Building the next NZ team

[shadowformz]

Another South Island article today. https://www.thepress.co.nz/sport/350183219/south-island-rugby-league-consortium-behind-nrl-team-bid

 

[Santino Patane]

A sincere question (particularly to the Kiwis here) with no bias or trolling at all- is there genuine desire in NZ for a second NRL team? If there was, I’d be all for them to get the next licence but I see a few hesitations around it.

More specifically, are the Warriors divisive in NZ like the Broncos were in Brisbane- ie are there fans of the game that can’t get the on the Wahs? Here in Queensland, it seems all the kiwis (probs all the Pacifikas) love the Wahs. With their success atm, wouldn’t it be better to embed the Warriors as a power club rather than dilute the game in Nz?

Or would it be that most kiwis are very parochial and would back both teams?

Again, I’m not at all trying to hang shit, the thread creator seems genuine in wanting to have a real discussion about the topic and I’m all for that, I’m just curious around these points. Cheers all!

 

[mongoose]

A sincere question (particularly to the Kiwis here) with no bias or trolling at all- is there genuine desire in NZ for a second NRL team? If there was, I’d be all for them to get the next licence but I see a few hesitations around it.

More specifically, are the Warriors divisive in NZ like the Broncos were in Brisbane- ie are there fans of the game that can’t get the on the Wahs? Here in Queensland, it seems all the kiwis (probs all the Pacifikas) love the Wahs. With their success atm, wouldn’t it be better to embed the Warriors as a power club rather than dilute the game in Nz?

Or would it be that most kiwis are very parochial and would back both teams?

Again, I’m not at all trying to hang shit, the thread creator seems genuine in wanting to have a real discussion about the topic and I’m all for that, I’m just curious around these points. Cheers all!

i don't think you get it.... We will crush Rugby Union in NZ! just like adding the Dolphins has crushed AFL in QLD.

 

[Matiunz]

A sincere question (particularly to the Kiwis here) with no bias or trolling at all- is there genuine desire in NZ for a second NRL team? If there was, I’d be all for them to get the next licence but I see a few hesitations around it.

More specifically, are the Warriors divisive in NZ like the Broncos were in Brisbane- ie are there fans of the game that can’t get the on the Wahs? Here in Queensland, it seems all the kiwis (probs all the Pacifikas) love the Wahs. With their success atm, wouldn’t it be better to embed the Warriors as a power club rather than dilute the game in Nz?

Or would it be that most kiwis are very parochial and would back both teams?

Again, I’m not at all trying to hang shit, the thread creator seems genuine in wanting to have a real discussion about the topic and I’m all for that, I’m just curious around these points. Cheers all!

Mixed bag to be honest with plenty of pros & cons for both.

Warriors are essentially NZs team at the moment regardless of where you are from and for the majority of expats in Aus will support them.
The NZ non-Warriors fans tend to fall into 2 categories 1.They followed another Winfield cup team prior to the Warriors or 2.Disillusioned by the Warriors historical performance so have jumped on another team (usually whoever was doing well at the time).

Appetite for another team is strong for a couple of reasons
1.Not everyone is from Auckland, there is a perception from the regions despite being NZs default team it is still very Auckland centric and the regions do feel a little neglected/unrepresented at times.
2. There is a bit of an “anti kiwi bias” sentiment (wether real or imagined) if there is a second team this may dilute this.
3. There’s a school of thought that the Warriors are the big fish in a small pond and have a history of players thinking they have “made it” just by playing nrl vs winning. Having a bit of local competition may force the Warriors to sharpen up their act a bit.

In terms of how support would split for NZ 2 it really depends on where the team would be based. South Island whilst a natural split only has around 20% of the population and is sparsely populated, I’d assume most South Islanders would make them number one but I’d suggest the remainder would stick with the Warriors and adopt NZ 2 as their second team.
Having it North island based would probably convert a higher percentage of Warriors supporters.

There are still significant challenges for NZ 2
1. No obvious clear cut one over the other Candidate between Wellington and Christchurch (each had pros and cons the other doesn’t)
2. Although I’d suggest the Warriors are the most popular club team in the country the sport itself is embarrassingly amateur in its governance and is pretty much a niche sport outside of Auckland. You’d need to improve this to sustain a team in the regions, both grass roots and second tier. This is one of the major reasons that despite the NZ/Pasifika player base being circa 40% in the NRL the Warriors don’t particularly benefit from it. Juniors know they have a much higher chance of success in the Aus school systems and most leave early.
3. Recruitment for the Warriors is a serious struggle and they in the past have had to pay massive overs or essentially “retirement paydays” on older players, this will be amplified for NZ2. Rightly or wrongly there’s a negative perception of living in NZ to most Australians, once they get there they’re often pleasantly surprised but the stigma remains, Mt Smart’s industrial location doesn’t give the best perception to traveling teams.

In summary I think the appetite is there and I think it would be a smart move from the NRL to further engage the NZ audience, however it will come with some significant challenges that need to be addressed and a solid foundation will need to be built for it to succeed.

 

[MugaB]

If super rugby can have 6 teams in Nz
Blues, MP, chiefs, canes, highlndrs and crusaders.
NRL can do atleast 3, Im not saying right away tho, but it can be done, one in Christchurch, and one in Hamilton should do it, Wellington is probably not suited for NRL, Hamilton is close enough to both BOP region and Auckland to create a local derby with the warriors, and well a Christchurch team can represent the whole of the south Island

 

[Perth Red]

If super rugby can have 6 teams in Nz
Blues, MP, chiefs, canes, highlndrs and crusaders.
NRL can do atleast 3, Im not saying right away tho, but it can be done, one in Christchurch, and one in Hamilton should do it, Wellington is probably not suited for NRL, Hamilton is close enough to both BOP region and Auckland to create a local derby with the warriors, and well a Christchurch team can represent the whole of the south Island

Why do you say that? When you look at revenue, player numbers, tv audiences etc etc Union is clearly significantly bigger than league in NZ. You'd need a big shift in those key metrics to make a claim like 6/3 clubs. which is what Matiunz is alluding to above

 

[Perth Red]

Interview today with Tony Kidd

CSB - Tony Kidd - NEW NRL TEAM? - The Country Sport Breakfast | iHeart

<p>Could there be an NRL team based in Christchurch by 2026? </p><p>See <a href='https://omnystudio.com/listener'>omnystudio.com/listener</a> for privacy information.</p>

www.iheart.com

 

[Canard]

Interview today with Tony Kidd

CSB - Tony Kidd - NEW NRL TEAM? - The Country Sport Breakfast | iHeart

<p>Could there be an NRL team based in Christchurch by 2026? </p><p>See <a href='https://omnystudio.com/listener'>omnystudio.com/listener</a> for privacy information.</p>

www.iheart.com

Old mate backed away from saying they were going to announce/launch anything in Vegas.

"We've got some big things to announce, after Las Vegas" was the direct quote.

 

[Perth Red]

Old mate backed away from saying they were going to announce/launch anything in Vegas.

"We've got some big things to announce, after Las Vegas" was the direct quote.

It kind of reminds me of the big hoopla we made in 2012 around the Pirates bid and Bears on CC. Hopefully theirs goes somewhere this time. Getting legit investors will be the massive thing for them for the NRL to take them seriously. They could do with another media spokesman, tbf to Tony he doesnt come across as engendering confidence at times!

 

[Vee]

Another South Island article today. https://www.thepress.co.nz/sport/350183219/south-island-rugby-league-consortium-behind-nrl-team-bid

The most concerning part of that is there's not much talk about pathways and juniors. A Hollywood-based Kiwi as the public face of the bid is a fair way down my list of criteria.

 

[flippikat]

A sincere question (particularly to the Kiwis here) with no bias or trolling at all- is there genuine desire in NZ for a second NRL team? If there was, I’d be all for them to get the next licence but I see a few hesitations around it.

More specifically, are the Warriors divisive in NZ like the Broncos were in Brisbane- ie are there fans of the game that can’t get the on the Wahs?

I think the reply from @Matiunz sums up the situation well.

Through necessity the Warriors have to focus on Auckland - it's their base, the biggest city, and taking too many games away from Mount Smart would devalue memberships.

The downside to that is that at times the "New Zealand" billing seems like lip-service - especially when the home-away-from-home games in other NZ cities change all the time without any over-arching pattern or plan.

A 2nd NZ team would mean that we don't put all of our 2nd tier (underneath test footy, but above provincial) eggs in one basket, which IMO has to be good for the game here.

 

[Canard]

The most concerning part of that is there's not much talk about pathways and juniors. A Hollywood-based Kiwi as the public face of the bid is a fair way down my list of criteria.

It's clear the poor bugger has nothing.

He keeps using we also, when it's also clear it's just him.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

A sincere question (particularly to the Kiwis here) with no bias or trolling at all- is there genuine desire in NZ for a second NRL team? If there was, I’d be all for them to get the next licence but I see a few hesitations around it.

More specifically, are the Warriors divisive in NZ like the Broncos were in Brisbane- ie are there fans of the game that can’t get the on the Wahs? Here in Queensland, it seems all the kiwis (probs all the Pacifikas) love the Wahs. With their success atm, wouldn’t it be better to embed the Warriors as a power club rather than dilute the game in Nz?

Or would it be that most kiwis are very parochial and would back both teams?

Again, I’m not at all trying to hang shit, the thread creator seems genuine in wanting to have a real discussion about the topic and I’m all for that, I’m just curious around these points. Cheers all!

I’m not sure in terms of overall desire having been out of the country for a long time, but I’d say it’s definitely a yes on the second count. The Warriors are always going to be seen as an Auckland team to some degree and that means that there will be people in other regions who’d follow a rival NZ side as there’s often a bit of Auckland vs the rest sentiment. Plus there’s also an element of fans who’ve been burned by the Warriors ups and downs over the years who would follow a second NZ side.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

Always thought Pounamu green and White/Black would work quite well as a ’neutral’ colour set- looks quite good in the Maori kits.

Yeah that’s an obvious one- subbing the black for brown would work too (though I’d make the brown the least dominant colour, have it primarily green/white with brown trim). Would work particularly well with the Kea as a mascot.
Wellington would be easy, I’d just stick with the region’s traditional yellow and black as that’s an unused combo in the NRL currently. Add some white in there if it was using the Orcas brand.

 

[flippikat]

I’m not sure in terms of overall desire having been out of the country for a long time, but I’d say it’s definitely a yes on the second count. The Warriors are always going to be seen as an Auckland team to some degree and that means that there will be people in other regions who’d follow a rival NZ side as there’s often a bit of Auckland vs the rest sentiment. Plus there’s also an element of fans who’ve been burned by the Warriors ups and downs over the years who would follow a second NZ side.

For me (Wellington-based Warriors fan) - assuming it's a Christchutch based team, it comes down to branding and engagement.

That includes whether the team markets itself as Christchurch/ South Island, or a wider "NZ that's not Auckland centred".. things like name, logo and club colours.. heck, even a commitment to a game per year here at Sky Stadium would be encouraging.

A team billed as "South Island" or Southern, decked out in mostly the red & black of Canterbury province will not sway me from the Warriors - and in fact may even become my most disliked team in the league, if they develop that Canterbury swagger that's so endearing (hehehe) to us Wellington sports fans.

 

[Santino Patane]

Mixed bag to be honest with plenty of pros & cons for both.

Warriors are essentially NZs team at the moment regardless of where you are from and for the majority of expats in Aus will support them.
The NZ non-Warriors fans tend to fall into 2 categories 1.They followed another Winfield cup team prior to the Warriors or 2.Disillusioned by the Warriors historical performance so have jumped on another team (usually whoever was doing well at the time).

Appetite for another team is strong for a couple of reasons
1.Not everyone is from Auckland, there is a perception from the regions despite being NZs default team it is still very Auckland centric and the regions do feel a little neglected/unrepresented at times.
2. There is a bit of an “anti kiwi bias” sentiment (wether real or imagined) if there is a second team this may dilute this.
3. There’s a school of thought that the Warriors are the big fish in a small pond and have a history of players thinking they have “made it” just by playing nrl vs winning. Having a bit of local competition may force the Warriors to sharpen up their act a bit.

In terms of how support would split for NZ 2 it really depends on where the team would be based. South Island whilst a natural split only has around 20% of the population and is sparsely populated, I’d assume most South Islanders would make them number one but I’d suggest the remainder would stick with the Warriors and adopt NZ 2 as their second team.
Having it North island based would probably convert a higher percentage of Warriors supporters.

There are still significant challenges for NZ 2
1. No obvious clear cut one over the other Candidate between Wellington and Christchurch (each had pros and cons the other doesn’t)
2. Although I’d suggest the Warriors are the most popular club team in the country the sport itself is embarrassingly amateur in its governance and is pretty much a niche sport outside of Auckland. You’d need to improve this to sustain a team in the regions, both grass roots and second tier. This is one of the major reasons that despite the NZ/Pasifika player base being circa 40% in the NRL the Warriors don’t particularly benefit from it. Juniors know they have a much higher chance of success in the Aus school systems and most leave early.
3. Recruitment for the Warriors is a serious struggle and they in the past have had to pay massive overs or essentially “retirement paydays” on older players, this will be amplified for NZ2. Rightly or wrongly there’s a negative perception of living in NZ to most Australians, once they get there they’re often pleasantly surprised but the stigma remains, Mt Smart’s industrial location doesn’t give the best perception to traveling teams.

In summary I think the appetite is there and I think it would be a smart move from the NRL to further engage the NZ audience, however it will come with some significant challenges that need to be addressed and a solid foundation will need to be built for it to succeed.

Thanks mate, best response to this I’ve heard on the topic, I appreciate your objective perspective on it.

 

[Santino Patane]

I’m not sure in terms of overall desire having been out of the country for a long time, but I’d say it’s definitely a yes on the second count. The Warriors are always going to be seen as an Auckland team to some degree and that means that there will be people in other regions who’d follow a rival NZ side as there’s often a bit of Auckland vs the rest sentiment. Plus there’s also an element of fans who’ve been burned by the Warriors ups and downs over the years who would follow a second NZ side.

Totally didn’t realise that there was such a divide in the whole Auckland/everywhere else regions. But it makes sense that it would be. Cheers!

 

[Santino Patane]

I think the reply from @Matiunz sums up the situation well.

Through necessity the Warriors have to focus on Auckland - it's their base, the biggest city, and taking too many games away from Mount Smart would devalue memberships.

The downside to that is that at times the "New Zealand" billing seems like lip-service - especially when the home-away-from-home games in other NZ cities change all the time without any over-arching pattern or plan.

A 2nd NZ team would mean that we don't put all of our 2nd tier (underneath test footy, but above provincial) eggs in one basket, which IMO has to be good for the game here.

Good point, you would hope if a second team came in, it could focus the Warriors more outside of Auckland better

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

How realistic is it to talk about adding a second and a third club to New Zealand?

In the ideal scenario you would provide Christchurch Wellington with the 18th and 20th licence.

If we want to increase the value of the NZ broadcast rights then we'll need to provide the broadcasters with more local content. Three teams will be needed to compete with Super Rugby for marketshare.

 

[MugaB]

Why do you say that? When you look at revenue, player numbers, tv audiences etc etc Union is clearly significantly bigger than league in NZ. You'd need a big shift in those key metrics to make a claim like 6/3 clubs. which is what Matiunz is alluding to above

Im not looking at past trends, the nz public arent as fickle as to only follow one code, if nrl have a presence in two more areas they are probably going to rate better than or equal to the RU franchises there, besides having aus nrl teams travelling over to nz upto a possible 3 times a fortnight, is pretty good draw card for nz, they are doing alright with just one warriors club, imagine in 20 years there might be 3