RugbyRebels

Mr Mwenda wrote: ↑Sat Jun 10, 2023 5:02 pm Lots of sad things popping up calling Irish "more than just a club" but not seen anything about Richmond and London Scottish back in the day....

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Jun 07, 2023 9:40 am Bang on. This is painful and awful and I would much prefer if we could relaunch Irish, Wasps, and Wuss in the Championship (with Wasps preferably being where they belong rather than squatting in the Midlands)...

Puja wrote: ↑Mon Jun 26, 2023 12:42 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Wed Jun 07, 2023 9:40 am Bang on. This is painful and awful and I would much prefer if we could relaunch Irish, Wasps, and Wuss in the Championship (with Wasps preferably being where they belong rather than squatting in the Midlands)...

Well, this just sounds worryingly promising: https://12ft.io/proxy?ref=&q=https://ww ... iership-2/

Common sense? Actually attempting to build a viable second tier with reasonable funding and a coherent link and connection to the Prem, that isn't just an oubliette for whatever team gets relegated one season? This does *not* sound like the RFU that I know.

Puja

FKAS wrote: ↑Mon Jun 26, 2023 1:55 pm Hmm lots of talk about branding and bringing back the lost clubs. I'm not sure I agree about parachuting them back into the Championship, especially as what's being mooted here sounds like an effective ringfencing arrangement but including the Championship and not just the Prem. Sounds like a good excuse to cut off the leagues below and any unfashionable clubs to get the known names in.

Not enough talk about funding either. I'd prefer some much stricter ownership criteria as well.

Puja wrote: ↑Mon Jun 26, 2023 5:07 pm

FKAS wrote: ↑Mon Jun 26, 2023 1:55 pm Hmm lots of talk about branding and bringing back the lost clubs. I'm not sure I agree about parachuting them back into the Championship, especially as what's being mooted here sounds like an effective ringfencing arrangement but including the Championship and not just the Prem. Sounds like a good excuse to cut off the leagues below and any unfashionable clubs to get the known names in.

Not enough talk about funding either. I'd prefer some much stricter ownership criteria as well.

I'm assuming this is all part of the 100 guy's plan to attract investors for 2025 with a full relaunch of pro rugby and offering the opportunity to invest in "Prem 2" franchises that aren't just a badly-organised hole to throw money into, but a viable entity that is linked with "Prem 1" and has guaranteed promotion, relegation, and cup competition.

I understand the feeling of unfairness on ringfencing and rewriting the rules to allow fashionable names back in, but the truth is that we cannot have a full pyramid in England - rugby just isn't big enough and it just doesn't work. We are going to need to separate the professional and the amateur games - not necessarily imperviously (I'd be in favour of a well organised and ambitious club, that meets some MSC, being allowed to apply for entry into "Prem 2"), but it cannot just be done on sporting merit alone because the money and interest is not there to support anything below the Championship and you cannot have a professional entity that you are trying to have people invest in that could disappear into an amateur comp with a bad season. A fence will need to be ringed somewhere and I'd be much more in favour of doing it under "Prem 2" than pulling up the drawbridge under "Prem 1" and only having 10 pro teams.

And there's no doubt that it'll be easier to drum up interest in Prem 2 as a commercial vehicle if it contains Wasps and London Irish (don't know if Worcester would have much name recognition to non-rugby folk). I'd go a step further and, while sporting success would be one of the criteria, I'd also like to see "Prem 2" franchises picked on things like geographical spread, so that our 18-20 pro and semi-pro clubs cover a better span of the country and we don't get things like Colchester school children having to travel to Northampton.

If I was allowed to pick, I'd have Irish and Ealing rounding out London, with Wasps either eastern side of the city or actively in East Anglia. I'd then have Worcester, Bedford, and Coventry covering the already pretty well-covered Midlands, Pirates for Cornwall, Jersey (if they're interested) because it's a good underdog story to sell (and also that would be just reward for their results), and then Doncaster and AN Other to try and cover more of the north than just Manchester and Newcastle. But that does require finding 10 people willing to invest in a rugby club, which feels ambitious.

Puja

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Mon Jun 26, 2023 5:52 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Mon Jun 26, 2023 5:07 pm

FKAS wrote: ↑Mon Jun 26, 2023 1:55 pm Hmm lots of talk about branding and bringing back the lost clubs. I'm not sure I agree about parachuting them back into the Championship, especially as what's being mooted here sounds like an effective ringfencing arrangement but including the Championship and not just the Prem. Sounds like a good excuse to cut off the leagues below and any unfashionable clubs to get the known names in.

Not enough talk about funding either. I'd prefer some much stricter ownership criteria as well.

I'm assuming this is all part of the 100 guy's plan to attract investors for 2025 with a full relaunch of pro rugby and offering the opportunity to invest in "Prem 2" franchises that aren't just a badly-organised hole to throw money into, but a viable entity that is linked with "Prem 1" and has guaranteed promotion, relegation, and cup competition.

I understand the feeling of unfairness on ringfencing and rewriting the rules to allow fashionable names back in, but the truth is that we cannot have a full pyramid in England - rugby just isn't big enough and it just doesn't work. We are going to need to separate the professional and the amateur games - not necessarily imperviously (I'd be in favour of a well organised and ambitious club, that meets some MSC, being allowed to apply for entry into "Prem 2"), but it cannot just be done on sporting merit alone because the money and interest is not there to support anything below the Championship and you cannot have a professional entity that you are trying to have people invest in that could disappear into an amateur comp with a bad season. A fence will need to be ringed somewhere and I'd be much more in favour of doing it under "Prem 2" than pulling up the drawbridge under "Prem 1" and only having 10 pro teams.

And there's no doubt that it'll be easier to drum up interest in Prem 2 as a commercial vehicle if it contains Wasps and London Irish (don't know if Worcester would have much name recognition to non-rugby folk). I'd go a step further and, while sporting success would be one of the criteria, I'd also like to see "Prem 2" franchises picked on things like geographical spread, so that our 18-20 pro and semi-pro clubs cover a better span of the country and we don't get things like Colchester school children having to travel to Northampton.

If I was allowed to pick, I'd have Irish and Ealing rounding out London, with Wasps either eastern side of the city or actively in East Anglia. I'd then have Worcester, Bedford, and Coventry covering the already pretty well-covered Midlands, Pirates for Cornwall, Jersey (if they're interested) because it's a good underdog story to sell (and also that would be just reward for their results), and then Doncaster and AN Other to try and cover more of the north than just Manchester and Newcastle. But that does require finding 10 people willing to invest in a rugby club, which feels ambitious.

Puja

The Jersey DoR was on the Champ (I think) pod after they won the league and they ate interested as he said they were a year or two in advance of where they want to be, ie challenging and beating Ealing (plus whoever would’ve been the 13th PRL team) for promotion. Which would tie in with the mooted 24/25 season launch.
I think the final north team would need to be Leeds and they would probs need to based on the northern edge of the city to attract the Otley, Ilkley, Harrogate, York and Wharfedale parts of the world. West Park Leeds would be perfect assuming they could get planning permission for a stadium, especially if you also granted them a Allianz Prem franchise (there is a lot of bad blood over the fact they don’t already have one). You might even attract Lancaster back to be HC.

Puja wrote: ↑Mon Jun 26, 2023 6:10 pm

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Mon Jun 26, 2023 5:52 pm

Puja wrote: ↑Mon Jun 26, 2023 5:07 pm

I'm assuming this is all part of the 100 guy's plan to attract investors for 2025 with a full relaunch of pro rugby and offering the opportunity to invest in "Prem 2" franchises that aren't just a badly-organised hole to throw money into, but a viable entity that is linked with "Prem 1" and has guaranteed promotion, relegation, and cup competition.

I understand the feeling of unfairness on ringfencing and rewriting the rules to allow fashionable names back in, but the truth is that we cannot have a full pyramid in England - rugby just isn't big enough and it just doesn't work. We are going to need to separate the professional and the amateur games - not necessarily imperviously (I'd be in favour of a well organised and ambitious club, that meets some MSC, being allowed to apply for entry into "Prem 2"), but it cannot just be done on sporting merit alone because the money and interest is not there to support anything below the Championship and you cannot have a professional entity that you are trying to have people invest in that could disappear into an amateur comp with a bad season. A fence will need to be ringed somewhere and I'd be much more in favour of doing it under "Prem 2" than pulling up the drawbridge under "Prem 1" and only having 10 pro teams.

And there's no doubt that it'll be easier to drum up interest in Prem 2 as a commercial vehicle if it contains Wasps and London Irish (don't know if Worcester would have much name recognition to non-rugby folk). I'd go a step further and, while sporting success would be one of the criteria, I'd also like to see "Prem 2" franchises picked on things like geographical spread, so that our 18-20 pro and semi-pro clubs cover a better span of the country and we don't get things like Colchester school children having to travel to Northampton.

If I was allowed to pick, I'd have Irish and Ealing rounding out London, with Wasps either eastern side of the city or actively in East Anglia. I'd then have Worcester, Bedford, and Coventry covering the already pretty well-covered Midlands, Pirates for Cornwall, Jersey (if they're interested) because it's a good underdog story to sell (and also that would be just reward for their results), and then Doncaster and AN Other to try and cover more of the north than just Manchester and Newcastle. But that does require finding 10 people willing to invest in a rugby club, which feels ambitious.

Puja

The Jersey DoR was on the Champ (I think) pod after they won the league and they ate interested as he said they were a year or two in advance of where they want to be, ie challenging and beating Ealing (plus whoever would’ve been the 13th PRL team) for promotion. Which would tie in with the mooted 24/25 season launch.
I think the final north team would need to be Leeds and they would probs need to based on the northern edge of the city to attract the Otley, Ilkley, Harrogate, York and Wharfedale parts of the world. West Park Leeds would be perfect assuming they could get planning permission for a stadium, especially if you also granted them a Allianz Prem franchise (there is a lot of bad blood over the fact they don’t already have one). You might even attract Lancaster back to be HC.

Leeds were a name that I thought about, but there's a risk in pulling someone up from NL2 North (especially when they were so comprehensively relegated from NL1 last season) anf they would be (relatively) on the doorstep of Doncaster.

There's no-one really leaping out in the North though. The big names of the past: Orrell, West Hartlepool, Waterloo, Rotherham are all lower divisions now. Possibly best to have an 8 team league, let Bedford/Worcester/Coventry fight over 2 spots in the Midlands and start looking for a northern team to develop as a prospect for 2-3 years' time?

Puja

FKAS wrote: ↑Mon Jul 17, 2023 2:31 pm I'm surprised that Exeter are one of the teams pushing for an increase in the cap. They can't be at the cap currently unless there's more players to be announced as 4 are confirmed in and 16 confirmed out including some of their biggest names.

Bristol, Bath and Sarries all have owners willing to put their hand in their pocket though so I can imagine they will want to push on if at all possible.

FKAS wrote: ↑Mon Jul 17, 2023 2:31 pm I'm surprised that Exeter are one of the teams pushing for an increase in the cap. They can't be at the cap currently unless there's more players to be announced as 4 are confirmed in and 16 confirmed out including some of their biggest names.

jimKRFC wrote: ↑Thu Jun 29, 2023 8:24 am Not sure where to put it, but in an effort to fill the home game gaps Bristol have now added the Crusaders to the Fixture list, with them and the BaaBaa's that two more home gates.

Just seen it's included in the season ticket as well.

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Mon Jul 17, 2023 3:14 pm

FKAS wrote: ↑Mon Jul 17, 2023 2:31 pm I'm surprised that Exeter are one of the teams pushing for an increase in the cap. They can't be at the cap currently unless there's more players to be announced as 4 are confirmed in and 16 confirmed out including some of their biggest names.

Always worth remembering, Exeter signed pretty much everybody up to new 3-year deals when Covid hit, the cap reduced, but those contracts were able to put 25% outside of the cap.
Those come due this summer, so those players would all be being offered a 25% cut; or let go, so that the rest can be paid properly.

Given that allowance, it's basically impossible to judge who's where in relationship to the cap based on ins vs outs.
In sheer numbers, I don't think 4 in, 16 out, is outside of the ordinary (though the number of those who are starters for Ex. surely is; but IMO is explained by the above)

Tigersman wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2023 9:29 am Bristol and Bath struggled in the league this year despite spending up to the cap, let's be real they are not competing against the Irish or French teams at all currently so kinda funny how they want to spend purely because they think it will solve their prem rut despite trying to window dress it as a European thing.

At least Exeter and Sarries have both won stuff recently, although unsure if Exeter are that level anymore they challenege in Europe. Meanwhile Bath isn't even in the champions cup and Bristol got in through the back door.

Almost as if Bath and Bristol might need to learn that it isn't the cap causing them issues.

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2023 9:36 am

Tigersman wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2023 9:29 am Bristol and Bath struggled in the league this year despite spending up to the cap, let's be real they are not competing against the Irish or French teams at all currently so kinda funny how they want to spend purely because they think it will solve their prem rut despite trying to window dress it as a European thing.

At least Exeter and Sarries have both won stuff recently, although unsure if Exeter are that level anymore they challenege in Europe. Meanwhile Bath isn't even in the champions cup and Bristol got in through the back door.

Almost as if Bath and Bristol might need to learn that it isn't the cap causing them issues.

It's not like Craig and Landowne have ever tried to spend their way to the top before...

Erm, and what do you mean about Bath not being in the Champions Cup?
For some, really obvious reason, the elite competition of European rugby has 80% representation for the least elite league in Europe (as well as a few not-European teams)

Also, to be fair, under JvG things do seem to be changing at Bath - whether for the better or not is TBD, but Craig will always want to throw his credit card around at the shiniest of toys.

FKAS wrote: ↑Mon Jul 17, 2023 4:05 pm

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Mon Jul 17, 2023 3:14 pm

FKAS wrote: ↑Mon Jul 17, 2023 2:31 pm I'm surprised that Exeter are one of the teams pushing for an increase in the cap. They can't be at the cap currently unless there's more players to be announced as 4 are confirmed in and 16 confirmed out including some of their biggest names.

Always worth remembering, Exeter signed pretty much everybody up to new 3-year deals when Covid hit, the cap reduced, but those contracts were able to put 25% outside of the cap.
Those come due this summer, so those players would all be being offered a 25% cut; or let go, so that the rest can be paid properly.

Given that allowance, it's basically impossible to judge who's where in relationship to the cap based on ins vs outs.
In sheer numbers, I don't think 4 in, 16 out, is outside of the ordinary (though the number of those who are starters for Ex. surely is; but IMO is explained by the above)

I'd forgotten they'd used that loophole. A lot of the high earners are out the door though, even if a lot of those remaining are now on a position to renegotiate for new contracts it's not a good market to do that unless you want to go to France. Which admittedly quite a few have done. I'm still expecting more signings to be announced by them.