Let me be very clear… I am a fan of the league and want to see it improve. BUT, for the love of all things good and holy, CAN WE PLEASE STOP SUGGESTING WHERE THE NEXT TEAM SHOULD BE LOCATED?
Like Halley’s Comet it seems as though the topic of expansion always circles back. Whether it be Facebook or Reddit, fans of the league continually ask the question: Where should the MLR expand too next?
I get it. As rugby fans, we want to see professional rugby in our backyard. Let’s not forget that three years ago, I too was in a city that did not have a representative in the league. I felt that pain. But I adapted and adopted. My team for the first 5 MLR seasons was (and to an extent still is) the Nola Gold. Unfortunately, I could only get to one match a season and was forced to celebrate victories and agonize over defeats from the comfort of my living room. But I knew all too well just how difficult of a “sell” it was to bring expansion to one of the largest sports markets in the United States.
Fans of the league must understand the financials required to start an MLR team. We, as a fanbase, need to stop discussing where the next team should be unless a viable ownership group has stepped forward and the potential city holds a strategic advantage.
It is widely estimated that viability requires a potential ownership group to provide proof liquidity of $20 to 25 million dollars. To be a team owner, the group must pay an upfront cost of $10 million for a franchise fee AND prove that they can pay the estimated $2 million capital call for at least 5 seasons. I would also add that teams have an estimated $5-6 million budget each season. Thus, the cost of joining starts at $20 million, but can escalate rather quickly depending on market demands. By that I mean housing costs for players, marketing costs, stadium and facility rental, and food service costs while players are training. Any interested group is told that they should expect losses for at least 5 seasons. Given these financials, ownership is not for the casual multimillionaire or the passing rugby fan. Even if an investor with deep pockets materializes, they should not expect an ROI until the day their interest is sold, or the league lands a major TV deal. Given these realities, the league is not responsible, nor should it be responsible for cultivating ownership groups in potential markets.
After we get past the financials, a potential expansion ownership group and city should be determined to hold some strategic advantage prior to being granted a franchise. Obviously, there is some flexibility here. In other words, is the juice worth the squeeze? There are many rugby strongholds in the United States. But simply having a strong rugby community does not make a city strategic. Even in a strong rugby market it can be difficult to get the community out to a match on a Saturday. Afterall, “Saturday is a Rugby Day” and many are playing the game. We can postulate all that we want about where the next team should be located. But, unless a team has both a strong ownership interest and a strategic value, we need to strengthen what has been built. Some recent examples may illuminate my point of how an additional team represented sound ownership and/or strategic value:
- Anthem Rugby Charlotte is the newest franchise to hit the league. While not a major market like New York, it is a city that has become closely aligned with the Eagles XVs program. I know, I know… Was it the chicken or the egg? Pretty sure it was the chicken. But, at least for the near future Anthem Rugby Charlotte, per Scott’s vision, will advance USAR’s pursuits towards 2031. The logic behind the effort is sound and versions of this model have been used to advance the success of Uruguay and Chile. No doubt, had it not been for Project Moonshot, Charlotte was an unlikely MLR city. So, the value is more strategic. The ownership model does concern me. I hope that this effort has a plan for sustained ownership in the future.
- The Miami Sharks, with a 6-10 record, have a lot of positives to take away from the 2024 Season. This is a model franchise that is getting a lot of things right. Part of that is due to the ownership group which includes Marcos Galperin. He is the CEO and Co-founder of Mercado Libre who’s net worth is estimated at $8 billion. They clearly have the financials to sustain early financial losses. This Argentine group understands the major market in Miami and has the partnerships to thrive. They have partnered with Inter Miami FC, thus benefit from marketing, facilities, and connectivity to the city. This team is well capitalized and understands the market. The Sharks represent both a strategic value and strong ownership. That being said, the sports market in Miami can be fickle. If they can build a loyal fanbase, it will be hard to beat the passion.
- When the league was first initiated, the Chicago Lions were believed to be the team that would represent the 3rd largest city in the US. But the Lions leadership shifted their focus, which left the city without a team for the better part of the 5 seasons. Enter the ownership group led by Peter Bernick, Phil Groves, and Matt Satchwell. The Chicago Hounds have a very sound formula. They found a great facility in Seatgeek Stadium. While it is a bit too large to create an intimate atmosphere for the market, it is a “one stop shop” for the team. Players are at the facility for all aspects of their professional day. Additionally, the team is building connections within the large rugby community, and they understand the Chicago sports fan. If the Hounds can build this fanbase and improve upon their semi-final appearance, they can be a beacon in the league.
- Technically, Rugby Football Club LA is not new to the league, but it might as well be. Since its entry into the league what was known as Rugby ATL is in its third rebrand. The new ownership relocated to the HUGE LA market with a starving rugby community that was left shocked by the abrupt shuttering of the Giltinis. In spite of the fact that some of the players and staff moved with the team, an infrastructure had to be built from the ground up. Owner Peter Sickle is no stranger to the sport of rugby. Peter has been a coach, manager, and owner. In fact, he also owns the Tel Aviv Heat. Strategically, this is one of many advantages. This guy loves rugby and believes in the LA market. Obviously, LA is a rugby community that has deep roots and a great club scene. It shares some facilities with the LA Galaxy which can be a useful partnership. Once the team finds its identity, this team has tremendous potential.
All of the “new” teams mentioned are anchored with either a strong strategic value or an ownership committed to rugby. While this may not guarantee long-term success, it represents the keys to entry into the MLR. Fans need to understand that neither quality can be fostered by the league. IT IS NOT THE LEAGUE’S RESPONSIBILITY TO PLANT AN MLR FLAG IN A CITY. In fact, the MLR should slow the role of expansion unless a new group can prove it is both well financed and strategic. So, for all things good and holy… STOP SUGGESTING WHERE THE LEAGUE SHOULD EXPAND.


Leave a Reply