NRC Rnd 5: UC Vikings v Sydney Stars

[qwerty51]

Would the Brumbies not use the NRC as a time to get minutes into these players to develop their games? Or would people prefer them to be professional trainers? These guys are the next batch of Brumbies players and they are rightly using the NRC to continue their development. Just like the Rising, Brisbane and Perth are doing.

No one said they don't play, just play for other teams.. again it's not attacking the Vikings, it's attacking the set-up of the comp.

 

[Brumby Runner]

I agree with a points system in some ways, but as I have said before its really down to what you want the NRC to do for you.
The Rams use it as a showcase for non-signed members of their associated clubs and as such a tool to aid in signing new players.
The Vikings and Rising etc have no such need for this at the moment.
For me it should be about unearthing raw talent from club rugby and I dont see the point in playing a team of mostly super signed players that are starting or on the bench for most of the super season - but that is maybe because of my choice of team?

That looks like a particularly honest assessment if you ask me.

The idea of the NRC surely is to provide as high quality rugby as possible at the level below Super. Non-contracted players benefit much more from playing the best rather than an homogenous mix of club level players.

 

[qwerty51]

The NRC isn't just for uncontracted players, it's mainly for the guys who sit on the Super benches or are in the 35 squad but never play during the year and just train.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I think the mix is alright of super rugby And leading club players is right as most want to see that mix in any case - just need to make sure more consistent mix amongst teams to create more level playing field and competitive games

 

[Jagman]

The NRC isn't just for uncontracted players, it's mainly for the guys who sit on the Super benches or are in the 35 squad but never play during the year and just train.

Part of the problem with difference in quality of the teams isn't just the difference between fringe Super players and top level club players but the difference between fringe Wallabies and everyone else. City and Vikings each have what I would deem 3 test players in their starting 15 (or players who will be Wallabies very soon): Gill, Higginbotham, Kerevi; and Vaea, Alexander, Lealiifano (you could also include Arnold). Some of these players don't count toward the 14 super player limit. Watching Higginbotham and Vaea waltz through or smash defences, you can see the difference such a player makes.
Put Gill and Higginbotham in the Test arena which is the standard they are at and you do a lot to cut City down to size. I guess what I'm saying is its just the way it's fallen together this year. Yes some adjustments are needed but when test level fringe Wallabies end up mostly into two teams and these teems have plenty of professionals to complement them what can you do?

 

[TOCC]

The problem I see here is for some reason you think the Super Rugby sides are inherently linked to the NRC sides, that's a poor model to work off. The out of state NRC sides aren't any more entitled to the Super Rugby players any more than the NSW ones. In fact the NSW ones are more entitled to those players given they produced/developed them, getting them playing back to their roots would create more interest/tribalism too.

Minimum Super Rugby players rule. Simple.

Vikings, Rising, Spirit, City can get first pick and then they offload the others. Dargaville and Vaea were key players of the Stars and Country last year. It's just so stupid they're left to play for an already stacked team.

Nah, wrong thought process. You are trying to lower the standard of the top performing teams as a means to even out the tournament.

Completely disassociating super rugby teams is the mindset of someone from NSW whose Super Rugby team has offered little towards the NRC. Disassociating the super rugby teams lowers the standard the comp by pulling scarce coaching, S&C, logistical, marketing and management staff from the NRC systems.

The super rugby connections provide a professional structure that non-contracted players can improve their game within. It makes no sense to remove that and force amateurism or a lesser system on the NRC teams.


Cut the number of teams in NSW and get the Waratahs and NSWRU(possible ARU) more involved in the NSW based teams to improve the structure to a more professional standard and the teams will improve naturally. I'd support an adjustment to the super rugby player quota, but only a minor reduction in the maximum figure.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TOCC]

Not exactly. 8k-20k for 3 months. You couldn't be full time pro but neither is anyone in the ITM Cup.

where did you get $20k from?

ITM Cup has full time professional players(albeit only on the average national wage), the salary cap and wages of the NRC and ITM Cup are miles apart.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Nah, wrong thought process. You are trying to lower the standard of the top performing teams as a means to even out the tournament.

Completely disassociating super rugby teams is the mindset of someone from NSW whose Super Rugby team has offered little towards the NRC. Disassociating the super rugby teams lowers the standard the comp by pulling scarce coaching, S&C, logistical, marketing and management staff from the NRC systems.

The super rugby connections provide a professional structure that non-contracted players can improve their game within. It makes no sense to remove that and force amateurism or a lesser system on the NRC teams.


Cut the number of teams in NSW and get the Waratahs and NSWRU(possible ARU) more involved in the NSW based teams to improve the structure to a more professional standard and the teams will improve naturally. I'd support an adjustment to the super rugby player quota, but only a minor reduction in the maximum figure.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Have to admit you have summed it up well TOCC as super rugby side involvement for non NSW sides very good whilst NSW (Tahs) clearly been very poor. Very good and valid point that should not be penalising the stronger teams who have got it right to weaken them because of the ineptitude of NSW rugby (and hence poor performances of Sydney Teams)

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Have to admit you have summed it up well TOCC as super rugby side involvement for non NSW sides very good whilst NSW (Tahs) clearly been very poor. Very good and valid point that should not be penalising the stronger teams who have got it right to weaken them because of the ineptitude of NSW rugby (and hence poor performances of Sydney Teams)

Or to put more simply what the issue really highlights is problem with NRC is with NSW teams and lack of effective strategy / collaboration / involvement of TAHS with sides etc

 

[TOCC]

I think we tend to get wrapped up in the player resources and focus on that as the only factor in the structure of the teams, but equally as important is the coaching, S&C, medial and logistical staff which provide the added edge in professionalism.

All this talk of a limited pool of players needs to be also reflected in the discussion about the limited pool of resources when it comes to all the backroom staff.

Reduce the number of super rugby players in the teams by 3 or 4, get rid of the Wallaby marquee concept(i think thats a waste of time) and improve the 'HPU' support to the NSW based teams and i think the NRC will become more even. I think the NSW teams will naturally improve their competitiveness in coming years as the teams mature.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

I think we tend to get wrapped up in the player resources and focus on that as the only factor in the structure of the teams, but equally as important is the coaching, S&C, medial and logistical staff which provide the added edge in professionalism.

All this talk of a limited pool of players needs to be also reflected in the discussion about the limited pool of resources when it comes to all the backroom staff.

Reduce the number of super rugby players in the teams by 3 or 4, get rid of the Wallaby marquee concept(i think thats a waste of time) and improve the 'HPU' support to the NSW based teams and i think the NRC will become more even. I think the NSW teams will naturally improve their competitiveness in coming years as the teams mature.

Probably disagree here TOCC.

I think the Wallaby marquee concept is more about positive brand association - in fact only thing is about....I don't think having the wallaby brand association is a bad thing at all. And on very odd occaision a wallaby player gets drop and plays the odd NRC game (like Will Skelton last year for the stars) adds profile to NRC. All about branding - and bigger brands (and draw cards) are Wallaby and Super rugby brands to attract wider appeal.

Benefits for clubs is they get wider exposure of leading club players for audiences who would not other wise go to club rugby game - and hence get greater awareness of club rugby and potential to increase interest in club rugby via NRC of audiences who would not otherwise have gone near a club rugby game.

Win win....for all...I sometimes wonder if some of the clubs have really missed the opportunity here. E.g Easts and Randwick and potential to grow interest/ supporters outside of the geographic confines of their locations - e.g. if were partnering with say Stars they have potential to market interest in their clubs via their leading players playing for Stars for games played in inner west as well as in the East.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

Probably disagree here TOCC.

I think the Wallaby marquee concept is more about positive brand association - in fact only thing is about..I don't think having the wallaby brand association is a bad thing at all. And on very odd occaision a wallaby player gets drop and plays the odd NRC game (like Will Skelton last year for the stars) adds profile to NRC. All about branding - and bigger brands (and draw cards) are Wallaby and Super rugby brands to attract wider appeal.

Benefits for clubs is they get wider exposure of leading club players for audiences who would not other wise go to club rugby game - and hence get greater awareness of club rugby and potential to increase interest in club rugby via NRC of audiences who would not otherwise have gone near a club rugby game.

Win win..for all.I sometimes wonder if some of the clubs have really missed the opportunity here. E.g Easts and Randwick and potential to grow interest/ supporters outside of the geographic confines of their locations - e.g. if were partnering with say Stars they have potential to market interest in their clubs via their leading players playing for Stars for games played in inner west as well as in the East.

But to note TOCC only disagree with your point on Wallaby marquee concept as don't believe that should be changed.

All other points you made 100% agree on...big benefit of NRC is geting leading players at next level below exposed to better coaching/mix with professionals which all helps develop the next generation of super rugby and wallaby players - but also most importantly helping bring this experience back to their clubs.......helps also lift the standard of club rugby so all win win in my books and NRC has probably been one of the most positive initiatives to advance Australian rugby for my mind since rugby turn professional....and alongside introducing Rebels and Force into super rugby...

 

[Caputo]

Two points to make are that this year is an aberration due to non availability of Wallabies at World Cup and some fringe players on standby in Europe. Usually more Wallabies preparing for NH End of Year tour.

JID, Pindan and Dewar Shield players selected earlier and do pre NRC training squads with S&C at Super Clubs. Some are already training with Super teams as part of elite age group.

 

[Caputo]

I am not sure on the definition a Super Rugby Playr is it contracted in 2015 and not include 2016 players (Anae, Toua etc). Does EPS count and the transitional contract or club players called up for Super Rugby bench.