Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
Mitre 10 Cup
Southland consider leaving air nz cup
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="scuubasteve" data-source="post: 156007"><p>I think the unions do help out their catchment areas, but only as a consequence of helping themselves first. Their primary aim is certainly not to help out their little brothers.</p><p></p><p>I think Auckland does its bit, like loaning player such as Justin Collins and Anthony Koonwaiyou to Northland, and the Hooker Tom McCartney to Harbour. But then when Derren Witcome gets injured they took McCartney straight back.</p><p></p><p>The Big 5 only help out because it helps them. They loan players to get them game time. Then when they become good they take them back. Or instead they just buy the ready made quality player for big money after a small union has persisted with training them up (Corey Flynn, Kevin Senio, Nick Evans, Craig Newby etc)</p><p></p><p>Players like Chris Jack, Rico Gear, Ali Williams and Brad Thorne all go to Tasman without the intention of playing rugby for Tasman. Its not fair to blame Canterbury, or the players for this dodgy system, because everyone will push the rules if you let them.</p><p></p><p>Although there was a big difference in how Chris Jack handled himself compared to Rico Gear! But the point is that Tasman has massive player expenses because they have big name guys who don't play for the Makos. Tasman posted a loss of over $500K last year!!</p><p></p><p>For a prime example of a system not working, take a look at the Bench players for this weekends final. Guys like Kevin Mealamu, Angus McDonald, Troy Flavell, Lochie Munro, Isiah Toeava, Dane Coles, Rodney So'oialo, Alby Mathewson and Conrad Smith. these players would walk into a starting spot for most teams around the country. If we had all the best guys in the starting 15's every week wouldn't the level of competition be higher?</p><p></p><p>Why don't the Crusaders decide to offload Kieran Read and Issac Ross to Tasman instead of Williams and Thorne? Because they want to have their cake and eat it! They want the big name players on the Crusaders books, but want the best players for their NPC team (even if they have to be on the bench). And what do you know, they get it!</p><p></p><p>It looks suspiciously like the Crusaders are just the puppet, with the Canterbury Rugby Union pulling the strings.</p><p></p><p>If the Big 5 continue to have a Super Team subsidising them then they will continue to have the best players and the biggest sponsorship deals. The small unions will continue to have the unneeded excess players and small sponsorship deals, so they may as well not even try to compete. The big unions are good enough without the S14 franchises giving them a helping hand.</p><p></p><p>Last year Auckland had an annual revenue of $15M. BOP had $3M</p><p></p><p>When you have 5 times the money to spend how could you not win?</p><p></p><p>I'd be alot happier if you had to play a certain number of NPC games the previous season before you were eligible for the Super team. And if they dropped the cap by at least $150,000K. $300,000 would be ideal.</p><p></p><p>I think that's what all this huffing and puffing from the G9 unions is all about. They know that they're never gonna compete with the current setup. and realise that, if they could force the salary cap lower, then they could pick up some of the better players that the big guys could no longer afford. If this did happen then player payments overall would drop significantly because there would be more quality product (players) on the market, its all supply and demand. The G9 unions would also become more competitive and could get more money from sponsorship and bigger crowds through the turnstiles.</p><p></p><p>It could happen, but I doubt it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="scuubasteve, post: 156007"] I think the unions do help out their catchment areas, but only as a consequence of helping themselves first. Their primary aim is certainly not to help out their little brothers. I think Auckland does its bit, like loaning player such as Justin Collins and Anthony Koonwaiyou to Northland, and the Hooker Tom McCartney to Harbour. But then when Derren Witcome gets injured they took McCartney straight back. The Big 5 only help out because it helps them. They loan players to get them game time. Then when they become good they take them back. Or instead they just buy the ready made quality player for big money after a small union has persisted with training them up (Corey Flynn, Kevin Senio, Nick Evans, Craig Newby etc) Players like Chris Jack, Rico Gear, Ali Williams and Brad Thorne all go to Tasman without the intention of playing rugby for Tasman. Its not fair to blame Canterbury, or the players for this dodgy system, because everyone will push the rules if you let them. Although there was a big difference in how Chris Jack handled himself compared to Rico Gear! But the point is that Tasman has massive player expenses because they have big name guys who don't play for the Makos. Tasman posted a loss of over $500K last year!! For a prime example of a system not working, take a look at the Bench players for this weekends final. Guys like Kevin Mealamu, Angus McDonald, Troy Flavell, Lochie Munro, Isiah Toeava, Dane Coles, Rodney So'oialo, Alby Mathewson and Conrad Smith. these players would walk into a starting spot for most teams around the country. If we had all the best guys in the starting 15's every week wouldn't the level of competition be higher? Why don't the Crusaders decide to offload Kieran Read and Issac Ross to Tasman instead of Williams and Thorne? Because they want to have their cake and eat it! They want the big name players on the Crusaders books, but want the best players for their NPC team (even if they have to be on the bench). And what do you know, they get it! It looks suspiciously like the Crusaders are just the puppet, with the Canterbury Rugby Union pulling the strings. If the Big 5 continue to have a Super Team subsidising them then they will continue to have the best players and the biggest sponsorship deals. The small unions will continue to have the unneeded excess players and small sponsorship deals, so they may as well not even try to compete. The big unions are good enough without the S14 franchises giving them a helping hand. Last year Auckland had an annual revenue of $15M. BOP had $3M When you have 5 times the money to spend how could you not win? I'd be alot happier if you had to play a certain number of NPC games the previous season before you were eligible for the Super team. And if they dropped the cap by at least $150,000K. $300,000 would be ideal. I think that's what all this huffing and puffing from the G9 unions is all about. They know that they're never gonna compete with the current setup. and realise that, if they could force the salary cap lower, then they could pick up some of the better players that the big guys could no longer afford. If this did happen then player payments overall would drop significantly because there would be more quality product (players) on the market, its all supply and demand. The G9 unions would also become more competitive and could get more money from sponsorship and bigger crowds through the turnstiles. It could happen, but I doubt it. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
Mitre 10 Cup
Southland consider leaving air nz cup
Top