NRC 2018

[kiap]

What can't be forgotten about World Rugby is that they don't tend to pour money into one competition continuously.

Here's a scenario:

​

After a few years in NRC, and Fiji and Samoa flogging amateur Aussie teams in front of literally 150 spectators in places like Geelong and Tamworth, World Rugby decide to approach NZ Rugby to see if they're interested in expanding their NPC top division, funded with some lolly from Dublin HQ. The kiwis decide to give it a go, and from 2024, the NRC is back to being an actual aussie third tier comp.​

​

Don't think it could happen? Remember that NZ vetoed IRB money being used for an ARU + PI third tier comp in the past.

But there's no need to look too far ahead. The game needs to get past 2020 first.

 

[Rebels3]

I'd keep the two country's if we went this way. Which I'm not against at all. Could still do as you suggest as well in terms of teams composition. Looking at this you could almost suggest you're thinking of a structure that could essentially form a reasonable break away structure from Super Rugby.

I just like the idea of the people in Tamworth thinking the Tahs are coming to town instead of NSW Country, just builds more excitement and makes them think the Tahs are truly a state representative team.

^ That's not the worst idea in the world.

Bigger 'brands' to the forefront. Rugby is not a big enough sport in this country to scatter its marketing to the winds.

I wouldn't make it mandatory for all Reds/Tahs games to be non-metro. Any team still needs their main home ground IMO to build their regular supporters following for the comp.

One (or two max) games played regionally by each team would be sufficient in an expanded comp with 7+3 teams - but I would include this for all oz teams.

Even the Shute/QPR teams (as well as the other states) can do their one out of town game. That'd be in the range of 7-9 aussie regional matches in a single round-robin.

… Package up ticket deals from main organisation, and by alternating H/A games you can have an NRC match in Syd/Bris just about every week of the comp.

Using the Tahs as an example again and considering this could be a 4/5 home game season they could have the following

1 x Newcastle, 1 x Wollongong, 1 x Tamworth, 1 x Western Sydney and 1 x any other regional town

The Reds could be the same

1 x Gold Coast, 1 x Cairns, 1 x Toowomba, 1 x Townsville and 1 x Sunshine Coast

The derby between the QLD prems team could and would pack the hill at a place like Ballymoore with a stick it to the Reds amateur ethos fueling the fan engagement. Same with a Tahs team vs the best of the SS, played somewhere like Brookvale Oval.

From here the Force, Rebels, Brums can also take a game or two to other areas.

 

[kiap]

I just like the idea of the people in Tamworth thinking the Tahs are coming to town instead of NSW Country, just builds more excitement and makes them think the Tahs are truly a state representative team.

Sure.

Although other than the team names, it's pretty much what the NRC is now.

That team (Eagles or, now, Tahs) have players travelling away for (say) 7-8 weeks out of 9.

That's a big, big weakness in the NRC format for that team.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I just like the idea of the people in Tamworth thinking the Tahs are coming to town instead of NSW Country, just builds more excitement and makes them think the Tahs are truly a state representative team.




Using the Tahs as an example again and considering this could be a 4/5 home game season they could have the following

1 x Newcastle, 1 x Wollongong, 1 x Tamworth, 1 x Western Sydney and 1 x any other regional town

The Reds could be the same

1 x Gold Coast, 1 x Cairns, 1 x Toowomba, 1 x Townsville and 1 x Sunshine Coast

The derby between the QLD prems team could and would pack the hill at a place like Ballymoore with a stick it to the Reds amateur ethos fueling the fan engagement. Same with a Tahs team vs the best of the SS, played somewhere like Brookvale Oval.

From here the Force, Rebels, Brums can also take a game or two to other areas.

Come to think of it having the SS running another Sydney team would be fine by me. Playing out of one of the northern clubs.

 

[Bandar]

I am disappointed by the non-event of the Western Sydney team in WSR

For me the NRC next year could be
RA Supported
Brumbies
Rebels
Reds
Waratahs

WSR Supported
Force
Western Sydney

WR (World Rugby) Supported
Drua
Samoa/Tonga

Post 2020 we have the making of something we can sell to TV viewers with RA only having to cover the costs of half of the comp, with the potential to expand with another QLD team, Adelaide and either of Samoa or Tonga.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I am disappointed by the non-event of the Western Sydney team in WSR

For me the NRC next year could be
RA Supported
Brumbies
Rebels
Reds
Waratahs

WSR Supported
Force
Western Sydney

WR (World Rugby) Supported
Drua
Samoa/Tonga

Post 2020 we have the making of something we can sell to TV viewers with RA only having to cover the costs of half of the comp, with the potential to expand with another QLD team, Adelaide and either of Samoa or Tonga.

It's disappointing. A bit of a missed opportunity to present potentially the first fully professional NRC season.

 

[Brumby Runner]

Rebel 3, I am not necessarily against your proposal and it might just be a good model to replace Super Rugby if that disappears after 2020. But I am intrigued by how the various Aussie teams would differ from the existing NRC sides, except maybe for the Qld team. As Kiap says above, it looks to me that the Brumbies, Rebels and Force would be the same as the Vikings, Rising and Western Force now, while I'd say the improvement in talent in one NSW side would also be minimal. I can see that the Reds would be a stronger team by amalgamating the City and Country teams, but really, would there be any significant strengthening of the other sides?

In future years if the NRC (or its replacement) can be scheduled at times outside the international window, then there would be greater or lesser improvement just through the availability of Wallabies, but will that happen?

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Rebel 3, I am not necessarily against your proposal and it might just be a good model to replace Super Rugby if that disappears after 2020. But I am intrigued by how the various Aussie teams would differ from the existing NRC sides, except maybe for the Qld team. As Kiap says above, it looks to me that the Brumbies, Rebels and Force would be the same as the Vikings, Rising and Western Force now, while I'd say the improvement in talent in one NSW side would also be minimal. I can see that the Reds would be a stronger team by amalgamating the City and Country teams, but really, would there be any significant strengthening of the other sides?

In future years if the NRC (or its replacement) can be scheduled at times outside the international window, then there would be greater or lesser improvement just through the availability of Wallabies, but will that happen?

So combining City and Country in QLD to form the Reds would make them stronger but doing the same in NSW to form the Tahs wouldn't? Really? Pretty sure the Tahs won the Aus conference this year and the Reds came fourth. Not sure how that would work.

 

[Brumby Runner]

WCR, I am saying that there are so many Tahs in the Wallabies squad, that there were very few to share across the two NRC sides this year. Put them together and there won't be a huge difference in the talent available to the amalgamated side. But in Qld, there were far fewer Reds in the Wallabies squad, so an amalgamation there would quite significantly strengthen the one team. Just imagine the City forward pack with the Country backline, and throw Cooper in there too. I don't think too many people would suggest the other NRC sides would offer them a lot of trouble, but probably especially not the amalgamated Tahs side.

It would be a different proposition if all the Wallabies were available for selection.

 

[Rebels3]

Rebel 3, I am not necessarily against your proposal and it might just be a good model to replace Super Rugby if that disappears after 2020. But I am intrigued by how the various Aussie teams would differ from the existing NRC sides, except maybe for the Qld team. As Kiap says above, it looks to me that the Brumbies, Rebels and Force would be the same as the Vikings, Rising and Western Force now, while I'd say the improvement in talent in one NSW side would also be minimal. I can see that the Reds would be a stronger team by amalgamating the City and Country teams, but really, would there be any significant strengthening of the other sides?

In future years if the NRC (or its replacement) can be scheduled at times outside the international window, then there would be greater or lesser improvement just through the availability of Wallabies, but will that happen?

I think it'd be based around encouraging clubs to play their best possible sides during this window, particularly as their 'name' would be associated with it.

The associated success with being a true national champion would hopefully bring some much needed success to certain clubs as well as having a product that fans would be more invested in as they would see the Rebels/Force/Reds brands etc associated. Prime example of this is my housemate purchased a Rebels ticket this year with me, was fairly invested in watching games, as soon as the nrc started lost invested interest, yet is looking to buy another season ticket next season. Hopefully more people to grounds, more sponsors on board and a greater product for tv stations to show.

The Wallabies missing from the squads would open many an opportunity for young players and the two representative amateur sides would be a brilliant window for those players to push for professional contracts. It would also give the Shute Shield and QLD Prems comps something they truly have control of and hopefully a better link to the professional game than the current one. It could be seen as their side, without the dirty Reds or Tahs hands all over them, as perception would have it.

Obviously with the Wallabies players gone there would be less prestige than Super Rugby etc. but there would be more on the line than the current competition. Potentially this could generate more money so we can pay our players a few extra dollars, create a real representative pathway for club amateur club competitions and increase the standard of play to best prepare players for the highest level, at worst it'd create greater combinations heading into the next season.

 

[Brumby Runner]

I appreciate what you are saying, but I ask again in what tangible way would the Rebels, Force, Brumbies and Waratahs be strengthened from the sides currently being put out by the Rising, Force, Vikings and 2 x NSW sides? With essentially the same teams involved (other than Qld) why would any extra fans take an interest than they do now?

And assuming the Super competition continues (which is a big assumption atm as the World League looks like it might be the end of Super if it gets up) the national champion is already established by the team finishing on top of the Aussie conference.

The only real changes I can see in your proposal are the introduction of a couple of amateur sides who would just become the easybeats, and the strengthening of the amalgamated Qld side. The way I see it, such a competition would only survive in the absence of the present Super Rugby competition, and it might be the right way to go in that eventuality, although I can't ever see teams made up of only club players ever adding anything to the equation.

 

[Rebels3]

There was numerous super rugby regulars that were given the NRC off, Sam Carter and Lachie McCaffrey were two prime examples of this. Players like Matt Philip played 2 games in this years NRC, each side had around a minimum of 5-6 amateurs in every side. The brands itself automatically leads to greater legitimacy with sponsors, tv audiences and fans alike, this could lead to tangible dollars (maybe not a heap) but hopefully something that would mean we could pay our players an extra 10/20k a season to stay on shore instead of heading to the NPC or Japan/Europe on short term deals. It'd also mean the squads wouldn't have 1-2 week preseason lead ups. This will all lead to a greater product. The two amateur sides will provide the QPR and SS their own operation, something they can control themselves in the professional game which should help bridge the divide. It would also put an emphasis on the best of the best club footballers getting a chance at the next level, instead of the current situation where quality players are missing out due to politics, an abundance of professional players in the position already (despite they might not be better than you) or colts/young prospects getting the jerseys despite clearly not been a better player. It just in my eyes seems a more cohesive shop window for aspiring club players to put their best foot forward. Plus it would create buy in from the club competitions as they would feel they have a place at the table.

And where does this world league will mean there is no super rugby, i have read just about every article on it and not one creates this assumption. It's just the same amount of international games as currently played but with an added incentive

 

[Brumby Runner]

I can see you are very committed to your proposal R3 and I applaud you for that. As I said above, it just might be the type of competition that will replace the present Super comp if it dies with the introduction of the World League.

But just looking at the examples quoted, Sam Carter could well have lined up for the Vikings this year but probably at the expense of Darcy Swain who has shown great form and probably established himself as the most prominent of the emerging locks in the country. If not Swain, then Enever who is himself a Wallaby. Similarly, McCaffery could have and probably would have started in place of Leber or Edwards, but what the Vikings are lacking in the backrow is a No 7 fetcher. McC would handle that job better than the alternatives but is still not an out and out No 7 that is required. In the end, those changes wouldn't have made a significant difference to the Vikings outcome in the NRC.

Philip is an excellent player and would have enhanced the performance of the Rising's forwards pack, but why did he miss those games. Was it injury? Injuries will happen in all teams every year, so it is hard to make an argument that the presence of one better player would improve the performance of a team over the duration of the NRC comp.

However, I really don't have a problem with the quality of teams like the Rising or the Vikings. It is the NSW sides that I question. Even if amalgamated into one, I cannot see in the present year or in the next few to come, that there will be a huge improvement in overall quality while-ever so many of the Tahs players are missing through national duties. That might change in future, especially with a different coaching panel at the Wallabies, but if it does it will probably be at the expense of one or two of the other teams.

I am still skeptical about the makeup of the teams in your proposed competition being in any marked way different from the present day NRC teams.