Division 1, Super League revamp arrives amid decreased interest

Washington and Philadelphia-Whitemarsh have been dropped from the Super League schedule and the 2009 Division 1 championship will be contested among eight regions over three May weekends, but USA Rugby's efforts to reshape senior club competition appear to have lost their original impetus.

Already underway, the revised Division 1 title chase designates 57 teams contending for the 32-team playoffs. As expected, the blueprint foreshadows the four 'high performance' regions which the union intends to establish, while partially restoring the old four-territory system in that the national semifinalists will be determined by geography as well as merit.

The scheme also nationalizes the definition of 'first division' and reserves playoff places for more than half of these teams, something of an inflated standard of excellence. In recent years, the Super League too has permitted almost half its teams to reach the postseason.

But the three-year effort to rationalize senior competition has already lost ground. When launched by the 2006 report of International Rugby Board consultant Alan Solomons, the mantra was that improved club competition was the first and most important step to improving the Eagles. National team management, among others, no longer believes that to be the case.

In selections and interviews, head coach Scott Johnson has made it clear that he is uninterested in the proverbial 25-year-old  'journeyman' player. Leading lights of club rugby are generally too old and not focused enough for international competition, in his view, and nothing less than a fully professional, NFL-style competition will serve to produce more younger, athletic players. Thus Johnson has frequently gone completely outside domestic rugby in choosing new players for the team, including 4 players in the Saturday's match 22 against Japan.

Still, the purpose of competition is to crown a champion, and several union committees have labored in an effort to straighten the rococo path to the American crown.

The 2009 Division 1 championship establishes two conferences, both with four divisions. Each of the three territories that used to comprise the old East (Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, and South) along with the Midwest form the Eastern conference, which will provide two semifinalists, while Southern California, the Pacific Coast, and the West make up the Western conference.

The eight divisions manifest America's demographic and administrative concentrations as well as places where the union would like to make inroads, such as Florida, but the playoffs do not necessarily reflect its playing strengths. After the union's mid-1990s fissure into seven territories, early-round, nationwide competition saw California's Division 1 sides predominated the final four. But the introduction of four 'competitive regions' earlier this decade first began to roll back back that approach.

Vestiges of territorial boundaries remain in the odd combination of Northern California and Utah in a 'Pacific Coast' division, while the West is split in two. Save for the Kansas City Blues, the five teams comprising the West (North) division are closer to Utah than Utah to California, but that would have meant crossing administrative lines. Meanwhile, three of the four Eastern divisions are subdivided, and the 38-team conference is more populous than the 29-club West.

Several Super League teams are fielding Division 1 sides (including Belmont Shore, OMBAC, Old Blue, and the Boston Irish Wolfhounds), and there are a handful of former Super League sides (Olympic Club, Gentlemen of Aspen, Kansas City Blues, Washington, Life University). Philly-Whitemarsh is outside the frame.

The playoffs themselves see top-ranked teams hosting first-round games on May 2, followed by a conference championship doubleheader weekend (rounds of 16 and 8) on May 16-17, and culminating in a final-four weekend on May 30-31.

East conference

Northeast division

1. New England 2. Metropolitan New York

Albany Knickerbockers Long Island

Amoskeag Manhattan

Boston Irish Wolfhounds Old Blue

Connecticut Yankees Union

Mystic River White Plains

New Haven

Worcester

Mid Atlantic

Baltimore-Chesapeake

Maryland Exiles

Media

Norfolk Blues

Nova

Pittsburgh Harlequins

Raleigh

Schuylkill River

Washington

Midwest

1. East  2. West

Buffalo Metropolis

Cincinnati Wolfhounds Palmer College

Detroit Tradesmen Pearl City

South Side Irish Wisconsin

South

1. North 2. South

Atlanta Old White Boca Raton

Atlanta Renegades Ft. Lauderdale

Life University Miami

Nashville Miami Tridents

Naples

West Conference

Pacific Coast

1. Northern California 2. Utah

Diablo Old Gaels Park City Haggis

Hayward Griffins Provo Steelers

Olympic Club St. George

Sacramento Capitols Utah Saints

Sacramento Lions

San Mateo

Southern California

Belmont Shore

Grunion

Las Vegas

Los Angeles

OMBAC

Santa Monica

West - North

Boulder

Denver Highlanders

Gentlemen of Aspen

Glendale Raptors

Kansas City Blues

West - South 

Austin Blacks

Austin Huns

Dallas

Dallas Harlequins

Houston Athletic

Shreveport

Woodlands

Comments

[what a cluster]

If TU administration lines are still dictating the regions, why do we call this a revamped competition?

I thought the 7 TU's and their rigid regions was what we were revamping.

Trying to create improved competitions appears to have given way to more of the same.

[Reorg]

This well help, it is a better organized system, on par with the old 4, which provided a more streamlined pathway.

All they need to do now is:

1. Abolish the D2 and D3 National Championships.

1a. D2 East/West winners play a promotion/relegation game per sub Union. This become their Championship.
1b. D3 Play a relegation/promotion game - sub Union only. ditto.

This WILL drive better players upward to the top Leagues.

The Super League must have a minimum standard (field,website,ability to podcast,proper club structure, promote youth rugby,etc).

Promotion/relegation should not exist in this League as it is our emerging "professional league". This League needs a commissioner. This League becomes our Eagle pool. Eagle players must qualify by playing 1 or 2 matches for the SL or for a D1 club, this includes College players. Those who do not play in the top Leagues are not eligible for National or Territorial play.

The NA4 was a total failure and is easy to see why. Lesser players were able to slip into the League because of the way it was managed. The NA4 (or type of ITT)is fixable, but not in it's current state. We have a disorganized mess right now. The is the CEOs fault. There are good enough players at home right now that could easily play 3rd tier International rugby.

The Eagles have less than a handful of potential T1 players and dozen T2 players. The problem is that the NA4 over the years have place a bunch of T3 types into the Eagle pool based on a phone call and a failed system.

The CEO could be successful despite having no idea how to manage domestic comps if the Commissioners were accountable and understood the system (American).

Then all we would need is accountability in Boulder...

[thoughts]

Isn't this plan like a half days work for three guys who know what they're doing.

Wow!

[Yeah]

I agree that there isn't a need for a D2/D3 National Champ, keep the Championships to the four regions.

I'd take it one step further in regard to D2/D3 though. The two should be combined. The cream will still rise to the top and they can play for promotion to D1. When you take out the elite of D2 and the very worst of D3, the rest of the clubs are fairly similar. Having two separate competitions just complicates things and creates more travel.

[rollback or roll over?]

Social rugby (D2/D3)should not have a National Championship. It devalues our comps. 99% of these players could care less about a National Championship. The urge to win a Championship is usually driven by some crazed troll who can't pass or catch. Most D1 players are social, as well, and could care less about a National Championship, but this would change as better players are driven through those programs and standards are set for the dullards in charge of Club rugby.

That system is much easier to manage.

You could make the Eagle pool the SL and those who play for a final 16 D1 only. Those who want to risk a potential snub by playing with a lesser team - fine.

The Eagle 15's pool could also be expanded to final 4 Collegiate and the Eagles 7's program (those discovered by a qualified evaluator - Al C). Al C should be given a full time position as coach and chief domestic development officer. He is a proven commodity and we need to keep him moving forward.

The NA4 budget should be replaced with two games. An East/West and a USA/Canada "A" match. The rest of the games are USA "A" games (expanded pool) which are somewhat regional and play top foreign clubs, tier 2 A's, Tier 3 Internationals. We should have 8 of these per year. This becomes a watchable Eagles pool comp.

The Eagles must be able to operate independently and have some kind of identifiable pathway/standard.

The foreign legion has butchered our comps over the last 10 years. It is time to be sensible and move forward in a deliberate and organized path. It would take 3 or 4 accountable American rugby men one whole day to solve this problem, then lead as part time commissioners during the season.

We have wasted millions and not developed our domestic game. We have devalued our comps and American players and Coaches. The best organized clubs should be rewarded and top domestic players should be driven to the top Leagues. Its time.

-former TU Coach

[roll over and play dead]

Change qualifier as D1 final 4 only - will drive better players to the SL.

Expand the SL to 12 to 16 teams over time. D1 should remain constant at 64 teams with sub Union promotion and relegation.

[Pete]

Anyword on P-W situation, are they going to continue or fold?

Washington should have dropped to D-II or D-III as they have forfeited two or three matches due to low numbers.

As a D-II/D-III player I agree that while the national championship model is nice, it is unnecessary. That is rare are the times when there are more then a handful of players on the average D-II or D-III club that aspire to reach anything more then the LAU or TU playoffs. About 10-15 years ago my club reached the TU final four and even before we played a game we were wondering if we'd get numbers to play past in the national playoffs if we were able to get that far. I like Yeah's idea but I'd take it one step further. In the MARFU for example, there should a fourth division where the true social clubs would play (on a LAU level) drop the lower D-II clubs into D-III and combined the two D-II leagues into a single league with 8 teams.

[NO!]

OMG, what would D4 rugby look like? Wait, don't tell me, keep it to yourself. I don't want to know.

[Theo]

We have a handful of "D4" teams in our area, they also go by the name of social sides. Truely social in every sense of the word, they play a handful of matches every year and generally only schedule games against each other. When they do venture out, they get hammered by B sides and show no real interest in growing into competitive clubs.

Instead of the creation of a Division 4 (I already think we have too many divisions), I'd rather see good D3 teams pushed into D2, so that there's room in D3 for these social sides. Until that day comes, the true social clubs will stay away from any sort of structured play.

If I had to pick though, I agree with some of the posts above. We should have the RSL, 64 D1 teams, and then everyone else lumped into the same division where the championship goes no further than their region. To give clubs incentive, have clear promotion and relegation within the four regions.

[Happy Holidays]

USArFu could give a flying faux about our domestic comps. Just another smokescreen to buy more time and create another diversion in their search for for the golden egg.

As far as Boulder Press releases go:

1. Positive ones mean that they have been up to nothing much, about to go on holiday or they screwed something up and are trying to cover it up.
2. Very positive means that they just paid a consultant $10,000 to discover something that we have already known for 20 years.
3. Somewhat negative means that we have a game coming up soon or they just got back from holiday.
4. Middle of the road means that they just made a royal blunder and are trying to hide something.
5. Very negative means their contract extension negotiations were put on hold.
6. Friendly and cordial means that they just got back from holiday and have been up to nothing much and don't have anything on the ledger this month.

Just expect something bad just happened whenever we get a fairly positive press release from Boulder. The latest one is more along the lines of we are working on it - something very bad just happened.

[Pete]

Theo & NO!-

Outside of a few grad programs in the Philly area the problem in the MARFU is you have to be part of the structure of play if you want to be able to schedule matches. Ask yourself this: What difference does it make to me if there is a D-III or D-IV? Does it effect me if I play RSL or D-I? If the structure is already in place will it effect me if another division of play is added? The answer is no on all points. In each LAU in the MARFU (and I'd imagine all across the country) there is a clear division within D-II and D-III amongest the top clubs and the bottom feeders. A quick glance at the history of the MARFU standings and you would see that Richmond (or United or Richmond Lions) have never finished higher then 3rd from the bottom in D-II and have never made the playoffs in 13 out of 14 years of D-II play. Meanwhile there have been clubs that have moved between the divisions successfully. Media comes to mind winning MARFU D-II in 1996, moving down to D-III in 1998? and now a playoff team in D-I. Virginia is another club, they were a playoff team for several years in D-II then the students at UVA started their own club, Virginia fell apart, moved down in 2003, rebuilt and are now a top D-III club even beating the Washington Irish early this fall before MARFU play started and the Irish were unbeaten in MARFU play. Furthermore Theo your plan was what was in place for years and years in the US and it didn't work. Why would a club that in today's league structure sits at the bottom or the middle of D-III want to play a match against a club that is clearly better in all aspects? You want to compete against clubs that are on your level, improve and move up. It's a simple scheme and easily installed.

[What a joke]

The politics of the TUs caused this 32 team abomination.

What is comical is that some TUs still have seeding tournaments to determine their seeds.

Playoffs should be you lose, your done, not you lose you play a stronger opponent later on.

[abob]

We could debate D2, D3, D4 for months, but until clubs get beyond the parochial attitude that exists, we won't see much movement. For ex. in Pittsburgh, Pitt City and Harlequins should merge to be a strong D1, but cannot due to old boy opposition. In Harrisburg, Old Gaelic & Harrisburg could merge to form a strong D2 or even D1, but no...same all over the country.

[Pete]

I think a lot of you that adovcate that clubs merge and move up a division or form stronger D-I clubs or that D-II & D-III are a waste are missing a big point: The mass majority of people who play rugby do it as a hobby or as a pastime and aren't in it to play D-I or RSL. Witness the amount of clubs that play lower division rugby. Merging clubs rarely works, look at the Richmond Lions, they are 13 years into a merger between the R.A.T.S. and Richmond RFC. The thought was to produce a strong D-I club between the two, what has it produced? A weak D-II club that should be playing D-III. OR how about Philly-Whitemarsh? They've gone into administration and plan on coming back in 2009 as a D-II club. What about Lehigh Valley? That's 3 former clubs Allentown, Bethlehem and Southside something or other now playing D-III when 14 years ago Bethlehem and Allentown were D-I clubs. For every succesful merger (PAC, San Fran-Golden Gate) there is a disastern of a merger. These mergers fail b/c some people on top of the club structure want to move up when the players are content playing lower division rugby and will move on when the demands of playing up are forced upon them.

[Fire USAR]

Less teams equal less rugby. More teams equal more rugby. History has shown that merging creates a marginally better club. Three years later there is less rugby in the area. A competitive atmosphere is a good thing. Those who want to merge with another club obviously are not interested in making their club better. This is sad. Those people should not be in charge of your club. They will eventually drive your club into the ground.
I believe that USAR has made another blunder by not promoting fill ins for the failed former SL clubs. Less teams means less opportunity for elite players who don't want to move away from job family. The SL should be regional and have 16-20 teams.
USAR is attempting to strangle the SL. USAR will call it a failure next year (when some teams will play each other 3x), and then try and implement their new city based model (which is basically exactly what we have anyway - only that they can control it.

There are enough players to field 20 teams. Dissolving the D2 and D3 Nationals and establishing the criteria for All-Star play/Eagle play will drive the good players upward.

USAR should be there to dictate/structure the standards for each level of play. They have not done that.

USAR is not a very good role model.

With USAR's track record, do you want them controlling anything?

Empower the TUs again. Help them with guidlines and proper HP. Stop devaluing our comps and give us a proper/ manageable domestic pathway.

What the F is the goal of this administration? They will run it into the ground unless they have a plan. Waiting for someone else to do it will drive future athletes to other sports. What the F is the goal for this administration?

[Anisa]

Greeting. The man who is swimming against the stream knows the strength of it.
I am from Mauritania and also now teach English, give true I wrote the following sentence: "Download the free ebook how to write letters formerly the book of letters by mary owens crowther."

Thanks :o. Anisa.