URC to look at draft system

[Groundhog]

We need learn from the GAA to split Dublin in two..... So north you'd have Clontarf and Belvo students who don't know their way home and south you'd have everything else!!

A lot is made of us having too much talent for four teams..... Have these people actually seen Connacht?

I do like that the URC are thinking differently to try and drive on weaker teams, but the only way a draft works is if it's entirely voluntary and players can nominate themselves, which leaves you with lads who are fringe players anyway.

 

[Reiser99]

The reality is there is no quick fix to bridging these gaps or developing good systems.

Rugby needs to grow it's fan base and grass level participation to develop players further. Really those in charge need to be thinking 20-30 years forward. Having said that, if nothing changes quickly, will rugby still be a professional sport in 15 years?

 

[pagliaccio_euforico]

We need learn from the GAA to split Dublin in two..... So north you'd have Clontarf and Belvo students who don't know their way home and south you'd have everything else!!

A lot is made of us having too much talent for four teams..... Have these people actually seen Connacht?

I do like that the URC are thinking differently to try and drive on weaker teams, but the only way a draft works is if it's entirely voluntary and players can nominate themselves, which leaves you with lads who are fringe players anyway.

I saw a Connacht jersey the other day. Their brand is global and you can't stop them.

 

[Smurfy]

I'm not sure why the IRFU, with the best player development system in the NH currently, would agree to a draft system. Why would they want to bring players through and then see them disappear into the chaos that is Welsh rugby for instance? The difference between NFL and rugby is that there is an international dimension, in club terms as well as with national sides. A draft system within national boundaries might have merit, but sending players to another union is a bit of a reach.

 

[IT157]

I'm vehemently against the draft in American sports cause I believe it's anti-competitive and it two thirds of the league doing what Newcastle is doing now.
But, where our pro teams and where our players come from don't align. Major population centers don't produce baseball or football players. That is mostly the rural south plus California. NHL would be Minnesota, Michigan, and specific parts of Canada. Basketball would just be a few cities.

What!

The complete opposite actually. Makes the leagues far more competitive.

 

[Groundhog]

Yeah, I don't see how a draft is anti-competitive. It's l the great equaliser in American sport, and can turn a team around in a short amount of years. It's not like the likes of Luton Town in Football will realistically ever have a shot at winning the PL (barring an oil billionaire buyout), but the Cleveland Browns could conceivably win a Superbowl not that long after a winless season.

 

[pagliaccio_euforico]

Look at the nba last season, 1/3 of the league was intentionally losing, how is that competitive?

Baseball has 10 teams that are trying to win this year.

The browns have not finished higher than third in the division since 2007. The draft isn't helping them.

 

[Groundhog]

Look at the nba last season, 1/3 of the league was intentionally losing, how is that competitive?

Baseball has 10 teams that are trying to win this year.

The browns have not finished higher than third in the division since 2007. The draft isn't helping them.

I don't watch basketball or baseball, so I can't comment. The Browns remain **** because they're an impressively terrible organisation. And you can't argue they haven't improved through the draft anyway. Only used them as a hypothetical, but, actual examples, the Colts went from 2-14 in 2011 to 11-5 in 2012 because they drafted Andrew Luck. The Chiefs were a 2 win team in 2012. The Bengals in the last few years are a good example too! Yes tanking is its own issue, but if you want to be a doormat, you can be a doormat imo. Certainly no one tanked in the NFL this year, it was fairly competitive.

The point being NFL teams can turn their fortunes around in a way that the likes of Zebre or Dragons in rugby can't really. If you don't have the player base you don't have the player base. The draft remains the great equaliser in American sport, which is completely not replicable anywhere else, but it can make awful teams competitive in the medium term.

 

[Bruce_ma gooshvili]

From the article I think a 'draft system' is misleading. It smells to me more like the solution being considered is straightforward loan deals, like in football (which strangely do not seem common in rugby).

From the chart I posted in the eligibility thread we see Scotland, Italy and Wales all import a lot of non-qualified players (between 12% and 33%). And unlike Ireland's non-qualified players, a lot of these guys are journeymen who arguably do not greatly elevate squad strength. So why not keep the money in-house within the URC unions and give incentives to Irish and Saffa surplus players (preferably younger players struggling for game time) to consider moving to a URC bottom feeder on loan? Better for all concerned on splashing cash on journeymen from other parts of the world.

Its completely reliant on the Irish and SA unions seeing positives for themselves in terms of player development and reduced wage bill. Football clubs routinely put players out on loan in other countries, so its not something too radical.

With all that said, if you removed Leinster (huge wage bill and hiring a Bok head coach as an assistant for crying out loud!) and Zebre (getting the Italian rejects and with little budget) from the equation I do not think there is any issue with competitiveness in the URC. That may change if the Welsh salary cuts have an impact and they sink towards Zebre.

I also think some of the weaker URC teams are woeful at scouting Tier2 for bargains on good players so there is a lot of scope for URC sides to be a bit creative. The French clubs absolutely hoover up young prospects from Georgia, Spain and increasingly the Netherlands. The URC could definitely go sniffing about these guys before or after the French pick them up. Same with South America. Loads of the Spanish and Uruguayans in the u20s that finished above Scotland will end up jacking in the sport by their mid-20s if they can't get a career move that pays. Some of thess guys have a fair bit of ability.

 

[Bruce_ma gooshvili]

Look at the nba last season, 1/3 of the league was intentionally losing, how is that competitive?

Baseball has 10 teams that are trying to win this year.

The browns have not finished higher than third in the division since 2007. The draft isn't helping them.

I agree with you on the NBA, but that is because in a 5 man game, drafting a 'star' can transform your team beyond all recognition. So it becomes sensible for an organisation to not try too hard to win sometimes in order to 're-build'.

I don't think the negative impact of the draft is so strong in the NFL because it is harder for one man (even a QB) to completely transform a team. Plus, I suspect it is easier to evaluate a college basketball player and how they will perform in the NBA than it is with the NFL (e.g. Tom Brady overlooked in the draft but loads of QBs picked in the first round who fail dramatically).

Likely a moot point as I do not think the URC are suggesting an actual draft.

 

[higgik]

Why would teams produce the talent, though?

It works in America because the colleges are producing the players for the draft - why should Leinster pump resources into their academy just to see their top talents going off to Zebre?

True, so remove the Pro team franchise from the development structure.
Development is for national team potentially, and those who are successful play pro rugby for one of the franchises.

 

[SG59_]

I like the idea of a draft system, but it would need to be drastically different to work here. Rugby has too many issues to solve before doing this.

 

[The Seeker]

I don't watch basketball or baseball, so I can't comment. The Browns remain **** because they're an impressively terrible organisation. And you can't argue they haven't improved through the draft anyway. Only used them as a hypothetical, but, actual examples, the Colts went from 2-14 in 2011 to 11-5 in 2012 because they drafted Andrew Luck. The Chiefs were a 2 win team in 2012. The Bengals in the last few years are a good example too! Yes tanking is its own issue, but if you want to be a doormat, you can be a doormat imo. Certainly no one tanked in the NFL this year, it was fairly competitive.

The point being NFL teams can turn their fortunes around in a way that the likes of Zebre or Dragons in rugby can't really. If you don't have the player base you don't have the player base. The draft remains the great equaliser in American sport, which is completely not replicable anywhere else, but it can make awful teams competitive in the medium term.

Regarding your Cleveland Browns comment, you nailed it. Their front office is and has been a dumpster fire for a long time. The city of Cleveland has been cleaning up its image and revitalizing the downtown area, while the Browns remain the armpit of the NFL. Jimmy Haslam has a 44-94 record as their owner.