OomStruisbaai wrote: Thu May 13, 2021 5:35 am
Its so sad the fancy professional $hark$ don't invest in structures to get any team in the Varsity Cup.
In the new environment its the factory of tomorrow's rugby stars.
I actually like that all the unions don't have the same systems. Let's test them and see what works.
The Western Cape seems committed on persisting with their model:
Get noticed by one of the elite rugby schools, get into one of the 3 VC teams, get into the WP U20 team, WP, Stormers
But because this model is a funnel, and we have so many players, we will lose 80% of our talent to other unions.
It's tricky. You get first dibs at some of the best players sure, but your scouting and talent identification needs to be exceptional...otherwise you drain your budget and sit with dud players on contract.
They drain your budget AND occupy slots in your team rosters.
The Bulls also had this model, but their funnel was even narrower and just wasn't sustainable.
The Lions revitalised their union using Moneyball. Deeply in debt, dwindling crowds and inconsistent revenue due to getting screwed over by relegation out of Super rugby, they had to play clever.
Ackermann and Straeuli did an amazing job developing a unique gamplan that no other Union was using, and recruiting players that were rejected by other teams for not fitting traditional gameplans of the time.
Players like Faf and Jantjies and Whiteley and Jaco Kriel. Moneyball.
I actually like the Sharks' hybrid model. It throws the net wider and makes peace with the fact that you won't get first dibs, but also limits your risk.
You save up to buy players you need and that have a proven record at a premium, and fill the other slots with rejected players from other Unions' feeder systems that are actually good, were overlooked for non-playing reasons; contracts, not attending the right school to get on the fast track etc. It's like the best of both worlds...they have some good junior programs with a very narrow funnel to the Sharks Academy, and then the financial backing to buy what they need from other unions...be it players for specific gameplans or positions, or for marketing and branding or to meet transformation targets. Seems smart to me.
Varsity Cup is nice and all, but it is too niche. Too elitist. If you didn't / don't attend one of those Universities, or have a close relative attending, why would you be invested in the teams?
I still maintain "Varsity Cup" should be national club competition similar to the USA's NCAA March madness bracket.
Get 32 or 64 clubs to "qualify" and get drafted into a massive bracket; and then play for National Championship Title. Winners advance, losers drop to lower tier brackets to play out their season there. In the early rounds it might have to be regional drafts to keep costs down. I have no doubt that the big university teams will likely still dominate in the final rounds, but I would find this type of tournament much more compelling personally.