PRO14 - 2019/20 New Conferences

PRO14 issued the new conference structures today with an explanation of how they did it. It was based on the performance of each team in the regular stage of the season - not including the finals. And then teams ranked by their union accordingly. Teams 1&4 from Ireland play Teams 2&3 from Wales, and vice versa.
The new conferences will run for the next two seasons.


Conf A
Dragons
Glasgow
Leinster
Ospreys
Cheetahs
Ulster
Zebre


Conf B
Benetton
Cardiff
Connacht
Edinburgh
Kings
Munster
Scarlets

Mixes it all up a little..!

Looks pretty fair to me.

Can’t see any problems

It’s a fix, Irish bias, PrO’14, tax breaks, etc., etc.

Looking forward to it!

I have ten new pristine stacked folders of lovely new stats, financial reports, TV secret contractual negotiations recorded by my special hacking unit...I have 25 specialist lawyers lined up to back up every word I say ....

...and yeah, I might watch one of two games too.

SecretFly wrote:I have ten new pristine stacked folders of lovely new stats, financial reports, TV secret contractual negotiations recorded by my special hacking unit...I have 25 specialist lawyers lined up to back up every word I say ....

...and yeah, I might watch one of two games too.

Yes, but can you answer THE question to end all questions - what is <insert any Pro14 team name>’s wage budget?!

Tinkering with the conferences is too late. The Pro14 was killed off last season with the TV deal with Premier Sports.

It’s dead now, just awaiting the post-mortem.

No9 wrote:Tinkering with the conferences is too late. The Pro14 was killed off last season with the TV deal with Premier Sports.

It’s dead now, just awaiting the post-mortem.

It's about as dead as the English Premiership was when it moved to Sky, i.e. not dead. It's just not as visible to those who don't want to pay.

Pot Hale wrote:  It was based on the performance of each team in the regular stage of the season - not including the finals.  

That's odd. Geoff999rugby assured us that the regular season was after the play offs.

geoff999rugby wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:  
I'm going by this line from the most recent article:

The two sections are to be re-shaped, based on finishing positions at the end of this season's regular fixtures.

The season ends after this weekend not when the Conference matches are completed.

The play offs are part of the season's regular fixtures

The play offs are part of the season's regular fixtures? Are you sure about that?

YES

RugbyFan100 wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:  It was based on the performance of each team in the regular stage of the season - not including the finals.  

The season ends after this weekend not when the Conference matches are completed

Nothing odd about it.  The season does end after the final not when the conference matches are completed.  

Obviously, it would have ended sooner for the Welsh teams - you’re right about that.

I see the files, folders and lawyers are out already......

Gonna be a doodle pip of a season.....

I think I'll go try and find Crusoe's island, in a dingy.

First 'burn' of the season from Pot Hale! We've not even made it to pre-season yet.

Yes. Dragons are top of the conference. End the season now.

Obviously from Dragons point of view, I’m concerned that we are in a different conference to Kings, as we potentially have a better chance of finishing bottom of ours now. I’ll be interested to see what the fixtures throw up and who has the home fixture out of us two.

Conference B apart from the Kings and Munster any team could finish 1-6.  There will be some scrap for 3rd place.

The Oracle wrote:First 'burn' of the season from Pot Hale!  We've not even made it to pre-season yet.  

It’s a tough job but someone’s gotta do it, Oracle.

Which teams play 10 home games, which teams play 11 home games. Anyone know how the extra home advantage on one season rankings that drives the next two years of conference make-up. Who ranked higher because of the extra home fixture?

Also, how for the coming year, who has the higher/lower number of home fixtures? And how many season tickets have been sold or potentially mis-sold. Did people pay the money in expectation of 10 games or 11?

Or in the year that it goes from 11 to 10 games does your club go quiet, and in the year it goes from 10 to 11 do they nudge up the price?

People complain about the Pro14 refs however, interesting that the Jaguares get to their first ever super rugby quarter final v the Chiefs and Glen Jackson is appointed as ref. Hmmm, that's a bit fishy, no?

RugbyFan100 wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:  It was based on the performance of each team in the regular stage of the season - not including the finals.  

That's odd. Geoff999rugby assured us that the regular season was after the play offs.

I knew you would misquote me

what I said was the play offs were taken into account LAST time (as it happens it made no difference then)
What I also said was I did not know what was going to happen THIS time

The play offs are part of the regular season to claim otherwise is bizarre - that doesn't change the above

Please be accurate when quoting others

thebandwagonsociety wrote:Which teams play 10 home games, which teams play 11 home games.  Anyone know how the extra home advantage on one season rankings that drives the next two years of conference make-up. Who ranked higher because of the extra home fixture?

Also, how for the coming year, who has the higher/lower number of home fixtures? And how many season tickets have been sold or potentially mis-sold.  Did people pay the money in expectation of 10 games or 11?

Or in the year that it goes from 11 to 10 games does your club go quiet, and in the year it goes from 10 to 11 do they nudge up the price?

Can only speak for Ulster who let us know in advance their would be no reduction and no increase because of the switches from 11 to 10 and back the other way.

geoff999rugby wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:  It was based on the performance of each team in the regular stage of the season - not including the finals.  

That's odd. Geoff999rugby assured us that the regular season was after the play offs.  

I knew you would misquote me

what I said was the play offs were taken into account LAST time (as it happens it made no difference then)
What I also said was I did not know what was going to happen THIS time

The play offs are part of the regular season to claim otherwise is bizarre - that doesn't change the above

Please be accurate when quoting others

I didn't misquote you. I quoted you. I didn't alter any of your words that you typed. It's plain to see what you said. And what you said was wrong.

Anyway, it does amuse me that a "league" could have the current champions seeded as 2nd best team. Only in the world of the Pro14 would this happen.

I said the play offs are part of the regular season, I also made it quite clear that I did not know whether the play offs
were to be taken into consideration when determining the conferences for the coming year.

If you can find a post from me where I said the play offs were going to be included in the calculation please quote it, in full
Put up or shut up !

geoff999rugby wrote:I said the play offs are part of the regular season

Which is quite clearly incorrect.

https://twitter.com/PRO14Official/status/1140606465650171906

But whatever, you want to tell yourself Geoff.

That quote states 'Hi, the rankings are set from the 21 Rounds of the regular season'
That does mean the other games are not part of the regular season.
It is stating that the determination of the conferences are confined to the 21 conference matches

If games are played every year and are scheduled every year then they are regular fixtures

You really need to look up the meaning of the word regular in the dictionary

geoff999rugby wrote:That quote states 'Hi, the rankings are set from the 21 Rounds of the regular season'
That does mean the other games are not part of the regular season.
It is stating that the determination of the conferences are confined to the 21 conference matches

If games are played every year and are scheduled every year then they are regular fixtures

You really need to look up the meaning of the word regular in the dictionary

Geoff - my understanding of the term regular season has always been that it means the regular league or Championship fixtures worked out in advance of season starting. Playoffs are not part of that. The PRO14 divides the Championship into 2 stages - The Conference Stage (Regular Season) and the Finals Stage (QF/SF/F).

In betting markets, this term is used all the time -
"All outright markets which state Regular Season are deemed to mean the official standings of teams after all matches of the predetermined season are played and before any playoff matches have commenced."
"Outright betting is for the regular season only, unless otherwise stated."
"Regular Season Winner
You're betting on: the team which finishes first in the league table of a competition (before any play-off or finals series begins)"
In Sports Reporting:
"Super Rugby Quarter-Finals Confirmed After End Of Regular Season"
From PRO14 - " Note, Season rankings based on overall points during regular rounds 2018/19.

In short, the regular season is based on the principle that teams earn points during it, hence it is used to determine the final placings. The playoffs don't change the final table of overall points. Same as in the Premiership or Top 14. Each union then ranks its teams accordingly based on the points they gained.

Hope that clarifies the matter for you.

Not really - the word regular means that which always occur
The play offs always occur and by definition are part of the regular season
I would not take betting definitions, I prefer a dictionary

'the regular season is based on the principle that teams earn points during it, hence it is used to determine the final placings'
Is a qualified definition - it is not a definition of a regular season
Having said all that I appreciate your post as it does show how a genuine misunderstanding of what constitutes a regular season has arisen - thanks for that.

Anyway I suspect others are bored on this and we have flogged it to death so I suggest stopping.

The bigger point is RugbytFan100 claimed I stated the conferences for 19/20 would be based on the standing after the complete 18/19 season including the play offs - that is simply not a true

geoff999rugby wrote:Not really - the word regular means that which always occur
The play offs always occur and by definition are part of the regular season
I would not take betting definitions, I prefer a dictionary

'the regular season is based on the principle that teams earn points during it, hence it is used to determine the final placings'
Is a qualified definition - it is not a definition of a regular season
Having said all that I appreciate your post as it does show how a genuine misunderstanding of what constitutes a regular season has arisen - thanks for that.

Anyway I suspect others are bored on this and we have flogged it to death so I suggest stopping.

The bigger point is RugbytFan100 claimed I stated the conferences for 19/20 would be based on the standing after the complete 18/19 season including the play offs - that is simply not a true

Well they would be based on the standings after the season has finished because the playoffs make no difference to the conference standings/league table. The regular season stage/playoff stage is used in many sports - google it. In some sports, the playoffs are called the post-season.

Not sure what either of you are arguing about. The standings in the conference don't change - they're based on the regular season Rounds 1 - 21 planned games. There are no points for the Finals stages. The ranking by each union of its teams either 2 or 4 teams is based on where they finished during the regular season. It's the same as they did the first time. Scarlets were first ranked in Wales, Dragons were fourth. Munster were ranked first and Leinster second - same as the season just finished.

Hope that explains.

What we have here is the dilution of the language by Americanisms.

Previously regular meant something done consistently over time. We have adopted the American meaning "normal"

Example.
Previously having "regular sex" meant that you were getting it twice a week.
Currently having "regular sex"  means that you are not doing anything weird.

"Can I get a regular skinny decaff Americano Mocha Choca Dooo Daa, to go?"

God, you people!

It's like taking teeth out with a chisel!!!!

Stop it!

A return to NORMALCY!!!!!!!!

St John The Enforcer wrote:What we have here is the dilution of the language by Americanisms.

Previously regular meant something done consistently over time. We have adopted the American meaning "normal"

Example.
Previously having "regular sex" meant that you were getting it twice a week.
Currently having "regular sex"  means that you are not doing anything weird.

All I know is when the doctor asks me if I’m regular, he isn’t asking if I’m normal.....

Like many things blame the Americans for destroying the language......

Pot Hale wrote:

St John The Enforcer wrote:What we have here is the dilution of the language by Americanisms.

Previously regular meant something done consistently over time. We have adopted the American meaning "normal"

Example.
Previously having "regular sex" meant that you were getting it twice a week.
Currently having "regular sex"  means that you are not doing anything weird.

All I know is when the doctor asks me  if I’m regular, he isn’t asking if I’m normal.....

..... he should though....

Whats with all the fiddling around?

Have a real league.

TightHEAD wrote:Whats with all the fiddling around?

Have a real league.

I have a feeling that you have a very narrow definition of a "real league".  You could perhaps try to explain what makes a real league rather than just slagging off something you do not like.

I hate the conference set up.

Why reinvent the wheel?

Just an omission from the league organisers that its not that exciting, hence why American sport does it.

TightHEAD wrote:I hate the conference set up.

Why reinvent the wheel?

Just an omission from the league organisers that its not that exciting, hence why American sport does it.

Because there are now too many fixtures. Of course they could have chosen not to expand, but that brought in extra income. Creating the conferences had bugger all to do with any perceived lack of excitement and is finance driven. As it will be when the English Premiership expands. Now personally I enjoy the premiership more, but that has nothing to do with the format and is down to my nationality and locality. The Pro14 is as much a real league as the Premiership - both play a pile of matches before the play-offs.

That you do not like conferences only affects your enjoyment.

I enjoy the conference system, but do think that its primary benefit is building established rivalries within a wider league system, I'm thinking mainly of the NFL with its historic rivalries contained within divisions.

Pro14 is still a new league, but I do think they need to settle on which conference teams are in if they are going to establish those games, but also keep incorporating the existing Welsh/Irish/Scottish rivalries.

Thinking about it some more, an NFL type schedule could work really well if the rumours are true and 2 more SA sides are going to join at some point, you could end up with 4 divisions of 4 split into 2 conferences. Assuming the general trend of wanting to reduce games applies..

Each team would play 18 games
All teams in own division home and away - 6 games
All teams in other division in conference home and away - 8 games
All teams from one division in other conference split home and away - 4 games

Each team would be guaranteed 9 home and 9 away games, if they want to increase the number of games to 20 you could have home and away games against the team finishing in the same position the prior season from the last remaining division

You'd then have the option of rotating divisions between conferences to keep the schedule fresh

I think most of us were a bit wary of the conference system when it first came in, partly because it all happened in a bit of a rush and who does like change?

Two years in and it is probably going much better than expected and is keeping the games meaningful and interesting for fans of most of the teams right up to the end of the season.

Having the two extra play off places and the meritocratic qualifying system for Europe has really helped as well but you would have to say that the Pro14 was a decent product last year, best year ever I would say and hopefully will improve further as some of the weaker teams get their acts together.

I suspect we could probably do with one more team per conference as an optimum number for the league, which would then do away with the need for the third derby match at the end of the season, which can be a dead rubber.

We may get that in the future if the rumours from SA are true, but we need to get the two existing teams playing a lot better first. We certainly don't need the addition of any uncompetitive teams or certainly ones that don't have the potential to improve, which most of the current weaker teams do have.

The only thing I would say about the change is that there were a few rivalries building that now have been diluted a bit but it creates the opportunity for new rivalries and hopefully those that were growing will help with attendances

Don't start me on attendances!

Lowest attendance - 1,142, Kings v Leinster.

Thats National league one territory.

TightHEAD wrote:Don't start me on attendances!

Lowest attendance - 1,142, Kings v Leinster.

Thats National league one territory.

TightHEAD wrote:Don't start me on attendances!

Lowest attendance - 1,142, Kings v Leinster.

Thats National league one territory.

Well it’s better than the attendance at Twickenham in the same week.

TightHEAD wrote:Don't start me on attendances!

Lowest attendance - 1,142, Kings v Leinster.

Thats National league one territory.

That is one of the most random comments I've ever seen. I'm still scrolling through the thread to see who you are replying to????

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:Don't start me on attendances!

Lowest attendance - 1,142, Kings v Leinster.

Thats National league one territory.

That is one of the most random comments I've ever seen. I'm still scrolling through the thread to see who you are replying to????

He's not - he's deliberately trolling. It's his thing.

marty2086 wrote:The only thing I would say about the change is that there were a few rivalries building that now have been diluted a bit but it creates the opportunity for new rivalries and hopefully those that were growing will help with attendances

Hope this helps!

The Conference system has worked well and the RFU are more likely to go for that choice compared to the T14 model.

Changing up the conferences is a good idea.  It means rivalries are strenghten as you only have one chance to beat them like the 6 Nations.  I am sure Glasgow and Ulster still have niggle after two years apart.  Also different teams each year are good for the fans.

I am excited for Con B next year as apart from the Kings and possibly Munster I have no idea where the rest are likely to finish.

TightHEAD wrote:

marty2086 wrote:The only thing I would say about the change is that there were a few rivalries building that now have been diluted a bit but it creates the opportunity for new rivalries and hopefully those that were growing will help with attendances

Hope this helps!

Leinster v Kings was not a growing rivalry.

Hope that helps.

Pot Hale wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:

marty2086 wrote:The only thing I would say about the change is that there were a few rivalries building that now have been diluted a bit but it creates the opportunity for new rivalries and hopefully those that were growing will help with attendances

Hope this helps!

Leinster v Kings was not a growing rivalry.

Hope that helps.  

Sure this counts as a new rivalry?

Why would people not want to watch the (then current) European Champs in SA?

Hope this helps.