• 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.

Where to for Super Rugby?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Brumby Runner

Jason Little (69)
How would Oz find the players to support 8 competitive teams? We don’t have enough for 4 teams. This would weaken the whole competition if they would further spread and compromise the overall product. Making it even less appealing to PE and/or broadcasters.

The point is that, with some reallocation of playing/coaching resources, they would be competitive with each other. It is not necessary for them to be competitive with NZ sides or any others whom they are not playing. So long as we can keep most of the best (test) players involved, the Wallabies will still be competitive on the world scene.
 

WorkingClassRugger

Michael Lynagh (62)
The point is that, with some reallocation of playing/coaching resources, they would be competitive with each other. It is not necessary for them to be competitive with NZ sides or any others whom they are not playing. So long as we can keep most of the best (test) players involved, the Wallabies will still be competitive on the world scene.


And if NZ went to an 8 team domestic structure they're teams won't be as concentrated as well. In terms of our teams we could simply take our 5 plus the Drua/Lautui and then sort out the other two. Hell, we could keep the Country's. But base them in regional areas.
 

rugboy

Jim Clark (26)
The point is that, with some reallocation of playing/coaching resources, they would be competitive with each other. It is not necessary for them to be competitive with NZ sides or any others whom they are not playing. So long as we can keep most of the best (test) players involved, the Wallabies will still be competitive on the world scene.


Although the suggestion was for the winners to play NZ and Japan ultimately in a champion play off, with a severely weakened product we would be destroyed by NZ teams. This would further reduce the spectacle and also the value to prospective PE and Broadcasters.

There are a number of layered issues I see with a solely domestic product.

Our current TV deal of $57m a year was pooled with SA and NZ as part of the SANZAAR agreement. Our TV deal was the least of the three which meant the actual money RA received from TV revenue was higher than $57m a year. Despite this, there was barely the money to fund 4 franchises in Australia as well as support the Wallabies, 7s etc with RA well reported debt levels needing significant bailout from WR (World Rugby) to stay solvent.

With a reduced TV deal and/or PE investment of which we are at the mercy to take whatever is offered with little alternative, how can we honestly think we can go from barely running 4 franchises to supporting 8? PE firms are there to make money they wont throw good money after bad to make a weak product weaker by diluting the product across more teams. Secondly, with the proposed 8 team structure are we thinking that it will operate as a beefed up version of the current 4 team format ie. same salary cap etc? Again I cant see a PE group willing to double the current outlay, or close to it, when the tv deal wont support a return. Should the Salary cap then drop across the domestic competition then most of the best (test) players you refer to will follow the lead of the QLD 3 and head abroad to maximise their earning in their short career window. Which further weakens the product and value.

No doubt a domestic product could appeal to fans, although how and where these teams are formed could be an issue as with no history and limited buy in we are essentially making the NRC our second tier rather than third which could further alienate rusted on fans of the current teams. I doubt there would be little commercial value in that.

Im also worried by the truth of your statement "It is not necessary for them to be competitive with NZ sides or any others whom they are not playing" NZ sustained success as international level has been based primarily around the fact their their domestic teams are there to best prepare their players for national duties. I also cant see how, even in the event a PE throws ridiculous money to run an 8 team comp which can afford to pay our top players their current salaries to keep them here, that playing in a weakened comp with many players lower than the current super quality how that will help prepare the Wallabies for a larger step up to test rugby. We could see our 7th ranked Wallabies a highlight.

The catch 22 of less funds ie. salary cap, more teams with weakened competition and an exodus of test players is that it would no doubt lead to further calls to scrap or reduce the Giteau Law which in turn would allow more top tier or upcoming talent to head offshore to stronger leagues, further weakening the domestic product. The end result could see the domestic comp much like the A-League soccer, a quick stop for developing players or one to completely by pass on their journey to the top of overseas markets and our national team is almost entirely selected from overseas players who rarely set foot on home soil.
 

WorkingClassRugger

Michael Lynagh (62)
Although the suggestion was for the winners to play NZ and Japan ultimately in a champion play off, with a severely weakened product we would be destroyed by NZ teams. This would further reduce the spectacle and also the value to prospective PE and Broadcasters.

There are a number of layered issues I see with a solely domestic product.

Our current TV deal of $57m a year was pooled with SA and NZ as part of the SANZAAR agreement. Our TV deal was the least of the three which meant the actual money RA received from TV revenue was higher than $57m a year. Despite this, there was barely the money to fund 4 franchises in Australia as well as support the Wallabies, 7s etc with RA well reported debt levels needing significant bailout from WR (World Rugby) to stay solvent.

With a reduced TV deal and/or PE investment of which we are at the mercy to take whatever is offered with little alternative, how can we honestly think we can go from barely running 4 franchises to supporting 8? PE firms are there to make money they wont throw good money after bad to make a weak product weaker by diluting the product across more teams. Secondly, with the proposed 8 team structure are we thinking that it will operate as a beefed up version of the current 4 team format ie. same salary cap etc? Again I cant see a PE group willing to double the current outlay, or close to it, when the tv deal wont support a return. Should the Salary cap then drop across the domestic competition then most of the best (test) players you refer to will follow the lead of the QLD 3 and head abroad to maximise their earning in their short career window. Which further weakens the product and value.

No doubt a domestic product could appeal to fans, although how and where these teams are formed could be an issue as with no history and limited buy in we are essentially making the NRC our second tier rather than third which could further alienate rusted on fans of the current teams. I doubt there would be little commercial value in that.

Im also worried by the truth of your statement "It is not necessary for them to be competitive with NZ sides or any others whom they are not playing" NZ sustained success as international level has been based primarily around the fact their their domestic teams are there to best prepare their players for national duties. I also cant see how, even in the event a PE throws ridiculous money to run an 8 team comp which can afford to pay our top players their current salaries to keep them here, that playing in a weakened comp with many players lower than the current super quality how that will help prepare the Wallabies for a larger step up to test rugby. We could see our 7th ranked Wallabies a highlight.

The catch 22 of less funds ie. salary cap, more teams with weakened competition and an exodus of test players is that it would no doubt lead to further calls to scrap or reduce the Giteau Law which in turn would allow more top tier or upcoming talent to head offshore to stronger leagues, further weakening the domestic product. The end result could see the domestic comp much like the A-League soccer, a quick stop for developing players or one to completely by pass on their journey to the top of overseas markets and our national team is almost entirely selected from overseas players who rarely set foot on home soil.

There are multiple issues to be investigated and determined. How much would a TV deal be worth? What would the extent of any PE investment likely be? What will the landscape in terms of the global game look like with real discussions going on regarding establishment of a unified calendar and the Nations Championship.

While this kind of would be the NRC elevated it would be structured in a much different way. First of all it would be professional featuring our current professional franchises alongside Fiji and ideally two other teams. In terms of TV deal this would have at the very least the same ability to draw in viewers as Super Rugby in terms of minimum average. I'd argue more so as our highest rating Super Rugby games over the past several years have consistently been our derbies. And there are two threads on this very site that have been tracking Super Rugby ratings that support that.

If PE investment does materialise that would likely help secure a stable salary cap (especially if it is in fact in the hundreds of millions as the article suggested) that would help keep more talent in Australia. It would also likely require significant restructuring of how the game is administered at the professional level which will help.

Then there is the opportunity presented by the Nations Championship structure. Remember the original proposal was for a 12 year £6.3b deal. If this could be resurrected and a deal somewhat close to that achieved our ability to pull this off become a whole lot easier.

I understand that everything above it hypothetical but so much is up in the air at the moment regarding the game in general. For what it's worth I don't think we'll see a domestic structure in 2021. Likely some kind of TT structure with Super Rugby AT and Super Rugby AU playing much the same schedules as present but with crossover games. With 2022 being the most likely point in which this could occur.
 

wamberal

Phil Kearns (64)
We simply have to have a Trans-Tasman comp. We also need a National Club competition, my suggestion on the RA thread is for a knock-out Cup along the lines of the FA Cup.


The Trans-Tasman Cup would give us a product for evening viewing, the Knock-out Cup would be played on Saturday arvos, much friendlier for the grassroots, and hopefully it would rate okay on FTA.
 

WorkingClassRugger

Michael Lynagh (62)
We simply have to have a Trans-Tasman comp. We also need a National Club competition, my suggestion on the RA thread is for a knock-out Cup along the lines of the FA Cup.


The Trans-Tasman Cup would give us a product for evening viewing, the Knock-out Cup would be played on Saturday arvos, much friendlier for the grassroots, and hopefully it would rate okay on FTA.


I'd be happy with a TT competition. But all options need to be looked at particularly if PE is a serious option. I'd be happy for a post-season knock-out Cup competition of around 16 club teams. Or something akin to 7s with progressive stages with teams falling into categories as they win/lose.

So 16 teams qualify. First round winners go forth in the Cup. Losers fall into the Bowl. Second round winners in the Cup move onto the Cup semi's and losers into the Plate. Similar for the Bowl and Shield. Third round semi's with a Cup, Plate,Bowl and Shield final all played at a central venue all televised on Sunday while the 3/4,7/8,11/12 and 15/16 games are also played at the same venue but on Saturday.

This way each participating team plays 4 games over 4 weeks. With 32 games in total.
 

WorkingClassRugger

Michael Lynagh (62)
Private equity would make our franchises more competitive, which I reckon would make the Trans-Tasman even more attractive. I just cannot see us building a national competition from scratch..


It likely wouldn't be from scratch. It would very likely be based around the same basic concept as Super Rugby AO and Super Rugby AU.
 

KOB1987

John Eales (66)
A follow up PE question.
How do the investors make money?
They own or invest in the competition so they sell the broadcast rights, or broadcast it themselves so from subscribers in that instance. There would be other revenue such as sponsors, etc. They have to fund the competition, which involves paying the participating clubs, but the clubs would be responsible for paying their own players. Or PE can invest in the actual clubs. Viscous circle theory.
 

Quick Hands

David Wilson (68)
A follow up PE question.
How do the investors make money?

I'm sure that there are people that know more about the world of high finance than I do, but I assume either the club/franchise in which they invest turns a profit and/or the competition that they are in turns a profit.

The Brisbane Broncos for example have an annual revenue of around $40 million from merchandise, memberships, sponsorships etc and seems to run at a significant surplus.
 

Raytah

Sydney Middleton (9)
Is anyone able to share the content/gist of the latest Wayne Smith article in the Aus. Sounds from the title that it is about possiblity of Brumbies/Rebels merger as part of new TT comp.
 

The Honey Badger

Jim Lenehan (48)
A domestic comp would almost certainly include the Brumbies, Rebels, Force, Waratahs and Reds (the latter two potentially rebranded as Sydney and Brisbane) plus at least 3 others. Most likely a 2nd Brisbane or QLD team, Western Sydney and 1 or more of North Sydney, Newcastle and Fiji. Add a state of origin series and/or a short champions league with NZ teams and I think this could work.

you would have to think North Sydney Leagues club would be open to some sort of venture with Rugby.

They want back a spot in the NRL and seem to be blocked forever. Rob & Hamish go and pay them a visit
 

The Honey Badger

Jim Lenehan (48)
How would Oz find the players to support 8 competitive teams? We don’t have enough for 4 teams. This would weaken the whole competition if they would further spread and compromise the overall product. Making it even less appealing to PE and/or broadcasters.

There are so many players wanting a pro contract. nearly every player at Uni to start with, virtually every player playing 1st grade SS.

Numbers of players are not the problem. The standard would drop a bit from Super Rugby if we open up more domestic teams, but so what.

It would still be a very high standard and we would have our own national comp with our best players (Wallabies) playing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top