This past July 4th, ESPN aired a live rugby match. An international test match and World Cup qualifier between our USA Eagles and our Canadian rivals. This was a huge boon for the sport in spite of being moved to ESPN2 because of the Steve McNair tragedy. I could drown on about rugby getting shafted for yet another story about a professional athlete's negative mojo coming back to bite them in the ass, but I'm not. Instead, lets talk about whether ESPN is a good fit for USA Rugby at all.

We all know ESPN to be the "Worldwide Leader in Sports." I enjoy ESPN, but the moniker is misleading to say the least. Poker and Competitive Eating are not sports. Nor is spelling. They are games at most and not a sports network needs to have on to fill air time. Lets face it, ESPN is a huge media machine that cares little for developing new audiences for up and coming sports unless the price is right. Period.

What USA Rugby needs to do is look at other sports that have carved out their on paths, with little to no help for ESPN. I am think mainly of MMA and the UFC in particular.

In 2005, Spike began airing The Ultimate Fighter, a reality show that culminated in 2 young men winning contracts with the UFC. When the show began, ESPN didn't cover MMA. It wasn't on their radar. When the Pay Per View numbers became too great to ignore, the sport became a tangible commodity. ESPN in turn, snapped up an MMA news site and have since started top produce their own MMA news program. The UFC parlayed their viewership on Spike into becoming a huge sport. Granted, the UFC had been around since the early 90's, but you can't argue that being seen on TV didn't help the sport's notoriety.

The key for the UFC was finding the right outlet for them. A station that wanted to work with them and promote the programing. If USA Rugby wants to develop a relationship with ESPN, that it is awesome, but expect more of the same for them when it comes to 'breaking news.' Rugby will always get the shaft if a 3-on-3 street trivia contest breaks out.

There really needs to be something done. The USA Eagles suck. They had a pretty good showing during the World Cup and took all that momentum into the Churchill Cup only to fall flat on their asses. An 0-3 effort is the kind of thing that sets rugby in the US back.

It is well known that the US public only cares about sports that we are good at. If an American can't win, then it isn't a sport to us. One thing that we are good at is football and that is where rugby needs to focus some attention.

I watched the draft in April along with every other God-fearing American sports fan. The raw athletic talent would leave most big rugby clubs in Europe open up their purse strings just based on possibilities. Out of all that talent 252 players were taken. Any of those won't even make the team. Even more will be out of the NFL in a matter of years.

That is a lot of football talent just going to waste, but think of the potential. If a kids plays a little rugby in high school, they could go on to play college football and return to the sport later and adapt very easily. The problem is, where are they going to play? This is where a professional league here in the US would be great.

This time of year would be a good time for the US market. Basketball just ended and baseball is still in the middle of the season. With football a long way off, people will be jonesing to watch some carnage. Rugby could offer just that niche.

Let's face it, the Arena Football League is crummy football. It has survived all this time because it doesn't have competition from other sports that fill that American need for a contact sport. Again, rugby would be a great alternative.

Getting people understand the sport only takes a little bit of time. In spite of our inpatients, the US sports fan is very savvy and would pick it up in no time. It just needs to be marketed correctly and shown to fans in an interesting way. Starting with the commentators. There is nothing worse than watching a sport when the commentators blow the dog. Cultivating an American voice for rugby is important. Place real experts in the booth with him that have a personality.

One you had a league and someone showing the games in the right way, athletes would consider it an option if the NFL doesn't pan out. I stress that you don't compete with the NFL, you work around it to get what you need. Take the athletes that get cast aside. Use the off season as your main part of your season.

If only I had a crap load of money...

Growth of the Domestic Game Begins with You...

The RWC 2007 Champions are South Africa. The champs shared a pool with US Rugby, and that is where the similarities stop. Although, the best try of the tournament was turned in by the US against South Africa.

It is now time to start looking ahead to the next RWC in 2011 as well as the growth of the game domestically. Great strides must be made if we are to get out of the group stages.
The youth game must continue to grow. I coach and play here in Oregon, where the model system is in place, literally. Rugby Oregon runs the high school rugby here in our state and is the blueprint organization that US Rugby wants every other state to follow. It is rare that get a chance to be involved with something so on the cutting edge.

I could go into great detail about Rugby Oregon, but you should just check it out for yourselves: www.rugbyoregon.org

My point is this, we have a great deal of fantastic athletes that dedicate themselves to single sports, that often times leave kids feeling burnt out. Coaches of football, basketball and soccer often attack rugby, or one another, solely to horde athletic talent for themselves. This is a travesty of the first order. Never should an adult stand in the way of the expansion of any child’s horizons because of a personal vendetta.

Granted, some of these attacks can come from well meaning, yet uninformed people. The fact is rugby is a rough game. Hiding doesn’t help anybody, nor does promoting/glorifying the possibility for injury. We simply need so show people the game itself to best demonstrate the context of the physicality.

As rugby fans, players, coaches, parents, I implore you to get out and talk to every athletic director you can about getting the sport of rugby into high schools. Buy giving kids the option of playing rugby in high school, we expose them to the game and plant a seed for the future. If a player wants to play a college in another sport, they might return to rugby after college because it is far more accessible then many others.

USA Eagles Rugby

Rumor has it that Nigel Melville, the new CEO of USA Rugby, is interested to start a professional league or tournament here in the good old USA. Nothing pleases me more than this ides. It would be a tremendous boos to the sport and make it a viable option for young athletes out of college. Obviously the competition wouldn't be top tier rugby at first, but it does beg the question of how far on could push the proverbial envelope.

The US has a good quality of life and money. Offering these things to rugby players from all over would deepen the quality of talent pool instantly. Giving us a chance to thrust our boys into direct competition with experienced players. I'm not sure of which structure would be best, but I feel like a European approach could be better although I'm not completely sold.

In New Zealand, everything is structured from clubs, to regions, to Super 14 sides then nation team. At every level there is a dedication to the national side. In most European sides the professional team creates the structure and everything filters up to their 1st XV. The only problem with this is a lack of focus on the international game as club comes first.

I personally prefer the Australasia approach, but don't feel the US has an infrastructure in place to make it happen. For example the Australians have been having a hard time adding a level between club and Super 14. This level exists as NPC in New Zealand. It is the final step before Super 14 selection and the avenue that separates professional from amateur.

Either way, it will be good for our national team which is headed for the World Cup with a good chance of picking up 2 wins for the first time. The Eagles are in Pool A with England, Samoa, Tonga and South Africa. At the Churchill Cup, the England Saxons (step below England's 1st XV) beat us pretty bad, so I wouldn't go looking for an upset there. Let's not talk about South Africa because we all know how that will go and focus on Tonga and Samoa.

The Samoans finished just behind the Junior All Blacks and Australia A in the Pacific 6 Nations. They looked tough and easily the most organized island nation. They are athletic and boast a line-up of professional players. They US needs to be physical and hope for wet conditions. Samoa and Fiji played sloppy ball in the muck and neither could get their offense going.

Tonga is a proud nation of rugby with many players of Tongan descent playing for other national sides. The boys that choose to represent, although many are professionals, don't seem to be getting enough time together. They didn't look crisp in the Pac-6. I look for the US to push the Tongans and come out on top.

Rugby on ESPN

Now, I touched on ESPN's lack of rugby coverage in the resent past. Ranting and raving about how they couldn't find their own asses in the dark with a flashlight. Then, out of the blue, I stumbled onto this article at ESPN.com: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=2949136.

Needless to say, I was shocked. I peed a little, then I read the piece. It was just that: a piece, but then again, what do we expect? Truth is we shouldn't expect perfection. Not yet anyway. Many folks left complaints about the article on ESPN, but I'm so scared that if we push too hard it might scare ESPN away like a fawn in the woods.

This is a start. I might even say a good start if it wasn't for the boo-boos in the article. Then again, I can only hope that this is the beginning of full rugby coverage on ESPN. This did get me thinking: what do American media outlets need to do to ensure the commercial sucsess for rugby on TV? Well...

1) Keep the some of the native countries TV announcers
This might seem like an odd request, but having people that truly know the sport will ease the American audience into rugby. Now, you do have to selective. Some announcers suck, but anything has to better than some schmuck trying to stager through a test match with no clue as to what is going on down on the pitch. Just wait till the States get a load of Murray Mexted!

2) Utilize American coverage techniques
No one shows a sport like we do. We have a certain flare. Giving rugby an American touch is something that is needed esthetically. Our camera angles, sound, etc. will add to the power of the sport. They show the games in HD in other countries, but it seems to lack the punch of a college football game. Something that would need to change.

3) Highlight and rule explanation shows
Use the current media structure to hype the sport. Top 10 trys on Sportscenter, commercials that introduce the players (tell me America wouldn't respond to George Gregan,) etc.

South African Rugby Turmoil

A lot has been said about South Africa and its rugby in resent weeks. Word has spreads about pressure being applied to the South African Rugby Union by the African National Congress. The shake up has to do with the composition of the national team's racial make-up and the 'Springbok' mascot. New quotas would have the SARU drop the Springbok name and have mandatory number of 10 black/colored players in the starting 15. This has raised a big stink in the international scene as many are calling this the death of South African rugby.

I remember watching my first few rugby matches and instantly taking a disliking to the South African sides. My memories of Apartheid flashed through my head. For me it was more images really, the knowledge of oppression and that was wrong. Plus, the lack of black player shocked me. This was Africa after all. I learned later how rugby was seen and kept as a white sport. My first thought was: South Africa will not have changed until you see a black fly half in a Springbok jersey.

Why fly half? Well simply put, it is the one position that is most like a Gridiron quarterback on the rugby pitch. Most Americans grew up being taught the struggles of Black athletes. Jackie Robinson, Arthur Ashe and many others paved the way. One name that might not ring a bell, but was still hugely important is Doug Williams. Doug Williams was the first African-American quarterback to win a Super Bowl. This opened eyes and changed minds. He wasn't the first Black quarterback, but he did break a lot of stereotypes. He wasn't a runner; he was a passer. Williams lead his team with poise. Up until that moment, people doubted a Black man's ability to lead a football team. Believing that they weren't smart enough. Doug Williams knocked that down by taking a team to the pinnacle of American sport.

Now this quota system is understandable, but hesitate to completely condone it. I don't like politics and sports. Far more often then not, things get messy and nothing is solved. Just because you have the power, doesn't mean it needs to be used. Form the perspective that the population is not truly represented in the countries national sport; I can understand the push for equality. Could we imagine the push for equality in the arena of American professional sport? White people still have the majority, but Black athletes populate the fields. Some might have a problem with it, but I don't. The best need to be left to compete. If the best rugby players happen to be white than so be it. It may represent the continuation of an oppressive past, but that isn't the athlete's fault.

My feeling is that Black athletes in South Africa just need time, funding and patients. The New Zealand Maori side is a great example to follow. Take the best the Black South Africa has to offer and push forth with a touring side. Prove your worth against the world and more importantly, the Springboks. Let the white establishment have their team. I don't want to advocate segregation, but take your own destiny in your hands.

I draw these comparisons because they make sense to me. The people of South Africa want change, but I don't know if this is the right path. The struggle of the Black man in America could serve as a guideline for the Black people of South Africa. A lot of power has been thrust upon them in a very short amount of time. Your hope is for them is to learn from the mistakes of their predecessors.

RWC 2007 and other thoughts...

We are mere months out from the Rugby World Cup 2007 and I am pissed. As an American rugby enthusiast, I have very few options to watch my rugby. It took some time, but I have a method that works for me. Still, it would be nice to sit and watch a little rugby on the Ol' big screen without giving up my first born. Maybe even HD? Now way, that is just crazy talk!

What about Joe & Joanie Sixpack? Well he/she is SOL. Seems like none of the major sports outlets are even sniffing the event as a possible stop gap in their never ending stream of crap. Who gives an ish about poker? More importantly, who thinks it's a sport? If you do, you need a punch in the face.

Just because you are competing, doesn't make it a sport. Simple as that. You can conjure a competition out of literally anything! My dad used to get into contests with kids from the block to see how many boards up on the garage you could pee. If it sold ads, it would be on Sportscenter tomorrow. How is that right?

Americans love our football. 'Gridiron' as the world calls it, is made for TV. Nothing will ever compete with our attention when it comes to Gridiron, but rugby could (and should) be the perfect off-season fix. Rugby is the grandaddy of the sport that has become our true past time. Although the can be abstract to the casual viewer, it grows on you like herpes. It's with you for life. People just need a chance to watch top-flight rugby. For example: the upcoming Tri-Nations/Bledisloe Cup match between the Wallabies and the All-Blacks. All it would take is some little lead in stories, (those little blurry visioned pieces that run before major sporting events) some advertisement and there you have it: a rugby event with American interest.

For example, the USA Eagles U-19 team finished 3rd this past year of the WC (granted in Grade B, but I digress.) Not one word in the American sporting press. The American presence has not been positive on the international scene. The Baseball World Classic, failure at the Olympics in basketball, etc. You would think we would be trying to grab stories that could pull in interest. A little positive spin. Hell, Reagan did it for Christs sake! How do flagmakers sleep at night?

All I am saying is this: if ESPN wants to be the leading sports network, it needs to throw back to the old days when it played, well, sports.

Cheers,

Matt