The Future for the PRO14 - Part 5 - How are the Unions doing?

First topic message reminder :

Some of the Irish provinces seem to be doing fine.  Munster might be able to pay back a few shillings to Landsdowne HQ this season.  Leinster have finally started sharing. Connacht have survived Mr Grumpy and have managed another Challenge Cup quarter.  Could they make the final?
Ulster need a separate topic to cover all their issues.  Oh - and they have one.  

Italy.  Treviso are now Benetton and improving to the point of it being grudgingly admitted outside of Italy.  Zebre?  See Ulster above.  The FIR continue to fiddle the other unions while Rome burns.  

Scarlets on the other hand continue to see Byrne roam.  And sidestep.  The WRU must be grinning from ear to ear as Scarlets are simply steaming.   Who needs union monies when you can assemble a squad like this?  Top of their conference and finishing top of their pool in front of a packed house to gain a home quarterfinal in the Champions Cup. What more could you ask for?  Possibly a sneaky Welsh cap for Tadgh Beirne but little else to complain about.  If Gatland can harness the Scarlets, a la Leinster and Glasgow, and get Wales moving to the top in the Six Nations, the WRU might need to send a little more love (hard cash) over Llanelli way to encourage them further.  

Dragons got bought by the WRU.  And then hired an Irish coach. And then fixed their pitch.  And then things went so so.  And the jury went out on Jackman.  And then they started losing. A lot.  And then they had lots of announcements about new players for next season. And then they got knocked out of the Challenge Cup.  
And now it’s a wait for another season.  Not sure if the jury has come back in yet but Jackman has a battle on his hands.  

Ospreys continue to plumb new depths and eventually decided to fire their coach after failing in the Champions Cup once again.  Will they be in the Challenge Cup next season?

Cardiff have at least made the knockouts of the Challenge Cup but they’re still batting eyes at the WRU some say.  Will they succumb to the union’s clutches?

All the way down to Port Elizabeth for the new entrants.

The Southern Kings? See Zebre.  X 100.   Massive squad revamp needed and SARU investment.

Cheetahs?   Just when they’d notched another triumph on their league bedpost, came the news that another of their players had been nicked for another SR side. Their top try scorer is leaving too.  They’ve 8 wins in the bag, can they get a few more to make it into the playoffs?  

And finally the Scots.  Cockerill is definitely making inroads and if it doesn’t happen this season, they’ll be making life difficult in 2018/19 for a few of the higher up clubs. Their sassy and classy neighbours look strong prospects for the Championship title with a single loss so far.   Not too long ago, the SRU was making plaintive noises about the costs of running the two clubs and seeking private investors.  Then they went quiet.  Then they announced a profit for the first time in a long while.  And investment in academy is starting to pay off.  And the Test team isn’t doing too shabby either.  SRU CEO, Mark Dodson, says long term objective is to secure external investment to ensure the future of the game.  

We’ve had the first inkling of a change and expected increase in TV revenues for the Championship with EirSport announced as the new broadcaster for games in the Irish territory.  Anayi & Co still have to deliver a substantial increase on previous revenues.  The SARU/SuperSport deal has ensured part of that with a reported 36m six-year agreement.   What will GB deliver?

Private investment and Union control/money.  Will a happy marriage eventually be reached?

Not sure if anyone saw but Zebre got 5k at the weekend

Brendan wrote:Not sure if anyone saw but Zebre got 5k at the weekend

Almost 6k but that was at a different venue in L'Aquila.

Kings also had a decent crowd last week when they moved to George, back to PE this week and it was barely 3.5k..

VinceWLB wrote:

Brendan wrote:Not sure if anyone saw but Zebre got 5k at the weekend

Almost 6k but that was at a different venue in L'Aquila.

Kings also had a decent crowd last week when they moved to George, back to PE this week and it was barely 3.5k..

Think there was some sort of rugby festival on in L'Aquila at the weekend with kids games and a club game too so they tapped into a crowd there, it's something clubs need to look at. Picking the right ground and building up a solid fanbase but one off games might draw a crowd that regular games don't

marty2086 wrote:

VinceWLB wrote:

Brendan wrote:Not sure if anyone saw but Zebre got 5k at the weekend

Almost 6k but that was at a different venue in L'Aquila.

Kings also had a decent crowd last week when they moved to George, back to PE this week and it was barely 3.5k..

Think there was some sort of rugby festival on in L'Aquila at the weekend with kids games and a club game too so they tapped into a crowd there, it's something clubs need to look at. Picking the right ground and building up a solid fanbase but one off games might draw a crowd that regular games don't

Will be interesting to see the size of the crowd for the derby game hopefully they can get over 6k

They have both surpassed their highest attendance and also average is up .

One downside was the 1k who watched Zebre take on Cardiff

How are the attendances in Wales and Scotland this year compared to previous years?

Intotouch wrote:How are the attendances in Wales and Scotland this year compared to previous years?

http://www.cardiffrfcfans.co.uk/analysis/split_attendances_pro14.php

It looks like crowds are down in Wales and Ireland.

It looks like someone forgot there is a round of games to go in both countries, derbies none the less

Crowds are up not down.
That table shows 46,000 less for Ireland with 4 less fixtures.
2 more to be played and 2 less because of the change in structure.
After this coming weekend the average per game will be up.
Same for Scotland so crowds continue to rise, albeit modestly

Scotland should go up by at least 10-12k once the derby game is included after losing a game. They are limited in how far they can grow because Scotstoun needs to be expanded (sell out's every game) and Edinburgh have not found a proper home yet. There are rumours of a 6k stadium in the works for Edinburgh that may raise the attendances going forward. If Scotstoun (or another home for Glasgow) gets to 10k, Scotland's numbers would bounce.

Wales and Ireland should be down slightly on totals having lost 2 home fixtures. Italy should be matching 2011 (2nd best season so far) after losing a home game which is great news. South Africa have almost matched the Scots clubs after not knowing if they were going to exist 2 months before the season.

With a strange format, this is not a bad result. Certainly there is a path forward.

marty2086 wrote:It looks like someone forgot there is a round of games to go in both countries, derbies none the less

If you add on the likely crowd at PS etc. you'll still see them down.

So nobody forgot.

Did you forget that the IRFU employ all of the players in Ireland? I do remember you spending a lot of your time, and chasing me on twitter, trying to claim otherwise.

And, yet again, all you achieved was to make yourself look silly.

geoff999rugby wrote:Crowds are up not down.
That table shows 46,000 less for Ireland with 4 less fixtures.
2 more to be played and 2 less because of the change in structure.
After this coming weekend the average per game will be up.
Same for Scotland so crowds continue to rise, albeit modestly

It's total crowds, not average crowds, by the way. You seem to be using a different measurement.

http://www.cardiffrfcfans.co.uk/analysis/club_attendances.php?seasonID=23&clubID=20

That link will help if you're looking for average attendances.

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:It looks like someone forgot there is a round of games to go in both countries, derbies none the less

If you add on the likely crowd at PS etc. you'll still see them down.

So nobody forgot.

Did you forget that the IRFU employ all of the players in Ireland? I do remember you spending a lot of your time, and chasing me on twitter, trying to claim otherwise.

And, yet again, all you achieved was to make yourself look silly.

Awww bless

Chasing you? You mean when I replied to a comment you made on an account I follow? That time?

The same time when you told me to prove what I said or I was a liar, then when I used the same line on you, you called me childish and blocked me?

PhilBB wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:Crowds are up not down.
That table shows 46,000 less for Ireland with 4 less fixtures.
2 more to be played and 2 less because of the change in structure.
After this coming weekend the average per game will be up.
Same for Scotland so crowds continue to rise, albeit modestly

It's total crowds, not average crowds, by the way. You seem to be using a different measurement.

No he's using the more accurate measurement since there are less games, the average crowd is a better barometer

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:It looks like someone forgot there is a round of games to go in both countries, derbies none the less

If you add on the likely crowd at PS etc. you'll still see them down.

So nobody forgot.

Did you forget that the IRFU employ all of the players in Ireland? I do remember you spending a lot of your time, and chasing me on twitter, trying to claim otherwise.

And, yet again, all you achieved was to make yourself look silly.

Awww bless

Chasing you? You mean when I replied to a comment you made on an account I follow? That time?

The same time when you told me to prove what I said or I was a liar, then when I used the same line on you, you called me childish and blocked me?

Revisionism is your friend, it seems. But welcome back to interacting with me.

There's a tweet waiting for your reply. You know, when you claimed the IRFU didn't employ every player in Ireland? Remember making that claim?

Whoopsie, eh? Being schooled on the set up of the team you claim to be a supporter of. That's embarrassing.

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:Crowds are up not down.
That table shows 46,000 less for Ireland with 4 less fixtures.
2 more to be played and 2 less because of the change in structure.
After this coming weekend the average per game will be up.
Same for Scotland so crowds continue to rise, albeit modestly

It's total crowds, not average crowds, by the way. You seem to be using a different measurement.

No he's using the more accurate measurement since there are less games, the average crowd is a better barometer

"How are the attendances in Wales and Scotland this year compared to previous years?" was the question.

Average is a word missing from the question.

Either way, the average attendance link is there for you to knock your socks off with.

1,000 down in Belfast. Why's that? Not enough Friday evening games? Not attracting the female support as much as they used to?

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:It looks like someone forgot there is a round of games to go in both countries, derbies none the less

If you add on the likely crowd at PS etc. you'll still see them down.

So nobody forgot.

Did you forget that the IRFU employ all of the players in Ireland? I do remember you spending a lot of your time, and chasing me on twitter, trying to claim otherwise.

And, yet again, all you achieved was to make yourself look silly.

Awww bless

Chasing you? You mean when I replied to a comment you made on an account I follow? That time?

The same time when you told me to prove what I said or I was a liar, then when I used the same line on you, you called me childish and blocked me?

Revisionism is your friend, it seems. But welcome back to interacting with me.

There's a tweet waiting for your reply. You know, when you claimed the IRFU didn't employ every player in Ireland? Remember making that claim?

Whoopsie, eh? Being schooled on the set up of the team you claim to be a supporter of. That's embarrassing.

Revisionism? So you didn't block me after using your own logic against you?

Nice to se your bullsh!t is as strong as ever

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:Crowds are up not down.
That table shows 46,000 less for Ireland with 4 less fixtures.
2 more to be played and 2 less because of the change in structure.
After this coming weekend the average per game will be up.
Same for Scotland so crowds continue to rise, albeit modestly

It's total crowds, not average crowds, by the way. You seem to be using a different measurement.

No he's using the more accurate measurement since there are less games, the average crowd is a better barometer

"How are the attendances in Wales and Scotland this year compared to previous years?" was the question.

Average is a word missing from the question.

Either way, the average attendance link is there for you to knock your socks off with.

1,000 down in Belfast. Why's that? Not enough Friday evening games? Not attracting the female support as much as they used to?

It doesn't say total attendances either

marty2086 wrote:

Revisionism? So you didn't block me after using your own logic against you?

Nice to se your bullsh!t is as strong as ever

Yes, there's your revisionism again. I didn't block you for using my logic against you.

Now that you're here: who contracts all of the players in Ireland, Martin? Maybe you can review some of those tweets you sent in case you'd forgotten your stance at the time.

Now, of course, you'll know better, right? So who contracts all of the players in Ireland, Martin?

marty2086 wrote:
It doesn't say total attendances either

So we can use either measure as I've provided both.

And you didn't answer why crowds are down in Belfast. Any ideas?

Guess when you called me childish right after that tweet and said you were done and blocked me it was just a coincidence

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
It doesn't say total attendances either

So we can use either measure as I've provided both.

And you didn't answer why crowds are down in Belfast. Any ideas?

I guess when you said 'It's total crowds, not average crowds, by the way. You seem to be using a different measurement. ' that was me just being a revisionist

That matters been discussed on other threads, if you came out of your basement there have been a few quite public on and off field reasons for it

marty2086 wrote:Guess when you called me childish right after that tweet and said you were done and blocked me it was just a coincidence

That was more than likely a result of you continuing to produce ignorance over who contracts the players in Irish rugby.

I note that you still can't bring yourself to admit your were wrong.

Come on, now, be a brave soldier. Nobody could possibly think less of you for admitting that you were schooled.

marty2086 wrote:
I guess when you said 'It's total crowds, not average crowds, by the way. You seem to be using a different measurement. ' that was me just being a revisionist

That matters been discussed on other threads, if you came out of your basement there have been a few quite public on and off field reasons for it

The guy did use a different measurement. So, no, it wasn't you being a revisionist. It was him using a different measurement.

Why would I need to come out of my basement to note the IRFU terminated the IRFU contracts that the Ulster players signed, because they were IRFU employees? I wouldn't need to do that, would I?

But they were, like every other pro rugby player in Ireland, contracted to the IRFU. Right?

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:Crowds are up not down.
That table shows 46,000 less for Ireland with 4 less fixtures.
2 more to be played and 2 less because of the change in structure.
After this coming weekend the average per game will be up.
Same for Scotland so crowds continue to rise, albeit modestly

It's total crowds, not average crowds, by the way. You seem to be using a different measurement.

No he's using the more accurate measurement since there are less games, the average crowd is a better barometer

"How are the attendances in Wales and Scotland this year compared to previous years?" was the question.

Average is a word missing from the question.

Either way, the average attendance link is there for you to knock your socks off with.

1,000 down in Belfast. Why's that? Not enough Friday evening games? Not attracting the female support as much as they used to?

Best to check facts first Ulster had 3 more Friday matches this year than last.
Our female support is fine thanks and very healthy compared to other grounds I've been to

The original claim is dishonest because the season is not over.
Once the crowds are in for those matches it will be the highest ever PROnn total attendance, your preferred measure, in the history of the competition.
Wales and Ireland will be, slightly, down, solely because of a drop from 44 to 42 matches.

geoff999rugby wrote:

Best to check facts first Ulster had 3 more Friday matches this year than last.
Our female support is fine thanks and very healthy compared to other grounds I've been to

The original claim is dishonest because the season is not over.
Once the crowds are in for those matches it will be the highest ever PROnn total attendance, your preferred measure, in the history of the competition.
Wales and Ireland will be, slightly, down, solely because of a drop from 44 to 42 matches.

Er, you "check facts" by asking questions, Geoff, and all I did was ask questions.

So you're claiming my "original claim" is dishonest because the season isn't over. You answered my "claim" with claims of your own, despite the season not being over (your standard), so does that mean that you're equally dishonest?

The question was about Scotland and Wales, by the way, not the 'highest ever PrO'xx total attendance', if you really want to be 'honest'

Your are not worth bothering about - you really aren't

Bye Bye

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
I guess when you said 'It's total crowds, not average crowds, by the way. You seem to be using a different measurement. ' that was me just being a revisionist

That matters been discussed on other threads, if you came out of your basement there have been a few quite public on and off field reasons for it

The guy did use a different measurement. So, no, it wasn't you being a revisionist. It was him using a different measurement.

Why would I need to come out of my basement to note the IRFU terminated the IRFU contracts that the Ulster players signed, because they were IRFU employees? I wouldn't need to do that, would I?

But they were, like every other pro rugby player in Ireland, contracted to the IRFU. Right?

This is a bit dull

What are your thoughts on how are the Unions doing?

WRU
Dragons while not preforming well this year, have made some excellent signings with the WRU involvement now.
Cardiff Blues, seam to be abit of a mess and don't show signs of getting to of it.
Ospreys, North a good addition, but really poor this season, it does't look like it will be much better next year either
Scarlets, the poster boys of Welsh rugby, great to watch but they do lose good players, Williams last year, Beirne and Barclay next year, can they keep at the top and keep turning over players?

Maybe more involvement from the WRU required?

SRU
Glasgow class act, Edinburgh much improved
its stadiums that have been and still are the issue.

But SRU doing a great job, don't know about buying a stake in a Prem team, it means they would have to pay Prem for player please like RFU do. Would be better forming parthership, with Dragons, Connacht, Italians, SA.

IRFU
emmmm
2 provinces are doing very well.
1 being rebuilt
1 decent mid table side, much better than bottom team they were and even ave a championship

FIR
much improved, well done

SA
Good and bad.
cheetahs good, Kings bad,
can't really be blamed due to short notice, losing players and one long long season.

Hopefully over next 2/3 years Cheetahs and Kings will not lose players to other SA and European teams, and can really build something.

geoff999rugby wrote:Your are not worth bothering about - you really aren't

Bye Bye

Ah, another dishonest chap who can't admit to his own failings.

Kingshu wrote:

Cardiff Blues, seam to be abit of a mess and don't show signs of getting to of it.

I got that far and stopped.

What does it mean?

PhilBB wrote:

Kingshu wrote:

Cardiff Blues, seam to be abit of a mess and don't show signs of getting to of it.

I got that far and stopped.

What does it mean?

I think it means Cardiff won 11 games and got 7th spot on 53 points last season but didn’t qualify for Champions Cup with Benetton taking their place and they lost in the quarterfinal of the Challenge Cup and this season have won 11 games and got 53 points and have qualified for Champions Cup despite Benetton winning more games and more points and they’re in the Challenge Cup final against Gloucester yet their home gates are down.

But I’m not sure.....maybe he just thinks they’re mediocre and not showing signs of improvement.

Pot Hale wrote:

I think it means Cardiff won 11 games and got 7th spot on 53 points last season but didn’t qualify for Champions Cup with Benetton taking their place and they lost in the quarterfinal of the Challenge Cup and this season have won 11 games and got 53 points and have qualified for Champions Cup despite Benetton winning more games and more points and they’re in the Challenge Cup final against Gloucester yet their home gates are down.

But I’m not sure.....maybe he just thinks they’re mediocre and not showing signs of improvement.  

Nah, it can't be that as last season they won 11/22 and this season they've won 11/20, plus 'Benetton winning more games' implies that Benetton have won more than 11.

It must be something else.

PhilBB wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

I think it means Cardiff won 11 games and got 7th spot on 53 points last season but didn’t qualify for Champions Cup with Benetton taking their place and they lost in the quarterfinal of the Challenge Cup and this season have won 11 games and got 53 points and have qualified for Champions Cup despite Benetton winning more games and more points and they’re in the Challenge Cup final against Gloucester yet their home gates are down.

But I’m not sure.....maybe he just thinks they’re mediocre and not showing signs of improvement.  

Nah, it can't be that as last season they won 11/22 and this season they've won 11/20, plus 'Benetton winning more games' implies that Benetton have won more than 11.

It must be something else.

The comparison is with last season. Benetton won 5 games and 23 points last season. This season they’ve won 11 and 54 points to date.  And they’re still not going to qualify.

Pot Hale wrote:

The comparison is with last season. Benetton won 5 games and 23 points last season. This season they’ve won 11 and 54 points to date.  And they’re still not going to qualify.

They got awfully lucky getting two games against the Dragons and two games against the Southern Night Staff Kings XV.

Such is the imbalance caused in this ever more awful 'league'.

PhilBB wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

The comparison is with last season. Benetton won 5 games and 23 points last season. This season they’ve won 11 and 54 points to date.  And they’re still not going to qualify.

They got awfully lucky getting two games against the Dragons and two games against the Southern Night Staff Kings XV.

Such is the imbalance caused in this ever more awful 'league'.

And they had to play Leinster and Edinburgh away and are the only team currently to have beaten either at home in the league. Cardiff also played Dragons twice.

Blues have improved on the Field but off it have not. Blues fans are talking about lack of recruitment for next season and struggled to find a coach. Question marks over their home and when/If the WRY will have to step in. Next season will be the test of can they stay as the second best region which they got due to the Ospreys being rubbish for half the season

Compare Blues to Ulster. They are about the same level yet Ulster fans would say this was one of the worse seasons in the last 10 years. Blues one of their best.

They are back where they belong, mun !

Brendan wrote:
And they had to play Leinster and Edinburgh away and are the only team currently to have beaten either at home in the league. Cardiff also played Dragons twice.

Blues have improved on the Field but off it have not.  Blues fans are talking about lack of recruitment for next season and struggled to find a coach.  Question marks over their home and when/If the WRY will have to step in.  Next season will be the test of can they stay as the second best region which they got due to the Ospreys being rubbish for half the season

Compare Blues to Ulster.  They are about the same level yet Ulster fans would say this was one of the worse seasons in the last 10 years.  Blues one of their best.

Yeah, they didn't get lucky playing Leinster the week before a European semi final, did they? Gee.......

I'd love to know why you think Cardiff and Ulster are on the same level. Ulster have had millions more poured into them for more than a decade, have a significantly higher wage bill yet are still crap.

As for the recruitment and the coach, we'll see how that one plays out. They didn't 'struggle' to find a coach, by the way. They found two until the WRU got involved, but it's not fair to expect you to know that. Mulvhill is now in charge of the recruitment for next season and has his budget. Let's see what he comes up with.

PhilBB wrote:

Brendan wrote:
And they had to play Leinster and Edinburgh away and are the only team currently to have beaten either at home in the league. Cardiff also played Dragons twice.

Blues have improved on the Field but off it have not.  Blues fans are talking about lack of recruitment for next season and struggled to find a coach.  Question marks over their home and when/If the WRY will have to step in.  Next season will be the test of can they stay as the second best region which they got due to the Ospreys being rubbish for half the season

Compare Blues to Ulster.  They are about the same level yet Ulster fans would say this was one of the worse seasons in the last 10 years.  Blues one of their best.

Yeah, they didn't get lucky playing Leinster the week before a European semi final, did they? Gee.......

I'd love to know why you think Cardiff and Ulster are on the same level. Ulster have had millions more poured into them for more than a decade, have a significantly higher wage bill yet are still crap.

As for the recruitment and the coach, we'll see how that one plays out. They didn't 'struggle' to find a coach, by the way. They found two until the WRU got involved, but it's not fair to expect you to know that. Mulvhill is now in charge of the recruitment for next season and has his budget. Let's see what he comes up with.

Would you like to expand why the Blues needed to get the WRU involved with their coach hire. If you get people who want the job but you can't afford or don't want to pay them what they want then you haven't found one, you just have people interested. If you can't get people to sign that implies you are struggling

Strenght of the Blues and Ulster teams would be on a par (Ulster have a stronger squad Blues a stronger team IMO) and are both their Country's third best team generally.

I think that if you take out the bad start the Blues had I think they have improved on the Field but off field stuff make me worried for them next year especially if Dragons improve a lot as means it will be harder for them to keep/replace players

Ulster also having a terrible season could miss out on the the playoffs by as little as 1pt (could also be 8pts)

Brendan wrote:
Would you like to expand why the Blues needed to get the WRU involved with their coach hire. If you get people who want the job but you can't afford or don't want to pay them what they want then you haven't found one, you just have people interested.  If you can't get people to sign that implies you are struggling

Strenght of the Blues and Ulster teams would be on a par (Ulster have a stronger squad Blues a stronger team IMO) and are both their Country's third best team generally.

I think that if you take out the bad start the Blues had I think they have improved on the Field but off field stuff make me worried for them next year especially if Dragons improve a lot as means it will be harder for them to keep/replace players

So, you had to ask why the WRU were involved but then, before receiving a reply, answered your own question. That's an interesting approach.

The answer to your question has 200,000 reasons. And it has the spirit of co-operation as a further reason. Now, those 200,001 reasons were not insurmountable to getting the coach they wanted, but when the four on the shortlist are all worthy candidates then it makes sense to choose those reasons. I'm sure that you'll agree. Yes?

I'm sure you'd say the strength of the teams were on a par, but one costs considerably more than the other. One has a bloke earning over half a million quid a year, so I'd say that your measurement of the squads was missing some crucial details.

The final sentence indicates to me that you don't follow Welsh rugby too closely. I'm guessing that you're not Welsh.

The amount paid for players don't relate to the strenght of the team as shown by Bristol last year who are paying over the odds for average players just so you can get them. Also due to the number of Irish players produced and the need to fill a team with so many Irish means the value goes up (supply & demand). Also by your logic Trimble must be a better player than Stockdale because they haven't put much investment into him compared to Trimble.
So to rephrase the skill, playing and on field things are similar regardless of all the off field things like wages.

In regard my last comment I assume you mean about Blues struggling to get players. So here is my logic
1. As Piviac is expected to be Welsh coach after Garland signing for Scarlets means the international coach knows you and what you can do if you sign for them. Scarlets will also have his ear (esp Jones takes over) so can bump people up.
2. Ospreys have been the best region over all and while having a slump would be expected to get back up so people will sign for them on reputation.
3. That leaves two regions to fight over the rest of the top Welsh players. One is backed by the WRU who are actively bring people back to Wales and are bankrolling region. The other has massive off field issues and it is unclear when it will be resolved, has a small squad and has not been active in the player market. They also did sign a player and then let him out of his contract because they couldn't afford him.

So based on that logic with the limited number of people to go around the Blues will be 4th choice for any player looking to play in Wales

Brendan wrote:The amount paid for players don't relate to the strenght of the team as shown by Bristol last year who are paying over the odds for average players just so you can get them.  Also due to the number of Irish players produced and the need to fill a team with so many Irish means the value goes up (supply & demand).  Also by your logic Trimble must be a better player than Stockdale because they haven't put much investment into him compared to Trimble.
So to rephrase the skill, playing and on field things are similar regardless of all the off field things like wages.

In regard my last comment I assume you mean about Blues struggling to get players.  So here is my logic
1. As Piviac is expected to be Welsh coach after Garland signing for Scarlets means the international coach knows you and what you can do if you sign for them.  Scarlets will also have his ear (esp Jones takes over) so can bump people up.
2. Ospreys have been the best region over all and while having a slump would be expected to get back up so people will sign for them on reputation.
3. That leaves two regions to fight over the rest of the top Welsh players.  One is backed by the WRU who are actively bring people back to Wales and are bankrolling region.  The other has massive off field issues and it is unclear when it will be resolved, has a small squad and has not been active in the player market.  They also did sign a player and then let him out of his contract because they couldn't afford him.

So based on that logic with the limited number of people to go around the Blues will be 4th choice for any player looking to play in Wales

The strength of the team isn't affected by money, because of Bristol. OK. But we'll forget about Leinster, then, shall we? Jesus wept, money / strength of squad / performance is directly related.

You don't think that we have the same supply and demand issue in Wales, Brendan? Really? Come on now, have a think. We have that issue, and worse, because our guys (get this!) can live in Wales and play in England. No need to up sticks. No need to move house. No need to earn in a different currency (but no massive tax break, either, at the end). So the supply / demand argument holds no water.

1. It could be Rennie up next for Wales. Does that mean players should sign for Glasgow? Remembering, of course, only Halfpenny has moved to Llanelli since Pivac's name has been mentioned.
2. I can't think who has signed for the Ospreys on 'reputation'. Do you have a name in mind?
3. You seem unaware that the Dragons have the smallest playing budget for this and next season, underpinned by the fact the RSA prevents the WRU spending more on that team than it does on the other three. Cardiff Blues doesn't have a 'small squad', either. It has the same size squad as the Scarlets. You also seem unaware of the large number of contract renewals Cardiff needed for this season. They will bring in three or four players over the summer, once Mulvihill has chosen them.

So, it seems that I was right, the basis of your thinking is skewed by your lack of knowledge of Welsh rugby.

A sizeable number of the Leinster squad are on their first professional contract or are academy players so they wouldn't be on massive money such as Levy, Porter, VDF. Just like Bernie is on small money and is taking less money to return to Ireland than what the Scarlets offered him.

If you think the WRU aren't putting more money into the squad and can afford the players they are getting then the current person in charge of player finances must have some negotionation skills. I know there are people in Wales who an play in England but many are coming back because of WRU

As per the Blues thread they have 38, Scarlets 50s and dragons & Ospreys mid 40s

again I think the Blues have done well This year but I feel they could be in for a few bleak years.

Brendan wrote:A sizeable number of the Leinster squad are on their first professional contract or are academy players so they wouldn't be on massive money such as Levy, Porter, VDF.  Just like Bernie is on small money and is taking less money to return to Ireland than what the Scarlets offered him.

If you think the WRU aren't putting more money into the squad and can afford the players they are getting  then the current person in charge of player finances must have some negotionation skills. I know there are people in Wales who an play in England but many are coming back because of WRU

As per the Blues thread they have 38, Scarlets  50s and dragons & Ospreys mid 40s

again I think the Blues have done well This year but I feel they could be in for a few bleak years.

Phil's right about the Dragons. The WRU are not bankrolling them. They've paid off the debts owed to the previous owners and bought RP which allowed rugby to remain at RP, rather than the previous owners selling to developers to recoup the monies owed to them which would have meant RP probably being demolished and houses being built. But bankrolling suggests putting extra into the playing budget, buying extra players that could not be afforded if not for the WRU, etc. That is just not the case. As Phil says the RSA does not allow this. The WRU just have an equal voice on the Dragons board now - 2 members from the WRU along with 2 non-WRU board members. So they don't even have a majority say. The new chairman has reportedly put in a 6 figure sum of his own money, so if anyone's bankrolling things then it's him.

Brendan wrote:A sizeable number of the Leinster squad are on their first professional contract or are academy players so they wouldn't be on massive money such as Levy, Porter, VDF.  Just like Bernie is on small money and is taking less money to return to Ireland than what the Scarlets offered him.

If you think the WRU aren't putting more money into the squad and can afford the players they are getting  then the current person in charge of player finances must have some negotionation skills. I know there are people in Wales who an play in England but many are coming back because of WRU

As per the Blues thread they have 38, Scarlets  50s and dragons & Ospreys mid 40s

again I think the Blues have done well This year but I feel they could be in for a few bleak years.

Brendan, it's a conservative estimate that the Leinster wage bill is €9m. You're only kidding yourself if you think that money doesn't count.

I'll repeat: the WRU cannot put more into the Dragons than the RSA allows. The finances are peer reviewed at PRGB meetings and Buttress has publicly confirmed the WRU aren't paying more in. They are covering losses for this season in a manner external to the RSA, but that's it.

And "as per the Blues thread" I pointed out the error to the person who thought it was 38. He hadn't included the transition academy squad members, even though other Welsh pro teams count those players in their first team squad. There are 13 in that academy squad, including a Welsh international.

So that makes it 51 players. See now?

So, just to confirm, which players have signed for the Turks and the Os because of the reasons you gave? And will you now agree that the Dragons will continue next season to have the lowest wage bill of the four Welsh pro teams? And will you note that your view on the 'small squad' was factually incorrect?

Once you strip out the reasoning for your "few bleak years", there doesn't seem to be much accuracy behind that claim.

The Oracle wrote: The WRU just have an equal voice on the Dragons board now - 2 members from the WRU along with 2 non-WRU board members.  So they don't even have a majority say.  The new chairman has reportedly put in a 6 figure sum of his own money, so if anyone's bankrolling things then it's him.  

You were right up until this point.

The Board may make the day to day decisions but the owners are definitely the WRU. Buttress works, as Executive Chairman, for his shareholders and his shareholders are the WRU.

Buttress has bought one of the £100k non-voting preference shares in the Dragons, it seems.

Fine Phil I guess we will have to see if off field problems will affect on field results in the coming years as they have Connacht, Treviso, Edinburgh etc.

By your same logic (about Leinster) Scarlet most spend tons on their players with all the international they have and Glasgow the same even if all three teams have a lot of academy players who have gone on to be stars and enjoy the environment so may be on less money

Brendan wrote:Fine Phil I guess we will have to see if off field problems will affect on field results in the coming years as they have Connacht, Treviso, Edinburgh  etc.

By your same logic (about Leinster) Scarlet most spend tons on their players with all the international they have and Glasgow the same even if all three teams have a lot of academy players who have gone on to be stars and enjoy the environment so may be on less money

What "off field problems" do you think exist?

Scarlets wage bill for the year up to June 2017 was £7.524m for 186 staff.

The idea the "stars" will be on less money is touching, but ultimately romantic nonsense. The SRU spent £25m on their professional rugby set up in the same year so you can be sure the internationals in Glasgow aren't on bread and water. The equivalent cost the IRFU €50m.

So you can do the maths, as they say, to work out far more gets spent in Ireland.

The Oracle wrote:

Brendan wrote:A sizeable number of the Leinster squad are on their first professional contract or are academy players so they wouldn't be on massive money such as Levy, Porter, VDF.  Just like Bernie is on small money and is taking less money to return to Ireland than what the Scarlets offered him.

If you think the WRU aren't putting more money into the squad and can afford the players they are getting  then the current person in charge of player finances must have some negotionation skills. I know there are people in Wales who an play in England but many are coming back because of WRU

As per the Blues thread they have 38, Scarlets  50s and dragons & Ospreys mid 40s

again I think the Blues have done well This year but I feel they could be in for a few bleak years.

Phil's right about the Dragons.  The WRU are not bankrolling them.  They've paid off the debts owed to the previous owners and bought RP which allowed rugby to remain at RP, rather than the previous owners selling to developers to recoup the monies owed to them which would have meant RP probably being demolished and houses being built.  But bankrolling suggests putting extra into the playing budget, buying extra players that could not be afforded if not for the WRU, etc.  That is just not the case.  As Phil says the RSA does not allow this.  The WRU just have an equal voice on the Dragons board now - 2 members from the WRU along with 2 non-WRU board members.  So they don't even have a majority say.  The new chairman has reportedly put in a 6 figure sum of his own money, so if anyone's bankrolling things then it's him.  

I though that the WRU while not putting money in directly were moving things like directors to being WRU employees so that the WRU now pays their wages meaning what Dragons used to pay them can go into the squad.
Theres no way they would have been able to pay for the squad they will have next year, on the same money they had two years ago, without some careful restructering.

Kingshu wrote:

The Oracle wrote:

Brendan wrote:A sizeable number of the Leinster squad are on their first professional contract or are academy players so they wouldn't be on massive money such as Levy, Porter, VDF.  Just like Bernie is on small money and is taking less money to return to Ireland than what the Scarlets offered him.

If you think the WRU aren't putting more money into the squad and can afford the players they are getting  then the current person in charge of player finances must have some negotionation skills. I know there are people in Wales who an play in England but many are coming back because of WRU

As per the Blues thread they have 38, Scarlets  50s and dragons & Ospreys mid 40s

again I think the Blues have done well This year but I feel they could be in for a few bleak years.

Phil's right about the Dragons.  The WRU are not bankrolling them.  They've paid off the debts owed to the previous owners and bought RP which allowed rugby to remain at RP, rather than the previous owners selling to developers to recoup the monies owed to them which would have meant RP probably being demolished and houses being built.  But bankrolling suggests putting extra into the playing budget, buying extra players that could not be afforded if not for the WRU, etc.  That is just not the case.  As Phil says the RSA does not allow this.  The WRU just have an equal voice on the Dragons board now - 2 members from the WRU along with 2 non-WRU board members.  So they don't even have a majority say.  The new chairman has reportedly put in a 6 figure sum of his own money, so if anyone's bankrolling things then it's him.  

I though that the WRU while not putting money in directly were moving things like directors to being WRU employees so that the WRU now pays their wages meaning what Dragons used to pay them can go into the squad.
Theres no way they would have been able to pay for the squad they will have next year, on the same money they had two years ago, without some careful restructering.

Well the WRU cleared the debts and loans. So that’s freed up more money. The competition money, tv money, etc. I always felt was being channeled into other things such as Newport RFC plus the huge spend each season trying to sort the pitch out. Now that they are officially separate entities the full amount of funding channeled via the WRU as part of the RSA should be going entirely to the Dragons, and should now be spent on what it’s meant to be spent on. The regions are meant to have a minimum salary/squad spend, if memory serves, and the Dragons have reportedly been spending under it for the last few years (the opposite issue to what the likes of Saracens have been accused of).  So it suggests the money was being used elsewhere.

We’re also getting rid of a lot of players. Deadwood, if you will. So that is going to free up a lot of budget.

So clearing debts and sorting the pitch could be seen as bankrolling I guess. However, I see it more as buying into the Dragons. They couldn’t have expected to get it free. The money they paid to buy them, or a share of them, will now allow the Dragons (hopefully) a bit more freedom and to reach the minimum squad spend expected of them. But the WRU won’t be putting in extra funding going forward over and above what they do at the other regions. Unless of course the new RSA negotiated soon has some agreement that sees them getting more funding. Can’t see the others going for that though!