Bismark Du Plesis bags Oz Conference

[The_Brown_Hornet]

But that can't possibly be known when the draw is done at the beginning of the season. Who here thought the Highlanders were going to be any good before the season started? Or that the Cheetahs would claim some high level scalps?

Swings and roundabouts mate.

 

[rustycruiser]

I just don't like that Team one from SA plays the two best teams from NZ/AUS and team two plays the two worst teams from NZ/AUS.

What is fair about that?

The way they do it in the NFL is the better your results one year, the harder you schedule the next and vice versa. For example, using the SA conference : if Sanzar has their shit together, next year the Lions (5th SA team) should miss the Reds (1st OZ team) and the Blues (1st NZ team) next year, while the Stormers (1st SA team) misses the Canes (5th NZ team) and the Rebels (5th OZ team)

 

[Richo]

That is a very good thought.

Although it would be better if they just played every team.

 

[Godfrey]

The way they do it in the NFL is the better your results one year, the harder you schedule the next and vice versa. For example, using the SA conference : if Sanzar has their shit together, next year the Lions (5th SA team) should miss the Reds (1st OZ team) and the Blues (1st NZ team) next year, while the Stormers (1st SA team) misses the Canes (5th NZ team) and the Rebels (5th OZ team)

I think it should be completely random. I don't like the idea of rewarding failure and punishing success. Everyone should get the same chance to miss playing the Reds.

 

[Richo]

Performance-based seedings for the next schedule push the competition towards parity, which can only be a good thing. Perennial contenders and perennial also-rans don't help develop the game or stimulate interest. Tighter games and a tighter ladder means more interest from fans across the board, IMO.

 

[rustycruiser]

Performance-based seedings for the next schedule push the competition towards parity, which can only be a good thing. Perennial contenders and perennial also-rans don't help develop the game or stimulate interest. Tighter games and a tighter ladder means more interest from fans across the board, IMO.

Sticking with the NFL, even with performance based scheduling, the cream still rises to the top. The top of the table teams are still there. Where it gets a little more interesting is the middle of the table teams. And the occasional bolter who goes from zero to hero, helped partially by the schedule. Realistically, the Lions would still be shit this year whether they missed the Reds/Blues, or Rebels/Canes. And likewise the Reds still good no matter their bye.

 

[MajorlyRagerly]

In isolation, his points make sense. 3 of the 4 bottom teams are Aussie. But there is obviously more to it than that.

To be honest though, I'm shocked that people expect a front rower to be able to grasp any more than the most basic of concepts.

Jamie Joseph fired a couple of pot shots & a few media grumbles in NZ have pointed out that the Crusaders don't play the lions or rebels & the reds get to play the rebels twice blah blah. But who cares. The best team will still win the comp & if you don't try new things, you never ever improve on things. NZ has dwindling crowds, Aus has stiff competition from other codes & SA is the main revenue source. You can't expect a tri tourney between these 3 nations to remain stagnant.

To be honest, I'm actually surprised at the lack of flak the Aussie teams have got. Everybody said not enough depth for 5 teams in Aus, lots of people said would be a joke etc etc. The fact that you've only faced a couple of pot shots / whinges at this point in the comp, is pretty close to a moral victory if you ask me.

 

[whatty]

But that can't possibly be known when the draw is done at the beginning of the season. Who here thought the Highlanders were going to be any good before the season started? Or that the Cheetahs would claim some high level scalps?

Swings and roundabouts mate.

I disagree I can be fairly sure what teams I would rather play 12 months out.

 

[Joe Mac]

I am actually enjoying this competition's format more, the more I read about the Saffa's and Kiwi's whinging.

I thinks its about time JON pitches SANZAR for a sixth Australian franchise.

 

[PaarlBok]

This is the first year in the history of Super Rugby (Pro only) that the Cheetahs have been Ok. The Lions are still woefull. So Du Plesis should IMO concentrate on his own backyard

Do you still think so after the weekend, Mate?

Maybe he is a bit harsh with his Aussie statement but he sure as hell is right about the unfairness of not every team playing the same opponents. Its a kak competition this. It need some serious timberwork. Myself blame Marinos for this, he sold our rugby agreeing for this competition, all done and dusted now.

 

[kiap]

Do you still think so after the weekend, Mate?

Maybe he is a bit harsh with his Aussie statement but he sure as hell is right about the unfairness of not every team playing the same opponents. Its a kak competition this. It need some serious timberwork. Myself blame Marinos for this, he sold our rugby agreeing for this competition, all done and dusted now.

Paarl, the Lions played well this week. Good result, and away from home too.

For me, the extra two rounds to ensure that all the teams meet is simply what should be. Everyone would feel better. It didn't happen but it should be made to happen.

Having said that, let me say this (borrowing some words from one of our knowledgeable posters above): Despite the unfairness of missing two teams in the draw, the cream will still rise to the top. I might post more on this later if I have time, but everyone should remember that there has always been unfairness in the draw, from S6 to S14 and onwards. There has never been home-and-away. If you have to travel away to play most of the strong teams, well that's just tough luck. Despite this, the cream still rises.

Home-and-away is not the answer either, it's never really been viable. For one thing, the TV deals are locked in now. And even if you cut, say, four teams (a legal nightmare) and get back to a S12 there'd still be a minimum of 24 weeks needed with finals. It's just too many. A conference system, in some format, is the answer. The Americans have been running conferences successfully in pro sports for forty-plus years now and it's the right way to go.

.

 

[TheNextBigThing]

The issue of not playing every team is not just one of fairness. Yes it exposes the schedule to criticism, but it also the comp loses something less tangible. I feel shortchanged that we don't get a crack at the Stormers or the Canes regardless of what the result may have been.

 

[kiap]

The issue of not playing every team is not just one of fairness. Yes it exposes the schedule to criticism, but it also the comp loses something less tangible. I feel shortchanged that we don't get a crack at the Stormers or the Canes regardless of what the result may have been.

Fine, lets put those two rounds back. Done.

Next!

 

[PaarlBok]

Home and away in the three conferenses may work. Top 2 or 3 qualify for a business end.

 

[kiap]

Home and away in the three conferenses may work. Top 2 or 3 qualify for a business end.

Obviously we are pissing in the wind a bit here, mate. But it's only an internet forum, so by all means go for it!

How will this proposal differ from what's in place now, other than a Top 2 instead of a Top 6?

What are the advantages and disadvantages? Home and away exists within the conferences now, although not for the overseas match-ups, of course...

 

[AngrySeahorse]

Yep, try as I might, I just can't get pissed on coffee.

You can if its an Irish coffee...