Where to for Super Rugby?

[Braveheart81]

I'm confused why people think that a longer version of the NRC will be a good replacement to the NRC given how few people turn up and watch those games either in person or on TV.

The biggest problem with moving to more domestic teams is if we were no longer using the Waratahs, Reds, Brumbies etc. who have entrenched fanbases. They may be small but they are substantially larger than any NRC team or any new team.

I am not trying to suggest the status quo is going well. Just that some of the alternatives could be a lot worse.

 

[Bandar]

I'm confused why people think that a longer version of the NRC will be a good replacement to the NRC given how few people turn up and watch those games either in person or on TV.

The biggest problem with moving to more domestic teams is if we were no longer using the Waratahs, Reds, Brumbies etc. who have entrenched fanbases. They may be small but they are substantially larger than any NRC team or any new team.

I am not trying to suggest the status quo is going well. Just that some of the alternatives could be a lot worse.

If the NRC was to step up I would think 3 teams would be:

ACT Brumbies
Melbourne Rebels
Western Force

The problem goes back to the start of Super Rugby and using State representative teams as a club/franchise, you could keep the Waratahs and Reds but I think you would be better off keeping the names for actual rep games maybe on Lions tours and mid week matches during the June (soon July) test window.

 

[Omar Comin']

I think the Waratahs and Reds are entrenched enough as club/franchise teams that if we went the domestic route it'd be better to keep them as they are. Along with the Brumbies, Rebels and Force they would form the basis of a new national competition. They haven't been state rep teams for a long time now.

And just because you have a NSW (or Sydney) Waratahs doesn't mean you can't also have a separate West Sydney or Newcastle team. Same with the Reds and another Brisbane or QLD team. Nor does it stop you from having state rep teams.

 

[sunnyboys]

RE why NRC when it appears no one really follows it.

NRC largely sits outside the normal window for Australian domestic footy leagues I.e. March to Sept
It asks fans to commit to a second domestic team in the same calendar year.
It lags Super Rugby by some 15 years of history.

If NRC style comp replaced Super Rugby, I think you could assume that most if not all of the domestic fans and viewers would migrate.
It would be played at the right time of the year for the an Australian context.
It would no longer be the second comp - the late comer asking fans for just that bit too much
It wouldn’t have Super Rugby as competition
It would have all Aus based test players

 

[hoggy]

I think the Waratahs and Reds are entrenched enough as club/franchise teams that if we went the domestic route it'd be better to keep them as they are. Along with the Brumbies, Reds and Force they would form the basis of a new national competition. They haven't been state rep teams for a long time now.

And just because you have a NSW (or Sydney) Waratahs doesn't mean you can't also have a separate West Sydney or Newcastle team. Same with the Reds and another Brisbane or QLD team. Nor does it stop you from having state rep teams.

I agree with this, we do not need to replace any of the existing franchises, they remain under a domestic structure and you build from this, like a second Sydney team, one important aspect would be to try as best to attract private investment and also accepting that to begin with and for a long time the money will be substantially less.

To grow a tree at first must come the seedling

 

[sunnyboys]

I’m on the other side of the fence regarding Reds Tahs etc.

It just feels illogical to have a state team and then other teams from a region within that state.

I’d love to see those Brands utilised for event games - one offs vs each other, or vs touring test teams or invited OS provincial teams

Just a different viewpoint.

 

[Braveheart81]

If NRC style comp replaced Super Rugby, I think you could assume that most if not all of the domestic fans and viewers would migrate.
It would have all Aus based test players

I think the first one is a huge assumption. Loyalty to a team is a big thing.

The second one will be true but the big hurdle here might be that a big restructure of the game's finances could mean the local test players are a fair way down the pecking order ability wise to the current ones if it meant that a lot of our best players went overseas looking for contracts more commensurate with their earnings potential.

 

[Omar Comin']

I’m on the other side of the fence regarding Reds Tahs etc.

It just feels illogical to have a state team and then other teams from a region within that state.

Is it any different to the A League having Sydney FC, and then introducing another team within part of that city, the West Sydney Wanderers?

There's lots of examples like that in world sport.

The Waratahs fan base comes primarily from the eastern suburbs and north shore/northern beaches of Sydney. They have a bit of an elitist image, which is the perfect foil for a Western Sydney team. I think there'd be the potential for quite a good cross-town rivalry in Sydney if you kept the Waratahs as a club team.

 

[Braveheart81]

I think you would be heavily shooting yourself in the foot if you didn't utilise the two biggest brands in Australian rugby outside the Wallabies to the fullest extent you could.

 

[Omar Comin']

The second one will be true but the big hurdle here might be that a big restructure of the game's finances could mean the local test players are a fair way down the pecking order ability wise to the current ones if it meant that a lot of our best players went overseas looking for contracts more commensurate with their earnings potential.

It's also possible that the ARU could keep the regular test players / big stars, but lose the guys around the fringes of selection. They'd still be able to pay big bucks to the core Wallabies guys through central contracts, but outside of the top 15-20 players, the next 20-30 best guys would likely have their wages reduced. And those guys would still be in pretty high demand overseas.

 

[sunnyboys]

Yes expecting fans to move across is an assumption - but lets look at it this way ... the current teams aren't shooting the lights out with drawing crowds or engaging fans... in all this, there is risk involved.

and yes, the pool of test players playing in Oz might be smaller as some look to maintain current earning capacity. hence why i used the words Aus based test players. a shift away from Super Rugby to a domestic league is going to mean less income than what we get currently. and losing some top tier players will happen. that is also a risk. but currently we have those top tier players in our Super teams and people are turning off the TV.

Omar, Sydney FC doesnt have over 100 years tradition of being known as NSW like to Waratahs do.

I agree that there should definitely be teams based loosely on East v West in Sydney. Its a rivalry that city understands. although it can tend to ignore the insular peninsula.

In Bris i'd like to see a Bris City team vs a Logan/Sunnybank based team. I think it has potential to be a good rivalry.

 

[sunnyboys]

B'heart - yep i get that side of the argument - but what have the Tahs delivered in fans and TV viewers with 15 years practice? are these brands really worth that much?? is it the team brands or the comp? it might be that those brands need a new comp. it might also be that those brands have lost their cache as well.

its a tough one to get right.

but the idea of dusting off my reds jersey for a couple of special games a year is quite attractive.

 

[Brumby Runner]

I agree that there should definitely be teams based loosely on East v West in Sydney. Its a rivalry that city understands. although it can tend to ignore the insular peninsula.

In Bris i'd like to see a Bris City team vs a Logan/Sunnybank based team. I think it has potential to be a good rivalry.

Alternatively, could be North v South as the harbour provides a natural boundary. That would also achieve a more equitable division of talent, I believe.

 

[Braveheart81]

B'heart - yep i get that side of the argument - but what have the Tahs delivered in fans and TV viewers with 15 years practice? are these brands really worth that much?? is it the team brands or the comp? it might be that those brands need a new comp. it might also be that those brands have lost their cache as well.

its a tough one to get right.

but the idea of dusting off my reds jersey for a couple of special games a year is quite attractive.

Sure, but do those people suddenly become a die hard fan for a brand new team? They haven't for the NRC teams, they don't for club rugby. It's not like Waratahs crowds have dropped off and the crowds at Shute Shield games are multiple thousands higher each weekend across the comp.

Personally I'm not sure what I'd do. I'd still watch a heap of rugby on TV but would I migrate my live rugby watching to that new team or would I become a Swans or Wests Tigers member instead (the other two teams I follow). I am not nearly as passionate about those sports but I do watch their games most weeks (Swans particularly) and attend a few games each year.

This is a complex problem and in my view one of the biggest problems a domestic comp faces is that it wouldn't create interest from overseas TV markets which is a substantial part of what Super Rugby has going for it.

 

[sunnyboys]

Braveheart81 - yeah it’s hard to know how much will be lost from offshore broadcast rights.

It’s a difficult problem to solve. But the long term trajectory has been downward and cutting the Force hasn’t changed that.

We might wonder who would some new team, but we can equally start to wonder about who will be left watching the existing teams

 

[sunnyboys]

the other big unknown is what would NZ do if we walked.

i do like a trans tasman comp to replace Super Rugby - but NZ would revert to provinces and bring in their top 7 provinces vs our 4/5 teams. this would mean nz talent is more diluted and make out teams more competitive. talent equalisation is a massive issue in Super Rugby. this would help address it without NZR giving up control over players.

you could even do a two tier comp - using all NZ provinces with promotion and relegation.

this would address relative competitiveness between oz and nz teams, and timezone issues. and hopefully also maintain offshore broadcast interest.

would require big changes for NZ - shifting NPC to March etc... (and before any kiwis jump in ... no i dont expect NZR to fix oz rugby problems ... i'm just spit balling ideas!)

 

[Omar Comin']

Omar, Sydney FC doesnt have over 100 years tradition of being known as NSW like to Waratahs do.

My point is just that it doesn't necessarily matter if you have one team that's named X and another that's part of X. There's many examples of it.

And it's not like the Waratahs have focused much on Western Sydney, or regions outside of Sydney. Everyone knows where they play and where the majority of their supporter base comes from. I'm agnostic about potentially changing NSW to Sydney, but I don't think there'd be any problem with changing it. The Roosters in the NRL were called Eastern Suburbs for like 90 years before changing to the Sydney City Roosters and finally the Sydney Roosters.

 

[hoggy]

This is a complex problem and in my view one of the biggest problems a domestic comp faces is that it wouldn't create interest from overseas TV markets which is a substantial part of what Super Rugby has going for it.

I think this highlights the catch 22 situation faced by the code here, that the competition is so reliant on overseas pay TV money yet at what cost has this been to the local domestic market.

 

[sunnyboys]

My question on offshore broadcast dollars is this - how few viewers or live punters still justifies making a product for international audiences?

Are we happy with sub-10k crowds and sub 50k viewers as long as the money keeps coming from offshore?

What about 5k crowds and 29k viewers like the Tahs got this week?

When do domestic needs become greater than the offshore dollars?

 

[hoggy]

My question on offshore broadcast dollars is this - how few viewers or live punters still justifies making a product for international audiences?

Are we happy with sub-10k crowds and sub 50k viewers as long as the money keeps coming from offshore?

What about 5k crowds and 29k viewers like the Tahs got this week?

When do domestic needs become greater than the offshore dollars?

And we need to be asking exactly who is benefiting from Super rugby here, when quite clearly it is at the cost of a supporter base.