How many professional teams does Wales need to be successful?

Following on from Graham Henry's comments about Wales have too many professional teams and that it should go down to 3 or possibly 2 pro teams. How many teams do you think Wales needs on a domestic level. I'd be happy with 2 teams. East and West. I'd settle for 3 at the stage though and see how that goes.

That would end us internationally - and without a successful international side that would end pro rugby in wales given that is where the majority of money comes from.

I've said one of the issues we have had is youngster not getting enough gametime. It's actually been refreshing to see youngsters getting chances. Ospreys have already shown what good coaching and younger talent can do.....

East and West? Where you thinking? Maybe Aberystwyth on the west coast and maybe Newtown or Llandrindod Wells for the east team?

TAFKA The Oracle wrote:Maybe Aberystwyth on the west coast and maybe Newtown or Llandrindod Wells for the east team?

I guess either one of those options would probably produce a better 20 year track record than the Dragons.

Welshmushroom wrote:That would end us internationally

Not agreeing with Sir Graham then I take it?

Jimmy Moz wrote:

Welshmushroom wrote:That would end us internationally

Not agreeing with Sir Graham then I take it?

It’s hardly the word from Sir Graham. You see the “we need 2 go down to 2 teams boyo” literally every weekend now, for the last two seasons. Spoken by folks who don’t know much about rugby, the same lot who still think Gatland is the best coach in the world.

Jimmy Moz wrote:

TAFKA The Oracle wrote:Maybe Aberystwyth on the west coast and maybe Newtown or Llandrindod Wells for the east team?

I guess either one of those options would probably produce a better 20 year track record than the Dragons.

Who’s going to pay to build the stadia in these places?

I think it’s great to discuss ideas for the way forward, so I don’t want to dismiss anything as I’m sure we’re all passionate about Welsh rugby and just want the best for Wales going forward. So I won’t rubbish any ideas and I’m happy to discuss and debate them as long as others are willing to enter into it in the right spirit So these are just my thoughts:

For me the problem with 2 sides is that a) no nation with 2 sides has ever demonstrated any success, so why is that a model we would want to follow?

And b) these 2 sides still have to be based somewhere so you’re just going to get even more ‘disenfranchised’ complaining from those who haven’t got a pro team in their village. Unless they float on a cloud I cannot see how any club/region can not ‘disenfranchise’ someone, according to the criteria of the disenfranchised. Surely any businesses should be based in the biggest population centres to take advantage of the numbers locally. So if 2 teams we’re talking Swansea and Cardiff. So not east and west. Unless you’re talking east and west of Bridgend! They’re both centre south. But if these 2 are in Swansea and Cardiff then everyone will still moan and call it a conspiracy. Christ, look at the uproar at the moment about Ospreys’ possible new ground location. Loads of people saying it should move to Bridgend which is just a stones throw from Cardiff. And away from the 2nd biggest city in Wales.

Also c) if we drop to 2 we will firstly renege on our contract with the URC and European rugby tournaments where we are contracted to enter 4 teams, so there will be fines to pay at a time when we really could do without being fined. Plus, we lose millions in TV and competition money. It will obviously half from what it is now as they’ll just pay us for 2 teams rather than 4 entrants.

d) the final point is that nothing can change for at least 5 more years anyway, barring a team going bust. There is a participation agreement for 6 years, and we’re only a year in. So even if we did all agree on 2 teams it won’t be until 2029 before we can change anything, and who knows what the financial landscape will be by then. If the WRU hotel and zip wire are raking it in we might have enough money to fund 5 teams!

Would Wales moving down to two professional teams and one of them winning the European Cup be considered success ?

Some rugby countries have never had a successful club scene but Wales isn't one of them. Top down elitist sport is a depressing structure with all the vibrancy of favourites and underdogs replaced by sports politics, because everyone knows and feels it is artificial.

Look for me it boils down to chances for youngster to come through. If we went down to 2 there would be even more limited chances for young talent to play.

Every club wants to win things and I get that but the health of the game is bigger than just club success. I know people say Scotland is a good example of it working but I dont agree. One of the main differences between wales and scotland is we have much bigger numbers in terms of club sides and amateur teams playing the game. It's not comparable as Scotland often have to use residency even with 2 sides to fill major playing holes in scottish rugby.

4 is a healthy number to keep competition for international selection competitive and to cover injuries etc. Without a good supply of numbers to international level it would stint the national teams ability to succeed in the long term and doom the finances for rugby in wales at all levels.

Ospreys are already showing what can be done even with limited resources. The problem in Welsh regional rugby is they all want quick success and buy players. The goal shouldnt be to buy players but to develop a strategy that allows you to bring your own through. Sure there may be an issue around keeping those players after a few seasons if they are excellent but then that opens a chance for another youngster again so the cycle continues.....But the last 5-7 years in regional rugby they have often tried to avoid development and just bring in ready made replacements. They need to change from short term thinking to a more long term recruitment plan.

I agree with most of that, Welshmushroom. Apart from the bit at the end Not sure if it was just a throw away comment, but to say the regions, clubs, academies, etc. 'have often tried to avoid development' is just wrong in my opinion. My son plays mini rugby so I go around all over south wales to clubs with him to watch him play, and I get to see the amount of work going on to develop talent. In the Gwent region I see the amount of free and paid holidays camps for kids that the Dragons and various local councils and sports development teams put on. My son's team has Dragons and Newport RFC players, plus WRU coaches, down to do workshops. My son is also in the district side and I see how much work they put in to develop the best players from U11s, U15s. You've got things like the DC Thomas cup (U11s); you've got the Dewar shield; regional age group academies from U16. There's the Dragons cup for Gwent age group club sides, and I'm sure equivalents in the other regions. There's the youth teams at most of the clubs from 17-18 before seniors. You've got the college league that's televised on S4C (a really enjoyable watch actually). And of course the actual regional academies at the different ages, all with dedicated coaching teams and all playing against each other. The sole purpose of these is development for the regions. And all of this stuff from mini rugby, to U11 and U15 district, to youth to academy is feeding up into the regions who, if you just look at the team sheets, are doing their bit and giving opportunities to these youngsters.

Where it sometimes falls down is that the players are often simply not good enough when they come through. Hence the tinkering by the WRU at semi-pro level as the jump is currently too big, so the EDC is the latest attempt to develop players ready to step up to regional level. But if they're not quite up to it THEN I think it's absolutely fine to look outside for players rather than just chuck in players just to make up the numbers. Good solid pros from SA, England, etc. do wonders for a region in terms of standards, bringing in new ideas that are not all WRU-centric (I'm thinking the regional coaches, academy coaches, etc. probably all go through the same WRU training so might all be a bit similar). I keep thinking back to what some of the older Ospreys players have said about the 'Galacticos' period and how the likes of Marty Holah, TiaTia, Gerry Collins, Justin Marshall.......how the ideas, knowledge, skills and experience hey brought did wonders for their development. They didn't feel blocked or held back. It was the opposite with Tipuric and Shane Williams saying it brought them on and raised their game. So for me some outside support in terms of coaching and players is a fine thing and should be encouraged, within reason. Balance is obviously key. As long as there is some sort of quota in place then I think that balance is easily achievable, and not to the detriment of Wales' talent development.

I'm not doubting the youth grade stuff going on in Wales.

My issue is at the actual Pro level chances to get minutes in the past haven't been great. It's one thing I have actually enjoyed this season as all the welsh pro sides have had to give youngsters gametime at that level. Sure it won't result in instant success but it does give young players exposure at that level and help their development into pro rugby. It usually takes about 3 years of experience at Pro level to even determine if they can step up at that level. It's not a case of determining if youngsters are good enough the minute they arrive but actually taking on their development to the next stage. Very few youngsters are actually equipped the minute they step up into pro rugby enviroments. And this is where historically regional rugby has cut corners. But i dont have an issue with your viewpoint on this.

If you’re right about the time it takes for players stepping up to prove they can do it, and I’m not saying you’re wrong, but let’s use it as an example. 3 years to step up - therein lies a massive problem. E.g. Nicky Smith has announced that he’s off to Gloucester next season. Who is the next cab off the rank? We cannot wait 3 years to replace him with someone just as good (who may not actually turn out to be as good at the end of the 3 years) so sometimes we will need short term cover of a player of a proven standard (perhaps from another league) while we wait for the local talent to mature. Otherwise you’re ‘doing a Dragons’ and just putting in players like Chris Coleman who are clearly not up to it, the pack goes backwards, and we all know what happens if you’ve got no platform. I feel we have to plug gaps until the structures feeding up into the pro game are much better at producing oven ready regional players. Hopefully the EDC will help with that but I’m not confident! But I’ll wait to see what the EDC looks like first. My fear is that it will just be another Welsh Prem with a few less teams!

I see where you are going but I would say Nicky Smith's replacement should have been trained 3 years ago to be ready for this moment. And that is why the regions are in a hole right now. They can't instantly replace players last minute. It's why the planning needs to be longer term which currently it is not, hence why they need to go overseas.

The Coleman thing I get but he is only 25. A lot of Tightheads dont reach peak until much later. I agree if we didnt see improvements in the next season or two we really should be looking at other youngsters coming through. To be fair though its hard to judge any prop in a dragons pack as our tight 5 are not great as a unit.

As a said though before though this season has been refreshing to see so many young guys getting chances. You have also been able to see their improvements as the seasons have gone on. Most youngster dont have a strong second season (second season syndrome) as often sides have a lot more footage to be able to analysis the players weaknesses by that point. But usually by season 3 you start to see how they come back and if they actually can make it at that level.

Welshmushroom wrote:I see where you are going but I would say Nicky Smith's replacement should have been trained 3 years ago to be ready for this moment.  And that is why the regions are in a hole right now.  They can't instantly replace players last minute.  It's why the planning needs to be longer term which currently it is not, hence why they need to go overseas.

The Coleman thing I get but he is only 25.  A lot of Tightheads dont reach peak until much later.  I agree if we didnt see improvements in the next season or two we really should be looking at other youngsters coming through.  To be fair though its hard to judge any prop in a dragons pack as our tight 5 are not great as a unit.

As a said though before though this season has been refreshing to see so many young guys getting chances.  You have also been able to see their improvements as the seasons have gone on.  Most youngster dont have a strong second season (second season syndrome) as often sides have a lot more footage to be able to analysis the players weaknesses by that point.  But usually by season 3 you start to see how they come back and if they actually can make it at that level.

Just on the bits in bold....... There is absolutely no way that teams below the Ospreys in Wales/their region have not been playing any props! Of course they have! Every single team below the Ospreys has Welsh props that have been, and are being, trained. Literally every year there is a new crop because the academies work on age groups. They are there. You can see the props listed on their website. Whether they're as good as Nicky Smith is another matter. But to say they're not being trained is just not correct as it suggests there's no academy or age grade teams in operation.

Rhys Henry is one. Made his debut 3 years ago. Came through the academy.
Gareth Thomas joined them young at 21 years old and has been developed to the point where he is a regular starter and is an international prop. 10 years development.
They've got Cameron Jones and Garyn Phillips listed as senior squad props. Both 23. So I'm guessing these have come through the ranks.
They've got others listed on their academy page.

Only Tom Botha has been bought in, and he's been decent in fairness.

anything below regional level isnt pro rugby. there is a world of differences in the standards. When I say 3 years preparation its not just about the time to physical get fitter and stronger. Its also about the minutes on the pitch at pro level to start adapting to the speed and power the game is being played.

Ospreys to their credit are one of the best regions for at least bringing some youngsters through historically but even when you look at the list of young props they currently have you can see the actual playtime they get in pro games:-

Ben Warren (24yo) 2023/24 - 13 games (1 started) 313 mins, 22/23 -4 games (0 started) 91 mins
Henry (25yo) 2023/24 - 15 games (3 started) 423 mins, 22/23 - 10 games (0 starts) 267 mins
Frackell (20yo) - No starts or mins
Garyn Phillips (22yo) - 11 games (3 starts) 271 mins, 22/23 - 8 games (1 start) 154 mins

Then add in the actual props that are seasoned vets:-
Gareth Thomas - 23/24 19 games (17 starts) 1116 mins, 22/23 21 games (12 starts) 858 mins
Nicky Smith - 23/24 17 games (9 starts) 729 mins, 22/23 21 games (14 starts) 1095 mins
Tom Botha - 23/24 18 games (17 starts) 1052 mins, 22/23 23 games (13 starts) 991 mins

My point here is just on the stats above none of the young probs will be able to directly replace Nicky Smith as none of them have even played 500 mins in a campaign let alone 1000. So what usually would have happened the region would have brought in a prop who can play 1000 mins a season because he has already done it.

Now that they cant do this due to finance this year and next we are at least seeing them being forced to give young players through at Pro level which is the way it should have always been to begin with.

And I dont buy the argument that is flying around at the moment that somehow wales doesnt have talented young rugby players. Theres plenty all over the place. The real issue is the lack of genuine chances they get at a Pro Level.

I dont want to bag the Ospreys either as Booth actually does give his youngsters the most out of any region. All I'm saying its not enough and we have a way to go on that front (and I'm only about regional rugby games here not the lower leagues or U20 appearances)

Welshmushroom wrote:The real issue is the lack of genuine chances they get at a Pro Level.  

That's because they are not good enough.

And that's becaise they haven't been coached properly from a young age

And that's because there aren't coaches good enough to coach them from that young age

And that's because of a lack of money.

Everything is about money.

Money is obviously important.  But money alone does not fix the problems in Welsh Rugby.

Proper strategies of how money is invested and what areas require strong decision making like in any business determines often how successful projects are.  Sport is no different on that front.  If a side spends it majority of money on senior players of today, your essentially putting the plan of developing players on someone else.  

Saying a youngsters isnt good enough before they have had a proper crack at it is at the very least is very naive.  Which job does anyone start and nail the minute they walk through the door.  Nobody.  Experience takes time to build and is essential in most walks of life to actually attain the standards required to excel.

It's fine to disagree on this as everyone has their own opinion.

Welshmushroom wrote:Money is obviously important.  But money alone does not fix the problems in Welsh Rugby.

Without that money, it's guaranteed there will not be success.

Proper strategies of how money is invested and what areas require strong decision making like in any business determines often how successful projects are.  Sport is no different on that front.  If a side spends it majority of money on senior players of today, your essentially putting the plan of developing players on someone else.  

Saying a youngsters isnt good enough before they have had a proper crack at it is at the very least is very naive.  Which job does anyone start and nail the minute they walk through the door.  Nobody.  Experience takes time to build and is essential in most walks of life to actually attain the standards required to excel.

It's fine to disagree on this as everyone has their own opinion.

This is what the scarlets are doing. Kemsley Mathias, Harri O'Connor, Archie Hughes, Charlie Titcombe, Morgan Jones, Ben Williams, Carwyn Tuipolotu have all been given decent game time, and part of the reason the scarlets are down the bottom of the table is that they are not good enough. Call it harsh or naive or whateve you like but it's the truth. With good coaching they might be good professionals in 2028. But by that time the team will be so poor the fans will have drifted away.

With better coaches at youth level they might be ok by now if they had a ceiling hihg enough. But that takes money. It's all about money.

Meanwhile on the same budget Ospreys are doing exactly the same with more success. To say decisions on spending dont have an impact on performance is naive.

Hard to judge youngsters when the bulk of the head coaches have no experience at that level. I've always said the proving ground for young welsh coaches shouldnt be to run regional teams. We need experienced head coaches at those levels.

For example the guy who hires you at your job presumably knew what he was doing to be able to show you the ropes in your job.

Peel for example should never have been given the top job at the Scarlets. He just didnt have the experience for it. Its also why they now are bringing in someone above him to actually do the bulk of the role so he can go back to coaching. And he didnt come cheap either. Peel is on descent money there.

It seems pretty blindlingly obvious that whatever the number is, it's less than 4. Just not sustainable in current form, Dragons in particular are dire as are Scarlets. Rather like Falcons in prem those teams appear to be cannon fodder for rest. (Note I'm not suggesting here Newcastle are binned!).

Given levels of support, money available and quality of play I cannot see how Wales continue with 4 regions.

mountain man wrote:It seems pretty blindlingly obvious that whatever the number is, it's less than 4. Just not sustainable in current form, Dragons in particular are dire as are Scarlets. Rather like Falcons in prem those teams appear to be cannon fodder for rest. (Note I'm not suggesting here Newcastle are binned!).

Given levels of support, money available and quality of play I cannot see how Wales continue with 4 regions.

So how do you propose culling one of the 4 private businesses?

Welshmushroom wrote:Meanwhile on the same budget Ospreys are doing exactly the same with more success.  To say decisions on spending dont have an impact on performance is naive.

Hard to judge youngsters when the bulk of the head coaches have no experience at that level.  I've always said the proving ground for young welsh coaches shouldnt be to run regional teams.  We need experienced head coaches at those levels.

For example the guy who hires you at your job presumably knew what he was doing to be able to show you the ropes in your job.

Peel for example should never have been given the top job at the Scarlets.  He just didnt have the experience for it.  Its also why they now are bringing in someone above him to actually do the bulk of the role so he can go back to coaching.  And he didnt come cheap either.  Peel is on descent money there.

I pretty much agree with all of that.

As I hinted, money isn't the only key to success but it's certainly required for it.

Welshmushroom wrote:Meanwhile on the same budget Ospreys are doing exactly the same with more success.  To say decisions on spending dont have an impact on performance is naive.

Hard to judge youngsters when the bulk of the head coaches have no experience at that level.  I've always said the proving ground for young welsh coaches shouldnt be to run regional teams.  We need experienced head coaches at those levels.

For example the guy who hires you at your job presumably knew what he was doing to be able to show you the ropes in your job.

Peel for example should never have been given the top job at the Scarlets.  He just didnt have the experience for it.  Its also why they now are bringing in someone above him to actually do the bulk of the role so he can go back to coaching.  And he didnt come cheap either.  Peel is on descent money there.

WRT to Peel, it's a shocking decision mind. Him and a few others aren't being held accountable, they're just moving themselves around into different positions. I wonder what will become of Emyr Phillips? The scrum is one of the worst I've ever seen. I remember them getting dominated by Munster's second team, and their reward was a call-up from clueless Gatland!

Welshmushroom wrote:I see where you are going but I would say Nicky Smith's replacement should have been trained 3 years ago to be ready for this moment.  And that is why the regions are in a hole right now.  They can't instantly replace players last minute.  It's why the planning needs to be longer term which currently it is not, hence why they need to go overseas.

The Coleman thing I get but he is only 25.  A lot of Tightheads dont reach peak until much later.  I agree if we didnt see improvements in the next season or two we really should be looking at other youngsters coming through.  To be fair though its hard to judge any prop in a dragons pack as our tight 5 are not great as a unit.

As a said though before though this season has been refreshing to see so many young guys getting chances.  You have also been able to see their improvements as the seasons have gone on.  Most youngster dont have a strong second season (second season syndrome) as often sides have a lot more footage to be able to analysis the players weaknesses by that point.  But usually by season 3 you start to see how they come back and if they actually can make it at that level.

To be fair, the Ospreys had two premier LH's in Thomas and Smith, prior to that they had Dunan Jones, Paul James and that's just LH. I agree someone in Wales should be coming through more often but Ospreys are doing it more often than the other 3. On the whole the player development hasn't been good enough, nowhere near good enough compared to SA, Eng, Ire, France, etc. You can see that by watching their U20s teams and seeing them get a pro contract at age 20. Also you can forget about Coleman, he'll never come good.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

mountain man wrote:It seems pretty blindlingly obvious that whatever the number is, it's less than 4. Just not sustainable in current form, Dragons in particular are dire as are Scarlets. Rather like Falcons in prem those teams appear to be cannon fodder for rest. (Note I'm not suggesting here Newcastle are binned!).

Given levels of support, money available and quality of play I cannot see how Wales continue with 4 regions.

So how do you propose culling one of the 4 private businesses?

That wasn't the question though was it. I'm just giving my opinion as I see it and for some time now the question has been can 4 Welsh regions be sustainable and I don't see how they can.

Support is dwindling, money is getting reduced, top players leave to go elsewhere. Net result is performances get worse and spiral continues.

However, if you or others are content as it is then fair enough.

Welshmushroom wrote:Saying a youngsters isnt good enough before they have had a proper crack at it is at the very least is very naive.  Which job does anyone start and nail the minute they walk through the door.  Nobody.  Experience takes time to build and is essential in most walks of life to actually attain the standards required to excel.

It's not naïve when you look at our U20s over the last few years. If they're gash there, they'll always be gash. The scrum/forwards from the tournament just gone were some of the worst I've ever seen, yet people still talk like Kelleher-Griffiths is going to one day step up and be good enough.

mountain man wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

mountain man wrote:It seems pretty blindlingly obvious that whatever the number is, it's less than 4. Just not sustainable in current form, Dragons in particular are dire as are Scarlets. Rather like Falcons in prem those teams appear to be cannon fodder for rest. (Note I'm not suggesting here Newcastle are binned!).

Given levels of support, money available and quality of play I cannot see how Wales continue with 4 regions.

So how do you propose culling one of the 4 private businesses?

That wasn't the question though was it. I'm just giving my opinion as I see it and for some time now the question has been can 4 Welsh regions be sustainable and I don't see how they can.

Support is dwindling, money is getting reduced, top players leave to go elsewhere. Net result is performances get worse and spiral continues.

However, if you or others are content as it is then fair enough.

It's my question. Right now:

-If fewer than 4 is teh desirable number of teams. How do we get there?

Also, if you're up for a discussion on 'sustainable' teams and their existence, then it's basically only Leinster that survive.

mountain man wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

mountain man wrote:It seems pretty blindlingly obvious that whatever the number is, it's less than 4. Just not sustainable in current form, Dragons in particular are dire as are Scarlets. Rather like Falcons in prem those teams appear to be cannon fodder for rest. (Note I'm not suggesting here Newcastle are binned!).

Given levels of support, money available and quality of play I cannot see how Wales continue with 4 regions.

So how do you propose culling one of the 4 private businesses?

That wasn't the question though was it. I'm just giving my opinion as I see it and for some time now the question has been can 4 Welsh regions be sustainable and I don't see how they can.

Support is dwindling, money is getting reduced, top players leave to go elsewhere. Net result is performances get worse and spiral continues.

However, if you or others are content as it is then fair enough.

But this is an important part of the debate.  Lets say that getting rid of 1 region was possible (ignoring the WRU's inability to close a business, but it could de-fund it and tell them they were not going to enter them in any competitions - but not a great look from a PR point of view).  But lets say it's possible.  For me all that would happen is you'd have 3 sides on roughly the same money as now.  So what's the point?  Might as well have 4 and at least we then have space for youngsters to play.  There seems to be a thought that reducing to 3 would mean the original funding for 4 can then be spread around just the 3 sides.  But the overall income will reduce a lot too, so will there really be much more, if any, for the 3 remaining sides?

TAFKA The Oracle wrote:

But this is an important part of the debate.  Lets say that getting rid of 1 region was possible (ignoring the WRU's inability to close a business, but it could de-fund it and tell them they were not going to enter them in any competitions - but not a great look from a PR point of view).  But lets say it's possible.  For me all that would happen is you'd have 3 sides on roughly the same money as now.  So what's the point?  Might as well have 4 and at least we then have space for youngsters to play.  There seems to be a thought that reducing to 3 would mean the original funding for 4 can then be spread around just the 3 sides.  But the overall income will reduce a lot too, so will there really be much more, if any, for the 3 remaining sides?

The WRU can't de-fund 1 region. It can only do that if the 4 regiosn sign a new participation agreement with a clause that says 'The WRU can de-fund a region any tiem they want to'.

And I don't think they'll do that.

(They don't fund any of the regions by the way, they pay them for services and participation)

RugbyFan100 wrote:

TAFKA The Oracle wrote:

But this is an important part of the debate.  Lets say that getting rid of 1 region was possible (ignoring the WRU's inability to close a business, but it could de-fund it and tell them they were not going to enter them in any competitions - but not a great look from a PR point of view).  But lets say it's possible.  For me all that would happen is you'd have 3 sides on roughly the same money as now.  So what's the point?  Might as well have 4 and at least we then have space for youngsters to play.  There seems to be a thought that reducing to 3 would mean the original funding for 4 can then be spread around just the 3 sides.  But the overall income will reduce a lot too, so will there really be much more, if any, for the 3 remaining sides?

The WRU can't de-fund 1 region. It can only do that if the 4 regiosn sign a new participation agreement with a clause that says 'The WRU can de-fund a region any tiem they want to'.

And I don't think they'll do that.

(They don't fund any of the regions by the way, they pay them for services and participation)

Yes I know that Was just posing a hypothetical. And yes, on your 2nd point that was kinda my point too. The monies the regions get in ‘funding’ are mostly made up of money the entrants earn from TV, competition and player release/player development (whatever that bit is called). So scrapping a region means reduce tv and competition money, and no 4th region to pay services to so that would probably be reduced to. So the remaining 3 would probably not be better off.

While we're at it, can we dispense with this terrible idea that a 'development' region can be placed in the URC.

Name me a succesful pro team sports league that has a 'development' team in it.

RugbyFan100 wrote:While we're at it, can we dispense with this terrible idea that a 'development' region can be placed in the URC.

Name me a succesful pro team sports league that has a 'development' team in it.

Agreed. Sponsors, URC, ERC, and other clubs/unions would rightly be pi$$ed off with that. Should never be allowed.

Well it seems the WRU are considering going from 4 to 3 regions.

Quote from Nigel Walker :

"It has got to be an option which will be considered and discussed," said Walker.
Which way we go on that has yet to be determined but of course, reducing to three regions has to be on the table. But that doesn't mean we will."

So those who keep saying they cannot cull a private business, well it appears they might.

It’s amazing that the ‘3 regions’ was most people’s hot take from Scrum V on Sunday. The plan worked, to distract everyone from the fact that Gatland was able to do his own review to the board of stooges. I’ve no doubt he explained that he was to continue doing the same thing over and over again, and hoping for a different result. No doubt the board lapped it up and probably offered a pay rise. So glad to not be putting in a single penny to the game, ever again. They’ve destroyed the domestic game, they’ve now destroyed the international game. Toxic organisation of blazer brigadiers from top to bottom.

I’ve not read through all this thread so apologies if this has already been mentioned, and as it doesn’t directly impact me, feel free to shoot me down/ignore me.

In terms of the number of regions it depends on what the WRU/fans want.  If you want a successful Welsh national team with a conveyor belt of lads coming through then more is better, if you want the regions to be more successful, then fewer is better.

The argument we’ve had in Scotland time and time again, is that we need a 3rd pro team to get the lads who are kicking their heels on the bench/academies some gametime, however realistically we can’t afford it without massively defunding the existing pro teams and the associated pathways.  There are other issues specific to Scotland that isn’t relevant to this conversation.

So to me that is what it boils down to, if you want a successful national team and the potential increase in player numbers associated with that, then keep as many pro teams as possible, if you want a pro team to win something and then the potential increase in young folk interested in the game as a result of that, then have fewer pro teams.  I don’t think there is a right or wrong answer, it just depends on priorities.

mountain man wrote:Well it seems the WRU are considering going from 4 to 3 regions.

Quote from Nigel Walker :

"It has got to be an option which will be considered and discussed," said Walker.
Which way we go on that has yet to be determined but of course, reducing to three regions has to be on the table. But that doesn't mean we will."

So those who keep saying they cannot cull a private business, well it appears they might.

I think the terminology has been mixed up between different posters. The WRU cannot close a business. It does not have the power to close a business. Just like it can't close HMV or Sainsbury's. And so 'get rid', 'close', 'dissolve' and all those other terms people have been using is just not possible. So it depends what you mean by 'cull'. What the WRU could do is choose not to put 1 of the regions forward as a pro team entrant into the competitions. And in doing so they would then not have to pay them any of the TV and competition money or monies for services like it does currently. I.e. defund the region and eventually cut it adrift. And then offer the best players to the remaining regions. That is one option. And I guess you could describe that as 'cull'. The business wouldn't necessary close but it would struggle then on and would not have a league or competition to play in. I'd imagine that would be an extremely bad look politically, at a time when the WRU are faced with lots of bad press about the way they handle things, amateurism at the highest level, the sexism scandal, etc. So suddenly cutting a team out and making all of those people redundant, and not to mention saddling the club with the debts of all the contracts it would still have to honour....... I just don't think they'd do it.

The issue the WRU has with that is also that only last year they signed a 6 year participation agreement with each of the 4 sides. So to 'cull' one would break the contract and they'd have to pay the culled region compensation I would have thought as they've signed an agreement for £4.5m funding for those 6 years (the first year was £5m, dropping to £4.5m for the rest). So that's going to be very costly at a time when the WRU is skint. The Dragons have just gone back into private ownership with some sports investors coming on board. I'm sure they would have done their due diligence and determined if the WRU could or would suddenly axe or cull a region from it's 4 entrants. These are intelligent guys with lots of investment experience. No way would they buy a club that could be chucked out of leagues and competitions at the drop of a hat.

Another issue is that the WRU is contracted to enter 4 teams in the URC and Euro comps in exchange for the CVC money, TV deals and competition income. Reneging on that by removing one would come with penalties I would have thought and would mess up the fixture list if done suddenly. So I just don't think that will happen.

In 5 years time when the participation agreement runs out then yes I think we could see change, but we might be in a better position financially then anyway.

EWT Spoons wrote:I’ve not read through all this thread so apologies if this has already been mentioned, and as it doesn’t directly impact me, feel free to shoot me down/ignore me.

In terms of the number of regions it depends on what the WRU/fans want.  If you want a successful Welsh national team with a conveyor belt of lads coming through then more is better, if you want the regions to be more successful, then fewer is better.

The argument we’ve had in Scotland time and time again, is that we need a 3rd pro team to get the lads who are kicking their heels on the bench/academies some gametime, however realistically we can’t afford it without massively defunding the existing pro teams and the associated pathways.  There are other issues specific to Scotland that isn’t relevant to this conversation.

So to me that is what it boils down to, if you want a successful national team and the potential increase in player numbers associated with that, then keep as many pro teams as possible, if you want a pro team to win something and then the potential increase in young folk interested in the game as a result of that, then have fewer pro teams.  I don’t think there is a right or wrong answer, it just depends on priorities.

Agree with all of that EWT Spoons. That's been my take on it too. I would add this, however. And I've probably said it a number of times before:

The whole argument about reducing to 4 regions seems to boil down to 2 things/advantages:

Concentrating the talent pool into 3 rather than 4 and increased funding between 3 rather than 4.

But I still haven't seen any workings that demonstrate this being a possibility.

On the funding issue, the WRU currently funds the region £4.5m per year. Considering TV money, I believe, is something like £2m per club and then you have competition income on top of that, CVC money (if that's different?). If you go to 3 teams you lose a load of that income anyway. So would the WRU really have much more to give to the 3 remaining pro teams? They'll reduce their own income by cutting one so we're probably back to square one.

On the talent issue - many would argue that the Dragons should be the ones to cut, and it's hard not to agree (even as a Dragons fan). But those same people argue that the Dragons only have around 6 or 7 top class players. So cut the Dragons, distribute those players such as Wainwright, Basham, et al. around the other teams........ 2 more players at those is not going to make them Heineken Cup or URC league winners is it?

So a couple of extra players and realistically not much more (if any money)......... what would be the actual point of going from 4 to 3?

I like the comment I read from one of the regional chief execs - 'you can't grow anything by cutting'. I think it will just continue the downward spiral. Fewer academies. Fewer players getting game time. Fewer pros. Before we know it we won't have enough for 3. So we'll go to 2. And that doesn't seem to get anyone anywhere.

It's a very real problem Scotland will have in years to come.  Where and how will the next Scottish generation of players get chances.  Edinburgh and Glasgow can only bring so many players through in a much smaller playing season.  Given both are striving to reach top 8 every year they then go out and top up with overseas.  

The big issue for Scotland on that front is they used to use the 3 year residency to good effect as part of boosting the national team.  But with 5 year residency rules in place its much harder to do that.  It for example doesn't work so well now if you take any player at 25+ because by the time they actually can play international rugby, they probably only have 2-3 years at the top end.  

They probably will be fine for the next 2-3 years with their current crop but as those guys drop out - its hard to see where the next generation of internationals will come from.  Sure both the clubs sides will no doubt produce a fair few that will be international standard but in order for them to really challenge the top sides internationally at a bare minimum they need to have 30-40 proper options to really be able to drive standards.

I think it would be a death spiral to do something similar in Wales.  I've yet to see any evidence to suggest any international side can be a top 5 side with less than 4 teams at club level over a very long time.  Scotland are the only exception and I suspect after the current crop go we may see a drastic drop in rankings from them as they won't be able to exploit the residency rule.  

Rebuilding is a thing for every team but the premises generally is if you have your 4 best players playing in any position you have options for selection in case things such as loss of form & injury occur.  

I also dont really trust the powers that be to actually choose the correct teams.  I've always said that the Dragons should be the powerhouse of Welsh Rugby for a number of reasons.  For starters the majority of clubs reside in Gwent, biggest participation numbers of any area, best historical attendance figures (back in the Brown era), still the largest concentration of rugby fans in the country, etc.

I've no doubts in my mind at all had the Dragons been setup similar to Leinster, we would be talking about Dragons as the best supported team in Wales with the best squad.  But for me the potential can and will never be realized until someone comes along and invest heavily in setting it up that way.  

Its even the decisions at semi pro level that are mind boggling to me.  But that is another topic for another day