The future of English club rugby

Coming up to twenty years of the pro era, how do you feel that the future will pan out in the next 18-20 years?

In the past two decades or so (apart from Wuss and Exeter) nothing much has changed.

If London gets an NFL franchise in that time (as seems likely) the potential impact on both Rugby codes, both in terms of fan support/income and competition for talent, is huge. Many elite level players will be drawn to the much higher salaries on offer

mawhis wrote:If London gets an NFL franchise in that time (as seems likely) the potential impact on both Rugby codes, both in terms of fan support/income and competition for talent, is huge. Many elite level players will be drawn to the much higher salaries on offer

It might happen but seems unlikely. NFL had a much higher profile what - 20 years ago- when there were the London Monarchs and that didnt end well.

lostinwales wrote:

mawhis wrote:If London gets an NFL franchise in that time (as seems likely) the potential impact on both Rugby codes, both in terms of fan support/income and competition for talent, is huge. Many elite level players will be drawn to the much higher salaries on offer

It might happen but seems unlikely. NFL had a much higher profile what - 20 years ago- when there were the London Monarchs and that didnt end well.

The monarchs were an NFL Europe franchise, staffed by guys who weren't good enough to play in the real NFL, and the level of support reflected that. There are now serious discussions within the NFL about relocating a franchise here. Robert Kraft, who owns the New England Patriots, is apparently a big supporter of the idea. There'll be 2 games at Wembley this season, both of which are already sold out, With Roger Goodell, the NFL commissioner, already indicating that they're planning a third.

The NFL views the UK as a very important new market for growing their brand, and there is a geniune possibility that we'll have a full NFL franchise in London within 20 years, if fan support builds to a sufficient level. Both Rugby codes will then have to adapt to having the new guy in town.

Its a really interesting debate, I just think its a huge step moving from even two Wembley 'events' to, what - a 9 or 10 game season

lostinwales wrote:Its a really interesting debate, I just think its a huge step moving from even two Wembley 'events' to, what - a 9 or 10 game season

You're not the only one who thinks that, the logistical hurdles are huge, but the NFL commissioner and team owners definitely see London as the next market to expand into once they've sorted out LA, and are doing the groundwork now to prepare the UK for a franchise.

more from Sky here: http://www.skysports.com/opinion/story/0,25212,13283_8765717,00.html

Other than that I think there will be a need to deal with the gap between the Haves and the Have nots within the domestic club system, which seems to be growing.

A decision will need to be made about how many clubs England can actually sustain, and whether promotion/relegation are really the best idea.

Rollerball http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rollerball_%281975_film%29

Or historically the traditional English way i.e. fudging it.

Hopefully the second

[ed] Maybe with Wales?

It seems that the clubs have sorted themselves out...and their academies are now producing a conveyor belt of talent.

If we can get the right management structure in (be it Lancs or not) then i think English rugby could be right at the forefront of World rugby for some considerable time...

Of course being English we always have the potential to completely mess anything up.

GeordieFalcon wrote:It seems that the clubs have sorted themselves out...and their academies are now producing a conveyor belt of talent.

If we can get the right management structure in (be it Lancs or not) then i think English rugby could be right at the forefront of World rugby for some considerable time...

Of course being English we always have the potential to completely mess anything up.

Jeff I and Jeff II would be a significant improvement domestically in order to separate the club from the country.

We need as many of the clubs as possible to become self sufficient and not rely on sugar daddies to keep them going. I might be wrong but I think only Leicester, Northampton, Gloucester and Exeter turned a profit last year.

I remember reading somewhere that clubs need to get an average gate of at least 12,000 a week to be able to spend up to the cap. There are plenty of clubs a long way short of this and I think this should be the first target for most.

Cumbrian wrote:We need as many of the clubs as possible to become self sufficient and not rely on sugar daddies to keep them going.  I might be wrong but I think only Leicester, Northampton, Gloucester and Exeter turned a profit last year.  

I remember reading somewhere that clubs need to get an average gate of at least 12,000 a week to be able to spend up to the cap.  There are plenty of clubs a long way short of this and I think this should be the first target for most.

You're not wrong about the clubs, but those figures were from 2009/10, rather than last year (full table is here - http://www.espn.co.uk/premiership-2011-12/rugby/story/164350.html )

Owning your own ground will become key to premiership success/survival in my opinion, which is bad news for London Irish.

mawhis wrote:Owning your own ground will has become key to premiership success/survival

True (with modifications).

In the future I suspect that financial backing will follow the freehold owners rather than speculators.

I can see some London and SW mergers.
And I can also imagine a globulisation (i.e made into globules - not becoming global) of Tigers' finances akin to the Chiefs

The NFL are cautiously excited about expanding into the UK market. Whilst some rugby talent would be taken up by the new English franchise the bulk of any squad would come from American talent pools. The college system and lower structures of American Football would provide players who knew and understood the game rather than an en masse conversion.

There would also be the opportunity to bring in some of the American athletes who didn't make the cut but could be molded into good rugby players whilst the 7s game is growing in the USA the AP could also raise It's profile back in America as NFL fans supplement their sports very short season with rugby. Especially as rugby talent makes a name for itself in the NFL. Managed correctly the NFL franchise might not necessarily be a bad thing.

Maybe I'm alone here, but it grates me to hear of a NFL franchise based in the UK. We have some of the best sports in the world, with 2 cracking codes of rugby. Why on earth would we want to import NFL and draw kids away from our native sports? I hope it fails miserably, sorry.
I remember reading an article many years ago about youngsters in the W. Indies taking up US sports rather than cricket and the negative impact they feared it would have on the W.Indies cricket team. It pretty much came true.

I don't see NFL as any form of threat to either code of rugby, especially league. The UK simply isn't big enough to have 2 franchises, therefore you'd expect it to be focused purely in London. For NFL to be a threat you'd to have young talent coming through, but the appeal will not be wide enough to see the game played at schools. If the focus in the South, northern schools and clubs will not have the level of engagement and will not take the sport up in any great volume, hence my comment about league. As Sam points out, if a franchise is to come to the UK the bulk will be made up from US players both immediately and over the course of a number of years as that is where the young players are coming through from. There probably will be the odd token British player, but I don't see the huge salaries necessarily having the appeal to want to take someone away from the sport, otherwise the likes of Lomu, Robinson, etc would have been poached.

In general rugby is in good health. There is still lots of room for improvement and more clubs need to be self sustainable, however, I'm sure if you were to compare it to football clubs proportionately more clubs would be profitable in rugby than football. Whilst it was a sorry affair the sport needed the Richmond debacle as it forced the salary cap into place, which whilst some clubs may wish to remove this (invariably by those funded by sugar daddies who may prove to be short term investors?), it has a hugely positive effect on stabilising the game. Furthermore, the age groups seem to be well managed now and there is a real stream of talent coming through. I'm sure it is no coincidence that we have just won our first JRWC as I feel this will pave the way for more victories and long term success.

If I was English, two things would worry me.
Firstly, the finances are all to buggery. When you have top half of the second tier teams plus London Welsh having to work on shoestring budgets, the gap between the have's and the have not's will only grow leading to the premiership becoming a bit of a closed shop apaprt frpom ojne or two yo-yo teams.
Secondly, while the rate does seem to have dropped off, there are an awful lot of NEQ players. The sheer volume of players that England has should mean that this doesn't cause too much of an issue, you just have to be careful that you don't go the same way as the French and let club rugby seem to be important than the international game

I'm not entirely convinced by your argument, InjuredYA. But as you have much more experience in club and country NQPs than English fans do, I'd tend to agree.

I'd like a minimum of ten starter (fifteen squad) English players per Jeff 23.

But all this is entirely off-topic.
Which is about how the English club game will pan out - not how it would be preferable.

Maybe you are right cherry and it isnt a serious threat to areas of traditional rugby recruitment. But working class inner city kids are areas were we need to target and a pro NFL team is a potential draw for these kids. I think its a great sport mind you, just dont like it here.
There was a team who used to play out of our club and some of the weirdos they had turn out made me laugh. Instead of saying 'hello' or 'alright mate' and then shake hands, they would say 'whudup dawg' and bump fists and chests. They'd ask for a candy bar and a soda instead of chocolate and pop. If they were lads from the US then fair enough, but these were English lads born and bred.

Portnoy's Complaint wrote:I'm not entirely convinced by your argument, InjuredYA. But as you have much more experience in club and country NQPs than English fans do, I'd tend to agree.

I'd like a minimum of ten starter (fifteen squad) English players per Jeff 23.

But all this is entirely off-topic.
Which is about how the English club game will pan out - not how it would be preferable.

Not sure what you mean about more experience there, PC.
Ok, I wasn't too clear in what I was saying, I'll admit. Unless Englaish rugby gets itself sorted (my two points as examples), it could go downhill in my eye. it will end up with an elite ring-fenced division and the rest.
A lot also depends on what the owners want to do. I can see owners wanting to play more games abroad e.g. was it Sarries who went to the middle east or something?, to tap into new markets and pockets

MotelMoneyMurderMadness wrote:Maybe you are right cherry and it isnt a serious threat to areas of traditional rugby recruitment. But working class inner city kids are areas were we need to target and a pro NFL team is a potential draw for these kids. I think its a great sport mind you, just dont like it here.
There was a team who used to play out of our club and some of the weirdos they had turn out made me laugh. Instead of saying 'hello' or 'alright mate' and then shake hands, they would say 'whudup dawg' and bump fists and chests. They'd ask for a candy bar and a soda instead of chocolate and pop. If they were lads from the US then fair enough, but these were English lads born and bred.

you also have to remember that the NFL would draw significant TV revenue, corporate sponsorship etc. away from the sport. The drain of that money, combined with the drain of interest from non-traditional rugby areas would prove difficult. The NFL has gone out of its way to create a product which is glamorous, exciting and TV viewer friendly over the last few decades (while the IRB et al have stuck solidly to pandering to purists), and it will inevitably prove more appealing to neutrals than endless scrums in the mud at castle grimm (or wherever else).

Top level players, EPS members etc, may not be tempted, but its not difficult to see young up and coming players trying out. There's been too much movement between the codes, from Union to league in the amateur era,  and visa versa of late, for it not to be clear that players will follow the money. If players don't go to them, a newly founded NFL franchise may very well decide to hold numerous local scouting events to generate interest, attracting guys who would otherwise go to their local rugby clubs/academies. It would only take the loss of a few potential-elite level players to make England (and the other home nations) significantly less competitive in world rugby.

With Lomu, you have to remember that the Cowboys only offered him a practice squad place, which even today pays about $97,000 per season (compared to the £100,000 or so that full England internationals get), at a time when he was the biggest star in Rugby, with million pound endorsements etc. They weren't actually offering him more money than he would have made with NZ - not guaranteed anyway. If they'd scouted him before RWC'95 however, and he wasn't raking it in, who's to say that he doesn't take that shot?

The NFL is a bit of a red herring. There is no reason why the sports cannot coexist even if London does get a franchise. And that is still a huge 'if'.

In the short term, I imagine a lot will depend on how the Heineken/Amlin mess is sorted out. If that all falls apart I wouldn't be surprised if we saw some sort of B&I league a few years down the line. That could be really interesting. Equally, I'm content with the current structure and if we carry on as is for a while I'd be content. It would be nice to see a few new clubs come up via the Exeter route to add to the current ranks, and the rate that the academies are now churning out quality youngsters suggests we could easily sustain more pro teams if the interest is there.

A massive emphasis needs to be be placed on the 2015 World Cup being hosted in England. The various governing bodies need to get it right but there is also a huge onus on us to push and promote the game among the heathens and heretics yet to be converted. We have seen over the last days and months how easily this country can be turned onto sport given opportunity.

Not sure the RFU will get the RWC right to be honest. Currently It's set to be held in football stadiums. That's a bad move right off the bat.

formerly known as Sam wrote:Not sure the RFU will get the RWC right to be honest. Currently It's set to be held in football stadiums. That's a bad move right off the bat.

Really it is only a bad move for the established rugby fan.

Even if we ignore capacity issues (and if RWC15 does not break even, it will affect payments to clubs from RFU, and grassroots development) the soccer grounds have better facilities. To grow the game we have to break out from where it has a hold and enter new areas. Personally I feel rugby is so much a minority sport - and one that requires a certain level of intelligence to truly appreciate - that it swill never be massive. In fact globally 7s will be much bigger than 15s by 2024 olympics.

The RWC is alienating club rugby fans by holding the games at football matches; but doesn't international rugby in general alienate club fans? I know a number of you on here share my view that whilst I will always support my country fervently, my club is my main focus purely because I can put more in and get more out of it. My experience of going to Twickenham is that it is 2/3s full of people who watch one game a year and are there to get smashed. There's nothing wrong with that and equally they won't care if the RWC is held at football or rugby grounds. I am very fortunate that the RWC is being held at Kingsholm, but for argument's sake if Cheltenham Football club had a bigger ground and they were hosting the games I'd still go and watch the games of interest (as long as it doesn't clash with any Glaws commitments!)

My thinking, as you know, is similar to yours HKC.

I feel we need the money generated by the casual fan, who may attend the odd Internationals watch on TV, go to Twickenham and Wembley for the "special" matches. We need this money as the game cannot survive on those of us who watch week in week out.

This is why I am reasonably comfortable with where the RWC matches are being held. I may well have tried to get to Welford Rd if we had been chosen and am unlikely to attend the Crisp Bowl - but that is more down to my location and the travel than any boycott. I will certainly try and attend as many matches closer to me that I can afford and that do not clash.

Mind you as the AP (and possibly Rabo) is meant to be suspended during the RWC there may be no clashes.

Another thing about NFL is that it is an expensive sport to play. Lots of expensive kit. There is next to no NFL culture in this country and it would be enormously difficult to set it up in any schools that would take it. So as has been said the only talent going in would be American athletes and the odd guy with potential who might get targeted along the way.

I used to have a Mexican buddy who complained a lot about Mexicans playing american football when rugby would be a much better fit.

lostinwales wrote:Another thing about NFL is that it is an expensive sport to play. Lots of expensive kit. There is next to no NFL culture in this country and it would be enormously difficult to set it up in any schools that would take it. So as has been said the only talent going in would be American athletes and the odd guy with potential who might get targeted along the way.

I used to have a Mexican buddy who complained a lot about Mexicans playing american football when rugby would be a much better fit.

PC wrote:NFL in England?
Live TV pig spotting from Heathrow would be a more likely threat to rugby's future.

I strongly agree with me.

Should an NFL franchise be set up in the UK, I doubt playing participation in rugby would change to any degree. However the casual fan, who effectively subsidises the "die-hards" could very easily be tempted away.

My opinion with reference to the NFL franchise is that it will never become a serious challenge.

Firstly NFL depends heavily on the US colleges to produce the talent – so if it was going to have any hope of ousting the rugby codes from their current position and supply British players for the London franchise the universities would have to start developing the game – where would the money and personnel come from?

Secondly, the actual product is quite boring. Yes the highlight shows like that one Channel 4 used to show can be exciting and packed with event, but your average live game (which can go on for quite a while because of the timekeeping) is NOT a thrill packed spectacle. Often it’s very akin to a forwarded dominated rugby slug fest and if it’s played outdoors in the English winter it’s going to be a muddy pile up in the middle. A lot of the 'wow - did you see that moments' happen in bright dry conditions, the outdoor games in winter are not as photogenic.

Thirdly, NFL is actually played in the UK as we speak and has to stick to the summer as it cannot compete with our current winter sports. I used to play it as a way of keeping up fitness levels during the summer and a lot of the players were the same – primarily rugby players trying to keep the bulge at bay. It’s being trundling along for a couple of decades now and at UK grass roots level is still very much a summer niche sport.

Of course there are always the wannabe yanks who would turn up for anything remotely associated with Uncle Sam – there were half a dozen at the club I played for – loved putting on the kit and talking the talk but didn’t really enjoy the actual game. I bet London has its fair share of these types – but as they have little interest in rugby anyway we will not miss them.

As for the growth of English rugby – well considering we are in the middle of one of the worst recessions we have had in generations it’s not doing so bad. The premiership has just signed a lucrative deal with BT and the Championship might get some scraps from Sky as they search about for a filler to their football presentations.

And the Championship itself isn’t a bad product in its own right. Yes it’s still being raided for its up and coming talent and some premiership clubs use it to get gametime for its fringe players but I’ve seen some good games during the Falcons stay down there.

The NFL will not take off in this country, and the main reason is that it is at only one level, in most other team sports you have the domestic, national and international, to get to anything like the Americans/Canadians, we would need a full college system and a pro system, also we only tend to watch the highlights over here, as anybody ever watched a full American football game ? Two hours long with only half that time used in actual play.

Sorry TrailApe, perhaps I should read every post before I type.

LordDowlais wrote: we only tend to watch the highlights over here, as anybody ever watched a full American football game ? Two hours long with only half that time used in actual play.

Nonsense.

Sky Sports screens 2 games fully live back-to-back from 6pm sunday during the regular season, which pulls in about 100k viewers  as I understand it.

The Super Bowl pulled in 142k viewers on BBC, and 258k viewers on sky sports, which isn't bad considering it started at around 11pm (figures from BARB =201302060103]HERE.  ESPN's coverage of the premiership final, by contrast, pulled in 91k (figures =201105060129]HERE).

You also need to include the 80-90k people who attended the game at Wembley last season.

I'll try to shut up about the NFL now though - promise!  

mawhis wrote:

LordDowlais wrote: we only tend to watch the highlights over here, as anybody ever watched a full American football game ? Two hours long with only half that time used in actual play.

Nonsense.

Sky Sports screens 2 games fully live back-to-back from 6pm sunday during the regular season, which pulls in about 100k viewers  as I understand it.

The Super Bowl pulled in 142k viewers on BBC, and 258k viewers on sky sports, which isn't bad considering it started at around 11pm (figures from BARB =201302060103]HERE.  ESPN's coverage of the premiership final, by contrast, pulled in 91k (figures =201105060129]HERE).

You also need to include the 80-90k people who attended the game at Wembley last season.

I'll try to shut up about the NFL now though - promise!  

NFL is SHIYTE end of.

NFL is irrelevant to the future of our game as things stand. I don't believe that their potential market seriously overlaps ours and think they would maybe create a new base for themselves.

The state of English academies is pretty good and maybe even improving in terms of quality and quantity of emerging players. AP clubs will always get the pick but with increeasing competition for places more good ones will be playing in the Championship hopefully. If the current changes re sponsorship and TV exposure are made to work the top 6 or so Championship clubs will improve along with their facilities making a strong case for a more rigorous approach to promotion and relegation.

The future is bright as far as I'm concerned and whilst there may be some sticky moments for clubs financially, I hope the drive for sustainable business models goes on apace and is assisted by realistic attitudes from PRL and RFU alike.

That figure of only 91,000 viewers for the premiership final is shocking. There will obviously be thousands more who watched in pubs and rugby clubs but even so I'm staggered that the viewing figures are so low.

When I followed the link it was 120k.

HammerofThunor wrote:When I followed the link it was 120k.

Correct.

No wonder ESPN got cold feet

[ed] Useful link though. That's gone straight into my bookmarks library.

jeffwinger wrote:That figure of only 91,000 viewers for the premiership final is shocking.  There will obviously be thousands more who watched in pubs and rugby clubs but even so I'm staggered that the viewing figures are so low.

The actual figure was 120K as pointed out earlier, the 2011 got 91K and last years 86K.

English club rugby has never been that big a TV draw which is why Sky didn't really care when first Sentanta, ESPN and now BTsport have taken the lions share. Most people in TV sports rights consider BTsport to overpaid massively for the rights (although they will be negotiated down if the proposed European competition doesn't happen.

ESPN only averaged around 49-50K for AP games in the 3 seasons they had it and sky got averaged around double that. It is always outrated by the Heineken Cup and SuperLeague which Sky still have (although the HC is up in the air after next season)

As for Sky next year, they will show 18 Championship games (which are as cheap as chips for them) to complement their International, ERC and super15 rugby.

NFL has about as much chance of succeding in the UK as cricket has in the USA. Here in London there are large numbers of people who certainly imitate the US style in terms of dress/speaking/etc. who might go to games but when it comes to sport it's all about association football.
You can certainly fill Wembley on a couple of occaisons a year for "events", rather like Sarcens do and Quins do with Twickenham but realistically trying to sell out a full season at Wembley not to mention the conflicts with football, concerts, etc. seems unlikely. From the TV point of view the US would be reluctant to allow the games to be staged anywhere else so a groundshare arrangement woul be difficult "NFL live from Brentford" isn't going to work.

To follow the hypothetical thought of an NFL franchise in London, Wembly would not be as marketable as Twickenham. Putting the NFL in the home of Rugby would be a merketers dream. The opportunities for cross-promotion and cross-training, would be enormous. Would be a huge boost for English Rugby, and all Rugby in our islands as well.

Rugby Union, Rugby League and Gridiron have all been huffing and puffing about their expansionist plans for the past forty years.

There are dreams of a wedge into a global race for market interest in RU via a completely different sport (sevens), but sadly it can't happen.

Why?
Because of the glass ceilings. Whilst the major International competitions (6Ns and 4Ns) and the domestic continental club games secure entries via cartels, how (why?) should it be worth T3/4 nations expand their games?

RL in England and in a different manner apparently see a glimmer of light by possibly reverting to a fundamental sporting principle - that success should be awarded by achievement.

For instance, if Japanese clubs can't shortly take part at big tables, there is a great danger of them losing interest.

HammerofThunor wrote:When I followed the link it was 120k.

When I followed the link the first thing I saw was that 191,000 people watched a show on 4seven, the week ending 30 Jun 2013 called 'The Man With the 10 Stone testicles'  no joke.  I think we are doomed as a society.

EDIT:
I just read this was a huge show. WTF is happenning? I leave the country for a couple of years and everything turns to merde?
I just can't leave my people alone, can I?
GSTQ

Thinking about the NFL in London, I can't remotely see this as a threat.  The NFL would not worry abolut a sport which draws only 10,000 fans per game.  They would be going after large crowds, which might be marginal sports fans or people in the London area who would be looking for more family oriented entertainment than soccer.  I also wouldn't underestimate the number of Americans living and working in southern Enlgland at the moment, though they wouldn't be the ultimate target.  It is a different sport, despite its Rugby origins.  They would also be going after TV ratings.  The London NFL team would  have to play almost exclusively on Sunday evenings so it could be televised in the usual NFL time slots in the US.  And if there is some kind or partnership with the Premiership, at least a marketing tie-up, it could help Rugby grow.  But I see no negatives with having a team in London.  

Putting the NFL aside, I think for club Rugby to grow it will increasingly need to rely on TV money.  Some of this is how well it appears on TV.  Also Rugby will need better stadia to enable access to more people (whether casual or dedicated supporters) and provide a better match day experience.  And that takes investment and money.  

I can foresee relegation going away, teams required to spend closer to the salary cap, and perhaps even the goal posts moved to the back of the in-goal.  Don't be surprised to see more club matches off shore and, potentially, a tie-up with the Celtic league.  Anything to boost attendance and boost TV viewership

jeffwinger wrote:That figure of only 91,000 viewers for the premiership final is shocking.  There will obviously be thousands more who watched in pubs and rugby clubs but even so I'm staggered that the viewing figures are so low.

As someone said that moved up to 120k later.

It is also an indicator of how few people have ESPN - only th eFA cup final (229k) got more viewers on ESPN ion May.

In april the Football Premier League had the highest viewing figures (336k). On Sky the Football pull sin aboout 2M viewers.

doctor_grey wrote:Thinking about the NFL in London, I can't remotely see this as a threat.  The NFL would not worry abolut a sport which draws only 10,000 fans per game.  They would be going after large crowds, which might be marginal sports fans or people in the London area who would be looking for more family oriented entertainment than soccer.  I also wouldn't underestimate the number of Americans living and working in southern Enlgland at the moment, though they wouldn't be the ultimate target.  It is a different sport, despite its Rugby origins.  They would also be going after TV ratings.  The London NFL team would  have to play almost exclusively on Sunday evenings so it could be televised in the usual NFL time slots in the US.  And if there is some kind or partnership with the Premiership, at least a marketing tie-up, it could help Rugby grow.  But I see no negatives with having a team in London.  

Putting the NFL aside, I think for club Rugby to grow it will increasingly need to rely on TV money.  Some of this is how well it appears on TV.  Also Rugby will need better stadia to enable access to more people (whether casual or dedicated supporters) and provide a better match day experience.  And that takes investment and money.  

I can foresee relegation going away, teams required to spend closer to the salary cap, and perhaps even the goal posts moved to the back of the in-goal.  Don't be surprised to see more club matches off shore and, potentially, a tie-up with the Celtic league.  Anything to boost attendance and boost TV viewership

I'd have no problem with a B&I League or a Br League Or a UK League so long as promotion/relegation is part of the arrangement.

Franchises and cartels are a canker on pro sport.

Portnoy's Complaint wrote:For instance, if Japanese clubs can't shortly take part at big tables, there is a great danger of them losing interest.

I think you've chosen the wrong country to make your general point about barriers to entry. Japanese clubs have never shown any sign of wanting to "take part at big tables".

Portnoy, I think a two division B & I plus Italian League would be a good starting point, you could have a league with promotion and relegation and an internal cup competition to replace the B & I cup.
HEC replacement competed for by 7 teams from Top 14 and 7 from the other league together with last years winners of HEC/Amilin or thier new equivalent.
The top division would be the 8 teams from the Jeff and 8 from the Rabo - maybe some sorting out to do to allow for at least some intial particaiption in the top division by all the Rabo sides but in a couple of seasons the clubs would find their natural level.
To allow the process to bed in there would be no promotion/relegation outwith the two levels but you could slightly expand the lower division to allow for an extra couple of teams from England and the Celtic nations.
Would look like this (roughly) on last seasons table
First division
Saracens Tigers Quins Northampton Glaws Chiefs Bath Wasps
Leinster Munster Ulster Cardiff Ospreys Scarlets Glasgow Treviso
 
Second Division
London Irish London Welsh Newcastle Sale Worcester + 3 Championship sides
Connaught Edinburgh Zebre Dragons Welsh Valleys Team (Ponty?) North Wales Team + 2 others

Sixteen teams in the prem div IL?

plus international fixtures.

How'd that work?

Portnoy's Complaint wrote:Franchises..........are a canker on pro sport.

why?

I'm not sure any more, so help me out.  Promotion/relegation works with Football.  But American sports are pretty successful and there is no promotion/relegation. I can see both sides.  Sway me (as if my opinion matters).