The Future for the PRO14 - Part 4 - A Global Club Championship

First topic message reminder :

Following the Union Balldance of the last 12 months, another union has finally joined the party - SARU. The PRO12 league is gone with Martin Anayi's announcement of a global club championship involving conferences of teams from five unions with the potential for more to be included.

At first glance, it looks like a smart play - albeit somewhat fortuitous with SARU having to shed two teams from the Super Rugby competition. It brings together a lot more viewers that are attractive to media companies and business sponsors. Celtic Rugby Ltd still owns the competition with just its three founding shareholders - IRFU, SRU and WRU. No club or franchise owners involved. FIR failed to meet the required performance that would have made them shareholders at the beginning of July. And SARU weren't persuasive enough to get their seat at the table just yet. Rumours of a new company being set up failed to materialise. But they still signed up to a six-year agreement with £6m in funding each year.

It's not clear if this money is coming from SARU or directly from SuperSport, their broadcast partner. It is SARU who have signed the agreement to provide two teams so presumably the financial buck stops with them. It's more likely the £6m is a participation fee paid by SARU, similar to what FIR was charged when it joined in 2010. Media reports have said that the monies will be split equally amongst the 12 teams with travel and logistics costs for SA trips met centrally by Celtic Rugby Ltd since these will vary for clubs depending on whether they play one or both teams in SA.

Next on Anayi's agenda is the negotiation of a new media deal involving PPV and terrestrial TV, and online platforms. SuperSport may have already got their slice - all 20-22 home games involving Cheetahs and Kings plus some/all of the finals stages. Or perhaps not. Sky and possibly other PPV broadcasters such as Eir Sport may be willing to bid more to be the primary broadcaster for a higher profile, expanded Championship. But Anayi will want to keep a slice for terrestrial TV since they have a much better viewership reach. The current deal is for four years. Would a six-year deal be a better strategic move to guarantee increased revenues for a longer period? It would link in with the duration of the SARU agreement. And it would outlast the current participation agreement for the European Cup run by EPCR.

Further expansion is obviously the other key consideration with possibly other teams from SA, US and Europe coming on board. The danger is that Celtic Rugby goes too far and repeats the mistakes of Super Rugby. Better to build slowly to see if they will still come.

The coming season will be a fascinating one to see how the new structure and Championship beds in. Will attendances increase? Will there be more surprise results and potentially another new team to lift the cup next May?

Roll on 1 September.



Further info on PRO14 can be found here:
http://www.pro14rugby.org/2017/08/01/guinness-pro14-championship-qa/

marty2086 wrote:How many Irish, Scots, Italians and to a lesser extent Welsh expats live in the US? How many second or third generation who would love to watch a top level game in the US?

Good.

Whilst their at it, they can pay for the flights for the 30+ people that will need to travel, and put them all up in their homes, feed them, and drive to and from training and the stadium.

All sorted.

marty2086 wrote:
You mean do I know that the owner of a DC team will be a wealthy former US international who works with one of top athletic colleges in the US? Yes I do

No, I don't mean that.

marty2086 wrote:
How many Irish, Scots, Italians and to a lesser extent Welsh expats live in the US?

Do you know what an expat is? Because I'm pretty sure the expats you're referring to are well over 300 years old.....

mikey_dragon wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
How many Irish, Scots, Italians and to a lesser extent Welsh expats live in the US?

Do you know what an expat is? Because I'm pretty sure the expats you're referring to are well over 300 years old.....

Why exclude the comment about second and third generations that shows that I actually differentiate?

marty2086 wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
How many Irish, Scots, Italians and to a lesser extent Welsh expats live in the US?

Do you know what an expat is? Because I'm pretty sure the expats you're referring to are well over 300 years old.....

Why exclude the comment about second and third generations that shows that I actually differentiate?

Because I find it silly when Americans go over to Europe claiming to be Irish, or Italian.

Current Glasgow coach Dave Rennie:

"Tread carefully with expansions, we in super rugby brought teams in that aren't strong, and the competition was watered down. I would hate to see that happen here [in the pro14.]

Whatever comes here we need to make sure it is competitive and it's not just about 'growing the pot' "

There are numerous groups interested in setting up a team. One was New York builders, Murphy Kennedy Group. James Kennedy said they spoke with the pro12 last year about setting up a NY team but there were some disagreements about the timeframe.


Kennedy said his company wanted a longer period to set it up than the pro12 wanted. The pro12 were keen on getting it done faster.


That's just one group. There are plenty of other interested parties. Thing is, none of us know what's happening behind the scenes. The pro14 might have a great financial package already in place.


They've addressed the issue about weak teams. Anayi and the IRFUs Philip Browne said the pro14 unions will send coaches, players and other staff to any new side to help them get up and running. And in case any smart arse says it, obviously SA already had that expertise.


The Americans could put together a decent team if they started to bring their internationals home. There's plenty of US players in European clubs.


It may or may not work but let's not assume it's going to be a failure.

RugbyFan100 wrote:Current Glasgow coach Dave Rennie:

"Tread carefully with expansions, we in super rugby brought teams in that aren't strong, and the competition was watered down. I would hate to see that happen here [in the pro14.]

Whatever comes here we need to make sure it is competitive and it's not just about 'growing the pot' "

100% agree with that, and this man is talking from experience. Hope those words reach Anayi's ears.

mikey_dragon wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
How many Irish, Scots, Italians and to a lesser extent Welsh expats live in the US?

Do you know what an expat is? Because I'm pretty sure the expats you're referring to are well over 300 years old.....

Why exclude the comment about second and third generations that shows that I actually differentiate?

Because I find it silly when Americans go over to Europe claiming to be Irish, or Italian.

Whats that got to do with my point?

People can be both, just because they are raised in the US or any other country doesn't mean they aren't Irish or Italian

marty2086 wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
How many Irish, Scots, Italians and to a lesser extent Welsh expats live in the US?

Do you know what an expat is? Because I'm pretty sure the expats you're referring to are well over 300 years old.....

Why exclude the comment about second and third generations that shows that I actually differentiate?

Because I find it silly when Americans go over to Europe claiming to be Irish, or Italian.

Whats that got to do with my point?

People can be both, just because they are raised in the US or any other country doesn't mean they aren't Irish or Italian

You brought it up. I just don't see a significant amount of expats living there.

So that would make them American then, with great great great great great great great Italian, etc. grandparents.

There are over 6k Irish move to America annually and that's just those who identify as Irish there are probably a few more who identify as British. There are around 150k Irish born in the US currently mostly on the East coast. I think its about 100k for Italians. About 20% of the population identify as being of Irish or Italian heritage.

With the right marketing etc those are markets that can be tapped into along with the rest of the population.

I said that the league should have been in America last year for the Ireland ABs game laying some groundwork for a potential expansion.

Games should be played in conjunction with Italy, Scotland, Wales and Ireland playing games there and building the brand and establishing the players.

marty2086 wrote:There are over 6k Irish move to America annually and that's just those who identify as Irish there are probably a few more who identify as British. There are around 150k Irish born in the US currently mostly on the East coast. I think its about 100k for Italians. About 20% of the population identify as being of Irish or Italian heritage.

With the right marketing etc those are markets that can be tapped into along with the rest of the population.

I said that the league should have been in America last year for the Ireland ABs game laying some groundwork for a potential expansion.

Games should be played in conjunction with Italy, Scotland, Wales and Ireland playing games there and building the brand and establishing the players.

Interesting stats. When you say born there, I assume you mean born there to either Irish or Italian parents? I imagine that would be a good audience to get hooked if there are that many Europeans moving to the east coast. NZ and Ireland are probably the better known teams over there so I imagine that was a big occasion and did a lot to get the game recognised. Anyway, if we expand there then I hope it works out but the league will certainly require an upper and lower tier. If the American team has a chunk of their international team then they'll be pretty strong so no need to assume they'll just be getting thrashed.

Im lost, I didn't say born there so not sure which part you are talking about

mikey_dragon wrote:If the American team has a chunk of their international team then they'll be pretty strong so no need to assume they'll just be getting thrashed.

Do you honestly think so ? When was the last time the USA Eagles beat a team ranked in the top ten of the world ?

Currently the USA are ranked, I think, 17th in the world. I will stand to be corrected on this though. I cannot remember the last time they beat a team ranked above them. They're best result if memory serves me right is a draw with an Argentine select side at the start of this year.

Even if they had their entire national team in the Pro14 I reckon they would be no better than the Italian sides. But that is just my opinion.

marty2086 wrote:Im lost, I didn't say born there so not sure which part you are talking about

Think I got confused when I read "...There are around 150k Irish born in the US currently mostly on the East coast. I think its about 100k for Italians." but I see what you mean now.

LordDowlais wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:If the American team has a chunk of their international team then they'll be pretty strong so no need to assume they'll just be getting thrashed.

Do you honestly think so ? When was the last time the USA Eagles beat a team ranked in the top ten of the world ?

Currently the USA are ranked, I think, 17th in the world. I will stand to be corrected on this though. I cannot remember the last time they beat a team ranked above them. They're best result if memory serves me right is a draw with an Argentine select side at the start of this year.

Even if they had their entire national team in the Pro14 I reckon they would be no better than the Italian sides. But that is just my opinion.

I'm not sure but the Eagles are know for being pretty strong, at club level those players should be more competitive. The eagles are certainly better than the hopeless Italian sides.

LordDowlais wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:If the American team has a chunk of their international team then they'll be pretty strong so no need to assume they'll just be getting thrashed.

Do you honestly think so ? When was the last time the USA Eagles beat a team ranked in the top ten of the world ?

Currently the USA are ranked, I think, 17th in the world. I will stand to be corrected on this though. I cannot remember the last time they beat a team ranked above them. They're best result if memory serves me right is a draw with an Argentine select side at the start of this year.

Even if they had their entire national team in the Pro14 I reckon they would be no better than the Italian sides. But that is just my opinion.

How many of the top ten test teams play in the Pro14?

mikey_dragon wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Im lost, I didn't say born there so not sure which part you are talking about

Think I got confused when I read "...There are around 150k Irish born in the US currently mostly on the East coast. I think its about 100k for Italians." but I see what you mean now.

Yeah those numbers are actual immigrants, though I think it's just visas and doesn't include the likes of green cards and naturalisation

marty2086 wrote:How many of the top ten test teams play in the Pro14?

Why are you saying this ?

Ireland, Wales and Scotland are all top ten ranked nations, we are all competitive with each other,a team from the USA will be just like the Italian sides, because they do not have the players good enough to get their national team up any higher in the pecking order.

Unless they come in with a better structure than the Italians then they can leave it alone.

Ireland, Wales and Scotland don't play in the Pro14, teams from there do.

marty2086 wrote:Ireland, Wales and Scotland don't play in the Pro14, teams from there do.

They use the same players though. FFS marty. Why are you always this way ?

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Ireland, Wales and Scotland don't play in the Pro14, teams from there do.

They use the same players though. FFS marty. Why are you always this way ?

THEY AREN'T THE SAME TEAMS THOUGH

They aren't the same quality, the don't compete in the 6Ns, it's not complicated unless its you

Whatever about possible wealthy benefactors getting involved, USA Rugby will have to support this strongly as they will be the union signing a participation agreement.

Coaching and development resources will be provided by the existing Unions to help get team competitive.  Travel and logistics costs will be covered by sponsorship as stated previously by Anayi & Co. it won't be a cost burden for the existing clubs, similar to the SARU agreement.

Pot Hale wrote:Whatever about possible wealthy benefactors getting involved, USA Rugby will have to support this strongly as they will be the union signing a participation agreement.

Which brings about another contradictory statement from Pro12 chief Martin Anayi:

"We don't really want a model that copies the English and French, because we want to be here in 10 or 20 years time.

"I don't think it is sustainable. You look at Biarritz and clubs who have overspent in France regardless of whether they have a 98 million euro deal from Canal Plus," Anayi continued.

"That wealthy benefactor model is only as good as that wealthy benefactor wanting to be there and carry on spending.

"We don't see that as the be all and end all of rugby generally. The market forces do not allow for the kind of spend they are spending.

"No matter how much money comes into those clubs they will spend it on higher wages. We don't think that is the right model."

The pro14 seems to be making it up as they go along.

marty, look I am trying with you here. I really am, no wonder other members are laughing at us two on here.

Lets take Ireland for example. Ireland are what ? 4th in the rankings or 3rd ? They get their players from teams in the Pro14. Which must mean the teams are pretty competitive at this level as they have players who are achieving a high ranking on the international stage.

Look how rubbish the Italians are, always wooden spooners 14th in the world rankings, the same players in the Pro14 mostly. So how do you expect a team ranked lower than Italy, to use their players in the Pro14 and be better ?

Look this is not rocket science. IN MY OPINION, you could put Steve Hansen and Eddie Jones in charge of this potential team choc a block full of American internationals but they would still be crap. Just like they are at international level.

Shall we move this topic slightly sideways, even though it should still come under this topic.

Somebody in the last couple of weeks mentioned about the possibility of our League being covered by one TV deal (I'm sure a link can be found for this). It was reported yesterday that Sky have taken the rights for the English Football League (EFL) for the next 5 years at a cost of £600 Million, that is £120 Million a year, that is to cover the rights for 150 live matches.

If they are prepared to pay that sort of money for a below the top tier of Football in England, why wouldn't they pay substantially more for the exclusive rights to say 3 live matches every weekend of our League than what they are paying ATM. Before jumping all over this I don't mean more than the £600M, just a lot more than we are getting at the moment. Some of the areas that Sky don't cover separate deals could be negotiated, as long as they are not pittances.

There are 21 weekends with group matches, and 3 rounds of knockout Rugby, making aprox 70 matches available to be screened, I'm pretty sure any self respecting negotiator should be able to get well over half the amounts of money that the EFL have negotiated.

Discuss

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Ireland, Wales and Scotland don't play in the Pro14, teams from there do.

They use the same players though. FFS marty. Why are you always this way ?

Welsh and Scottish test players do not all play in the PRO14, LD.

wayne wrote:

There are 21 weekends with group matches, and 3 rounds of knockout Rugby, making aprox 70 matches available to be screened, I'm pretty sure any self respecting negotiator should be able to get well over half the amounts of money that the EFL have negotiated.

Discuss

Sorry, are you actually saying that sky should ditch their 1 game a week deal of £5m and pay £60m a year for 3 games a week?

What worries me about the US is how quick they were to disband their pro league. It only lasted from April 2016 to January 2017. It just sort of dissolved and disappeared mid season/off season, didn't it? Teams left and players weren't getting paid all within on season of the launch (if I remember correctly). Would hate for that to happen to one of their teams in the pro15. Would massively balls up the conferences, seedings, playoffs, etc. There needs to be a commitment to it long term and the resources to do that. Obviously.

Pot Hale wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Ireland, Wales and Scotland don't play in the Pro14, teams from there do.

They use the same players though. FFS marty. Why are you always this way ?

Welsh and Scottish test players do not all play in the PRO14, LD.

Most of the Welsh one's do.

wayne wrote:Shall we move this topic slightly sideways, even though it should still come under this topic.

Somebody in the last couple of weeks mentioned about the possibility of our League being covered by one TV deal (I'm sure a link can be found for this). It was reported yesterday that Sky have taken the rights for the English Football League (EFL) for the next 5 years at a cost of £600 Million, that is £120 Million a year, that is to cover the rights for 150 live matches.

If they are prepared to pay that sort of money for a below the top tier of Football in England, why wouldn't they pay substantially more for the exclusive rights to say 3 live matches every weekend of our League than what they are paying ATM. Before jumping all over this I don't mean more than the £600M, just a lot more than we are getting at the moment. Some of the areas that Sky don't cover separate deals could be negotiated, as long as they are not pittances.

There are 21 weekends with group matches, and 3 rounds of knockout Rugby, making aprox 70 matches available to be screened, I'm pretty sure any self respecting negotiator should be able to get well over half the amounts of money that the EFL have negotiated.

Discuss

You're right Wayne. There was a media story on this topic in the last few weeks based on comments made by Anayi at the PRO14 launch I think. He said he wasn't averse to the idea of a single broadcaster and that this had been done with other kinds of comps at a similar stage of development. Absolute live exclusivity would mean less games on TV with the hope that this would drive gate attendances. But Anayi also said that they might be inclined to take different approaches with different markets. Online/social media could play a bigger role next time around.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

wayne wrote:

There are 21 weekends with group matches, and 3 rounds of knockout Rugby, making aprox 70 matches available to be screened, I'm pretty sure any self respecting negotiator should be able to get well over half the amounts of money that the EFL have negotiated.

Discuss

Sorry, are you actually saying that sky should ditch their 1 game a week deal of £5m and pay £60m a year for 3 games a week?

It's not a matter of 1 match compared to 3. It concerns exclusivity, I just mentioned 3 as a starting point.

wayne wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

wayne wrote:

There are 21 weekends with group matches, and 3 rounds of knockout Rugby, making aprox 70 matches available to be screened, I'm pretty sure any self respecting negotiator should be able to get well over half the amounts of money that the EFL have negotiated.

Discuss

Sorry, are you actually saying that sky should ditch their 1 game a week deal of £5m and pay £60m a year for 3 games a week?

It's not a matter of 1 match compared to 3. It concerns exclusivity, I just mentioned 3 as a starting point.

But you're saying that "any self respecting negotiator should be able to get well over £60m" per year for the rights to the pro14 yes?

I think SKY look at how much they can sell as well. For example, how many countries around the world want to show Premiership football, SKY can sell all these other countries access to these games at a very healthy profit.

Can they do the same with the Pro14 ?

Is there much interest outside of the countries that are in it ?

This is where the bargaining chip comes from.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

wayne wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

wayne wrote:

There are 21 weekends with group matches, and 3 rounds of knockout Rugby, making aprox 70 matches available to be screened, I'm pretty sure any self respecting negotiator should be able to get well over half the amounts of money that the EFL have negotiated.

Discuss

Sorry, are you actually saying that sky should ditch their 1 game a week deal of £5m and pay £60m a year for 3 games a week?

It's not a matter of 1 match compared to 3. It concerns exclusivity, I just mentioned 3 as a starting point.

But you're saying that "any self respecting negotiator should be able to get well over £60m" per year for the rights to the pro14 yes?

No he's not, RF. He means a substantial jump on what the league gets now.

Pot Hale wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

wayne wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

wayne wrote:

There are 21 weekends with group matches, and 3 rounds of knockout Rugby, making aprox 70 matches available to be screened, I'm pretty sure any self respecting negotiator should be able to get well over half the amounts of money that the EFL have negotiated.

Discuss

Sorry, are you actually saying that sky should ditch their 1 game a week deal of £5m and pay £60m a year for 3 games a week?

It's not a matter of 1 match compared to 3. It concerns exclusivity, I just mentioned 3 as a starting point.

But you're saying that "any self respecting negotiator should be able to get well over £60m" per year for the rights to the pro14 yes?

No he's not, RF.  He means a substantial jump on what the league gets now.

"well over half the amounts of money that the EFL have negotiated."

= well over £60m

RugbyFan100 wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

wayne wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

wayne wrote:

There are 21 weekends with group matches, and 3 rounds of knockout Rugby, making aprox 70 matches available to be screened, I'm pretty sure any self respecting negotiator should be able to get well over half the amounts of money that the EFL have negotiated.

Discuss

Sorry, are you actually saying that sky should ditch their 1 game a week deal of £5m and pay £60m a year for 3 games a week?

It's not a matter of 1 match compared to 3. It concerns exclusivity, I just mentioned 3 as a starting point.

But you're saying that "any self respecting negotiator should be able to get well over £60m" per year for the rights to the pro14 yes?

No he's not, RF.  He means a substantial jump on what the league gets now.

"well over half the amounts of money that the EFL have negotiated."

= well over £60m

Yes - we could all see where your incredulity was headed. A little hyperbole does tend to happen every now and then on this forum.

Pot Hale wrote:

Yes - we could all see where your incredulity was headed.  A little hyperbole does tend to happen every now and then on this forum.  

I'm just a little worried that people's expectations might be, how can I say........... "not met", when the new tv deal is agreed.

LordDowlais wrote:marty, look I am trying with you here. I really am, no wonder other members are laughing at us two on here.

Lets take Ireland for example. Ireland are what ? 4th in the rankings or 3rd ? They get their players from teams in the Pro14. Which must mean the teams are pretty competitive at this level as they have players who are achieving a high ranking on the international stage.

Look how rubbish the Italians are, always wooden spooners 14th in the world rankings, the same players in the Pro14 mostly. So how do you expect a team ranked lower than Italy, to use their players in the Pro14 and be better ?

Look this is not rocket science. IN MY OPINION, you could put Steve Hansen and Eddie Jones in charge of this potential team choc a block full of American internationals but they would still be crap. Just like they are at international level.

So a team made up with a few players from the Ireland team are as good as the Ireland team, logic seems clear as mud

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:marty, look I am trying with you here. I really am, no wonder other members are laughing at us two on here.

Lets take Ireland for example. Ireland are what ? 4th in the rankings or 3rd ? They get their players from teams in the Pro14. Which must mean the teams are pretty competitive at this level as they have players who are achieving a high ranking on the international stage.

Look how rubbish the Italians are, always wooden spooners 14th in the world rankings, the same players in the Pro14 mostly. So how do you expect a team ranked lower than Italy, to use their players in the Pro14 and be better ?

Look this is not rocket science. IN MY OPINION, you could put Steve Hansen and Eddie Jones in charge of this potential team choc a block full of American internationals but they would still be crap. Just like they are at international level.

So a team made up with a few players from the Ireland team are as good as the Ireland team, logic seems clear as mud

Can anybody help with this one ?

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:marty, look I am trying with you here. I really am, no wonder other members are laughing at us two on here.

Lets take Ireland for example. Ireland are what ? 4th in the rankings or 3rd ? They get their players from teams in the Pro14. Which must mean the teams are pretty competitive at this level as they have players who are achieving a high ranking on the international stage.

Look how rubbish the Italians are, always wooden spooners 14th in the world rankings, the same players in the Pro14 mostly. So how do you expect a team ranked lower than Italy, to use their players in the Pro14 and be better ?

Look this is not rocket science. IN MY OPINION, you could put Steve Hansen and Eddie Jones in charge of this potential team choc a block full of American internationals but they would still be crap. Just like they are at international level.

So a team made up with a few players from the Ireland team are as good as the Ireland team, logic seems clear as mud

Can anybody help with this one ?

Well you used Irelands world ranking to suggest that an American team, cannot compete with the Irish provinces and all the rest because the US team aren't ranked as high

Its all irrelevant, surely this stupid schtick is an act?

LordDowlais wrote:I think SKY look at how much they can sell as well. For example, how many countries around the world want to show Premiership football, SKY can sell all these other countries access to these games at a very healthy profit.

Can they do the same with the Pro14 ?

Is there much interest outside of the countries that are in it ?

This is where the bargaining chip comes from.

That could depend on what rights to what territories are being offered by PRO14 to a primary or sole broadcaster. It might only be live rights to the UK and Ireland market, because PRO14 might judge they would get a better deal selling secondary rights on to other markets themselves.

Pot Hale wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:I think SKY look at how much they can sell as well. For example, how many countries around the world want to show Premiership football, SKY can sell all these other countries access to these games at a very healthy profit.

Can they do the same with the Pro14 ?

Is there much interest outside of the countries that are in it ?

This is where the bargaining chip comes from.

That could depend on what rights to what territories are being offered by PRO14 to a primary or sole broadcaster.  It might only be live rights to the UK and Ireland market, because PRO14 might judge they would get a better deal selling secondary rights on to other markets themselves.  

Sky don't sell the Premier League packages

Marty, please listen, then leave me alone.

THE SAME PLAYERS ARE BEING USED. I can only gauge how the Americans will do by judging how their players perform for their country, which is not very good, in fact it is very poor by other countries standards.

Despite results, Wales/Ireland/Scotland our regions/provinces/super teams and countries players are all pretty competitive, with each other and other nations. In contrast Italy are not. But they are better than the USA.

Now, just because all these American internationals who have wopping wins over nations like Chile, how do you reckon that just beacause they will be called something like Washington they will transform into this magnificent side that will be straight away better than what they are when the are called USA ? They will still be the same players.

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:marty, look I am trying with you here. I really am, no wonder other members are laughing at us two on here.

Lets take Ireland for example. Ireland are what ? 4th in the rankings or 3rd ? They get their players from teams in the Pro14. Which must mean the teams are pretty competitive at this level as they have players who are achieving a high ranking on the international stage.

Look how rubbish the Italians are, always wooden spooners 14th in the world rankings, the same players in the Pro14 mostly. So how do you expect a team ranked lower than Italy, to use their players in the Pro14 and be better ?

Look this is not rocket science. IN MY OPINION, you could put Steve Hansen and Eddie Jones in charge of this potential team choc a block full of American internationals but they would still be crap. Just like they are at international level.

So a team made up with a few players from the Ireland team are as good as the Ireland team, logic seems clear as mud

Can anybody help with this one ?

Yes. Use the Jaguares and Argentina as a current operating example to make your point.

Like most nations outside of Tier 1 they struggle to get their squad together regularly, many of their squad also play at semi pro level so don't get to train day in day out

A move to professional rugby should see a pretty steady improvement in the Eagles standards.

Comparing them to Italy who came in to the league without any proper structures in place, the US have more and more colleges taking up the game creating a developmental pathway to grow the game and develop players for a potential franchise which is something the Italians were lacking for a long time.

A good team of 15 players etc when split over 4 teams will not necessarily create 4 good teams as.you'd then have to add other players into the mix. The argument initially should be whether those non internationals or internationals of other countries are as good before talking about sum of parts etc.

No 7&1/2 wrote:A good team of 15 players etc when split over 4 teams will not necessarily create 4 good teams as.you'd then have to add other players into the mix. The argument initially should be whether those non internationals or internationals of other countries are as good before talking about sum of parts etc.

You throw in different coaches, different calls and systems and its all a mystery as to how it would turn out. Especially if there is also a sprinkling of ABs, Springboks and Wallabies they could be a force.

I wonder how many players would fancy playing and living in the States

marty2086 wrote:Especially if there is also a sprinkling of ABs, Springboks and Wallabies they could be a force.

I said earlier in this thread that they would have to buy the whole All Black team to be any good, the players they have now are not good enough, not even if you had the best coaches in the world in charge of them. They do not have enough full time professionals.

I also said this:-

LordDowlais wrote:Unless they come in with a better structure than the Italians then they can leave it alone.

Now you are saying the same things and are trying to argue with me about it.

-Who ever they give a contract to would be a full time professional
-Signing players does not equate to structures
-Outside of the NFL there what 1 professional league in the world yet they aren't doing too bad