Waikato and the Chiefs
-
@booboo said in Waikato and the Chiefs:
P.S. i like that non Super base provinces are right up there. Takes me back to when Counties and Manawatu were leading the comp.
Overall it is much, much better than when players concentrated around the super hubs.
Talent wise it means that more players get a chance to show their abilities rather than only those identified by franchise selectors. This provides another avenue away for those not identified at college/U20s level.Edit: Liam Squire is probably a good example. Highest youth level was locally in Manawatu (PNBHS). Moved to (at that time) unheralded Ta$man for an opportunity. Looks unlikely that he would have been picked up early on by a Waikato/Wellington/Canterbury etc as he was on no ones radar.
-
There are a lot of crusty old fuckwits on the Waikato board, (I feel sorry for Monkley and Holah), and as long as they are there, nothing will change. Waikato have been on a slippery downward slope for a while now, and they still persist with town vs country antics even though there has been a bit of a shake up in terms of club pecking order. Otorohanga and Melville have been making great strides, while traditionally strong Fraser Tech and University were bottom 2 in the prems this year.
But as I said, old dogs fail to see it's a brave new world. As another poster said, perhaps being relegated will be the kick in the arse they need to take a long hard look at the union and where it is, and where it wants to be in future. Bleeding talent is a huge worry, and the team have lost a LOT of experience. Why are they leaving? Where are they going? What is being offered? That is where they should start the assessment.
-
@hooroo said in Waikato and the Chiefs:
@duluth said in Waikato and the Chiefs:
The Chiefs angle is interesting
Taranaki have long had ambitions of being a SR base. If they end this season as Ranfurly Shield holders and 1st division winners they have a strong hand to ask for more games
They too have a Test match venue, they have better crowds and produce more players
I expect infighting
That would be a fair call too. It would be a bit of fun if Super Bases were loaded out based on NPC performance
Works for me
-
@booboo said in Waikato and the Chiefs:
Relegation ain't what it used to be.
Nowadays you only need a couple of slip ups and you finish 7th and only 3 places out of the semis. Conceivably you could only be one game out of the play-offs and down you go.
Back in the day I think the smallest Div 1 ever got was 9. (3 divs of 9). But generally it was 10.
Is finishing 7th really that bad a slip up?
In Waikatos case finishing 7th was rather flattering... in reality they were in the bottom 3 or 4 teams of the combined competitions.
-
The way I'd structure it would be for a minimum of x amount of players to be selected from within franchise boundaries. NOT just from the host union, which appears to be how some have taken it. This would strengthen parochialism and in the case of the Chiefs in particular it would see a lot more Waikato, BOP and Counties players selected than has been the case in recent years. There were well publicised stats about the Chiefs in the last few seasons around the amount of players they had signed from unions outside their catchment VS the amount of players from the host unions. Who really wants that?? Since buying a couple of titles, what have the Chiefs achieved, and what's the damage been to Waikato? Meanwhile, look at the example of Whetu Douglas. Largely ignored by the Chiefs while they signed loose forwards from other parts of the country and even overseas, he's then lost to Waikato and in the meantime embarrasses both the Chiefs and Waikato administrations by performing outstandingly in a handful of games after being drafted in for the Crusaders. That's the kind of player who could still be around and strengthening both sides while maintaining more of a local flavour to the Chiefs.
-
@shark said in Waikato and the Chiefs:
The way I'd structure it would be for a minimum of x amount of players to be selected from within franchise boundaries. NOT just from the host union, which appears to be how some have taken it. This would strengthen parochialism and in the case of the Chiefs in particular it would see a lot more Waikato, BOP and Counties players selected than has been the case in recent years. There were well publicised stats about the Chiefs in the last few seasons around the amount of players they had signed from unions outside their catchment VS the amount of players from the host unions. Who really wants that?? Since buying a couple of titles, what have the Chiefs achieved, and what's the damage been to Waikato? Meanwhile, look at the example of Whetu Douglas. Largely ignored by the Chiefs while they signed loose forwards from other parts of the country and even overseas, he's then lost to Waikato and in the meantime embarrasses both the Chiefs and Waikato administrations by performing outstandingly in a handful of games after being drafted in for the Crusaders. That's the kind of player who could still be around and strengthening both sides while maintaining more of a local flavour to the Chiefs.
I totally get where you are coming from with that but you also have to remember that part of the franchise structure is for NZR to ensure as much as possible that the best players are playing at the highest levels and getting the required playing time. There is a need to spread talent around, not only to create stronger franchise teams but to help the situations where one franchise happens to hold all the cards in one position. One team having three top tighthead props is not good for the ABs if one of them is a continual reserve and the other a dirty dirty.
Without wanting to divert the topic, your story about the Chiefs 'buying titles' is well off the mark as well. The irony is that it was because the host unions couldn't supply the type of player the coach wanted they recruited the unwanted unknowns from elsewhere and honed them. -
Central contracting didn't prevent the Chiefs from having three AB half-backs for 2-3 years. There will always be circumstances in which that kind of thing happens. I'm suggesting a system where x amount of players have to come from within the franchise's boundaries. This could be spread depending in the size of the union ie at the Chiefs it might be six Waikato contracted players and four from each of Taranaki, Counties and BOP. This leaves 19 spots to pick up talent from around the rest of the country, which could include the second or third tighthead scenario you mentioned. This is a good compromise.
-
I'm fully in favour of splitting up the Mitre 10 cup and the Super Rugby. Franchises may get first dibs on players from inside their boundaries, but the old days of signing for a Super and the host ITM cup team sucked. Created imbalanced competition, and no reward for some of the provinces that regularly developed talent (Counties is a particular example).
We've got back to teh original concept when Super kicked off. Leon MacDonald played for the 3rd division Marlborough team for 2-3 years after Super kicked off, and then that was kind of the end of it. The current situation is much healthier, with 14 teams to play for.
-
@shark said in Waikato and the Chiefs:
Central contracting didn't prevent the Chiefs from having three AB half-backs for 2-3 years. There will always be circumstances in which that kind of thing happens. I'm suggesting a system where x amount of players have to come from within the franchise's boundaries. This could be spread depending in the size of the union ie at the Chiefs it might be six Waikato contracted players and four from each of Taranaki, Counties and BOP. This leaves 19 spots to pick up talent from around the rest of the country, which could include the second or third tighthead scenario you mentioned. This is a good compromise.
Would you like that scenario if it also filtered down to ITM Cup level? e.g. Canterbury can only select Canterbury club players that actually play club rugby, then the Saders can only select from there and from Ta$man?
I get what you are aiming at but it is simply a recipe for franchise players to congregate at certain base unions and the 'leftovers' would either need to shift towns or get left out. Imagine a Highlanders side of 80%Otago and Southland players?
Edit: you are counting Pulu and Weber? stretching the point somewhat.
-
@shark said in Waikato and the Chiefs:
. There were well publicised stats about the Chiefs in the last few seasons around the amount of players they had signed from unions outside their catchment VS the amount of players from the host unions. Who really wants that??
Me!
I don't care where the players hail from. That amature ship has long since sailed. I want the Chiefs winning titles, that's all that matter in terms of Super Rugby.
I am trying to think of a top professional competition that is 'regionalised' in terms of players
-
I feel the total opposite. I used to love NPC rugby. Years ago it was great seeing players come up through the ranks and graduate into their local Super rugby franchise. There was more of a natural progression for players and a hell of a lot more loyalty. Now they pluck from schools anywhere and I feel Super rugby and NPC have lost their 'soul'.
I find it increasingly hard to identify with the super teams plucked from any old where. I would rather see more regionally based picks where a player might take 2 or 3 years to become a regular starter, but knows he is being groomed as a successor to the incumbent. It was great to watch a guy play well in club rugby, then see how he shaped up in super rugby. Now a lot of super players don't play regularly in NPC, and rarely for clubs.
I think the spread of the unions between super franchises has been a significant challenge. The Crusaders are fortunate to have just two provinces, one extremely strong and another not too far behind. That supports a super squad and a development squad for the region, with local opportunities plentiful. The Highlanders have a much smaller population base between their two provinces. I always expected a formalised Association for them with either Hawkes Bay or Taranaki and perhaps a home match there thrown in. i.e. HB or Taranaki openly supplies players to Highlanders and Hurricanes, and gets a home match for each.
The Blues and Hurricanes work ok with 3 provinces now. But, the Chiefs are lumbered with 4 provincial squads to provide player pathways for. I think both Bay of Plenty and Counties Manukau have suffered from this with players like Joe Tupe and Sam Vaka not even picked up on the draft, and leaving. It is in the best interests of NZ rugby to have well balanced franchises. Currently the Highlanders and Chiefs are too much the polar extremes.
I believe that the best performances come from a settled and experienced team that builds up collective trust and confidence over years. That means keeping a squad together and supporting local development.
I wonder if a sixth franchise - Taranaki + Hawkes Bay is a viable solution in time, especially if NPC and club rugby become less relevant.
-
as a supporter of a smaller province, I like the way the contracting is now.
Back in the old days the likes of Sam Nock, probably both Goodhue brothers, Matich, would never have come back, the Pryors probably would never have come north in the first place, Ranger probably woulda still followed his same path as he has.
As it is, I understand a few provinces are after the signature of one of our young players, in the past a promise of a super contract to go with the NPC one would have been the offer to lure him away, now it rarely the case.
This assists the smaller provinces in retaining some of their own talent while attracting some outside talent.
I like Super rugby because it is NZ Rugby and sadly don't think I'll ever feel about a super team as i do Northland.
-
@nzzp said in Waikato and the Chiefs:
I'm fully in favour of splitting up the Mitre 10 cup and the Super Rugby. Franchises may get first dibs on players from inside their boundaries, but the old days of signing for a Super and the host ITM cup team sucked. Created imbalanced competition, and no reward for some of the provinces that regularly developed talent (Counties is a particular example).
We've got back to teh original concept when Super kicked off. Leon MacDonald played for the 3rd division Marlborough team for 2-3 years after Super kicked off, and then that was kind of the end of it. The current situation is much healthier, with 14 teams to play for.
Once again, I'm not suggesting a scenario whereby players flock to a Waikato or Canterbury. The other unions in these Super Rugby regions would have a proportionate representation, compulsorily. Including Counties. Then each franchise would also have plenty of opportunity to sign the balance of the squad from wherever, meaning there's no reason why a Goodhue couldn't remain in Northland and play for the Crusaders as one of their centrally contracted players. Compromise.
-
@shark said in Waikato and the Chiefs:
The way I'd structure it would be for a minimum of x amount of players to be selected from within franchise boundaries. NOT just from the host union, which appears to be how some have taken it. This would strengthen parochialism and in the case of the Chiefs in particular it would see a lot more Waikato, BOP and Counties players selected than has been the case in recent years. There were well publicised stats about the Chiefs in the last few seasons around the amount of players they had signed from unions outside their catchment VS the amount of players from the host unions. Who really wants that?? Since buying a couple of titles, what have the Chiefs achieved, and what's the damage been to Waikato? Meanwhile, look at the example of Whetu Douglas. Largely ignored by the Chiefs while they signed loose forwards from other parts of the country and even overseas, he's then lost to Waikato and in the meantime embarrasses both the Chiefs and Waikato administrations by performing outstandingly in a handful of games after being drafted in for the Crusaders. That's the kind of player who could still be around and strengthening both sides while maintaining more of a local flavour to the Chiefs.
Good to have you back Shark, looks like your time away has seen your dislike of Rennie and the Chiefs continue, but some of the bollocks in this post needs to be addressed.
Lets look at Whetu Douglas first - every franchise has overlooked players that have gone on to decent careers, it happens all the time. The Canes overlooked Dagg, the Crusaders let BBBR get away, the Canes missed Aaron Smith etc. Furthermore, if Douglas was as good as you're making him out to be a franchise would have picked him up as a squad member yet he was only picked up as an injury replacement - this was clearly the level that he was rated at the start of the season.
Now, lets look at your "buying a couple of titles" quip - I assume there was no way you said this with a straight face. The first two Crusaders winning teams could equally be seen as "bought titles" and the franchise used that success and a system you're advocating now to suck up talent from all over the country.
Also, have you seen the 2011 Waikato NPC squad that would have been picked from for the 2012 Chiefs? That squad wasn't great in a Super rugby sense.
The Super competition is for NZs best players, not for all players in a franchise home base. How many of these players would you have picked over the players the Chiefs picked for 2012? (I've crossed out those unavailable and put in italics those in the squad - which incidentally easily meets your 6 Waikato contracted players from your follow up post).
Armstrong Jono, Flanker 31.12.87 Te Awamutu Sports 1.81 101 0
Bradley Alex, Loose forward 30.09.81 Morrinsville Sports 1.90 114 20
Barnes Malcolm, Halfback 15.08.84 Hamilton Old Boys 1.79 85 18
Christie Sam, First five-eighth 26.09.86 Fraser Tech 1.80 92 16
Cummings-Toone Marcel, Hooker 17.07.84 University 1.82 106 0
de Malmanche Aled, Hooker 11.09.84 Hamilton Old Boys 1.85 114 52
Donald Stephen, First five-eighth 03.12.83 University 1.86 101 50
Ellison Andre, Prop 08.07.79 Hamilton Old Boys 1.82 119 1
Graham Romana, Lock 29.05.86 Hautapu 2.02 114 28
George Nathan, First five 13.06.91 Te Awamutu Sports 1.75 75 0
Grice Rory, Number 8 02.04.90 Otorohanga 1.75 110 0
Halai Frank, Wing 6.03.88 Hamilton Marist 1.95 105 3
Hohneck Zak, Loose forward 08.03.90 Otorohanga 1.85 105 9
Holah Marty, Flanker 10.09.76 Hamilton Marist 1.84 99 71
Kahui Richard, Centre 09.06.85 Te Rapa 1.90 101 35
Kerr-Barlow Tawera, Halfback 15.08.90 Hautapu 1.87 89 17
Lam Jack, Number 8 18.11.87 Hamilton Marist 1.88 107 28
Leonard Brendon, Halfback 16.04.85 Morrinsville Sports 1.82 95 43
Lynn Toby, Lock 06.10.84 Te Rapa 1.97 114 66
May Ben, Prop 13.10.82 Te Awamutu Sports 1.94 118 15
Malo Jono, Halfback 23.01.90 Hamilton Marist 1.79 86 0
Messam Liam, Loose forward 25.03.84 Hautapu 1.88 107 82
Middleton Chris, Lock 11.03.87 Te Awamutu Sports 1.99 110 2
Mikkelson Tim, Wing 13.8.86 University 1.91 102 34
Murray Mark, Midfield back 22.04.87 Te Awamutu Sports 1.86 98 0
O'Donnell Declan, Midfield back 20.11.90 Melville 1.86 94 0
Olsen Josh, Lock 16.04.84 Hamilton Old Boys 2.01 111 4
Renata Trent, utility back 13.05.88 Hamilton Marist 1.80 90 33
Robertson Glen, Utility back 20.02.91 Fraser Tech 1.86 90 0
Shuster Rena, Midfield back 16.11.80 Hamilton Old Boys 1.85 95 0
Sivivatu Sitiveni, Wing 19.04.82 Frankton 1.85 99 28
Smith Toby, Prop 10.10.88 Hamilton Old Boys 1.90 113 23
Speight Henry, Wing 24.3.88 Hamilton Old Boys 1.86 96 24
Sweeney Paul, Flanker 19.12.88 Morrinsville Sports 1.86 99 0
Talakai Latu, Prop 26.12.89 Fraser Tech 1.85 124 7
Tauroa Ted, Prop 19.12.82 Otorohanga 1.86 126 5
Tokula Savenaca, Wing 15.06.85 Fraser Tech 1.92 97 29
Tyrell Josh, Flanker 16.10.90 Hamilton Marist 1.93 104 0
White Nathan, Prop 04.09.81 Te Awamutu Sports 1.88 117 66
Willison Jackson, Midfield back 05.09.88 Hautapu 1.82 92 34
Vant Leven Matt, Loose forward 23.10.87 Fraser Tech 1.94 105 10TBH, I think if you look at the Chiefs 2017 squad you'll find that the bulk are from the 4 home provinces that make up the franchise, it's just that Waikato is no longer the strongest province in the franchise.
