General Rugby Discussion

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

irishbucsfan wrote: »

An American team would be completely uncompetitive but their union would funnel a bunch of money into the league for the pleasure of being allowed to participate, just like the Italians did.

They're already investing in their own pro league, they're hardly going to abandon it or undermine it by having another team play in a completely different league.

irishbucsfan

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

They're already investing in their own pro league, they're hardly going to abandon it or undermine it by having another team play in a completely different league.

They could very easily do that, in order to be able to support a team on the east coast. World Rugby would happily subsidise it I'd imagine, given where theyre based

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

irishbucsfan wrote: »

They could very easily do that, in order to be able to support a team on the east coast. World Rugby would happily subsidise it I'd imagine, given where theyre based

Why create a team on the East coast to have it separate from their own league? I feel like we've had this conversation before.... they've talked of expanding the league next year and want to include Canada. Far more likely they'd split the teams into E/W divisions and add 2 or 3 more teams to make an east division.

A team in Toronto, NY, Boston, Chicago and add Ohio to that division. Vancouver replaces Ohio in the West division.

former total

A 13th team means you need four more weekends in the calendar from somewhere.

That is only one of the many, many reasons why this will never happen.

irishbucsfan

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Why create a team on the East coast to have it separate from their own league? I feel like we've had this conversation before.... they've talked of expanding the league next year and want to include Canada. Far more likely they'd split the teams into E/W divisions and add 2 or 3 more teams to make an east division.

A team in Toronto, NY, Boston, Chicago and add Ohio to that division. Vancouver replaces Ohio in the West division.

If they were going to do that then they wouldn't be talking to the Pro 12 about sending a team to Europe

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

irishbucsfan wrote: »

If they were going to do that then they wouldn't be talking to the Pro 12 about sending a team to Europe

Are they actually talking about it? I've only seen people on here talk about it in response to someone else suggesting it at some point.

Happy to be educated on this. Last I read US rugby was committed to making their own pro league work.

EDIT: I see the link a few posts back, got lost in the Lions talk. I stand corrected. Still can't see it happening though.

LeinsterDub

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Are they actually talking about it? I've only seen people on here talk about it in response to someone else suggesting it at some point.

Happy to be educated on this. Last I read US rugby was committed to making their own pro league work.

EDIT: I see the link a few posts back, got lost in the Lions talk. I stand corrected. Still can't see it happening though.

A nonsense idea. I'd rather see 2 Georgian teams and a Romania team in a conference set up.

Felix Jones is God

former total wrote: »

A 13th team means you need four more weekends in the calendar from somewhere.

That is only one of the many, many reasons why this will never happen.

Would it not be more likely that an Italian team goes if they don't become competitive

molloyjh

former total wrote: »

A 13th team means you need four more weekends in the calendar from somewhere.

That is only one of the many, many reasons why this will never happen.

It's being discussed alongside a conference system as well. Less games, more sides, less "shadow" sides as Thomond put it.

irishbucsfan

former total wrote: »

A 13th team means you need four more weekends in the calendar from somewhere.

That is only one of the many, many reasons why this will never happen.

14 teams mean you don't and it's also in line with where the other 2 european pro leagues will be in Europe by the time this happens.

I still can't imagine it's going to happen but when the calendar is restructured, if its done in the way the french/sanzar want it, there'll be space.

former total

molloyjh wrote: »

It's being discussed alongside a conference system as well. Less games, more sides, less "shadow" sides as Thomond put it.

See, I'm not sure that helps either. The league is struggling to engage the wider public, bringing in a more complex system may or may not help. The home-and-away system isn't perfect but everyone gets it. Start explaining how Ulster will play some teams twice, other teams once, but are only really competing with the teams in the 'northern conference' for a place in the semis, and you'll see eyes glazing over pretty quick.

A conference system must surely involve fewer interpros too?

Other issues:
1. Who will actually play for this American franchise?
2. Can they be at all competitive?
3. Is a megabucks TV deal at all realistic?
4. How will European fans react to having to watch games at 1 am?
etc. etc.

I think this America idea is a publicity grab, tbh.

irishbucsfan

A conference system is a really poor idea but surely is also extremely unlikely.

Expanding to 14 teams is fine in a restructured season, the only question is whether there are teams available who can add something to the league and I don't think American teams do that. London based teams would be more likely but then you have regulatory issues with the RFU getting involved.

I don't think we'll stay at 12 teams forever but I think we'll be there for a while yet, and hopefully by the time any expansion is realistic the Italians will be stronger.

awec

Adding more teams to the league would be stupid. Adding teams from north America would be daft. Adding teams from the proposed cities of Houston and Vancouver would be moronic.

The pro 12 already has too many rubbish teams.

sydthebeat

awec wrote: »

Adding more teams to the league would be stupid. Adding teams from north America would be daft. Adding teams from the proposed cities of Houston and Vancouver would be moronic.

The pro 12 already has too many rubbish teams.

ah stop sitting on the fence !!

thomond2006

awec wrote: »

Adding more teams to the league would be stupid. Adding teams from north America would be daft. Adding teams from the proposed cities of Houston and Vancouver would be moronic.

The pro 12 already has too many rubbish teams.

Where are Houston and Vancouver mentioned?

errlloyd

thomond2006 wrote: »

Where are Houston and Vancouver mentioned?

I read them in the Irish times article I think. But I saw them too for sure.

Edit: actually it's the BBC that reported it.

thomond2006

Thanks.

I don't think teams outside of the east coast are a runner. The travel time and cost would be very high.

awec

Time zones make this a nonsense. Who wants to watch Ulster v the Vancouver Vikings at 3am?

It is stupid and unworkable, the pro12 should focus more on improving the current crop of teams and less on crazy expansion plans into markets like the US.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

I saw Vancouver and Huston mentioned ages ago as expansion teams for the Pro League in the US. Adding them to the PRO 12 would be ridiculous. Adding a US team at all would be ridiculous but adding ones in time zones 6-8 away is really ridiculous.

It just makes no sense at all, even from a US point of view. If they want to grow the sport in the US having a team that plays most of their games in Europe and only allows for a very small section of their public to see home games just doesn't work.

b.gud

Have a match 7 times zones away you say, what could possibly go wrong

I know that's exceptional circumstances that you hopefully wouldn't run into if you were going to the states. This video however is quite interesting on the logistics of having an away game so far away and also how to prepare for a match with a 7 hour time difference

molloyjh

former total wrote: »

See, I'm not sure that helps either. The league is struggling to engage the wider public, bringing in a more complex system may or may not help. The home-and-away system isn't perfect but everyone gets it. Start explaining how Ulster will play some teams twice, other teams once, but are only really competing with the teams in the 'northern conference' for a place in the semis, and you'll see eyes glazing over pretty quick.

A conference system must surely involve fewer interpros too?

Other issues:
1. Who will actually play for this American franchise?
2. Can they be at all competitive?
3. Is a megabucks TV deal at all realistic?
4. How will European fans react to having to watch games at 1 am?
etc. etc.

I think this America idea is a publicity grab, tbh.

You won't find me disagreeing.

molloyjh

irishbucsfan wrote: »

A conference system is a really poor idea but surely is also extremely unlikely.

Expanding to 14 teams is fine in a restructured season, the only question is whether there are teams available who can add something to the league and I don't think American teams do that. London based teams would be more likely but then you have regulatory issues with the RFU getting involved.

I don't think we'll stay at 12 teams forever but I think we'll be there for a while yet, and hopefully by the time any expansion is realistic the Italians will be stronger.

Conferences could work depending on how they are set up. I do think we need to make some change somewhere. We're competing with the AP and T14 because we have a league set up that is exactly the same in structure to theirs. There is always going to be that direct comparison. The only real difference is the teams. And unless/until we can improve the quality of some of those teams we'll always be seen as the poor relation.

And with so many internationals in the league that's going to be a huge ask. Even with changes to the structure of the season players are not going to be playing more games. If there is any change to the number of games it will be a reduction, not an increase. So how do you make the Pro12 an attractive prospect to audiences and broadcasters when the teams are, by their nature, weaker more often? We have to start looking at providing something different. Something that sets the Pro12 apart from the AP and T14. Exactly what that is I don't know, but a conference system has got to be at least part of the conversation.

irishbucsfan

molloyjh wrote: »

Conferences could work depending on how they are set up. I do think we need to make some change somewhere. We're competing with the AP and T14 because we have a league set up that is exactly the same in structure to theirs. There is always going to be that direct comparison. The only real difference is the teams. And unless/until we can improve the quality of some of those teams we'll always be seen as the poor relation.

And with so many internationals in the league that's going to be a huge ask. Even with changes to the structure of the season players are not going to be playing more games. If there is any change to the number of games it will be a reduction, not an increase. So how do you make the Pro12 an attractive prospect to audiences and broadcasters when the teams are, by their nature, weaker more often? We have to start looking at providing something different. Something that sets the Pro12 apart from the AP and T14. Exactly what that is I don't know, but a conference system has got to be at least part of the conversation.

There won't be a reduction in the number of games, if anything there'll be a small increase but that is unlikely in the Pro 12 specifically. The change in structure will allow for more games not less, as the calendar becomes less disjointed. But that benefits the Pro 12 more than anyone else as it makes the players more available.

I don't see what a conference system would achieve apart from diluting the interest.

former total

molloyjh wrote: »

You won't find me disagreeing.

First time for everything WHA?!

molloyjh

irishbucsfan wrote: »

There won't be a reduction in the number of games, if anything there'll be a small increase but that is unlikely in the Pro 12 specifically. The change in structure will allow for more games not less, as the calendar becomes less disjointed. But that benefits the Pro 12 more than anyone else as it makes the players more available.

I don't see what a conference system would achieve apart from diluting the interest.

Heaslip will still only play a max of around 16-17 games a year for Leinster though. And at least 6 of those will be in Europe. He generally only plays around 10 in the Pro12. Adding more games just adds more games without the internationals. And that just adds to the problem, solving nothing along the way.

The issues are:

1. Player Availability - this is not going to increase, at least not in any meaningful way.
2. Weaker Teams - the Italians specifically, and adding more at that level will only make it worse.
3. Lack of Money - The above issues, as well as the disparate markets, means that it isn't worth as much as a competition when compared to the AP and T14.

We need to address those issues and adding an American side or a piss poor English side or a Georgian side isn't going to address the second issue. Adding more games is only going to highlight the first issue even more. And neither will lead to more money.

For the record, I'm not selling any particular solution here. I just think that we need to think outside the box to set ourselves apart without making the issues worse or highlighting them even more.

I do wonder if we could piggy back on the summer tour schedule in some way. Send the clubs to the country the national side is touring for a few mid-week games and have return fixtures during the Autumn. I was concerned costs would be prohibitive, but surely it'd be cheaper to do that then send teams over one by one to the US over the course of the season? It's something nobody else is doing and could be sold as part of the overall Pro12 rights (and be part of season tickets too)?

molloyjh

former total wrote: »

First time for everything WHA?!

I contest that it is NOT the first time actually..

irishbucsfan

molloyjh wrote: »

Heaslip will still only play a max of around 16-17 games a year for Leinster though. And at least 6 of those will be in Europe. He generally only plays around 10 in the Pro12. Adding more games just adds more games without the internationals. And that just adds to the problem, solving nothing along the way.

The issues are:

1. Player Availability - this is not going to increase, at least not in any meaningful way.
2. Weaker Teams - the Italians specifically, and adding more at that level will only make it worse.
3. Lack of Money - The above issues, as well as the disparate markets, means that it isn't worth as much as a competition when compared to the AP and T14.

We need to address those issues and adding an American side or a piss poor English side or a Georgian side isn't going to address the second issue. Adding more games is only going to highlight the first issue even more. And neither will lead to more money.

For the record, I'm not selling any particular solution here. I just think that we need to think outside the box to set ourselves apart without making the issues worse or highlighting them even more.

I do wonder if we could piggy back on the summer tour schedule in some way. Send the clubs to the country the national side is touring for a few mid-week games and have return fixtures during the Autumn. I was concerned costs would be prohibitive, but surely it'd be cheaper to do that then send teams over one by one to the US over the course of the season? It's something nobody else is doing and could be sold as part of the overall Pro12 rights (and be part of season tickets too)?

Jamie Heaslip only plays 16 games a year for Leinster because of the nature of the rugby he plays and the timing of that rugby during the calendar year. Restructuring the calendar specifically allows players like Heaslip to play more games during the long periods set aside for club rugby specifically with less international break periods, each of which require periods of rest. You'll have a period at the beginning of the season where he won't play, a period in December and then he'll have no international commitments until after the playoffs are finished. Irish provinces may still choose to apply the same limits on their players but they aren't really the problem, whereas the Welsh/Scots/Italians are less restrictive and this will allow their internationals to play more.

molloyjh

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Jamie Heaslip only plays 16 games a year for Leinster because of the nature of the rugby he plays and the timing of that rugby during the calendar year. Restructuring the calendar specifically allows players like Heaslip to play more games during the long periods set aside for club rugby specifically with less international break periods, each of which require periods of rest. You'll have a period at the beginning of the season where he won't play, a period in December and then he'll have no international commitments until after the playoffs are finished. Irish provinces may still choose to apply the same limits on their players but they aren't really the problem, whereas the Welsh/Scots/Italians are less restrictive and this will allow their internationals to play more.

They are still going to need rest periods during the season to ensure that they aren't burnt out when the international windows come around. We're still going to have the same number of games in the same time frame, just structured differently. The new structure might free players up for an extra game or two but as I said there won't be a meaningful increase in appearances. If we add more games to the mix then on top of that aren't we just right back where we started?

irishbucsfan

molloyjh wrote: »

They are still going to need rest periods during the season to ensure that they aren't burnt out when the international windows come around. We're still going to have the same number of games in the same time frame, just structured differently. The new structure might free players up for an extra game or two but as I said there won't be a meaningful increase in appearances. If we add more games to the mix then on top of that aren't we just right back where we started?

It will free top tier international players up for about 3-4 games per season. They're not going to be burned out in May because they played extra games against the Dragons and Treviso in October, that's not remotely realistic. The high intensity games are the ones they're already playing. This is why the club's are pushing so hard for the change.




On another note entirely Mark Dodson''s interview about US clubs makes it sound a plausible possibility:

http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/37150584

molloyjh

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It will free top tier international players up for about 3-4 games per season. They're not going to be burned out in May because they played extra games against the Dragons and Treviso in October, that's not remotely realistic. The high intensity games are the ones they're already playing. This is why the club's are pushing so hard for the change.




On another note entirely Mark Dodson''s interview about US clubs makes it sound a plausible possibility:

http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/37150584

I like the comment of the new mindset. We may not agree here on what will or won't work, but it's still a positive that these guys are looking to see what can and trying to make stuff happen. It certainly beats the hell out of sitting on their hands.