Tier 2 & 3 Rugby Forum

Major League Rugby

User avatar
Posts: 547
Joined: Tue, 22 Apr 2014, 16:02
National Flag:
CanadaCanada

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby jonny24 » Fri, 10 Apr 2020, 15:11

I'm not sure I like three conferences. Two would be good until we can go to 4.
Norfolk Harvesters RFC

Posts: 75
Joined: Sun, 05 Feb 2017, 15:38
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby Higgik » Fri, 10 Apr 2020, 15:37

jonny24 wrote:I'm not sure I like three conferences. Two would be good until we can go to 4.

14 is difficult to make a fair fixture list out of without having too many matches.

User avatar
Posts: 547
Joined: Tue, 22 Apr 2014, 16:02
National Flag:
CanadaCanada

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby jonny24 » Sat, 11 Apr 2020, 04:24

Higgik wrote:
jonny24 wrote:I'm not sure I like three conferences. Two would be good until we can go to 4.

14 is difficult to make a fair fixture list out of without having too many matches.


12 in conference games home and away, 4-6 cross conference games to get a message where they want, ideally 16 or 18. That's the beauty of conferences, you don't need to play everyone.
Norfolk Harvesters RFC

Posts: 717
Joined: Thu, 12 Dec 2019, 21:26
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby Chester-Donnelly » Sat, 11 Apr 2020, 08:20

jonny24 wrote:
Higgik wrote:
jonny24 wrote:I'm not sure I like three conferences. Two would be good until we can go to 4.

14 is difficult to make a fair fixture list out of without having too many matches.


12 in conference games home and away, 4-6 cross conference games to get a message where they want, ideally 16 or 18. That's the beauty of conferences, you don't need to play everyone.


Thank you for being the voice of reason. There is no ideal number of teams and no such thing as too many teams for a professional sports league. The league decides how many regular season games it wants then works it out from there. There is such a thing as too few teams. I believe 6 is the minimum number of teams a league needs. SLAR had 5 but that really was pushing the lower limit. 5 is the absolute minimum but certainly not ideal. 7 is a good number of teams.

Posts: 75
Joined: Sun, 05 Feb 2017, 15:38
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby Higgik » Sat, 11 Apr 2020, 08:36

Chester-Donnelly wrote:
jonny24 wrote:
Higgik wrote:
jonny24 wrote:I'm not sure I like three conferences. Two would be good until we can go to 4.

14 is difficult to make a fair fixture list out of without having too many matches.


12 in conference games home and away, 4-6 cross conference games to get a message where they want, ideally 16 or 18. That's the beauty of conferences, you don't need to play everyone.


Thank you for being the voice of reason. There is no ideal number of teams and no such thing as too many teams for a professional sports league. The league decides how many regular season games it wants then works it out from there. There is such a thing as too few teams. I believe 6 is the minimum number of teams a league needs. SLAR had 5 but that really was pushing the lower limit. 5 is the absolute minimum but certainly not ideal. 7 is a good number of teams.

Yes, I was just asking the difference between 14 and 15, as with 15 in 3 conferences would make it very easy to have an 18 game season, and yes I agree 5 is not enough. My personal preference for MLR would be 16 in 4 divisions of 4 playing an 18 game season. This is also my ideal for the English Premiership, with no promotion or relegation.

Posts: 717
Joined: Thu, 12 Dec 2019, 21:26
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby Chester-Donnelly » Sat, 11 Apr 2020, 09:43

Higgik wrote:
Chester-Donnelly wrote:
jonny24 wrote:
Higgik wrote:
jonny24 wrote:I'm not sure I like three conferences. Two would be good until we can go to 4.

14 is difficult to make a fair fixture list out of without having too many matches.


12 in conference games home and away, 4-6 cross conference games to get a message where they want, ideally 16 or 18. That's the beauty of conferences, you don't need to play everyone.


Thank you for being the voice of reason. There is no ideal number of teams and no such thing as too many teams for a professional sports league. The league decides how many regular season games it wants then works it out from there. There is such a thing as too few teams. I believe 6 is the minimum number of teams a league needs. SLAR had 5 but that really was pushing the lower limit. 5 is the absolute minimum but certainly not ideal. 7 is a good number of teams.

Yes, I was just asking the difference between 14 and 15, as with 15 in 3 conferences would make it very easy to have an 18 game season, and yes I agree 5 is not enough. My personal preference for MLR would be 16 in 4 divisions of 4 playing an 18 game season. This is also my ideal for the English Premiership, with no promotion or relegation.


I think removing promotion and relegation from the Premiership would be a big mistake. Most supporters don't want that. There is usually one or two teams likely to win the Premiership. The battle to avoid relegation is very exciting. The problem with relegation is the Championship isn't that strong. So the challenge is to strengthen the Championship, not stop relegation.

Posts: 2259
Joined: Sun, 20 Apr 2014, 16:57
Location: Leicester
National Flag:
Great BritainGreat Britain

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby sk 88 » Sat, 11 Apr 2020, 15:37

Chester-Donnelly wrote:
I think removing promotion and relegation from the Premiership would be a big mistake. Most supporters don't want that. There is usually one or two teams likely to win the Premiership. The battle to avoid relegation is very exciting. The problem with relegation is the Championship isn't that strong. So the challenge is to strengthen the Championship, not stop relegation.


Preach.

Ringfencing is like treating a toe infection with amputation rather than antibiotics.

Posts: 1640
Joined: Thu, 06 Apr 2017, 17:09
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby Tobar » Sat, 11 Apr 2020, 18:28

Would love BC and Portland franchises. Portland, while small, has a similar mindset that Seattle has and gets amazing sports spirit. Would love to have that for rugby too.

Posts: 6969
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby victorsra » Sat, 11 Apr 2020, 21:22

How is rugby in Portland?
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 1640
Joined: Thu, 06 Apr 2017, 17:09
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby Tobar » Mon, 13 Apr 2020, 12:16

There are two main clubs with a pretty strong rivalry. It’s not a big hub there but I think they would support it, they like niche sports there. The Portland Timbers get huge crowds in MLS.

Posts: 717
Joined: Thu, 12 Dec 2019, 21:26
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby Chester-Donnelly » Mon, 13 Apr 2020, 13:29

Some rugby presence. Large population. No NFL team. Natural rivalry with Seattle. It does seem like an ideal city for MLR expansion. The PNW region could become a real hotbed for rugby in North America.

Posts: 717
Joined: Thu, 12 Dec 2019, 21:26
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby Chester-Donnelly » Mon, 13 Apr 2020, 13:52

Higgik wrote:
Chester-Donnelly wrote:
jonny24 wrote:
Higgik wrote:
jonny24 wrote:I'm not sure I like three conferences. Two would be good until we can go to 4.

14 is difficult to make a fair fixture list out of without having too many matches.


12 in conference games home and away, 4-6 cross conference games to get a message where they want, ideally 16 or 18. That's the beauty of conferences, you don't need to play everyone.


Thank you for being the voice of reason. There is no ideal number of teams and no such thing as too many teams for a professional sports league. The league decides how many regular season games it wants then works it out from there. There is such a thing as too few teams. I believe 6 is the minimum number of teams a league needs. SLAR had 5 but that really was pushing the lower limit. 5 is the absolute minimum but certainly not ideal. 7 is a good number of teams.

Yes, I was just asking the difference between 14 and 15, as with 15 in 3 conferences would make it very easy to have an 18 game season, and yes I agree 5 is not enough. My personal preference for MLR would be 16 in 4 divisions of 4 playing an 18 game season. This is also my ideal for the English Premiership, with no promotion or relegation.


For MLR, 3 conferences (West, South, East) makes the most sense. There is no fourth region to have a conference.

Posts: 1640
Joined: Thu, 06 Apr 2017, 17:09
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby Tobar » Mon, 13 Apr 2020, 14:58

The NFL has 4 divisions of 4 teams each. It can be done.

Posts: 1992
Joined: Thu, 23 Feb 2017, 01:37
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby TheStroBro » Mon, 13 Apr 2020, 16:40

victorsra wrote:How is rugby in Portland?


Senior Rugby is pretty minuscule. Two men's clubs that have been around for awhile, but aren't big and compete in D3. The Portland area with Youth Rugby is huge, there is ayouth club in Vancouver, Washington that is bigger than both of those men's clubs by a factor or two. For perspective when you break it down compared to senior club.

High School-743
Youth-124
Rookie-201

Then for Senior Rugby you have a total of 624.

Those are the numbers for Oregon. So in any event, if we go purely by Rugby Community standards and are relying on that as a driver to place an MLR club, Portland would not be a good market.

However, I have said this before. The current Rugby Community will not be what sustains this league and in fact it doesn't. Seattle a place that sells out, 50-60% of their fan base had never seen Rugby until season 1. That number might even be higher to be honest.

I'm at the point where we need not focus on if there is a Rugby community where someone wants to place a team. The thing that will matter is brand deployment and community outreach events in advance of the first season. If we were to follow the internal MLR model, you're looking at brand deployment and events stretching out 18 months before kickoff. That was basically the case with TOR, NY, Free Jacks, DC. ATL seemed to be the only one that lagged behind that model, but did ok with attendance.

Posts: 717
Joined: Thu, 12 Dec 2019, 21:26
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby Chester-Donnelly » Mon, 13 Apr 2020, 18:30

Tobar wrote:The NFL has 4 divisions of 4 teams each. It can be done.


I can be done, but the NFL has a north (Midwest) conference and there is not much prospect of a Midwest MLR conference. I think the best structure would be 3 conferences of 6.

West: BC, Seattle, Portland, Utah, LA, San Diego.
South: Austin, Houston, Dallas, Atlanta, New Orleans, Miami.
East: New England, NY, DC, Toronto, Ohio, Chicago.

Posts: 1640
Joined: Thu, 06 Apr 2017, 17:09
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby Tobar » Mon, 13 Apr 2020, 19:12

Tbh, as evidenced by the NFL the divisions don’t have to make a ton of sense (the South has Indianapolis for instance).

Depending on additional teams joining the league, North could have RUNY, Toronto, New England and someone like Chicago. Southeast could be DC, NOLA, Atlanta, Houston or a Florida team.

I don’t really think it should be like this, nor do I think we should break up into specific divisions until the league gets to around 20-24 when there should be a long pause. Divisions will constantly change with new additions.

Posts: 1992
Joined: Thu, 23 Feb 2017, 01:37
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby TheStroBro » Mon, 13 Apr 2020, 19:27

Chester-Donnelly wrote:
Tobar wrote:The NFL has 4 divisions of 4 teams each. It can be done.


I can be done, but the NFL has a north (Midwest) conference and there is not much prospect of a Midwest MLR conference. I think the best structure would be 3 conferences of 6.

West: BC, Seattle, Portland, Utah, LA, San Diego.
South: Austin, Houston, Dallas, Atlanta, New Orleans, Miami.
East: New England, NY, DC, Toronto, Ohio, Chicago.


Why the heck are you asking for three conferences? That would make the playoff system extremely difficult. No Super Rugby idiocy, thanks!

Posts: 75
Joined: Sun, 05 Feb 2017, 15:38
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby Higgik » Mon, 13 Apr 2020, 20:23

Tobar wrote:Tbh, as evidenced by the NFL the divisions don’t have to make a ton of sense (the South has Indianapolis for instance).

Depending on additional teams joining the league, North could have RUNY, Toronto, New England and someone like Chicago. Southeast could be DC, NOLA, Atlanta, Houston or a Florida team.

I don’t really think it should be like this, nor do I think we should break up into specific divisions until the league gets to around 20-24 when there should be a long pause. Divisions will constantly change with new additions.

In order to have enough cross conference games the divisions cannot be bigger than 6.
So 15 teams 3 divisions of 5. 16 teams 4 divisions of 4, 18 teams 3 groups of 6.etc

User avatar
Posts: 547
Joined: Tue, 22 Apr 2014, 16:02
National Flag:
CanadaCanada

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby jonny24 » Mon, 13 Apr 2020, 22:05

Higgik wrote:
Tobar wrote:Tbh, as evidenced by the NFL the divisions don’t have to make a ton of sense (the South has Indianapolis for instance).

Depending on additional teams joining the league, North could have RUNY, Toronto, New England and someone like Chicago. Southeast could be DC, NOLA, Atlanta, Houston or a Florida team.

I don’t really think it should be like this, nor do I think we should break up into specific divisions until the league gets to around 20-24 when there should be a long pause. Divisions will constantly change with new additions.

In order to have enough cross conference games the divisions cannot be bigger than 6.
So 15 teams 3 divisions of 5. 16 teams 4 divisions of 4, 18 teams 3 groups of 6.etc


I'm not sure why you think that? "Enough cross-conference games" seems like a really arbitrary number to base your division alignment on.

Geographical conferences work because it saves travel, and is more likely to be rival cities.

Number of games is based on economic needs, fan appetite, and player welfare.

Settle on a number of games needed, home and away in a conference that makes sense, make up the numbers with the rest. It doesn't particularly matter if you play everyone every year. That's what playoffs are for.
Norfolk Harvesters RFC

Posts: 5779
Joined: Sat, 05 Jul 2014, 02:44
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby thatrugbyguy » Tue, 14 Apr 2020, 03:08

Raptors leaving has been rumoured for a while. Unfortunate.

Posts: 75
Joined: Sun, 05 Feb 2017, 15:38
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby Higgik » Tue, 14 Apr 2020, 10:56

Dallas website is live
Dallas.rugby
Interesting colours, like Seawolves or MBA Mavericks.

Posts: 75
Joined: Sun, 05 Feb 2017, 15:38
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby Higgik » Wed, 06 May 2020, 16:39

LA and Dallas joining in 2021.

2 conferences of 4 and 1 of 5 would be good.

Posts: 5779
Joined: Sat, 05 Jul 2014, 02:44
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby thatrugbyguy » Fri, 29 May 2020, 03:56


Posts: 75
Joined: Sun, 05 Feb 2017, 15:38
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby Higgik » Fri, 29 May 2020, 07:29

thatrugbyguy wrote:Um......... what?

https://www.majorleague.rugby/news/majo ... -giltinis/

Have I woken up on April 1st???

Posts: 3432
Joined: Wed, 14 Oct 2015, 13:30
National Flag:
GermanyGermany

Re: Major League Rugby

Unread postby RugbyLiebe » Fri, 29 May 2020, 07:44

Whats next? The New Orleans Gilsazeracs? Or going global with the Moskow Gilvodkas or the Munich Gilbeers? Maybe even start a French franchise with the Marseille Gilpastis?

ATL is still the worst name for a franchise though.
How to grow rugby worldwide?
Look at the world ranking in July. Teams ranked 1-10 have to play one team from 11-20 (they don't play in a regular competition) away the next year. 11-20 play 21-30 away and so on. Yes, it really is that simple.

PreviousNext

Return to Rugby Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests