Great post Canadian Rugger. It's interesting hearing another perspective and hard to argue that huge mistakes were made with regards developing rugby in Canada. However I think Italy's situation is completely different.
For example, I don't argue that Italy's Super 10 should be disolved. It absolutely must be retained. However new regional teams in sensible locations playing at a higher level could work. For example, it would be crazy putting a team south of Rome since rugby doesn't have a foothold there. Also, Italy will play/have played internationals in Rome, Bologna, Turin and Genoa recently demonstrating there's a market for the sport in those cities - combined those cities have one team in the Super 10, Capitolina of Rome.
I've taken a quick look at the websites of all Super 10 teams and to say they have good crowds is an exaggeration. All the photos show sparsely populated stadiums; only Petrarca seem to draw reasonable crowds. I'd highly doubt the league averages even 3000 fans per game (especially since only 3 grounds seem to have a capacity above that figure). A question I'd ask is whether 2 or 3 teams containing primarily Italian internationals (which the Super 10 can't provide) in larger catchment areas (but still in Italy's rugby heartland i.e. the north and Rome) and competing in a pan-European competition (currently Italian teams in small markets who compete in the Heineken Cup draw poor crowds) would generate bigger crowds on a regular basis. I firmly believe that they would. To help back up my point, here's the opinion of a few non-"welsh, english, irish, Anzac" rugby fans from the Italian National team thread:
Super 10 level is poor compared to other european competitions........Maybe the "Celtic solution" of creating two or three italian selections for the magners league would help our youngsters to improve. [/b]
Yep... I agree with you, our youngsters need to face harder challenges to become great players... [/b]
I totally agree with you. :cheers: [/b]
Link:
http://www.therugbyforum.com/index.php?sho...34672&st=20y
You've argued that redrawing a league in a country the size of Canada or Italy is foolhardy. If done incorrectly (like in Canada), it's a grave error. If done correctly, it will lead to a massive spurt in the sports popularity. One can only look at the growth of the A-League (three years in and average crowds hover around 14,000) in place of the ailing National Soccer League in Australia (an example I chose because the size and population roughly equates to Canada) to see what can be achieved.
Sponsorship money wouldn't be killed, it would be redistributed on a far larger scale. Here's an article from May 1, 2008 which can be adapted to suit a European competition (the article is a good read although it's not one I'd completely agree with):
A 2001 Accenture report commissioned by Sanzar said the Super 12 should expand to a Super 16 by 2005, then get even bigger, with teams from east Asia. The final step was linking with the Heineken Cup to form a global competition. The New Zealand Rugby Union's competitions review in 2005 also supported this model as the "highest revenue generating" competition, but like the 2001 Accenture report, has been mothballed.
[/b]
Link:
http://www.rugbyheaven.co.nz/4505145a22363.html
In essence, a larger competition (complete with the principle of revenue sharing as illustrated in the above article) brings in more revenue through TV money and sponsorship than the existing structure. The extra money can be used to grow the grassroots â€" in Ireland's case it's more schemes like the Tallaght strategy, in Italy's case the Super 10 clubs, in the French and English case it can line the pockets of the owners to a far greater extent than is currently the case (which is no bad thing). I believe this is what David Moffett was looking to achieve with his proposal. It's what John Kirwan and Nick Mallett, guys with a vested interest in Italian rugby, have advocated. Sure, there would be some losers (however who's to say that existing Super 10 clubs can't apply to be part of the league?) but the overall gain far outweighs that. Down the line Georgian, Spanish, Portugese, Romanian , Russian, German etc teams could be added.
Funny how only supporters of the Celtic franchises say this is a good idea.
Draw your own conclusions about the Magners league. [/b]
The same Magners League which provides a Heineken Cup finalist again? The same Magners League which provides the winner of the EDF Energy Cup (leaving aside it's faults for the minute)? The same Magners League which is home of the bulk of the 6 Nations Grand Slam winners? The same Magners League which by the end of next season will see 6 of it's 10 clubs play in large stadiums built over the last 5 years and which also own their own grounds? The same Magners League which sees it's average attendances grow exponentially year on year. The Magners League isn't a bad competition and the top 5 or 6 clubs are on a par with the top 5 or 6 in England and France. What it lacks is comparable financing and media coverage, a direct result of the smaller population base it serves.
