Pro game in trouble

[Saintjay]

Had a look Wembley looks like it's capped at 22 sporting events and 18 concerts and year. They have no limits on events under 51,000. Which isn't a bad attendance.

They've applied to increase the non sporting events by 8 taking it to 26 per year. Becoming more an entertainment venue than sports venue.

Gigs are where the money is for artist's, hence all these mega tours. Twickenham is definitely missing out

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Twickenham's limits are stupidly low, because of the location, aren't they?
Something like 5 a year?


Edit: Maximum of 3 per year, 2 of which have to be on a Saturday - mad!

 

[Crash Hamster]

I have a rule where I don't go to any event unless I'm spending more time at the event than it takes me to get there, so haven't been to Twickenham since the Moseley-Gloucester JP Cup final of 1982.

In those days, players were (largely, sort-of) unpaid... and rugby needs to move back somewhat towards this; it's no good offering players low or mid six figures a year if your clubs are going bankrupt. There's no harm in a game finding its financial and 'popularity' position and then staying there. This obviously applies to the administators too, who seem happy to command salaries that would make an international second row blush, while being spectacularly unhelpful.

Yes, rugby is hard, yes the career is/can be short/very short, but it's still a career choice, made willingly.

FWIW, I'd do away with some of the manufactured fixtures and concentrate on building an English league pyramid, giving meaning and spice to the games. Building a super-stadium in Rugby would be a brilliant move to guarantee funding in perpetuity.

 

[Saintjay]

Twickenham's limits are stupidly low, because of the location, aren't they?
Something like 5 a year?


Edit: Maximum of 3 per year, 2 of which have to be on a Saturday - mad!

Wow so Wembley is doing more in a year than Twickenham is in 5\7 years.

You'd hope someone in the RFU has worked that out.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

its a very similar debate re Eden Park....already cobbled together ...holding on by its teeth to be a world class venue.....but huge restrictions on noise due to being in a very expensive suburb...and i cant help they would easily pay for a new stadium somewhere else by selling off the land or building a couple of hundred townhouses

 

[pagliaccio_euforico]

I have a rule where I don't go to any event unless I'm spending more time at the event than it takes me to get there, so haven't been to Twickenham since the Moseley-Gloucester JP Cup final of 1982.

In those days, players were (largely, sort-of) unpaid... and rugby needs to move back somewhat towards this; it's no good offering players low or mid six figures a year if your clubs are going bankrupt. There's no harm in a game finding its financial and 'popularity' position and then staying there. This obviously applies to the administators too, who seem happy to command salaries that would make an international second row blush, while being spectacularly unhelpful.

Yes, rugby is hard, yes the career is/can be short/very short, but it's still a career choice, made willingly.

FWIW, I'd do away with some of the manufactured fixtures and concentrate on building an English league pyramid, giving meaning and spice to the games. Building a super-stadium in Rugby would be a brilliant move to guarantee funding in perpetuity.

Just have the pro game bind player salaries to 35-55% of a team's previous year revenues. Newly promoted teams can have the median figure for two years or something. Let salaries grow organically not based off what sugar daddy's. Would also give team's an extra advantage to building a revenue base.

 

[Which Tyler]

Just have the pro game bind player salaries to 35-55% of a team's previous year revenues. Newly promoted teams can have the median figure for two years or something. Let salaries grow organically not based off what sugar daddy's. Would also give team's an extra advantage to building a revenue base.

Would need far more complicated maths than that, and to sacrifice the (current) purpose of the salary cap.
A) What counts as "revenues"? IIRC Leicester own a car park, who's revenues go towards funding the club, Exeter used to own a hotel, several grounds include conference facilities (which presumably earn way less post-covid), whilst others don't even own their stadium or training pitches.
B) The (current) purpose of the salary cap is to keep a competitive league, rather than splitting off between the "Have"s and the "Have not"s - and TBH, it's doing a pretty good job. You can't just go out and buy league success in the way that, eg. Newcastle did before there was a salary cap (or some would say that Saracens did when they ignored the salary cap).

I'd further add, that... what do rugby clubs spend all their money on?
Even Sale and Newcastle have turnovers in the region of £12.25 Million p.a. whilst Harlequins are double that, and another 5 clubs hover around the £20M mark.
Yes, I know there's far more to it that Player salary + coaches' salary, but it seems that if you've a turnover of 4x the salary cap, if you're making a loss, it's because you choose to.
If Gloucester, say, can have a turnover of £17M for a total loss of £0.6M, and an actual EBITDA profit of £0.6M; what are Quins spending spending their extra £10M p.a. on to end up with a £4M loss (though only a £0.2M EBITDA loss). Okay, so Gloucester are cutting their coat according to their cloth, and not spending up to the salary cap - but I'm pretty confident they're not £14M below the cap!

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

I have a rule where I don't go to any event unless I'm spending more time at the event than it takes me to get there, so haven't been to Twickenham since the Moseley-Gloucester JP Cup final of 1982.

In those days, players were (largely, sort-of) unpaid... and rugby needs to move back somewhat towards this; it's no good offering players low or mid six figures a year if your clubs are going bankrupt. There's no harm in a game finding its financial and 'popularity' position and then staying there. This obviously applies to the administators too, who seem happy to command salaries that would make an international second row blush, while being spectacularly unhelpful.

Yes, rugby is hard, yes the career is/can be short/very short, but it's still a career choice, made willingly.

FWIW, I'd do away with some of the manufactured fixtures and concentrate on building an English league pyramid, giving meaning and spice to the games. Building a super-stadium in Rugby would be a brilliant move to guarantee funding in perpetuity.

Great post, although good luck in persuading any sports administrator to live within their means and have fewer games.

 

[pagliaccio_euforico]

@Which Tyler

Agree with your entire post.

I know basketball, football, and hockey use the term "[sport] related income" for setting the league salary cap. Someone who knows numbers better than me can figure it out.

Your second point should be the question everyone is asking and something I've been confused by since the beginning. What exactly are they spending their money on? At some point you deserve what you get.

 

[Rinkadink]

There is just too much international rugby, none of it feels special and now basically routine. There is such a disconnect, in England particularly, with who follows and attends competitions like the 6 Nations or World Cups and who follows and attends the professional/semiprofessional clubs. I've heard current players talking about how even they'd like more club matches and exposure at the expense of the international circus which is almost reassuring as it's not just the likes of me.

The RFU will not care about this however and in my honest opinion are inching towards franchising with how much it'd be cheaper for them. As long as they get enough to get their international player quota, a franchise or two competing in Europe and pay lip service to grassroots, they will be happy.

 

[Saintjay]

There is just too much international rugby, none of it feels special and now basically routine. There is such a disconnect, in England particularly, with who follows and attends competitions like the 6 Nations or World Cups and who follows and attends the professional/semiprofessional clubs. I've heard current players talking about how even they'd like more club matches and exposure at the expense of the international circus which is almost reassuring as it's not just the likes of me.

The RFU will not care about this however and in my honest opinion are inching towards franchising with how much it'd be cheaper for them. As long as they get enough to get their international player quota, a franchise or two competing in Europe and pay lip service to grassroots, they will be happy.

I just don't know any Saints fans who'd switch allegiance to a franchise/region the same for Tigers fans. I just can't see the East Mids clubs going for it.

 

[pagliaccio_euforico]

I just don't know any Saints fans who'd switch allegiance to a franchise/region the same for Tigers fans. I just can't see the East Mids clubs going for it.

Can't imagine the RFU is looking at the welsh regions and thinking that went well

 

[McTallshort]

Worcester just applied to join the Championship. Not all bad news then?

 

[higgik]

I just don't know any Saints fans who'd switch allegiance to a franchise/region the same for Tigers fans. I just can't see the East Mids clubs going for it.

Wouldn't have to be a new franchise.

Both Leicester and Northampton could be franchises.

My suggestion would be
Newcastle, Sale, Doncaster
Coventry, Leicester, Northampton
Bristol, Gloucester, Exeter
Saracens, Harlequins, Wasps (SE London)

 

[TRF_Olyy]

You think Bath fans are going to support Bristol?

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

Is there anywhere franchises actually work? Unless the idea is that due to the franchise we keep existing clubs but take ownership into the rfus hands?

 

[higgik]

Is there anywhere franchises actually work? Unless the idea is that due to the franchise we keep existing clubs but take ownership into the rfus hands?

Why not.
Set up a new league and invite teams to bid for a place based on fan base, stadium and financials.

Try to get a geographical balance.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

Why not.
Set up a new league and invite teams to bid for a place based on fan base, stadium and financials.

Try to get a geographical balance.

Because the rfu are useless. They focus more on diversity and inclusion and less on actual rugby.

 

[McTallshort]

You think Bath fans are going to support Bristol?

Well what's the alternative? The slow decline and end of professional rugby in England?

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

Well what's the alternative? The slow decline and end of professional rugby in England?

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