A Gold Coast Super Rugby team?

Lets try walking before running. In case your wondering where Australia, more precisely Q/L is in terms of "super" success - you're crawling.

My analogy with the US is a perfectly valid one, as is my one with France which you fail to address. Who are the current Olympic Champions from the 20’s?? No rugby isn’t a mainstream sport in the US but you can’t tell me that it’s only ‘new’ there. And like SA there’s no real depth to its history (although I’d argue that the US has had a more serious history of rugby than SA has) and today it’s not close to being a mainstream sport and has a very minute following (despite moving in the right direction). Yes when Melbourne entered the competition the TV deal received a boost but please man, use your analytical skills here. Do you not think that could have something to do with the fact that the new offering includes a considerably larger amount of content? The extra team led to the conference system which meant each team play an extra three games during the regular season and at the end of the season there’s an expanded final series. This is the nuts and bolts of why SANZAR received a significant boost to its TV deal. News Corp. will also look at things like ratings which were all up on when the last deal was signed so of course the value goes up. Don’t be so naïve to suggest that the large top up SANZAR received was down to the fact that Melbourne entered the competition. In any event, I agree that Melbourne’s inclusion does add some value to the competition due to the market conditions I have discussed above. Adelaide doesn’t or at least any miniscule value that it does add (simply due to the fact that a few more people might be watching) would be well and truly swallowed up by the financial drain of having a team there. I’m sorry KPM but it’s just not as simple as putting a team where population is. The real increases in TV deals come from what I have talked about above- amount of content and a proven ratings increase.

No doubt western Sydney is a Rugby League heartland but it doesn’t mean that there can’t be more than one sport out there. And despite Rugby League being king of the west and Rugby Union’s strongest regions being in the east and the north, Rugby still has a long (dating back prior to 1908) and proud history in the west. Rugby is deeply ingrained in Sydney (all over despite being stronger in some parts than others) and NSW’s sporting landscape, AFL is not. GWS may be coping some of this so called hostility because they are the most plastic and ridiculous franchise created in Australia’s professional sporting history. They’re most famous player (to Sydneysiders) is a League star that’s playing park football cause he’s not good enough to make the grade in his adopted sport. The public (with the help of the media) can see straight through what the AFL are doing. Like KPM here, the AFL sees the numbers which are very juicy indeed but the fact remains there isn’t support there for what is effectively viewed as a ‘Victorian’ game. The AFL however have the ‘war chest’ to pour the funds into this club and as I said above they expect to be doing that for the next two decades. The ARU doesn’t have that luxury and can only afford to make more calculated risks, which Adelaide (for all of the reasons listed above) is not. This plastic franchise is being propped up by the league and forcibly pushed into an area that clearly doesn’t have a want for them. With Sydney media adding fuel to the fire, there is a public perception that they are the invaders. You watch, the Wanderers won’t be met with the media barrage that GWS have been. You can already see that since the new team was announced. That’s because soccer has a history and some sort of traction out there. Rugby is the same. People have this misconception that all of Sydney’s affluent suburbs are in the east and Rugby is only followed by the upper class, therefore the game only gets followed along the coast. This is so wrong for a number of reasons. Yes League has endeared itself to the working class but it doesn’t mean that there aren’t those that follow rugby who aren’t in the higher socioeconomic classes. Secondly, there is money out west. Many young families who may have grown up along the coast have had to buy out there because rising house prices have forced them to. Finally there’s also a lot of NZ, PI’s and SA expats living out there who grew up with rugby as their sport of choice. The environment rugby would be moving into would feel far more like home than one the AFL is attempting to move into with Giants. You really can’t compare rugby ‘moving into’ the west with the AFL’s attempts, for starters you can’t ‘move in’ if you’re technically already there (which rugby is). Given the games history and current standing in the west (which is hardly the foreign sport that it’s painted out to be sometimes), it’s a vitally important market for rugby to have a presence in. Roughly half of Sydney lives out there and it’s where most of the city’s growth is set to occur. As I’ve pointed out to KPM, Adelaide hasn’t got any of this going for it. Agreed the there would be no hostility if rugby attempted to move into Adelaide with a professional team, but it wouldn’t be embraced by the masses like it needs to be because their involvement with rugby is so limited.

Rob9 - I tend to agree more with kingplaymaker, although you do make some pertinent points. I still think Adelaide would be a better bet than a team in Western Sydney. Western Sydney is mostly working class and steadfastly league heartland - they don't take kindly to another sport encroaching on their territory - just look at GWS. Adelaide, as you note, mostly don't know the difference between the two Rugby's, but do watch the Wallabies and although may not have a great base to start from, wouldn't be met with the hostility that a team in the Western Suburbs would.

Further to this, lets extend your whacky formula for big TV deals and financially successful (if not sufficient) professional sporting franchises to the US. With a population in excess of 300 million including many big cities, you’d assume they’d have the ‘NBA’ of rugby competitions that would be the envy of the rest of the world. Why is this not the case? Because rugby is still very much in the developmental phase in the US. There are places where the rugby market is more mature than it is than Adelaide too. But the sport plays a very minor role in the US sports market (just as it does in Adelaide) with only a small following and therefore there is no big bad rugby comp that’s sucking players from all over the globe like the NBA does. Rugby is a minor sport there, and despite being in the grand daddy of markets, the rugby market is small. You’ve discussed the situation in France elsewhere on this thread. Why do you think that some of the big cities in the north aren’t involved in Top 14 or even Pro D2, yet there are villages in the south playing in these top two tiers? Could it have something to do with the different sporting cultures occupying different regions and the fact that rugby is just about nonexistent up there? Just as it is in SA?? It’s business101, you can plop yourself in a big market but the numbers have to be there who want your product in order for you to be successful. As you’ve been shown, despite being the fifth largest market in Australia, there’s nothing about the situation in Adelaide that suggests that they want a professional rugby franchise. Culture is culture and it’s hard to change. If you’re trying to make an impact upon a culture then it takes time. You can’t force people to want your product either.

KPM, you've got a guy here from SA who's said that the majority of South Australians wouldn't know the difference between the two rugby codes. In my dealings with people from the festival state and after a few trips there myself as a mad rugby fan, I've drawn a similar conclusion that SA has a very low level of engagement with the game. You can have a market of 1.65m or 1.2 (whatever you want to go with) but it doesn't nessecarily equal 1.65 million rugby fans and stadiums with capacities that are only a minor percentage of the population being packed out. It certainly doesn't equal networks breaking ratings records either. You fail to recognise that the formula for big broadcast deals isnt as simple as putting teams where population centers are. If it were, professional sport in this country would be rolling in it, and we both know that's not the case. The networks and those that advertise on them (where the $$$ come from) are more smarter than that. See you actually have to get substantial amounts of these large populations tuning in and engaging with the sport for the money to come. And it's mine and many others observations that suggest that due to the current SA sporting landscape (and it's almost non existent level of engagement with rugby) the numbers just don't add up the way you're hoping they do. Focus on grass roots and developing the sport to a certain point in SA first. Build more of a footing than just some level of competition in the private schools (and I'd still garantee you that being in the first 18 as opposed to the first 15 would still be top of the pops and the schools would largely be drawing from the same kids to scratch together their rugby team too).This will take time (not overnight) and then 10-15 years down the track the market might be mature enough to take on a professional team. SA is by no means and that point yet and they won't be any time soon.

It appears as though we're going to have to agree to disagree: I'm not going to change my opinion that there's no way a long-standing, well-supported team like Biarritz (who, incidentally play Heineken Cup games in Real Sociedad's 32,000 seater Anoeta Stadium, that's 5,000 more seats than the town has people) can be cited in a proposal for a Gold Coast team.

KPM, the T14 are teams in a domestic club comp, not at the level of NPC or the Currie cup, let alone at the high paced elite super-provincial level of S15. Eastwood or Sydney Uni would knock them over - if at full strength with the provincial players available. Do the math - on average they would have about one French team member each, and have bought in (bought not brought) some Argentine and PI test level players to raise the standard a bit. I am sure Gosford or Newcastle could field a competitive team in the Shute Shield (anyone remember the 'Wildfires'?). A super-provincial level team is another matter.

Hear, hear! Though they already are facing it if you look at the results of the Wallabies.

KPM, I've already had a look at the population statistics for a number of the towns and cities you've mentioned, one that stands out is Perpignan which has a population in its metro area of over 300,000, making it nearly twice as large as Geelong, and comparable to Canberra. While its true that some of the places you mentioned are small when compared to the likes of the Gold Coast or Western Sydney, they are not the tiny villages you make them out to be. You also cite that these towns are in France, not Australia, and you're right to point out that a small medieval city in France is not a sprawling metropolis like Sydney or Brisbane, but Europe is a very different creature to Australia; there are not vast areas of sparsely populated land, with populations centred around a handful of cities. While somewhere like Biarritz might only have a small population it is surrounded by other towns and villages. Again, you have said that these locales are likely to have their own team, & they probably do. But who's to say that the inhabitants of a small provincial village don't support their local team of amateurs AND a professional team competing in the Top 14? Every small town in country Victoria has a passionately supported footy team, but those passionate supporters will still barrack for an AFL team too. Similarly, I'm originally from a small town in North-East England, one that has its own relatively well supported, lower league, football team, as well as a number of other amateur teams across a variety of sports. But the populace of my home town is also fiercely divided between fans of the two local Premier League teams too, Sunderland and Newcastle. This is quite common across Europe. My point being that while rugby is hugely popular in the southern departments of France (Midi-Pyrenees is often referred to as Pays de l'Ovalie, or Land of the Oval Ball, such is their passion for the game) the teams that inhabitant the top tiers of French rugby are not from little villages where the entire populace turns out on game day, but are teams that have been around for years and have grown their support during this time. I don't really think that it's plausible to look at somewhere like Biarritz and imagine the ARU saying "Well, if they can manage it with their population of 27,000, then Dubbo should be able to support a Super Rugby team too"

Call it Qld 2 or Qld white if you want. Base it wherever; its better than losing real talent to southerners or WA. Just a few caveats: all sports in Qld are doing well: Qld hold the Sheffield Shield, and have won the past 7 State of Origin series.

Alright let’s nitpick. 2,387,000 at the 2011 census. Due to the high growth rate of WA, a year on (June 2011 when the census was held to June 2012) their population is estimated at currently being just over 2,450,000. SA is just over 1,650,000. So we’re looking at a gap of 800,000. And one last time IT’S NOT ALL ABOUT THE NUMBERS! Please recognise there are other factors at play here KPM...

KPM, take a look at what’s happened over the Nullabour. They started off at Subiaco and were just about packing the place out. The Force drew just over 13,000 in game that was played against conference rivals (table topping conference rivals) and it was their inaugural captains last. Now there absolutely is a novelty factor when a new team comes to town but you’ve got to look past that. And the novelty factor for the Force is amplified by the all of the factors that I’ve listed out above> Factors that Adelaide and SA simply don’t have, including and most importantly a footing in the market eg. some level local interest in rugby due to the expat and other cultural phenomena’s. The Rebel’s first home game ever against the Tahs attracted 25,000 and they’re yet to sell out the 30 odd thousand seat stadium they play from. They’re further behind the 8 ball because rugby plays a less significant role in their sporting landscape than it does in Perth. But the size of the city/economy and again a significant expat population from NZ, QLD and NSW gives them something to build from. SA and Adelaide has none of this going for it. The makeup of the population (lack of expats) means the sport is almost unheard of and starting from further behind than it is in Victoria. You keep harping on about sports mad Australia… it’s not Rugby mad South Australia though. Look at the poor crowds at GWS (operating in a market that you yourself have recognized is a big one) and the Suns (big expat pop and the AFL has spent money getting some traction here before plopping the Suns in). We are a sports mad nation but clearly there are different sporting cultures operating underneath that which make up very different sporting landscapes amongst the states. As has been pointed out, we don’t have the deep pockets that the AFL has, our pockets are just about being turned out of our pants as it is. The AFL expects to be making a significant investment in these markets for the next 20 years, Demetriou has said so. The ARU would be kidding itself if it thinks it could afford that and as it stands the SA rugby market is far less mature than the west Sydney or GC AFL markets, and that in itself is saying something. Regarding Sydney, it was pointed out on the rugby club last night that the Tahs supposedly kicking the ball away is a media beat up and the stats say otherwise. Agreed they’re hardly playing an entertaining brand of rugby, but we need to be building professional sporting teams that are going to be sustainable in good on field times and bad. The nature of sport suggests that all teams are going to hit rough patches. The Tah crowds have been terrible this season. Even when the Reds were getting smashed around the park there for a few years running they were getting better crowds. 3 professional rugby teams in Sydney is plain and simply overcrowding that market and again the ARU doesn’t have the funds to be throwing at it.

I hadn't realised that the date was 2009, no, but here is a more up to date analysis:from June 2012 http://www.petermartin.com.au/2012/06/how-do-i-rate-south-australias-economy.html SA is not the old rust belt economy it is often painted out to be. Victoria sems critically exposed to the industries likely tobe most affected by the uncertainty surrounding the Carbon Tax. LaTrobe Valley etc, Ford in Geelong and the component manufacturers leading into it.

You do know that recording is 3 years old? My understanding is that since the onset of the mining boom which has been the driving force behind much of our countries economic prosperity in recent times and led us through a period of unprecedented growth, SA and TAS have been the two states that have been benefitted the least. Furthermore, the predominately manufacturing based economy of SA has experienced and is set for some dark days ahead. I know the QLD and NSW bottom lines are hardly something to be proud of, but these are a result of poor government policy and there is still money flowing in and moving around. I understand natural gas reserves could see SA prosper down the track, but as things stand they're are moving forward while at a snail’s pace when compared to much of the rest of the country. Regardless, nobody can deny what’s going on in WA and the VIC economy is at least three times the size of SA. They represent for safer conditions. KPM, you really need to start looking past the numbers. As they stand they’re not in your favour either. WA is at 2.45 (not 2.2) million and accelerating away from SA’s 1.65 ( I know it’s nit picking but not quite 1.7). There is a gap there of over three quarters of a million and it’s only going to get larger. And as I say, it’s not all about the numbers! There are plenty of other reason not to go to SA as it stands which it seems that you don't want to know about.