Just though I'd throw on in to see which GP franchises we all follow (little club bias coming out there ). Apologies if it's been done before.
If your refering to the English clubs, how did you come up with that? Most of them are 130 year (give or take 10) old clubs, not new amalgamations set up by a business enveloping smaller clubs, a-la the CL sides and, so a certain extent, the S14.
If your refering to the English clubs, how did you come up with that? Most of them are 130 year (give or take 10) old clubs, not new amalgamations set up by a business enveloping smaller clubs, a-la the CL sides and, so a certain extent, the S14. [/b][/quote] it's not much of a concern of how old they are as much as are they not all out for the common goal to win and make money?
Maybe in that sense, but not in the same mannor as Stuey is bastardising them in the "i'm lower league so I'm 1337" way, a-la; –noun franchise An agreement between a firm and another party in which the firm provides the other party with the right to use the firm's name and to sell or rent its products. Selling franchise rights is a method of expanding a business quickly with a minimum of capital.
There's a big difference between a franchise and a business. The GP clubs will (I assume) all be plc's (public limited companies), having issued shares when they established themselves as professional outfits. Many will have majority shareholders, but will ultimately be responsible to ayone invested in the business. A franchise will be privately owned, with utter control belonging to one individual or family. Just because the premiership clubs have money doesn't mean that they have 'sold out.'
Hee hee : Nah I was just indulging in a bit of inverse snobbery...the reason for the franchise dig was the way PRL are always trying to cement the status quo by fending off relegation whilst building a regional presence in various areas, the way the national knockout trophy was replaced with that silly, silly anglo Welsh thingy only re-inforces the gap between the chosen few and what seems to have been deemed the grass roots. At times it feels less like the top tier and more and more like an at best a Super14 type competition or at worst an American style inter-franchise trournament (granted that's an extreme way of putting it but you get my drift). I can certainly see why the RFU would want that, their 16 team model covers most regions and the extra investment in these clubs would allow them to establish full-on professional academies at these clubs. The talent would be nurtured as it's cherry picked from the lower leagues, this has got to be better for top clubs and therefore the national side.......in theory this will allow more money to filter down to the lower leagues via the RFU but I daresay that's not clubs want. I can see the merits of this way of doing things, look the at the Super14 but to me inorganic competition leads to stagnation I think...Just 'cause one team was in the ascendancy at the right time in history and another wasn't does that mean that one gets on the ship whilst the other is left waiting at the dock. Sale in, Orrell out. Worcester in, Coventry out. You get what I mean, anyway... sorry, didn't mean to start an argument.
