Super Rugby and the USA
Roar Guru By Working Class Rugger, 30 Nov 2011 Working Class Rugger is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- Rugby Union, SANZAR, southern rugby, USA
Several months ago, on one of my pieces regarding rugby in the United States, we were joined by a surprise contributor in the form of USA Rugby CEO and Director of Rugby, Nigel Melville.
In his brief visit(s), he provided fleeting details regarding his organization’s interests in establishing a possible Super Rugby franchise on the West Coast of the United States.
He also briefly divulged details on similar prospects on the East Coast regarding the Pro 12 (formerly Magners/Celtic League) and closed discussions regarding prospective investors in a domestic ‘Pro’ Rugby Championship.
(Interestingly enough, on a recent US-based blog, Bruce McClane, head coach of the New York Athletic Club in the Rugby Super League hinted at three individual groups attempting to do so)
In addition, reading the musing of Rugbymag.com editor and primary contributor Alex Goff published this morning about the costing for a small semi-pro league, stimulated my thinking in regards to how exactly to achieve this.
The obvious answer may very well be domestically from within the United States but considering the interest to reach the new markets expressed by NZRU CEO Steve Tew and the very public thoughts of John O’Neill, an alternative could be considered.
By that, I mean that SANZAR should invest in establishing a semi-pro Rugby Championship in the United States using the Alex Goff’s basic structures as a template with an eye on developing the marketplace and an entirely new conference for Super Rugby down in the not too distant future.
Or at the very least, a commercial stake in any future professional structure that may evolve within the United States.
First the details. In Goff’s article, he suggests a seven-team League, competing on a home-and-away basis constituting a 12-game regular season.
Each team would have a roster of 25 players plus five support staff which makes it 30 in total.
A standardized playing fee of $1,000 would be paid weekly to each. This would total around $2,500,000 per season according to Goff’s figures.
Add in stadium hire and travel, he figures a total cost of $3.5 million USD in annual costs before any commercial ventures are entered into. Not exactly enticing to investors looking to return a profit in the short term but potentially profitable in the medium.
Seems reasonable investment for an organization with the appropriate levels of foresight and entrepreurship. One that could provide Super Rugby with an invaluable opportunity.
So, is it possible? And do either of the current CEOs have the necessary clout to push such an idea through? Maybe, maybe not, no?
Here’s how I believe it should be approached.
In association with both, USA Rugby for the sanctioning rights and USA 7s LLC for the commercial contacts particularly with NBC, SANZAR could set up such a small and compact league by providing the finances required to get it up and running.
They could also use the likes of Melville and USA 7s to drive awareness and support within the American rugby community and the in the form of broadcasting support and sponsorship via the current relationships with NBC, it’s subsidiary Universal which will soon merge with Versus to form NBC Sports.
In time, as the league grows to the point SANZAR sees value enough in including it into Super Rugby, it can look to sell the rights to potential investors once the competition is proven.
The US sports manufacturer SGMA recently stated that there were over 1.5 million participants last season, including over 300,000 kids between the age of seven and 12.
This is a number they are looking to elevate to 500,000 in the coming years, allowing rugby in the US to gradually break from its small niche to a wider community presence.
Why not be a key partner in this evolution and provide the necessary finances to ensure when it does happen, SANZAR and Southern Rugby are at the forefront.
Recommend this story.
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
- Explore:
- Rugby Union, SANZAR, southern rugby, USA
November 30th 2011 @ 8:29am
Ray said | November 30th 2011 @ 8:29am | Report comment
nice piece wcr. what did alex goff suggest or do you have a link to his article?
November 30th 2011 @ 8:34am
Intotouch said | November 30th 2011 @ 8:34am | Report comment
How much money would be required to run a pro league in the USA?
It seems to me that it would be far more worthwhile to develop such a league than try to join existing competitions in different continents. The travel costs would be considerable I know either way but with such a large population and young player numbers as large as they are I keep thinking that it could be a viable league and could develop it’s own traditions and rivalries. I know that kids don’t buy rugby tickets but there are still more adult players than Wales for example. It must be possible.
November 30th 2011 @ 2:41pm
Working Class Rugger said | November 30th 2011 @ 2:41pm | Report comment
Whether or not such a competition ever integrates into Super Rugby or not investing in such a large commercial market, one that the game is rapidly expanding into could prove fruitful. If anything, an organisation such as SANZAR looking to invest into Rugby in the States may spark the interest of several very wealthy former Rugby player’s to look to do like wise.
November 30th 2011 @ 8:44am
Rough Conduct said | November 30th 2011 @ 8:44am | Report comment
Thanks Working, it’s good to have someone on the ball regarding US Rugby – what potential Nth America has for development of the game!
Any word on what format the 7 team comp would take, i.e Club or Provincial? I like what the Canadians have done with their 4 x provincial teams, combining some provinces but still retaining geographical / social identity, Prairie Wolfpack for example. The US would be able to do the same, let the big states have their own team – California, NY, Texas, then regional provincial teams such as New England, Mid-West, Rockies, Pac Nth West and Southern, the issue of whether to go completely national or East-West conference would also have to be addressed. I think this (provincial) has the potential to engage more fans than the current RSL club structure, it would also provide the perfect foundation for any future integration with Super Rugby. Surely combining with Canada to produce a ‘domestic’ competition would make sense also – has this been talked about?
November 30th 2011 @ 2:46pm
Working Class Rugger said | November 30th 2011 @ 2:46pm | Report comment
I’d imagine it would be someone similar to the Utah Warriors setup. Independent of clubs in terms of admin but forming a city/state representative organisation. The Warriors have quickly built strong relationships with the Utah clubs to source talent but are still an independent organisation. They open their training facility (a $2 million USD investment) this December.
I’d imagine Canadian teams would be certainly in the consideration of any such league if not from the get go then definitely very early on in it’s growth stages. In my opinion Rugby in both the US and Canada are intrinsically linked with one another and that goes for any future professional structures.
November 30th 2011 @ 8:54am
King of the Gorgonites said | November 30th 2011 @ 8:54am | Report comment
Nice article. Always interesting to discuss possible ways to grow the game.
So its 3.5M for the whole tournament, not per team?
The IRB are helping to fund Argentina’s inclusion into the Rugby Championship, any chance they may do the same for an American league. Afterall, the IRB would benefit significantly if they can grow rugby in the states.
Canada have an arrangement with a club in North Wales? Does American have any similiar arrangements?
November 30th 2011 @ 2:48pm
Working Class Rugger said | November 30th 2011 @ 2:48pm | Report comment
The $3.5 million is total not per team. Though I think his initial calculations do not take into account the any preseason. So say $4 million total. The IRB should absolutely be approached to assist in the funding of any such movements.
December 1st 2011 @ 4:52am
Matthew said | December 1st 2011 @ 4:52am | Report comment
Its a great idea to start a local semi-pro competition, but I think some of the numbers Alex used are a bit off. I dont think he took into account the amount of money it would take to rent proper stadiums to play in. And if we are going to make a run at this, then all of these games need to be played in actual stadiums, not the typical club field with a hill for its fans to watch from. Those are fantastic training grounds, but not for a semi-pro league. We would need to make this as commercially viable as possible for this to have any chance of sustainability.
My thoughts would be to play all games in MLS stadiums or small American footballl stadiums. To rent an MLS stadium I’m beating it would double what was suggested to run a team, bringing the total for the entire competition to around 7 million dollars. (1 Million per team) And that’s probably not even including marketing and TV production costs to help promote the league.
The former CPD (now D1A) last year broadcast 3 of its collegiate games on ESPNU (U = University) This is a 2nd tier sports station and USAR had to cover all of the production costs. (We had over 10,000 fans in attendance for the championship – game was played in Utah) For those 3 games (2 of which, were held in the same location on the same day) It costs USARugby a reported $70,000 dollars. So lets just say you want to get every team in your new league on TV at least once for a home game, plus 2 playoff games and the championship… That’s 10 games total at roughly $35K per game for production, which adds another $350,000 right there to your total.Not a lot of money, and most of that cost should be able to be covered by corporate title sponsorships. But it is an extra cost that I don’t think was thought of.
Anyway, my intent is not to bring down the idea of a semi-professional US based competition. I think its a great idea. Its just going to take a lot of work and needs to be done the American way. (sorry not trying to be an ass, but the U.S. has some of the most profitable professional sports competitions in the world, so there is no need to reinvent the wheel here) In regards to that, you cannot do a territorial based competition. That is NOT how sports teams are followed in the US. Americans show allegiance to 4 types of sports teams. Their High School team, Their College or University team, The City the live near or once lived in, and team USA. NOBODY HERE would be interested in seeing the Midwest Thunderbolts play the West Coast…. who cares… Maybe you could pull players from a region to form the teams but they would need tobe City based teams to be promotable. Which means they also wont understand some of the current club names like OMBAC, OPSB, NYAC or Life… they would need to be changed and lineups would need to be more like the following…(New York vs Boston) (Chicago vs Denver) (Atlanta vs Seattle) That is why going after current SL teams wouldn’t work. These franchises would need to be created from scratch like the Utah Warriors.
Anyway, its great to see that there is so much support from overseas regarding a U.S. based competition. I just wanted to share some of my thoughts on it.
December 1st 2011 @ 10:05am
Working Class Rugger said | December 1st 2011 @ 10:05am | Report comment
Yeah, I think Goff missed a few considerations in his figures.
November 30th 2011 @ 8:56am
B-Rock said | November 30th 2011 @ 8:56am | Report comment
I have always hoped US Rugby takes off – If it could ultimately be the number 6 or 7 sport in the US, this would be a huge win for rugby globally. Its not a pipe dream, it already has a foothold in the US through the college system and underlying support more broadly. They are not competing with the NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL – they are competing with NASCAR, Lacrosse, Soccer, etc – hardly an impossible feat
The first step in achieving this is a domestic league and sevens. I think your approach above is a solid one but I would not count on funding from SANZAR.
Costs of US$3.5m per team are not trivial, and while the JO’Ns of the world like to babble about opportunities in the US and other emerging rugby nations (Russia, Georgia, etc), the truth is it would be very difficult to justify.
The core decision for the ARU and SANZAR would be a high risk/high return (over the long term) investment in US rugby or investing domestically in Australian rugby (and SA and NZ rugby respectively). This is most important for Australia given our woeful investments in grass roots rugby, no domestic comp, etc. You could imagine the reaction from non-private schools and the clubs if the ARU announced a mult-million dollar investment in the US while the game continues to struggle locally outside of its core demographic.
November 30th 2011 @ 9:20am
Bay35Pablo said | November 30th 2011 @ 9:20am | Report comment
Goff’s article on rugbymag.com is at:
http://www.rugbymag.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2803:goffonrugby-dollars-and-pounds-and-pro-rugby&catid=96:goff-on-rugby&Itemid=292
A USA team in the Super Rugby has serious travel problems, because every team has to travel at least 14 hours to get to LA. That’s from Sydney. It would only work with a North America conference which didn’t have to play anyone else in the regular season (which kind of begs what’s the point). Which is also why the West Coast would tend to look to us and the East coast to Europe – travel times.
Bruce McLane has always been very dismissive of Rugby USA’s ability to organise a beer in a brewery, so dealing with them could be problematic. Their organisation of the National 7s comp this week seems to have verged on a disaster, in contrast to the CRC which is a LLC which also runs VEgas and rugbymag from memory.The current Super League apparently gets little help or support from Rugby USA, but pays dues, so you would probably be better off approaching the Super LEague to cut a deal with any teams not playing dropping back to Division 1.
Your 7 teams would presumably be SFGG, North West (Old Puget?), Dallas, Denver, Utah, Boston, consolidated NY, consolidated Chicago, with Life University going from the current SL and 1 team still needing to go. You thus cover the main strong rugby regions (although with a gaping hole in the south east).
The ARU has enough cash problems itself so it is unlikely to throw cash at the US, and look to the IRB. The IRB is propping up Rugby USA at the moment, and Melville is part of the IRB installed admin. I think that grates sometimes with the general rugby community over there.
November 30th 2011 @ 12:46pm
Mella said | November 30th 2011 @ 12:46pm | Report comment
How is 14 hours a serious travel problem when in the current competition its 16 hours from NZ to South Africa? More importantly there are less time zones between west coast US and NZ/AUS and the timezone works out better TV wise. I think Sanzar will only last a few more years and South Africa will go their own way turning Super rugby probably into a trans tasman competition. Then the ARU and NZRU should seriously consider 2 teams from west coast US and Canada, which would basically be their national teams. So a 12 team competition with the 2 N. American teams playing 2 weeks home, 2 weeks away, and the Australasian teams playing both teams on the trip up.
This would actually be the best way of launching professional rugby in N America. You’d only have 1 team in each of the US and Canada, smaller costs and the whole fan base could support the teams as quasi national teams, similar to NZ warriors in the NRL.
November 30th 2011 @ 12:59pm
FootyWiffaJ said | November 30th 2011 @ 12:59pm | Report comment
This is exactly what I was thinking when I first read this article. And if South Africs pull out of Super Rugby in the next few years then I was also wondering the possibilities of playing in Hawaii or in the pacific islands on the way back to Australia. Just to shorten the travel time somewhat.
November 30th 2011 @ 1:42pm
Brian said | November 30th 2011 @ 1:42pm | Report comment
Its 14 hours LA to Sydney not too mention LA to Durban. Wouldn’t a team in NY 6-7 hours from Western Europe be more realistic. Also shouldn’t there be any plans to have a Super Rugby team in Buenos Aires?
November 30th 2011 @ 3:41pm
Mella said | November 30th 2011 @ 3:41pm | Report comment
N. America should only happen if and when (I think its when) South Africa go their own way, so no need for LA to Durban. Argentina is the alternative option to N America but you need at least two teams to make the trip over worthwhile. Personally I believe there’s more potential in US/Canada and it would resonate more in the Aus market to have a team from California. Argie is probably more suited to progressing its existing club league to professionalism. For a Pacific team, the only option is Fiji. They have a US3bn economy, population near 1 million, the most exciting team when they’re playing well. Samoa and Tonga or a Pacific combination all dont work.
November 30th 2011 @ 3:58pm
Bay35Pablo said | November 30th 2011 @ 3:58pm | Report comment
14 hous is a long way to go for 1 game. If it was more then it is easier, but that’s 14 hours from Oz. Imagine the trek for the Force or SAF!
November 30th 2011 @ 3:04pm
Working Class Rugger said | November 30th 2011 @ 3:04pm | Report comment
The RSL has been in existence for 16 seasons now and to be honest Melville has achieved more in the last 4 years than they have in last 16. McLane and co. may like to criticize the USAR admin but they need to look at their own houses first. There has been zero growth in from the RSL in 16 seasons commercially. None whatsoever, or at least anything measurable. In an age where getting your product out is easier than ever via the internet you cannot find any footage of this year’s season unless you have the necessary permissions. Their website is poor to say the least.
Melville was be it parachuted into an organisation that was largely dysfunctional, overstaffed and under skilled. Many American Rugby fans have been resistant which is understandable but he is doing a good job in difficult circumstances. He has created a focus on youth via Rookie Rugby and he approached and developed the proposal to the USOC to the point now they have access to Olympic Training facilities and from next year will have a residency program for both their men’s and a number of their women’s 7s squads. For such a minority sport as Rugby is developing commercial ventures are difficult and many critics have been vocal of this but as above many have achieved far, far less.
I suspect the information regarding the ‘failure’ of the USAR 7s event comes from Rugbymag which should be noted is owned by USA 7s LLC who administer the CRC.
November 30th 2011 @ 4:03pm
Bay35Pablo said | November 30th 2011 @ 4:03pm | Report comment
The SL has always been an amateur comp, with all the problems that go with it. It’s the chicken or the egg problem, get on TV to go pro, but need to be pro to be good enough on TV.
The approach now seems to be to use college rugby as the selling point.
I cannot say I have looked too closely at the changes in Rugby USA, but the feeling I always got was a bunch of Euros parachuted into the US and trying to run the place like the old bwanas in colonial times. “it worked for us old chap so it should bloody work for you!”. Eddie O’Sullivan appears to have come and gone without adding much, which is a damning thing. And let’s not forget Scotty Johnson getting let down before that.
Rookie Rugby looks to be a great success, so it’s now a case up building the levels higher up the pyramid.
Goff has always been up front his mag is run by the same comp, so I don’t see a conflict. If they land valid blows in criticising them, they still hurt. The main complaint on the Nationals is timing, dropping them right in the middle of exams, and with teams already having spent budgets. All I’ll say is see who turns up at the Nationals as opposed to the CRC, and which seems to have the better line up.
November 30th 2011 @ 6:41pm
Working Class Rugger said | November 30th 2011 @ 6:41pm | Report comment
Bay
The RSL was established not only to provide a higher level of competition but create a professional platform for the game. Yes, they started from a very low base and are faced with huge obstacles in the forms you stated. However, they haven’t really done much to try to break the mold remaining more than happy to remain a exclusive club. The Glendale Raptors attempted to gain access for 3 years, easily the nations best set up and most professional club. They refused them entry only to allow the Warriors to participate. What happens when Utah wins the competition and starts drawing crowds (which from the efforts of their owner Sean Whelan is very possible). Will they kick them out of the league as I know they just got the vote in the first place.
November 30th 2011 @ 9:21am
Rickety Knees said | November 30th 2011 @ 9:21am | Report comment
Great post WCR – love getting the news from the US of A
November 30th 2011 @ 6:42pm
Working Class Rugger said | November 30th 2011 @ 6:42pm | Report comment
Cheers, Rickety
November 30th 2011 @ 9:35am
Steve R said | November 30th 2011 @ 9:35am | Report comment
Surely a North American league would be a better bet than a US league. Maybe 4 teams in each country. Canada – British Columbia, Prarie Provinces, Ontario and Atlantic. US – New York, Rockies, Great Lakes, West Coast.
November 30th 2011 @ 11:42am
SAMURAI said | November 30th 2011 @ 11:42am | Report comment
Agreed. I think it would make more sense creating a combined league of USA and Canada to make a ten/twelve team processional league. It would give more depth to each country, because at the last RWC there were only a handful of professionally players from both countries. The untapped potential of US Rugby is frightening.
November 30th 2011 @ 9:52am
sheek said | November 30th 2011 @ 9:52am | Report comment
Bay,
To support your argument, some fans look at a map in the same way European Emperors & Kings from the 19th century simply drew lines across a continent & said, “that’s mine”. And damn what the locals thought.
These modern day fans think, “oh yes, we can have teams from Australia, Argentina, Uruguay, NZ, SA, Fiji, Samoa, Tonga, Japan, Canada & USA all playing super rugby”.
They haven’t stopped to think about the long distances involved criss-crossing the southern hemisphere, not to mention the northern hemisphere as well, & the effect of travel & time zones debilitating the human body.
It’s not like us when we go on an overseas trip. One journey out, & one journey in. These professional rugby players would be expected to criss-cross oceans, continents, hemispheres & time zones numerous times each rugby season.
“Absolute mindless madness” is a phrase that immediately comes to mind.
Sydney to LA might only be a few centimetres apart on a map, but it’s an entirely different story to put the distance into practice.
Accepting Argentina into super rugby will be a massive enough task by itself, & would put the endurance of players to their limit.
I agree with those who suggest USA & Canada join together in a North American super league.
Great stuff Rugger, BTW.
November 30th 2011 @ 12:22pm
Football United said | November 30th 2011 @ 12:22pm | Report comment
^this
having sensible competitions and allowing for decent player recovery times >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chucking a super franchise left right and centre because they might be good.
November 30th 2011 @ 3:12pm
Working Class Rugger said | November 30th 2011 @ 3:12pm | Report comment
The franchise idea was thrown up by Melville as a means to gain access to professional opportunities for US based talent. I think looking to develop a local professional league would be more beneficial. I also think SANZAR should be involved in order to increase the competition value by having a ready made addition. Frankly, they should start putting pressure on the Argentine Union to start making moves toward establishing a South American Championship as well.
November 30th 2011 @ 3:09pm
Working Class Rugger said | November 30th 2011 @ 3:09pm | Report comment
In the direction in which I see Super Rugby developing, the conference system will allow for a competition spanning large geographical areas. The conferences will play most of the season internally with a limited number of cross overs. This would mean in the future the hopefully 2 Americas conferences would play internally and then against one another avoiding the need to cross oceans. The original three would remain as is in the current format.
November 30th 2011 @ 3:22pm
Johnno said | November 30th 2011 @ 3:22pm | Report comment
Working class rugger all these expansion plans sound exciting in theory but in practise so complicated and confusing to work out for the average fan, and tournament organisers. Keep the comp simple. I think the USA/Canada should just work together and develop a local league either together like NBA,NHL,MLB MLS, or have single competitions.
Rugby in USA/Canada still needs work at grass roots level.
Rookie rugby USA got an IRB award which is great they are developing nicely, and rugby in hawaii 1 million populations and majority is polynesian which is great base to develop talant.
Just can’t see 5-6 teams from USA/Canada/Argentina for at least 20 years around say just after 2035 world cup.
ANd who says argetintina would want into this super format in 25 years time, if Brazil, chile,uruguay catch up.
Same in USA/Canada if Mexico, Jamaica, trinadad, costa rica, hondurouas cuba, Nicaragua, barbados catch up as well.
ANd same with south africa. They are in Africa, and there is now and african nations club super style comp but south africa does not send it’s best teams yet.
As Zimbabwe, kenya,Nigeria, congo, botswana, namibia. ivory coast, Eygpt, ghana, uganda, morocco, tunisia, algeria catch up , then South Africa will gravitate to it’s natural home and time zone the continent of Africa which it has far more in common with than Australia/NZ, on every level, georgaphically, time zone wise, and culturally, Working Class Rugger.
November 30th 2011 @ 9:58am
Chris said | November 30th 2011 @ 9:58am | Report comment
Why not try to grow the college-based comp first? The structure and organisational ability is already there (no need to rely on Rugby USA if there are questions over their ability to run things), the players are already in place, and there is less of a commercial imperative to worry about. If this can be grown significantly, then the next step is a modest professional league.
November 30th 2011 @ 3:18pm
Working Class Rugger said | November 30th 2011 @ 3:18pm | Report comment
They already have in the form of the College Premier Division which has been re branded D1-AA to better fit with traditional College structures in the US. They have also pushed through the restructuring of the college scene into more geographic friendly and traditional lines as much as possible with the exception of the teams in D1-AA. D1-AA are the best programs in the country (well, most of them) with four geographically determined conferences, D1-A has 15 soon to be 16 conferences including several very promising structures. Same will be occurring in D2 and 3 in the next couple of seasons. All designed to streamline competition and reduce costs on teams.
November 30th 2011 @ 5:54pm
sky said | November 30th 2011 @ 5:54pm | Report comment
I totally understand your point, however the cable/satellite wars hurt rugby. I’m forced to have Comcast cable, I don’t have the option of buying the NBC extended package OR Fox Soccer Plus. I’d gladly pay to watch rugby, but I’m not given a choice. Torrents and illegal feeds til then.
November 30th 2011 @ 6:33pm
Working Class Rugger said | November 30th 2011 @ 6:33pm | Report comment
Do you get Versus? If so, you’d likely be in the broadcast range for NBC Sports when it comes online early next year. They’ll be broadcasting both the LV 7s and CRC as well as possibly the domestic Eagles tests.