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:Who ever they give a contract to would be a full time professional

Yes I know, but they would still be crap. They would have to get all their one or two pros playing around the world, fill in the gaps with other players until they get enough home grown players to step up to the mark.

Now I am not saying they would not be good eventually, but we have been saying this about the Italians for years, and if their national side is anything to go by they would be rubbish.

marty2086 wrote:Signing players does not equate to structures

I have never suggested this, but they do need a better structure than the Italian one because that is not going so well for the Italians.

marty2086 wrote:Outside of the NFL there what 1 professional league in the world yet they aren't doing too bad

Rugby Union.

The US have well established college system, which sustains professional leagues like the NFL hence its mention, along with the NBA and MLS.

And rugby is one of the fastest growing sports in the US with more and more colleges taking it up, I also seem to remember reading that some colleges were trying to get footballer players to switch codes because of the high attrition rate for them regarding making it to the NFL plus the injury rate.

marty2086 wrote:And rugby is one of the fastest growing sports in the US with more and more colleges taking it up, I also seem to remember reading that some colleges were trying to get footballer players to switch codes because of the high attrition rate for them regarding making it to the NFL plus the injury rate.

Except you missed out the bit where they tried pro rugby and it failed.

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:And rugby is one of the fastest growing sports in the US with more and more colleges taking it up, I also seem to remember reading that some colleges were trying to get footballer players to switch codes because of the high attrition rate for them regarding making it to the NFL plus the injury rate.

Except you missed out the bit where they tried pro rugby and it failed.

They didn't, a private entity did and they failed to pay the bills and it fell apart

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:And rugby is one of the fastest growing sports in the US with more and more colleges taking it up, I also seem to remember reading that some colleges were trying to get footballer players to switch codes because of the high attrition rate for them regarding making it to the NFL plus the injury rate.

Except you missed out the bit where they tried pro rugby and it failed.

They didn't, a private entity did and they failed to pay the bills and it fell apart

So it failed then, yes ?

Look, I do not want to do this too and froing with you anymore, it is sapping me, but obviously there cannot be that much interest in the USA as there would already be a league and it would not have gone bust. With the amount of people in America, surely something could have been done to save it, if it was as popular as you are making out.

Besides, I do not know what this has to do with how rubbish the USA Eagles are, and how they would improve with the same players in the Pro14.

I don't know about a US team being crap, esp when we do not know how it will be set up,
there are some useful US players already at a decent level
Joe Taufete'e Hooker Worcester Warriors
Titi Lamositele PropEngland Saracens
Paddy Ryan Prop Newcastle Falcons
Nick Civetta Lock Newcast
Tony Lamborn Flanker Hawke's Bay
Cam Dolan Number 8 Cardiff Blues
David Tameilau Number 8 Narbonne
AJ MacGinty Fly-half Sale Sharks
Marcel Brache Centre Western Force
Takudzwa Ngwenya wing ca brive

We also do not know will it be a US/CAD combined team with support from both Unions? Two academies supporting one team, maybe with some overseas players added to bring up depth (reduced over time). Maybe an agreement over 10/15 years, and will then it will be US only with the aim of CAD setting up a team of their own, with the academy in place and producing players already for 10 years.
There are too many unknowns to say they will struggle unless them recruit the All Black team. Untill more is known I will hold judgement. Even if its US only but with 15 NUSQ players reduced over time, then they will most likely be competitive, depending on the NUSQ.

The German team as well, will be interesting, I'm sure the Germany Union will be involved but to help set it up and running I am sure Hans-Peter Wild, will be involved. He was was instrumental in the formation of the Wild Rugby Academy, aimed at developing the sport of rugby union in Germany, financially supports Heidelberger RK, and chairman of Stade Français.

I do not expect him to be a sugar daddy, but I believe that he will work for the German union, to set up a Union owned team in Heidelberg, he's a German that has been pushing forward rugby in Germany and worked at the top of rugby also, I don't think there are any better for the job.
Heidelberg appears to be a good location, is one of the centres of Rugby union in Germany, four out of nine clubs in the Rugby-Bundesliga were from Heidelberg. Has no football team. Has a 5k stadium Fritz-Grunebaum-Sportpark, to start out in and the Wild Rugby Academy is based there.
I think that World rugby will also assist them, the same way as they are funding, Fijian Drua to play in the Australian National Rugby Championship.
I doubt it will be a German only team, but more likely the best European tier 2 players, or world tier 2 players. Imagine Georgian forwards with Fijian backs? With some Romanians and Germans that make the grade in as well? A tier 2 barbarians based in Heidelberg.

Leinster's Isa Nacewa and Jamison Gibson-Park have been sent home from South Africa due to visa issues. Hmmm. Something teams with Kiwis (lots of us!) might need to take into account. Apparently there are new tighter visa rules for kiwis in SA recently, for some reason. Perhaps a Pro14 issue that needs to be ironed out?

Big mistake from Leinsters part but I would imagine it was a bit of a scramble to get everything organised. The other teams will learn from their mistake.

Griff wrote:Leinster's Isa Nacewa and Jamison Gibson-Park have been sent home from South Africa due to visa issues.

Tough on Gibson-Park but Nacewa shouldn't have been playing in this one anyway after his high tackle last weekend.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

Griff wrote:Leinster's Isa Nacewa and Jamison Gibson-Park have been sent home from South Africa due to visa issues.

Tough on Gibson-Park but Nacewa shouldn't have been playing in this one anyway after his high tackle last weekend.

This rubbish again

profitius wrote:Big mistake from Leinsters part but I would imagine it was a bit of a scramble to get everything organised. The other teams will learn from their mistake.

Guy Easterbys statement on the matter

As of 16 January 2017 a visa is required for New Zealand nationals entering South Africa.

Unfortunately this visa was not applied for by Leinster Rugby on behalf of Jamison Gibson-Park and Isa Nacewa in advance of the squad leaving Dublin Airport on Tuesday afternoon. It was only brought to our attention upon landing into Johannesburg on Wednesday morning that this was now a requirement.

This was clearly an administrative oversight on our part and a valuable lesson has been learned.

Nick McCarthy will arrive in later today and for the moment no other player will be called up to the squad.

The squad is looking forward to the considerable challenge that awaits them against the Southern Kings.

marty2086 wrote:

profitius wrote:Big mistake from Leinsters part but I would imagine it was a bit of a scramble to get everything organised. The other teams will learn from their mistake.

Guy Easterbys statement on the matter

As of 16 January 2017 a visa is required for New Zealand nationals entering South Africa.

Unfortunately this visa was not applied for by Leinster Rugby on behalf of Jamison Gibson-Park and Isa Nacewa in advance of the squad leaving Dublin Airport on Tuesday afternoon. It was only brought to our attention upon landing into Johannesburg on Wednesday morning that this was now a requirement.

This was clearly an administrative oversight on our part and a valuable lesson has been learned.

Nick McCarthy will arrive in later today and for the moment no other player will be called up to the squad.

The squad is looking forward to the considerable challenge that awaits them against the Southern Kings.

Seems like a stupid mistake, but the pro12 only became a pro14 just over a month ago and the fixtures were a week or two later than that. Even if the visa was applied for immediately at that time, government administration speeds could easily have meant approval not coming through in time for these early fixtures. If I was any other club I'd be rechecking the passports all my players travel under and getting the relevant applications submitted asap to cover any trips.

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:And rugby is one of the fastest growing sports in the US with more and more colleges taking it up, I also seem to remember reading that some colleges were trying to get footballer players to switch codes because of the high attrition rate for them regarding making it to the NFL plus the injury rate.

Except you missed out the bit where they tried pro rugby and it failed.

They didn't, a private entity did and they failed to pay the bills and it fell apart

So it failed then, yes ?

Look, I do not want to do this too and froing with you anymore, it is sapping me, but obviously there cannot be that much interest in the USA as there would already be a league and it would not have gone bust. With the amount of people in America, surely something could have been done to save it, if it was as popular as you are making out.

Besides, I do not know what this has to do with how rubbish the USA Eagles are, and how they would improve with the same players in the Pro14.

Agree nearly completely with LD. I played rugby in NYC for a couple of years, have spent time all across North America (in Vancouver as we speak) and there is a tiny chance in my view that a decent US team develops without a lot of external, non-US money poured into it. Check out the History of the MLS for an example of how long it took for some success with a far more popular sport than rugby.

But I get the appeal, I really do - Millions of potential Irish, English etc descended viewers, Billions in Sports Sponsorship and TV deals, if rugby gets 1% of that we are all loaded!

Its unlikely.

Most US TV contracts are national or super-regional and a tiny 1-2 team league in NYC/Boston is not going to interest many broadcasters, especially as most rugby fans I know in the US only follow international rugby plus US sports. The time differences and the fact there is no one to talk to about it means that finding fellow PRO14 lovers is super difficult unless its Munster-Leinster match.

A US based team would need to be winning the league for YEARS before any mainstream american press will care about it, and how likely is a US team getting that good anytime soon? I think we should fully focus on SA as our expansion partner. I do not get the obsession with adding Georgia or Germany, they will be worse than the italians, and I do not see why PRO14 teams should sacrifice the quality of their league for little to no money.

Sorry but you are comparing setting up a a full league and the structures that go with it to setting up one team, maybe two at most?

MLS struggled at the start and still does because of a lack of quality, the best players are playing with players who are well below their level. Focusing all the resources into one entity pools the quality, lets not forget there is also a country up north that is also trying to develop their players. Im sure they'd love to play professionally at a high level closer to home.

This weekend Saracens play Newcastle in Philadelphia and the AP is shown on NBC Sports, so there is an appetite for the game in the US.

marty2086 wrote:Sorry but you are comparing setting up a a full league and the structures that go with it to setting up one team, maybe two at most?

MLS struggled at the start and still does because of a lack of quality, the best players are playing with players who are well below their level. Focusing all the resources into one entity pools the quality, lets not forget there is also a country up north that is also trying to develop their players. Im sure they'd love to play professionally at a high level closer to home.

Soccer in the US = 16M players
Rugby in the US = 115,000 players

That is a huge differential and it took decades to get a sustainable league off the ground. Sure 1-2 teams is a lot less of an issue, but who is going to pay for them? And even if US rugby scrapes enough money together for a team, how good will they be even with every good north american player crammed into them? 11th or 12th in the PRO14?

Americans are obsessed with winning. Having the 3rd or 4th worse team in a league from across the Atlantic will not catch on in the US when you are competing with every other US sport and the blanket coverage they get.

This weekend Saracens play Newcastle in Philadelphia and the AP is shown on NBC Sports, so there is an appetite for the game in the US.

Yep, 18,500 capacity sell out in a heavily promoted one-off game def shows the appetite... NBC showing AP games IS a good start, but I want to see successful viewing figures before I start to think things are changing.

Note, I was at the NZ match in Chicago and the stadium was rammed, but literally 2 blocks from the stadium, americans had no idea there was a rugby game on.

Don't get me wrong, I would LOVE rugby to be successful in the US. I would actually be able to see some matches. Connacht playing a NY Rugby team would blow my mind. But I know what the US rugby structures look like, I have played in them, I have met a lot of US rugby administrators over the years and they make the 1995 IRFU look like geniuses. If US rugby brings actual money, broadcast or otherwise, and a plan to the table for developing a team then we should consider them joining the PRO14, but until that happens we are kidding ourselves that they will be any better then a worse playing and supported Zebre.

Interesting article here, subscription needed:

Dire results, visa issues and the Currie Cup crossover - why Pro14 alarm bells are already ringing

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2017/09/14/dire-results-visa-issues-currie-cup-crossover-pro14-alarm/

RugbyFan100 wrote:Interesting article here, subscription needed:

Dire results, visa issues and the Currie Cup crossover - why Pro14 alarm bells are already ringing

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2017/09/14/dire-results-visa-issues-currie-cup-crossover-pro14-alarm/

As if we are going to subscribe for something that has clearly an agenda.

VinceWLB wrote:

As if we are going to subscribe for something that has clearly an agenda.

What agenda has the Telegraph newspaper got?

RugbyFan100 wrote:

VinceWLB wrote:

As if we are going to subscribe for something that has clearly an agenda.

What agenda has the Telegraph newspaper got?

Well they are using an administrative error by Leinster as a fault of the structures, it's hardly logical

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

VinceWLB wrote:

As if we are going to subscribe for something that has clearly an agenda.

What agenda has the Telegraph newspaper got?

Well they are using an administrative error by Leinster as a fault of the structures, it's hardly logical

What agenda has the Telegraph newspaper got?

wolfball wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Sorry but you are comparing setting up a a full league and the structures that go with it to setting up one team, maybe two at most?

MLS struggled at the start and still does because of a lack of quality, the best players are playing with players who are well below their level. Focusing all the resources into one entity pools the quality, lets not forget there is also a country up north that is also trying to develop their players. Im sure they'd love to play professionally at a high level closer to home.

Soccer in the US = 16M players
Rugby in the US = 115,000 players

That is a huge differential and it took decades to get a sustainable league off the ground. Sure 1-2 teams is a lot less of an issue, but who is going to pay for them? And even if US rugby scrapes enough money together for a team, how good will they be even with every good north american player crammed into them? 11th or 12th in the PRO14?

Americans are obsessed with winning. Having the 3rd or 4th worse team in a league from across the Atlantic will not catch on in the US when you are competing with every other US sport and the blanket coverage they get.

This weekend Saracens play Newcastle in Philadelphia and the AP is shown on NBC Sports, so there is an appetite for the game in the US.

Yep, 18,500 capacity sell out in a heavily promoted one-off game def shows the appetite...  NBC showing AP games IS a good start, but I want to see successful viewing figures before I start to think things are changing.

Note, I was at the NZ match in Chicago and the stadium was rammed, but literally 2 blocks from the stadium, americans had no idea there was a rugby game on.

Don't get me wrong, I would LOVE rugby to be successful in the US. I would actually be able to see some matches. Connacht playing a NY Rugby team would blow my mind. But I know what the US rugby structures look like, I have played in them, I have met a lot of US rugby administrators over the years and they make the 1995 IRFU look like geniuses. If US rugby brings actual money, broadcast or otherwise, and a plan to the table for developing a team then we should consider them joining the PRO14, but until that happens we are kidding ourselves that they will be any better then a worse playing and supported Zebre.

You do realise there are less than 80k registered players in Italy? 153k in Ireland?

You supplement the Americans with some Canadians, some Kiwis, Aussies, Pacific Islanders etc you lay the foundations of a decent team.

It didn't take decades to get the league of the ground, your own linked post says its anywhere between 3-8 years to get MLS going.

But the Americans have an owner for the DC franchise plus the backing of the Union so theres plenty to sustain it at least in the short term.

10 home games is not a huge leap for them to fill a stadium for if there is a fan base close by

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

VinceWLB wrote:

As if we are going to subscribe for something that has clearly an agenda.

What agenda has the Telegraph newspaper got?

Well they are using an administrative error by Leinster as a fault of the structures, it's hardly logical

What agenda has the Telegraph newspaper got?

I never said they had one though they do regularly like to sh!t on the Pro12/14

marty2086 wrote:You supplement the Americans with some Canadians, some Kiwis, Aussies, Pacific Islanders etc you lay the foundations of a decent team.

Canada are worse than they USA, why would they want to use their players ? Anyway why don't we just as the Baaba's to play in the Pro14 and be done with it.

All this trying to get the USA on board smacks of desperation. If I was in charge I would be doing all I could to get South Africa to jump ship from SANZAR and try and get into the Pro14 and 6N.

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:You supplement the Americans with some Canadians, some Kiwis, Aussies, Pacific Islanders etc you lay the foundations of a decent team.

Canada are worse than they USA, why would they want to use their players ? Anyway why don't we just as the Baaba's to play in the Pro14 and be done with it.

All this trying to get the USA on board smacks of desperation. If I was in charge I would be doing all I could to get South Africa to jump ship from SANZAR and try and get into the Pro14 and 6N.

Well you would

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:You supplement the Americans with some Canadians, some Kiwis, Aussies, Pacific Islanders etc you lay the foundations of a decent team.

Canada are worse than they USA, why would they want to use their players ? Anyway why don't we just as the Baaba's to play in the Pro14 and be done with it.

All this trying to get the USA on board smacks of desperation. If I was in charge I would be doing all I could to get South Africa to jump ship from SANZAR and try and get into the Pro14 and 6N.

Well you would

They are a rugby country.

USA are not interested in a team sport unless they have the monopoly over it, only play it in their country, and call the competition a World series, with all advertising all over it.

People should keep in mind that any expansion is not supposed to be a short term solution but a long term solution. The new teams will need time to grow. Connacht and Glasgow were usually the bottom 2 in the first few years of the celtic league and have since won the league.

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:You supplement the Americans with some Canadians, some Kiwis, Aussies, Pacific Islanders etc you lay the foundations of a decent team.

Canada are worse than they USA, why would they want to use their players ? Anyway why don't we just as the Baaba's to play in the Pro14 and be done with it.

All this trying to get the USA on board smacks of desperation. If I was in charge I would be doing all I could to get South Africa to jump ship from SANZAR and try and get into the Pro14 and 6N.

Well you would

They are a rugby country.

USA are not interested in a team sport unless they have the monopoly over it, only play it in their country, and call the competition a World series, with all advertising all over it.

Remind me again who sponsors the World Series and what part of the US the Blue Jays play in

profitius wrote:People should keep in mind that any expansion is not supposed to be a short term solution but a long term solution. The new teams will need time to grow. Connacht and Glasgow were usually the bottom 2 in the first few years of the celtic league and have since won the league.

This is true.

But we have also been saying this about the Italians since they have joined, very rarely have they been competitive. They do throw up the odd result here and then, but never have they strung a run together, or ever looked like breaking the habbit.

marty2086 wrote:

wolfball wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Sorry but you are comparing setting up a a full league and the structures that go with it to setting up one team, maybe two at most?

MLS struggled at the start and still does because of a lack of quality, the best players are playing with players who are well below their level. Focusing all the resources into one entity pools the quality, lets not forget there is also a country up north that is also trying to develop their players. Im sure they'd love to play professionally at a high level closer to home.

Soccer in the US = 16M players
Rugby in the US = 115,000 players

That is a huge differential and it took decades to get a sustainable league off the ground. Sure 1-2 teams is a lot less of an issue, but who is going to pay for them? And even if US rugby scrapes enough money together for a team, how good will they be even with every good north american player crammed into them? 11th or 12th in the PRO14?

Americans are obsessed with winning. Having the 3rd or 4th worse team in a league from across the Atlantic will not catch on in the US when you are competing with every other US sport and the blanket coverage they get.

This weekend Saracens play Newcastle in Philadelphia and the AP is shown on NBC Sports, so there is an appetite for the game in the US.

Yep, 18,500 capacity sell out in a heavily promoted one-off game def shows the appetite...  NBC showing AP games IS a good start, but I want to see successful viewing figures before I start to think things are changing.

Note, I was at the NZ match in Chicago and the stadium was rammed, but literally 2 blocks from the stadium, americans had no idea there was a rugby game on.

Don't get me wrong, I would LOVE rugby to be successful in the US. I would actually be able to see some matches. Connacht playing a NY Rugby team would blow my mind. But I know what the US rugby structures look like, I have played in them, I have met a lot of US rugby administrators over the years and they make the 1995 IRFU look like geniuses. If US rugby brings actual money, broadcast or otherwise, and a plan to the table for developing a team then we should consider them joining the PRO14, but until that happens we are kidding ourselves that they will be any better then a worse playing and supported Zebre.

You do realise there are less than 80k registered players in Italy? 153k in Ireland?

You supplement the Americans with some Canadians, some Kiwis, Aussies, Pacific Islanders etc you lay the foundations of a decent team.

It didn't take decades to get the league of the ground, your own linked post says its anywhere between 3-8 years to get MLS going.

But the Americans have an owner for the DC franchise plus the backing of the Union so theres plenty to sustain it at least in the short term.

10 home games is not a huge leap for them to fill a stadium for if there is a fan base close by

If a rich DC fellah wants to try his arm at starting a rugby team, I have no objection, I am just saying that knowing US rugby like I do I think it has huge odds against it and SA is the place our focus should be. Adding journeyman SH players hasn't made the Italians competitive, why would it make a US team? I would be delighted to be proved wrong, but this close by fan base I just do not see it in as NFL-mad a town as DC is. RE 3-8 years to establish MLS, they also had a 16 year pro league in the NASL to base the MSL on and it still took from the early 90s to 2002 for the MLS to stabilise and become profitable. And all that is with the most popular global sport with literally millions of US players.

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:You supplement the Americans with some Canadians, some Kiwis, Aussies, Pacific Islanders etc you lay the foundations of a decent team.

Canada are worse than they USA, why would they want to use their players ? Anyway why don't we just as the Baaba's to play in the Pro14 and be done with it.

All this trying to get the USA on board smacks of desperation. If I was in charge I would be doing all I could to get South Africa to jump ship from SANZAR and try and get into the Pro14 and 6N.

Well you would

They are a rugby country.

USA are not interested in a team sport unless they have the monopoly over it, only play it in their country, and call the competition a World series, with all advertising all over it.

Remind me again who sponsors the World Series and what part of the US the Blue Jays play in

The fact that there are Canadian franchises in US sports leagues which the US teams consistently dominate as well as the general american view that canada is little more than a northern US province, does not exactly support the argument that a tiny sport like rugby played and dominated in countries many time zones away from the US will take off there.

Looks like Brian Moore has his opinions of the South Africans in the Pro14.

And so has Reggie Corrigan.

Reggie Corrigan wrote:Both southern hemisphere teams have suffered heavy defeats, with Corrigan stating: "The last thing the Pro14 needs is two more whipping boys.

"The only reason the two SA teams are in the Pro14 is panic... it was all done last minute. SA rugby is in crisis mode right now."

The podcast quite good if you have time to listen to it:-

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2017/09/18/brian-moores-full-contact-episode-26-reason-two-south-african/

wolfball wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:You supplement the Americans with some Canadians, some Kiwis, Aussies, Pacific Islanders etc you lay the foundations of a decent team.

Canada are worse than they USA, why would they want to use their players ? Anyway why don't we just as the Baaba's to play in the Pro14 and be done with it.

All this trying to get the USA on board smacks of desperation. If I was in charge I would be doing all I could to get South Africa to jump ship from SANZAR and try and get into the Pro14 and 6N.

Well you would

They are a rugby country.

USA are not interested in a team sport unless they have the monopoly over it, only play it in their country, and call the competition a World series, with all advertising all over it.

Remind me again who sponsors the World Series and what part of the US the Blue Jays play in

The fact that there are Canadian franchises in US sports leagues which the US teams consistently dominate as well as the general american view that canada is little more than a northern US province, does not exactly support the argument that a tiny sport like rugby played and dominated in countries many time zones away from the US will take off there.

There is one Canadian franchise in MLB, in their 40 year history they have won 2 World Series and there have been nearly 20 other teams to win the Championship. In a competition with 30 teams and 29 are American of course they will dominate. They do however hold their own and it completely contradicts what LD said still

Rugby though is one of the fastest growing sports and I believe its the fastest growing team sport in the US

marty2086 wrote:Rugby though is one of the fastest growing sports and I believe its the fastest growing team sport in the US

7's maybe, because of the Olympics, but 15 a side, I don't think so, I would put soccerball ahead of it.

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Rugby though is one of the fastest growing sports and I believe its the fastest growing team sport in the US

7's maybe, because of the Olympics, but 15 a side, I don't think so, I would put soccerball ahead of it.

Well some of us work of facts rather than being completely clueless and making stuff

Both codes of the game are growing, 15s and 7s are being used to grow the game and the full code is being included as part of more college athletic programs with different codes being played at different times of the year.

Some of the top colleges set up the Varsity cup a few years back which is shown on NBC Sport

marty2086 wrote:Both codes of the game are growing, 15s and 7s are being used to grow the game and the full code is being included as part of more college athletic programs with different codes being played at different times of the year.

Please remind me, what happened to their pro league ? how long did it last ?

marty2086 wrote:Well some of us work of facts rather than being completely clueless and making stuff

Please feel free, enlighten me, show me these "facts" that show 15 aside rugby union is one of the fastest growing sports in the us.

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Both codes of the game are growing, 15s and 7s are being used to grow the game and the full code is being included as part of more college athletic programs with different codes being played at different times of the year.

Please remind me, what happened to their pro league ? how long did it last ?

marty2086 wrote:Well some of us work of facts rather than being completely clueless and making stuff

Please feel free, enlighten me, show me these "facts" that show 15 aside rugby union is one of the fastest growing sports in the us.

Their pro league was wound up because it was being run by a crook

Also I didn't say 15s was the fastest growing team sport, I said I believe rugby is. I didn't state it as fact

Then again

CNN wrote:It's the fastest growing team sport in the country, pulling in players from American Football, and the U.S. national side aims to be ranked within the top five in the world in five years.

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/03/04/sport/usa-rugby-nigel-melville/index.html

Or?

Inc. wrote:The Fastest-Growing Team Sport in the Nation Breeds Big Business

https://www.inc.com/mandy-antoniacci/the-fastest-growing-team-sport-in-the-nation-breeds-big-business.html

But 2014 figures from PHIT America list it at number 2 with a 10.7% over the previous 2 years with Lacrosse at 12.3%



Then again you say it how it is and say its different so that all must be wrong

So you are using information that is over a year old to prove your point, which does not prove your point by the way, it just suggests it does, then you put a chart up that shows that not only has the sport got the 4th least participants, but is the 6th fastest growing sport in the USA.

Now I know you like a good spin on things to suit your agenda, but please come on. When sports like adventure racing and lacrosse are doing better, no wonder rugby is struggling over there, is rugby one of the fastest growing sports in the USA ? Well yes, you can say that, but it is 6th in that list.

LordDowlais wrote:So you are using information that is over a year old to prove your point, which does not prove your point by the way, it just suggests it does, then you put a chart up that shows that not only has the sport got the 4th least participants, but is the 6th fastest growing sport in the USA.

Now I know you like a good spin on things to suit your agenda, but please come on. When sports like adventure racing and lacrosse are doing better, no wonder rugby is struggling over there, is rugby one of the fastest growing sports in the USA ?  Well yes, you can say that, but it is 6th in that list.

I can't find the tv deals for sports like Lacrosse, but, Sports Authority Inc. has signed a seven-figure deal to be an official partner of Major League Lacrosse (MLL) or about US$1 million annually. Not to bad sports like Lacrosse, it proves that there is money to be made without being a major sport.

LordDowlais wrote:So you are using information that is over a year old to prove your point, which does not prove your point by the way, it just suggests it does, then you put a chart up that shows that not only has the sport got the 4th least participants, but is the 6th fastest growing sport in the USA.

Now I know you like a good spin on things to suit your agenda, but please come on. When sports like adventure racing and lacrosse are doing better, no wonder rugby is struggling over there, is rugby one of the fastest growing sports in the USA ?  Well yes, you can say that, but it is 6th in that list.

You do realise that lacrosse is a pretty big deal in the US, especially at college level? Its played in hundreds of colleges including places like Duke and Penn State?

But again, I didn't say it was the fastest growing sport I said 'one of...' meaning it's on the list of the fastest growing sports. If you bothered reading you would know this.

I am sorry that those recording these things didn't publish figures yesterday so it was more up to date but then again if you bothered reading the article there is one that states there are figures showing that over 1.2m play rugby regularly in the US

Also you do realise that those who have less participants are more likely to grow faster rather than those with a large number because of maturation? Surely a successful businessman like yourself who know all about the product life cycle, it's a similar principle

marty, I am not arguing with you on this. Yes rugby is "one of" the fastest growing sports in the USA.

But it is not at the level that you are trying to make us all believe, and it is nowhere near the level needed to be competitive in the Pro14, neither is it big enough to make a mark in America.

I didn't try to make you believe it's any level

I stated it was one of the fastest growing sports and possibly the fastest growing team sport, you criticise me using year old figures to make my point yet you use 3 year old figures to dismiss my point?

USA has 119k registered players and a total of over 1.5m according to WR, Ireland have 109k registered and 109k in total. Those are 2017 figures by the way but USA don't have the numbers to compete with one team of which we don't know players and coaches

https://pulse-static-files.s3.amazonaws.com/worldrugby/document/2017/03/09/766b1947-4543-4bc5-9240-8d139046b653/2016-PARTICIPATION-MAP-FINAL.pdf

Is there a point at which fans of current Pro14 teams will start to get forlorn over the quality (or lack of it) in the competition?

The trade off:

E.g: with 2 SA teams, 2 ITA teams and 2 USA teams taking regular beatings from all other teams it's ok if there is an extra £10m on the table right?

What about if there's 2 SA teams, 2 ITA teams and 6 USA teams in a 2 division Pro20 with a £35m tv deal?

Does the constant depreciation of the overall quality, mean nothing as long as there is the chance of more money via an imporved tv deal?

marty2086 wrote:USA has 119k registered players and a total of over 1.5m according to WR, Ireland have 109k registered and 109k in total. Those are 2017 figures by the way but USA don't have the numbers to compete with one team of which we don't know players and coaches Rolling Eyes

Yet all this, and STILL no pro league, if it was as big as you are saying, why are they jumping into bed with us ? Why only one team ?

These are facts that you are not considering when you make these statements.

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:USA has 119k registered players and a total of over 1.5m according to WR, Ireland have 109k registered and 109k in total. Those are 2017 figures by the way but USA don't have the numbers to compete with one team of which we don't know players and coaches Rolling Eyes

Yet all this, and STILL no pro league, if it was as big as you are saying, why are they jumping into bed with us ? Why only one team ?

These are facts that you are not considering when you make these statements.

And did Wales, Ireland, Scotland or Italy have fully professional leagues prior to the Celtic League?

marty2086 wrote:

And did Wales, Ireland, Scotland or Italy have fully professional leagues prior to the Celtic League?

Wasn't that like 14 years ago

marty2086 wrote:And did Wales, Ireland, Scotland or Italy have fully professional leagues prior to the Celtic League?

I do not know about the Irish and the Scots, but I can confirm that Wales did.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

And did Wales, Ireland, Scotland or Italy have fully professional leagues prior to the Celtic League?

Wasn't that like 14 years ago

Sorry your point?

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:And did Wales, Ireland, Scotland or Italy have fully professional leagues prior to the Celtic League?

I do not know about the Irish and the Scots, but I can confirm that Wales did.

They were fully professional in Wales and not semi professional?

marty2086 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:And did Wales, Ireland, Scotland or Italy have fully professional leagues prior to the Celtic League?

I do not know about the Irish and the Scots, but I can confirm that Wales did.

They were fully professional in Wales and not semi professional?

Yes. Fully professional.

But for the most, they behaved like amateurs, and still do now.