• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Broadcast options for Australian Rugby

Slayer!

Herbert Moran (7)
I think the biggest issue Rugby Union had with Foxtel, was the lopsided and abuse like relationship.

Foxtel gave the viewer absolutely nothing to watch mid-week, the pundits and commentators they put in front of us were absolutely atrocious and then Fox journos would rip into the code rather than help build it up.

I would happily pay more if the code moved to an umbrella company if the product that company puts out is worth it. But the low effort Kearns et al put in will never be worth it.
You'll note that none of the people who signed the "Captains' Letter" were employed by Nine....
Funny that.
Almost like they wanted people who would promote the game.
 

Slayer!

Herbert Moran (7)
Especially with the bye rounds, broadcasters only get 12 weeks with 6 games as it is.

Stan is a different model. They don't need to fill hours of content.

RA will definately lose revenue from this. But it's linked to how many rebel supporters don't pay for Stan, not how many games a week there are
A full home and away season with 11 teams would be 100 games (5 games per round, two byes, over 22 weeks).
That's 16 more regular season games than the current one, over a longer stretch.
 

Strewthcobber

Simon Poidevin (60)
A full home and away season with 11 teams would be 100 games (5 games per round, two byes, over 22 weeks).
That's 16 more regular season games than the current one, over a longer stretch.
I understand that. Stan (and hence RA) don't make money per game though, they make money per subscriber. They don't sell advertising like FTA or have channels to fill airtime like Foxtel.

More games means Stan's expenses go up, as they have to produce each game.

So expenses go up with more games, but I can't see how subscriber numbers do? There may be one additional month of fees for the subset of subscribers who immediately cancel after the season and don't watch internationals
 

half

Dick Tooth (41)
Came across some ratings and growth that I believed was not possible. It confirms we should never ever never think News report the facts.

Any reports written on Rugby by News should be totally ignored.
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
A full home and away season with 11 teams would be 100 games (5 games per round, two byes, over 22 weeks).
That's 16 more regular season games than the current one, over a longer stretch.

11 teams playing a double round robin is 110 games over 22 weeks.
 

JRugby2

Ted Thorn (20)
I understand that. Stan (and hence RA) don't make money per game though, they make money per subscriber. They don't sell advertising like FTA or have channels to fill airtime like Foxtel.

More games means Stan's expenses go up, as they have to produce each game.

So expenses go up with more games, but I can't see how subscriber numbers do? There may be one additional month of fees for the subset of subscribers who immediately cancel after the season and don't watch internationals
This is true to a certain extent

They would be able to charge more for sponsorship and other things associated with each broadcast but on a broader level you're right. I have no doubt though that Stan Sport and Stan more broadly will eventually turn to an ad supported model (despite their best assurances they wont)

Someone would have to do the math, but some of this would be offset by Sky producing NZ games and a drop in Australian home fixtures. So even though there would be more fixtures in a HnA season they would have less Australian home games than if we had 5 teams.
 

Tazzmania

Bob Loudon (25)
What's going to happen to Super Round? With 11 teams it does not work.
Thinking outside the box.

11 teams each play each other once, 10 games per team.

The top five at the end of that stage go into the "Championship" pool and each play each other once 4 Games, the winner is the top team at the end of that stage.

The bottom six go into the "Challenger" Pool and each play five games with the winner the top team at the end.

Each team has one bye in the first round, and the top teams who will likley have the most All Blacks and Wallabies get an additional bye. The byes to be used to rest interational players so that it does not happen during games.
 

Mr Pilfer

Alex Ross (28)
Thinking about options for how super rugby could look 2026 onwards, how about something like this.

Super Rugby AU

- 5 teams
- 8 rounds (home and away)
- Top 2 play off in grand final to decide Aus champion

Super Rugby NZ

- as above

Then once above is completed they move to a "champions league" style tournament.


Champions League

- top 3 teams from Aus
- top 3 teams from NZ
- Fiji
- Jaguares
- 8 team comp, play each team once.
- Top 4 semis


Shield comp

- bottom 2 from Aus
- bottom 2 from NZ
- Moana
- Sunwolves
- 6 team comp, play each team once
- Top 2 grand final

Might create a bit of interest and not overly onerous travel schedule.
 

liquor box

Peter Sullivan (51)
Thinking about options for how super rugby could look 2026 onwards, how about something like this.

Super Rugby AU

- 5 teams
- 8 rounds (home and away)
- Top 2 play off in grand final to decide Aus champion

Super Rugby NZ

- as above
I would then have a Superbowl between the 2 winners

Then NRC with 8 teams, each franchise owns 2 x teams with double headers each weekend for 6 weeks. A home and away season and to make it easier I would have teams from the same franchise play together, for example NSW v QLD 1 and NSW 2 v QLD 2 on the same double header.

This allows for 1 x plane for the game to try to save costs and maybe fly in, fly out to save on accommodation.

I would have the teams coached by assistant Super Rugby coaches and have the head coach overlook their development ensuring that the NRC teams play in the style that he wants for Super Rugby.
 

Slayer!

Herbert Moran (7)
By all means, let's make it as complicated and as expensive as possible.
God, what you said!
Simple answer - full home and away Super Rugby season. 11 teams.
Let's not stuff about with creating new comps. What we have isn't perfect, but it's sorta working. Tweak it, not burn it.
 

liquor box

Peter Sullivan (51)
By all means, let's make it as complicated and as expensive as possible.
Hardly complicated, 2 x double headers each week so only fees for two venues. Only one flight needed for the two teams and no overnight accommodation required to save money.

Double headers hopefully bring a slightly bigger crowd so more money to the teams.

It also becomes cheaper by using existing coaching staff, players, head office, media teams etc.

Think of each franchise being like the QLD reds having ownership of QLD country and Brisbane in the last NRC, it was a smart decision that was somewhat viable.

It is a short 8 week season, 6 rounds and 2 weeks of finals between Super AU and International series beginning, the non test players then go to clubland for the rest of the year.
 
Top