Can Premiership beat Top 14? In economic terms

[Jaguares]

At present the most powerful league in Europe, in Economic terms, is the Top 14. They pay the higher wages and now have even agreed a new TV contract with more money. (â'¬70 million per season).

The Premiership is able to get more money? From TV and advertising. To overtake Top 14, assuming no salary cap.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Nah.

Crowds, compared to Top 14, are poor. Even our sugar daddies aren't as rich as those in the Top 14.

Not sure how TV viewing figures compare, which would impact advertising deals, but comparing the BT Sport vs the new Top 14 Deals would suggest that the Top 14 has a helluvalot of viewers.

 

[LittleGuy]

Nah.

Crowds, compared to Top 14, are poor. Even our sugar daddies aren't as rich as those in the Top 14.

Not sure how TV viewing figures compare, which would impact advertising deals, but comparing the BT Sport vs the new Top 14 Deals would suggest that the Top 14 has a helluvalot of viewers.

The average crowd sizes are not that disparate, I think Top 14 draws about a thousand more fans on average than Aviva teams, although it has to be factored in that there are an additional two rounds worth of home games which add extra revenue to the French clubs. There is a huge difference in attendance in the 2nd tier, where French clubs in D2 get around 5,000 fans a game on average and the RFU is only a little under 2,000.

 

[Big Ewis]

yeah well at least England's (the team) progressing very encouragingly, especially in view of that big home event thing in a year. I'm glad Top 14 sides are so strong, and the Top 14 league is really fun to watch, but I'd rather see a whole lot more done at the FFR even if it meant diminishing the spark from Top 14 a bit...
England haven't given up on the national team quite yet, not at all. They're still very, very focused on that and I guess it's a case of 'well our Prem sides are good but not great, whatever, England's doing well internationally'.

 

[welshglory]

Top 14 tv figures are huge compared to the premiership or any club rugby in the world, even the H cup. I think they average over 300,000 most games and the finals get over a million, even the pro d2. I think the free 2 air coverage gets multiple million views.

People who constantly whinge about the top 14 saying it's unstable or whatever don't even know how massive it is there (for rugby standards)
So yeah it ****s on everything else in tv views pretty much. Only SA can compete.

Add in the fact that tv deals only make up a fraction of revenue for most clubs...

 

[Jaguares]

Nah.

Crowds, compared to Top 14, are poor. Even our sugar daddies aren't as rich as those in the Top 14.

Not sure how TV viewing figures compare, which would impact advertising deals, but comparing the BT Sport vs the new Top 14 Deals would suggest that the Top 14 has a helluvalot of viewers.

Why? Not supposed to rugby union is the second most popular sport in England??

 

[ratsapprentice]

Second by a looooooooooooooooong way.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Might be but football is 10-50million times more popular in the general public.
Games in the third level of football get similar crowds to a lot of Aviva games.

 

[Jaguares]

Might be but football is 10-50million times more popular in the general public.
Games in the third level of football get similar crowds to a lot of Aviva games.

Like almost everyone. Rugby is a very tough sport, many blows and many injuries. Anyone can't withstand such a violent sport like rugby. It's logical that our sport never has crowds like football. To be a follower of a sport, you have to play this sport. It's very rare that a person is a follower of a sport if you've never played. Our sport is so violent for common people, then never have the crowds of football.

Whatever, I'm comparing it to France, where football is the most popular sport and rugby is the second sport too. I was thinking and maybe the reason could be that the League in France is smaller and doesn't have the popularity that the League has in England.

Then, in England rugby is 60% Union and 40% League and in France rugby is 90% Union and 10% League. Fictitious percentages but quite realistic, an English Rugby League supporter maybe say: "45% League, 55% Union".

That could be the reason why Top 14 is bigger than Premiership. I'm not sure about how big is League in France but definitely is smaller than English Rugby League. In the best, League in France is 20% and Union is 80%.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

No way is rugby 60% union 40% League over here.
It's more like 70/30, and then when you factor in casual fans when the internationals roll round it's more like 90/10.

Also quite a large number of the population will have played at least a small amount of rugby, as it's a sport taught in PE in a lot of (most?) schools.

 

[Jaguares]

No way is rugby 60% union 40% League over here.
It's more like 70/30, and then when you factor in casual fans when the internationals roll round it's more like 90/10.

Also quite a large number of the population will have played at least a small amount of rugby, as it's a sport taught in PE in a lot of (most?) schools.

Yeah but isn't the same play rugby at school among kids to play a higher level like university rugby among teens, harder.

 

[William18]

The English Premiership doesn't seem to average much more than the Super League. The real difference is that rugby union has a presence in London and seems to play a far larger roll on the national consciousness.

I think in England the EPL is very strong and also the Championship and the leagues further down also get big support. The Ligue One in France doesn't seem so well supported and I imagine their second division is a lot smaller than the Championship. It seems to me that there is a lot more space for rugby to grow in France as a domestic competition. It also seems to me that a lot of French cities only have one football team whereas in England each decent sized city has two (except Leeds). It seems in France while some cities don't have a team more of the major cities do have teams compared to England. Both countries in an ideal world would have teams in Liverpool, Manchester, Birmingham, Lille, Marseille

 

[Peat]

For us to overtake France would be a pretty major achievement. I don't want to say it can't be done but I don't see how you do it. Maybe if England won two World Cups back to back...

I also think that for rugby to draw the same number of punters through the gate/eyes on the screen as the French, our rugby map would have to be ripped up and started afresh. You would need more clubs in major metropolitan areas such as Brum, Liverpool and less in worthy but small backwaters such as Northampton, Gloucester. Given how our club system is run, that means a whole bunch of clubs coming out of nowhere and storming up the pyramid and yeah...

 

[smartcooky]

Top 14 wins hands down when it comes to money/economics, but I have to ask, with all that money and all those top level players playing in it, how come the quality of the rugby in Top 14 is so crap? Even the Pro12 has more exciting and better quality of play than Top 14. Watching USAP v Toulon on TV yesterday. I don't think I've seen so many dropped passes, knock ons and missed tackles.

 

[McTallshort]

Im not sure about France but in England football absolutely saturates nearly all sport coverage to an extent that a visiting alien from Mars you would think its the only sport we have. This makes the growth of other sports like Rugby Union or Rugby league very difficult but Union does have its trump card: the England National team which is considered by many football followers as team of strength and pride compared to the National football team. Of course this is subject to success and the period after the 2011 WC saw the knifes really out for Martin Johnsons failed side but SL has IMO turned this round and more people are taking an interest again. This coupled with the WC next could boost the game here particularly if we win it....

 

[FrenchFan]

Top 14 wins hands down when it comes to money/economics, but I have to ask, with all that money and all those top level players playing in it, how come the quality of the rugby in Top 14 is so crap? Even the Pro12 has more exciting and better quality of play than Top 14. Watching USAP v Toulon on TV yesterday. I don't think I've seen so many dropped passes, knock ons and missed tackles.

and that of course never happens in Super rugby. Never seen so many forward passes in Super 15. Its an attractive competition but I'd like to see them play on a muddy pitch like we get here over winter.

 

[ratsapprentice]

I also get the impression that subscription tv has a much larger customer base than something like Sky does.

And since the only rugby on terrestrial tv in England is the six nations (and last year the tour to Argentina) - not very many people have access to club rugby.
I think there are something like 6 million SkySports subscribers and less than 1 million BT sport subscribers.

So currently less than 2% of the population of England has access to the premiership on tv.

 

[TheSaffycen]

This makes the growth of other sports like Rugby Union or Rugby league very difficult but Union does have its trump card: the England National team which is considered by many football followers as team of strength and pride compared to the National football team

It is the problem that France will have soon If they don't have more players coming through, people say oh we have this many players coming through and it's the national coach that picks the wrong players, i'm a massive football and rugby fan and you can see a massive difference because the amount of players on show that are from their actual country. The more money pumped into the top 14 the worse the national team will get. The Premier League is the best in the world and England are pretty ****.

 

[smartcooky]

and that of course never happens in Super rugby. Never seen so many forward passes in Super 15. Its an attractive competition but I'd like to see them play on a muddy pitch like we get here over winter.

Of course it happens in Super Rugby; mistakes and errors happen in all sports. However, many Top 14 matches seem to be such a grind. Maybe I'm just not getting to see the good ones, as we do not get all of the matches. This last round we only got USAP v Toulon, and last week we only got Clermont v Castres and Bayonne v Paris. As for your remark about muddy pitches, well that is probably true. When Super Rugby started back in the 1990's, SANZAR set a minimum standard for quality of pitches, and every franchise was given about five years upgrade their standards. Just about every pitch used by NZ Elite teams has been totally relaid, with new drainage systems and a sand base resulting in no muddy pitches any more, not even in the depths of the wettest winter. The last two weeks have seen very high rainfall in NZ, yet you wouldn't know it watching the Chiefs v Crusaders and Hurricanes v Blues matches. I cant remember the last time I saw a Super Rugby match played in the mud. Many of the pitches used for elite rugby in France (and elsewhere) appear to be sub-standard. Perhaps if some of the Top 14 clubs invested some of their money in upgrading their pitches instead of buying players, the situation might improve.

 

[TheSaffycen]

Many of the pitches used for elite rugby in France (and elsewhere) appear to be sub-standard. Perhaps if some of the Top 14 clubs invested some of their money in upgrading their pitches instead of buying players, the situation might improve.

I don't know about France but in England in March we had rain everyday, no exaggeration it was on record as possibly the worst, no pitch can stand up too that amount of water and still be in a condition where there is no mud. Only Saracens can because we have a plastic pitch so it's fine, but most teams you can't do anything about it.