)
7. Brumbies Runners / Uni of Canberra
8. Uni of Queensland
9. Brothers
10. GPS
I have pretty much no idea about who has the money and supporter base in Queensland for this.
I'm also unsure about the financial positions of Randwick and Eastwood. Maybe we could see a combined 'NOT Sydney Uni / Tahs Academy' team in Sydney.
Gibbo
Ron Walden (29)
Thanks - I'll pass it onto the Board and Team who have put a lot of effort into it over the past few months.
dangerousdave
Frank Nicholson (4)
Also, doing some quick maths on the player numbers we get:
35*5=175 Contracted+EPS super rugby players
minus 30 Wallabies + 10-20 Team rehab
equals ~130 available super rugby players
25-30 players in each NRC squad * 8-10 teams = 200-300 players total
So this would involve 70-170 players not currently contracted to Super Rugby teams.
35*5=175 Contracted+EPS super rugby players
minus 30 Wallabies + 10-20 Team rehab
equals ~130 available super rugby players
25-30 players in each NRC squad * 8-10 teams = 200-300 players total
So this would involve 70-170 players not currently contracted to Super Rugby teams.
S
secondfive
Guest
no need for sarcasm Gibbo
Gibbo
Ron Walden (29)
Woops - I quoted your wrong post - Rookie error - I had too many tabs open - i mean to quote your post complimenting the Gordon website
Slim 293
Stirling Mortlock (74)
I was thinking about this the other day in regards to the Canberra team........
Let's say the Brumbies have approximately 15 players out due to test duties and injury, that leaves another 15 players in the main squad plus another 5/6 (apparently each squad now gets an extra cover player in case of injury outside the EPS).......
So then that allows for approx another 9-10 players from the John I Dent Cup to come into the team.......
The Melbourne and Perth teams will obviously have a stronger Super Rugby presence due to less Wallabies, but the Sydney and Brisbane teams will have their Super rugby contingent stretched out across multiple teams, however they also have access to a stronger club playing pool so it should balance out........
Let's say the Brumbies have approximately 15 players out due to test duties and injury, that leaves another 15 players in the main squad plus another 5/6 (apparently each squad now gets an extra cover player in case of injury outside the EPS).......
So then that allows for approx another 9-10 players from the John I Dent Cup to come into the team.......
The Melbourne and Perth teams will obviously have a stronger Super Rugby presence due to less Wallabies, but the Sydney and Brisbane teams will have their Super rugby contingent stretched out across multiple teams, however they also have access to a stronger club playing pool so it should balance out........
FiveStarStu
Bill McLean (32)
Regardless of the EOI, I think the ARU/NRCC will be careful to brand the teams as separate to those who may run them, in order to bring new/unaligned people into the competition.
With that in mind, I think you'll see a structure the likes of the ARC:
Sydney
Sydney (West)
Sydney (North/Central Coast)
Canberra
Brisbane
Brisbane
Melbourne
Perth
Personally, I would like to see a 10-team ARC, with two teams each linked to a Super franchise. Something along the lines of:
Sydney (Waratahs)
Sydney (North/Central Coast) (Waratahs)
Sydney (West) (Brumbies)
Canberra (Brumbies)
Brisbane (Reds)
Brisbane/GC (Reds)
FNQ/NT (Force)
Perth (Force)
Melbourne (Rebels)
Adelaide (Rebels)
Slim 293
Stirling Mortlock (74)
Having said that, it would be ideal if two organisations like the Vikings and Uni of Canberra were able to combine their resources for this one in the best interest for a Canberra team........
RugbyFuture
Lord Logo
thats stretching things far stu, particularly with territories, you'd have a civil war on your hands between the brumbies and tahs and their catchment area.
Bruce Ross
Ken Catchpole (46)
It's a hard life being a satirist. How can you send these blokes up? They leave you virtually nothing to work with. Here, I kid you not, is the full content of the "Expression of Interest Application" form:
EXPRESSION OF INTEREST APPLICATION
Return to nrc@rugby.com.au by 13 January 2014
Club, Organisation or Invidual:
Application Submitted By & Position In the Club/Organisation:
Your Contact Details:
Are you interested in fielding a team in the 2014 NRC as a (please tick):
•Stand Alone Applicant
•Part of a Possible Syndicate or Partnership (see below)
•Either of the Above
If you are interested in a syndicate or partnership approach, and already have partners in mind, please indicate them here:
"Invidual"? "Are you interested in fielding a team in the 2014 NRC as a Either of the Above"? I thought we were the rugby code that catered for the sentence-forming section of the population and the other mob were the boofheads.
It gets better. We are told:
The Expression of Interest is not binding in any way, and does not require you to address the criteria mentioned above at this stage. It is simply an indication that you may be interested in taking part, that you have genuine capacity to develop and deliver a suitable team program and provides an opportunity for the ARU to engage with you on a consultative basis.
You are asked to return the attached Expression of Interest form to
nrc@rugby.com.au by 13 January 2014.
Upon submitting an Expression of Interest, you will be provided with a formal tender document specifying the criteria that will be used by the ARU to select teams to participate in the competition.
There will be the opportunity for extensive consultation and collaboration
with all Rugby stakeholders during the tender window. The target date for announcing NRC Teams is 28 February 2014.
So a club, individual or other entity which lodges an EoI on January 13 will then be provided with a formal tender document which presumably will take some time to draft and submit. Let's say that takes them to the end of January. Then "there will be the opportunity for extensive consultation and collaboration with all Rugby stakeholders during the tender window." And after that consideration of the tenders will take place, leading to the announcement of the participating teams by 28 February.
Piece of piss, really.
.
EXPRESSION OF INTEREST APPLICATION
Return to nrc@rugby.com.au by 13 January 2014
Club, Organisation or Invidual:
Application Submitted By & Position In the Club/Organisation:
Your Contact Details:
Are you interested in fielding a team in the 2014 NRC as a (please tick):
•Stand Alone Applicant
•Part of a Possible Syndicate or Partnership (see below)
•Either of the Above
If you are interested in a syndicate or partnership approach, and already have partners in mind, please indicate them here:
"Invidual"? "Are you interested in fielding a team in the 2014 NRC as a Either of the Above"? I thought we were the rugby code that catered for the sentence-forming section of the population and the other mob were the boofheads.
It gets better. We are told:
The Expression of Interest is not binding in any way, and does not require you to address the criteria mentioned above at this stage. It is simply an indication that you may be interested in taking part, that you have genuine capacity to develop and deliver a suitable team program and provides an opportunity for the ARU to engage with you on a consultative basis.
You are asked to return the attached Expression of Interest form to
nrc@rugby.com.au by 13 January 2014.
Upon submitting an Expression of Interest, you will be provided with a formal tender document specifying the criteria that will be used by the ARU to select teams to participate in the competition.
There will be the opportunity for extensive consultation and collaboration
with all Rugby stakeholders during the tender window. The target date for announcing NRC Teams is 28 February 2014.
So a club, individual or other entity which lodges an EoI on January 13 will then be provided with a formal tender document which presumably will take some time to draft and submit. Let's say that takes them to the end of January. Then "there will be the opportunity for extensive consultation and collaboration with all Rugby stakeholders during the tender window." And after that consideration of the tenders will take place, leading to the announcement of the participating teams by 28 February.
Piece of piss, really.
.
RugbyFuture
Lord Logo
so when are they using my logo from 5 years ago? I'll expect contact within the week ARU....
Brumby Jack
Steve Williams (59)
You have to submit your expression of interest RF
SevensPhD
Chris McKivat (8)
Would LOVE to see this become a club-uni partnership. I am a little biased being an academic, but:
Tahs:
USyd
Eastwood- UMac
Randwick-UNSW
Reds:
UQ
Sunnybank-Griffith Uni
Bond Uni Breakers (to cover GC, but needs investment)
Rebels:
UVic or Deakin
Perth:
UWA
Brumbies:
UCanberra (no brainer with Brumbies moving onto campus)
That's 9 teams, consider giving Melbourne and/or Perth 2 teams for development.
Tahs:
USyd
Eastwood- UMac
Randwick-UNSW
Reds:
UQ
Sunnybank-Griffith Uni
Bond Uni Breakers (to cover GC, but needs investment)
Rebels:
UVic or Deakin
Perth:
UWA
Brumbies:
UCanberra (no brainer with Brumbies moving onto campus)
That's 9 teams, consider giving Melbourne and/or Perth 2 teams for development.
RugbyFuture
Lord Logo
that will get rid of the upper class stigma!
Lee Grant
John Eales (66)
Exactly.
I suspect that many people will be harping on negatives such as: why should the rich clubs get the benefit of getting a gig because they can afford to run a team. But hey, the funding problem was the root cause of the failure of the 2007 ARC and that should help to stop that situation recurring.
And if clubs, or successful bidding teams, if you will, can afford to run a team by entering into a syndicate with a non-rugby body, or by combining with another club for the NRC—good hustle.
The bidding process will not be on an even playing field: the ARU will give preference to bids from Melbourne or Perth, even if their bid does not appear to be as strong, otherwise, as a bid from elsewhere in the country.
And they will conspire to have a team from west Sydney, as they should.
Posters on this thread have deplored the advantages that Sydney University has in the Shute Shield.
I sincerely hope that they are successful in getting a bid for their club in the NRC. I am aware of the negatives; so people need not bother telling me what they are.
If the ARU do not accept a bid from Sydney University for a reason other than what is indicated in the media release today, they would be barking mad.
Love them or hate them, they provide a priceless resource for Australian rugby that has to be used.
We may be seeing the start of the process similar to that what England clubs had to undergo in 1995 when rugby turned pro in the NH. The financially stronger clubs had a big advantage and got the gigs, other things being equal; other clubs had to settle for a second division place etc, and still others stayed amateur.
There was a kind of a Darwinian rise of the financially strongest.
That will be a good thing or a bad thing in Oz, depending how you look at it, but at least it will be a different thing. Right or wrong, we have to try something different.
It won't be quite the same here as in England though, because amateur club rugby will be played until the middle of July—for a good five months—before the NRC starts.
Folks may have to switch allegiance for the NRC. It may be anathema for a Warringah Rats' fan like me to have to switch allegiance to Manly for the NRC, but I've done more surprising things in my life.
.
FiveStarStu
Bill McLean (32)
Cat_A
Arch Winning (36)
I've held off until I saw an announcement and some detail. To say I'm disappointed in the level and type of detail released would be an understatement.
I was at a lunch where Tony Shaw (QRU Pres) was speaking and he was unequivocally against the proposed comp from a QRU and a club standpoint - they would like the sponsorship money (and the coverage) - from Foxtel in this case - to go towards strengthening club rugby. He also indicated at the lunch that there was very strong resistance to the mooted structure from the NSWRU and the SS clubs too. FFS the Queensland Premier clubs have just found out that their ARU funding has been cut by $15K for next season!
Combine this with the likelihood that in order to form a joint venture with other clubs, potential 'franchises' will need to source funding to cover the costs of establishing, staffing, preparing and running the team, as well as a 'modest' salary cap. I'm not sure how much $$ they are expecting each club to make from match day receipts and bar sales, but I can guarantee that extra sponsorship is needed. The sponsorship market is already outrageously competitive for clubs and it's a major battle - how many sponsors do they think are dying to give cash to a side in a comp with one televised game per week?
And are the clubs really prepared to sacrifice some of the sponsorship $$ they need for Premier Rugby 2014 to be able to participate in a competition WITH NO PRIZE MONEY OR OTHER TANGIBLE REWARD FOR VICTORY? There is no return on investment for clubs (if, say, Sydney Uni entered a team, that might mean they would be able to attract more elite players to their club for the Shute Shield....oh, hang on....) and if ANY club has the money to pay the rumoured entry fees AND pay the salaries of players, AND pay for coaching, ground hire etc, SURELY they already have the resources to attract players with their 'good club culture'?
If we're desperate to have a third tier comp why do we need to have one with manufactured loyalties? What would be so wrong with mirroring the NZ structure where the "Blues" are supported by Auckland, BoP, Counties etc. In Australia we could run it as Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria, Western Australia etc. Expansion could then come from Country etc when they have the resources, human and otherwise, to join.
Yes there might be fewer teams initially, but the teams would be made up of non-Wallaby players, and it would still give the fringe-franchise, EPS and club players the chance to play alongside regular Super players. The QRU owns Ballymore (I'm sure the other Unions own training facilities too, but I'm not au fait with the workings) so playing and training facilities would be free. That sponsorship from Foxtel could go to the unions to help fund the costs etc. And if the Force or the Rebels don't have many players on Wallaby duty, and they gain an advantage? Surely that's a good thing to attract crowds in those areas?
I realise that my alternative means that my name would NOT forever go down in history as the greatest ARU CEO of all time, and the trophy would probably not be in my name (Pulver Plate anyone?), but the proposed idea is contingent on rugby in clubland being able to afford the professional set-ups plus additional salaries. Essentially the assumption is that clubland can tap into more money than the Force and the Rebels. You have to be shitting me - surely if there is anything we can all agree on, it's that there just isn't that much money in rugby right now.
I was at a lunch where Tony Shaw (QRU Pres) was speaking and he was unequivocally against the proposed comp from a QRU and a club standpoint - they would like the sponsorship money (and the coverage) - from Foxtel in this case - to go towards strengthening club rugby. He also indicated at the lunch that there was very strong resistance to the mooted structure from the NSWRU and the SS clubs too. FFS the Queensland Premier clubs have just found out that their ARU funding has been cut by $15K for next season!
Combine this with the likelihood that in order to form a joint venture with other clubs, potential 'franchises' will need to source funding to cover the costs of establishing, staffing, preparing and running the team, as well as a 'modest' salary cap. I'm not sure how much $$ they are expecting each club to make from match day receipts and bar sales, but I can guarantee that extra sponsorship is needed. The sponsorship market is already outrageously competitive for clubs and it's a major battle - how many sponsors do they think are dying to give cash to a side in a comp with one televised game per week?
And are the clubs really prepared to sacrifice some of the sponsorship $$ they need for Premier Rugby 2014 to be able to participate in a competition WITH NO PRIZE MONEY OR OTHER TANGIBLE REWARD FOR VICTORY? There is no return on investment for clubs (if, say, Sydney Uni entered a team, that might mean they would be able to attract more elite players to their club for the Shute Shield....oh, hang on....) and if ANY club has the money to pay the rumoured entry fees AND pay the salaries of players, AND pay for coaching, ground hire etc, SURELY they already have the resources to attract players with their 'good club culture'?
If we're desperate to have a third tier comp why do we need to have one with manufactured loyalties? What would be so wrong with mirroring the NZ structure where the "Blues" are supported by Auckland, BoP, Counties etc. In Australia we could run it as Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria, Western Australia etc. Expansion could then come from Country etc when they have the resources, human and otherwise, to join.
Yes there might be fewer teams initially, but the teams would be made up of non-Wallaby players, and it would still give the fringe-franchise, EPS and club players the chance to play alongside regular Super players. The QRU owns Ballymore (I'm sure the other Unions own training facilities too, but I'm not au fait with the workings) so playing and training facilities would be free. That sponsorship from Foxtel could go to the unions to help fund the costs etc. And if the Force or the Rebels don't have many players on Wallaby duty, and they gain an advantage? Surely that's a good thing to attract crowds in those areas?
I realise that my alternative means that my name would NOT forever go down in history as the greatest ARU CEO of all time, and the trophy would probably not be in my name (Pulver Plate anyone?), but the proposed idea is contingent on rugby in clubland being able to afford the professional set-ups plus additional salaries. Essentially the assumption is that clubland can tap into more money than the Force and the Rebels. You have to be shitting me - surely if there is anything we can all agree on, it's that there just isn't that much money in rugby right now.
JSRF10
Dick Tooth (41)
I'd like to think that membership of your local franchise should be an option to include in your Super Rugby membership. For example with a Tahs General Admission Ticket you get the first two home games free for ARC team of your choice and $10 in for each subsequent game.
- Status