Pro game in trouble

[McTallshort]

But franchises arnt the answer and won't actually change something material to get more fans or money into the game.

Well you don't know that because it hasn't been tried properly and it's often "that won't work because of x" which really translates to "let's just let the old system run for now and keep our fingers crossed"

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

Well you don't know that because it hasn't been tried properly and it's often "that won't work because of x" which really translates to "let's just let the old system run for now and keep our fingers crossed"

Show me where franchises have worked in rugby then? There are many cases of them failing.

Also a key point you didn't answer is, how would the franchise actually get more fans/ revenue?

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

Well that's crap.

 

[Saintjay]

Would be interesting to hear how Franchises would work, who buys out clubs etc. I've no how it works I am guessing it still boils down to money.

 

[McTallshort]

Show me where franchises have worked in rugby then? There are many cases of them failing.

Also a key point you didn't answer is, how would the franchise actually get more fans/ revenue?

Ok, let's imagine this. The Rugby clubs get together and restructure the league to create 8 franchises, they get a better TV deal (the current one is under valued) and launch a whole new product along side a 7s league (of the the same franchises) and even and Anglo Scottish or Anglo Irish cup.

Could it work? Honestly I don't know but what I do know is what we are currently doing is failing badly. So when have franchises worked in Rugby? About the same amount of time the current premiership has worked but franchises have never been tried unlike the current failing system.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

Ok, let's imagine this. The Rugby clubs get together and restructure the league to create 8 franchises, they get a better TV deal (the current one is under valued) and launch a whole new product along side a 7s league (of the the same franchises) and even and Anglo Scottish or Anglo Irish cup.

Could it work? Honestly I don't know but what I do know is what we are currently doing is failing badly. So when have franchises worked in Rugby? About the same amount of time the current premiership has worked but franchises have never been tried unlike the current failing system.

So your answer is just to get a new tv deal and create a 7s league?

Neither of those address the route causes of the clubs failure.

Rugby in England has two major failings, tons of fans only interested in the international game and tons of players who are playing at 3:00 on a Saturday and don't feel part of a premiership club. Until those issues are addressed we will continue to see the same old.

I'd make the community game a summer sport and also focus more on marketing England and the clubs together rather than coming across like two separate sports as they currently do.

Not sure even that will help though.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

Ok, let's imagine this. The Rugby clubs get together and restructure the league to create 8 franchises, they get a better TV deal (the current one is under valued) and launch a whole new product along side a 7s league (of the the same franchises) and even and Anglo Scottish or Anglo Irish cup.

Could it work? Honestly I don't know but what I do know is what we are currently doing is failing badly. So when have franchises worked in Rugby? About the same amount of time the current premiership has worked but franchises have never been tried unlike the current failing system.

i for one believe franchising rugby in NZ is whats killing it...they dont have the history of the old clubs...you just disenfranchise lots of fans

because a new franchise wont want to more closely align itself with one area over another...you end up with generic often meanly less branding that people dont connect with...go the "east west midlands Crocodiles!"...or the "north but not scoland devils"

 

[pagliaccio_euforico]

it seems any talk of franchising depends on the NZ/Wales model where they take the current teams and combine them into x amount of team rather than the NA model. IMHO the premiership essentially tried a half-ass version of the NA model with the P-shares.

The big 4 NA sports leagues were formed by teams organizing together to create better negotiating power, regular schedules, and rules about honoring each other contracts. Were teams excluded, yes, but very rarely were they forced to merge. The original teams then decided which markets they would expand to next.

Now the RFU has the ability to regulate schedules and player eligibility but maybe the top teams think they could do better on the commercial side. If English rugby were to embrace franchises I imagine it would be something like the p-shares combined with the super league licensing system. Except instead of IMG doing the grading it would be the original clubs.

i for one believe franchising rugby in NZ is whats killing it...they dont have the history of the old clubs...you just disenfranchise lots of fans

because a new franchise wont want to more closely align itself with one area over another...you end up with generic often meanly less branding that people dont connect with...go the "east west midlands Crocodiles!"...or the "north but not scoland devils"

always thought that Super Rugby sacrificed international popularity in an attempt to appease the neglected provincial teams. One of the beauties of sport is learning about locations that are not your own. It's how I learned about American and Canadian cities that weren't Philadelphia or New York and it's how I learned (and continue to learn) about the world. Also the provinces have really cool logos and uniforms while the franchises look like they were made in a 1990s comic book.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

it seems any talk of franchising depends on the NZ/Wales model where they take the current teams and combine them into x amount of team rather than the NA model. IMHO the premiership essentially tried a half-ass version of the NA model with the P-shares.

The big 4 NA sports leagues were formed by teams organizing together to create better negotiating power, regular schedules, and rules about honoring each other contracts. Were teams excluded, yes, but very rarely were they forced to merge. The original teams then decided which markets they would expand to next.

Now the RFU has the ability to regulate schedules and player eligibility but maybe the top teams think they could do better on the commercial side. If English rugby were to embrace franchises I imagine it would be something like the p-shares combined with the super league licensing system. Except instead of IMG doing the grading it would be the original clubs.

always thought that Super Rugby sacrificed international popularity in an attempt to appease the neglected provincial teams. One of the beauties of sport is learning about locations that are not your own. It's how I learned about American and Canadian cities that weren't Philadelphia or New York and it's how I learned (and continue to learn) about the world. Also the provinces have really cool logos and uniforms while the franchises look like they were made in a 1990s comic book.

dont get me started on logos and jerseys, 8 of 12 super rugby teams had predominately blue jerseys (none with a traditional rugby hoop) leading too some stupid jersey clashes...add on to the 90's microsoft clippart logos

 

[McTallshort]

So your answer is just to get a new tv deal and create a 7s league?

Neither of those address the route causes of the clubs failure.

Rugby in England has two major failings, tons of fans only interested in the international game and tons of players who are playing at 3:00 on a Saturday and don't feel part of a premiership club. Until those issues are addressed we will continue to see the same old.

I'd make the community game a summer sport and also focus more on marketing England and the clubs together rather than coming across like two separate sports as they currently do.

Not sure even that will help though.

For that you would have to get the clubs and RFU singing off the same hymn sheet which would be a challenge.

I would say this final thing on Franchises: Although I have absolutely no sympathy for Wasps and how they handled the move to Coventry at one point that got 17-20k people going to a Rugby game at 3pm on a Saturday in a city that had never seen those type of numbers come to a rugby game. Had COVID not ruined the groups other business and they had not fallen out with Cov City (not all their fault to be fair) you would probably still have a working franchise in the West Midlands

I current club model is absolutely not working and is only set to get worse, either someone takes full ownership of Rugby in England and does something with it or we are going to see the death of pro rugby in England within the next 5-10 years.

 

[Which Tyler]

First, we need to identify what the trouble is, then you see if you can manage it, and if not, what needs to change to address it; with steps that equate solutions to actions with more than wishful thinking.

Personally, I'm not seeing the steps between "we kill 2 clubs (including one of the best supported) and have franchises" gets us to "there's more money in the game" there just seems to be some detail in there that's missing.
Please note, I'm not particularly opposed to franchises as a matter of principal - though I am opposed to killing what we have just for funsies.
For that matter, I'm not particularly convinced that "the pro game (in England) is in trouble"

2 years ago, the average turnover for the 10 current clubs was ~£20M each.
The salary cap is £5.5M; with a marquee player, coaches, and a separate academy cap on top of that.
I'm pretty sure there's some cost-savings to be found in that intervening £14.5M

Sale can run a club on a turnover of £11.7M and an average gate of 5,385 - and spend £12.1M (with 20 members of staff in "Sales and Admin")
You've then got a club like Exeter, on as turnover of £25.7M and an average gate of 10,390 - and spend £29.7M (with 198 members of staff in "Sales and Admin")
I'm pretty sure that Exeter pay that extra £17.6M p.a. because they choose to, rather than because the extra spend is 100% essential to run a professional rugby club.
It looks to me, more like the problem isn't "there isn't enough money in the game" as it is "clubs are spending the money the way their wealthy owners (or board members) want it spent, rather than necessarily in the best financial interests of the club".



So, for solutions
A] What problem are you trying to address?
B] What is the proposed solution to that problem?
C] How does B] go about addressing A]?
D] What are the potential forseeable side effects of B]?

From what I can tell, reading the last 50 posts, we don't even know what A] is

 

[Saintjay]

As been said a thousand times. There's a disconnect between your average England fan and club fan.
Rugby since turning pro still remains a middle \ upper class sport. It's gains very little traction in state schools now
Youth community rugby is thriving, adult rugby not so much. Towns where rugby tends to do well are those not dominated by a big football club, Northampton, Exeter, Gloucester, Bath, possibly Bristol. Quins and Leicester are different but they have history and generations of fans on there side.

To maximise money you need viewers and attendances, people playing the sport. I'm not convinced Franchises solve these issues. Nor are the RFU competent enough to resolve them. Cuts to community coaching probably evidence they can't or won't.

 

[higgik]

Show me where franchises have worked in rugby then? There are many cases of them failing.

Also a key point you didn't answer is, how would the franchise actually get more fans/ revenue?

You don't have to look just at rugby.
Look at the IPL cricket or the start of the NFL.
In the case of the NFL, owners were starting to pay silly amounts to get the best teams and a visionary owner showed how, working together helped everyone overall.
Hence the move from clubs and teams to franchises bought from the league.

 

[Saintjay]

You don't have to look just at rugby.
Look at the IPL cricket or the start of the NFL.
In the case of the NFL, owners were starting to pay silly amounts to get the best teams and a visionary owner showed how, working together helped everyone overall.
Hence the move from clubs and teams to franchises bought from the league.

The money, tv rights, viewing figures are off the charts in the NFL compared to rugby. The College football system has 100k stadiums. Something like 25 of the top 35 most valuable teams in the world are in the NFL. The lowest team value is around 5.2 billion, Dallas Cowboys highest around 9 billion. In context Manchester United value is around 6.5 billion.

Rugby clubs are no way near the NFL even the French clubs.

 

[McTallshort]

The money, tv rights, viewing figures are off the charts in the NFL compared to rugby. The College football system has 100k stadiums. Something like 25 of the top 35 most valuable teams in the world are in the NFL. The lowest team value is around 5.2 billion, Dallas Cowboys highest around 9 billion. In context Manchester United value is around 6.5 billion.

Rugby clubs are no way near the NFL even the French clubs.

Correct but cricket franchises are and what's wrong with aiming high. The French have a great TV deal, great crowds and good revenues. It's the same sport. They have made an effort to work together for the greater good where as English and Welsh rugby haven't.

 

[stus768]

Would recommend a listen to this to that is a really good story of how the NFL made so many good decisions to build the league up to be so profitable

 

[Saintjay]

Correct but cricket franchises are and what's wrong with aiming high. The French have a great TV deal, great crowds and good revenues. It's the same sport. They have made an effort to work together for the greater good where as English and Welsh rugby haven't.

I think the starting point needs to be achievable and realistic. Which all boils down to generating the amount of 'interest' in the sport. The IPL and NFL is successful because of that. More interest more TV views equals better TV rights and sponsorship deals etc.

I think your right about clubs not working together. You've England rugby not necessarily working in the interest of clubs. Prem rugby not working in the interests of England. Then 10 clubs owners working on there own interests.

How you square that i don't know. I honestly don't know if Franchises would increase revenue or interest.

 

[McTallshort]

First, we need to identify what the trouble is, then you see if you can manage it, and if not, what needs to change to address it; with steps that equate solutions to actions with more than wishful thinking.

Personally, I'm not seeing the steps between "we kill 2 clubs (including one of the best supported) and have franchises" gets us to "there's more money in the game" there just seems to be some detail in there that's missing.
Please note, I'm not particularly opposed to franchises as a matter of principal - though I am opposed to killing what we have just for funsies.
For that matter, I'm not particularly convinced that "the pro game (in England) is in trouble"

2 years ago, the average turnover for the 10 current clubs was ~£20M each.
The salary cap is £5.5M; with a marquee player, coaches, and a separate academy cap on top of that.
I'm pretty sure there's some cost-savings to be found in that intervening £14.5M

Sale can run a club on a turnover of £11.7M and an average gate of 5,385 - and spend £12.1M (with 20 members of staff in "Sales and Admin")
You've then got a club like Exeter, on as turnover of £25.7M and an average gate of 10,390 - and spend £29.7M (with 198 members of staff in "Sales and Admin")
I'm pretty sure that Exeter pay that extra £17.6M p.a. because they choose to, rather than because the extra spend is 100% essential to run a professional rugby club.
It looks to me, more like the problem isn't "there isn't enough money in the game" as it is "clubs are spending the money the way their wealthy owners (or board members) want it spent, rather than necessarily in the best financial interests of the club".



So, for solutions
A] What problem are you trying to address?
B] What is the proposed solution to that problem?
C] How does B] go about addressing A]?
D] What are the potential forseeable side effects of B]?

From what I can tell, reading the last 50 posts, we don't even know what A] is

Good points.

I suppose the problem you are trying to address is : how to make Professional rugby in England sustainable and there are quite a few reasons why that's a problem but what isn't a problem is the product itself which is very good. So your start point is that.

 

[higgik]

Agree the product is great.
Listening to GBR podcast and they are right, it is very difficult to get 10 owners, RFU, CVC around a table and agree a way forward for the league as a whole.
Each owner wants to win with the best players, but the league needs to be competitive as a whole.
Just look at the salary cap issue.
Some owners want to increase it, others can't afford it, which will mean clubs going to the wall if they try. Then there is no league to play in.

 

[IT157]

As been said a thousand times. There's a disconnect between your average England fan and club fan.
Rugby since turning pro still remains a middle \ upper class sport. It's gains very little traction in state schools now
Youth community rugby is thriving, adult rugby not so much. Towns where rugby tends to do well are those not dominated by a big football club, Northampton, Exeter, Gloucester, Bath, possibly Bristol. Quins and Leicester are different but they have history and generations of fans on there side.

To maximise money you need viewers and attendances, people playing the sport. I'm not convinced Franchises solve these issues. Nor are the RFU competent enough to resolve them. Cuts to community coaching probably evidence they can't or won't.

Definitely. When I was growing up you had MOTD for football. There was no highlight show for domestic rugby on the terrestrial channels. I think that would have helped a lot in the 90s. The 6 nations on BBC was always a must watch. I know they have highlights programme for the domestic game now which is good, but it seems a little late. As in we are now in the highlight tiktok/instagram generation. It doesn't help that domestic football is go engrained in British culture as well. Hard to break that.