On 7s success and the 15s approach

The Eagles are one of the world's better 7s teams.

That is satisfying to write, because we have always held it possible, and everyone in American rugby should be proud. Save perhaps for the team itself, which like Ralph Waldo Emerson's conception of our country, ought to see itself as always in the act of becoming.

But it is important to note because the 7s national team is directly connected to the USA 7s, American rugby's leading commercial engine. When one succeeds, the other's prospects for success improve, and whole of the US game is likely to benefit because the duo jointly serve as our standard bearer in the commercial market.

The past four years have demonstrated the same cannot be said of the 15s game.

By all means, immediately bring in Eddie O'Sullivan, the Irish 'Triple Crown' winner with a successful track record here in the States. For a board that's spent unprecedented millions while taking the US to a first-ever winless season, an 0-4 World Cup, and 19th from 13th, there can be little reason to delay returning to an approach based on real knowledge of how to get the most out of American players and resources.

But defeating Canada in this summer's World Cup qualifiers will not vindicate those millions. Haunts the question: what could have been achieved by a pragmatic, thoughtful board which persuaded the IRB there's more bang for the buck in high schools and colleges than in elusive city-based leagues and high-performance regions?

Or a far-sighted board that took stock after the 2006 season and decided to play for 2011 with a new coach, instead of for 2007 with a short-timer? Or a business-minded board which recognized before the economic downturn that the Commonwealth plan was not only not working, but also not tied to any commercial dynamic?

(Reports that USA Rugby would have received a scant $200,000 for a Denver Bledisloe Cup match, while risking America's reputation on being able to deliver an astronomical 75,000 fans -- double the 2-day USA 7s crowd and many times the Churchill Cup audience -- are exhibit A in the case against the union's business nous.)

While we celebrate the success of Al Caravelli's men, and hope that Eddie O'Sullivan is given leave to restore a sensible approach to the test team, it is worth considering that the board too could use some new blood. The argument that the old system produced parochial representatives, inexperienced or unconcerned with the business side of the equation, does not mean that we are compelled to embrace a clique with little record of any kind in American rugby.

There are men enough with successful records, beginning with the 7s crew, and it is time for the pendulum to swing back.

Related: The High Performance Era, 2006-09
        The vision
        The execution
        The commerce

Comments

[bruce mclane]

Kurt,
You have touched a chord with me there. I think that this is a real opportunity for the USA to take a bad situation and hit it out of the park by hiring a man like O'Sullivan. He is exactly what we need to get our 15's Eagles going in the right direction.

[The king looks like the piss boy.]

Another great story KO. Everyone should take heed that any gains our new coach should have CANNOT cleanse Melville, Roberts and the Board of gross incompetance and mismanagement.

Why isnt Dan Lyle our CEO? He is the only person with hands big enough to pull it off.

[Stephen G.]

Al Caravelli has done a well and it is clear there is a direction he is headed with the sevens boys.

I would not pump O'Sullivan up too high. He is a good coach who has had everything at his disposal.

Won't be that way here and it is a real danger bringing him in.

Won't he have the same requirements as Johnson ?

[Blake Burdette]

O'Sullivan absolutley needs to be our next head coach. What he brings to the table very few can. Get some American to assist him and then turn the reins over to them after the next cup.

[paule barford]

O'Sullivan would be great choice for coach. He probaly would have got the job years ago if Gatland had not quit Ireland.His involvement with the coach program also leads to his street cred. He knows how big the country is and is well liked amongst American coaches. We are not Australia,NZ or god forbid England[and I'm English],we need to be coached to our needs,with what we have. We need our own identity , Eddie knows this.
paule barford

[Paul Keeler]

Al has done an outstanding job with the sevens. Regardless of our thoughts regarding an American(based) coach being in charge or not, I do not think one will be appointed.
I am of the understanding that it has been recognized that Americans need to be groomed into the position by whomever is appointed. I think Eddie O' would be great based on his experience, as long as he understands what he is signing on for. We need to start grooming our own, develop our own style of play based upon our own skill sets and stop trying to imitate the play of everyone else.
We dont kick well, we play good defense(but should be much better), like to run with the ball, and adore confrontations(contact). Sounds like we should be playing a running style of rugby.

As far as the rest: keep the CEO and keep the fire on Roberts. Nigel is one man trying to do a lot of things, and he didnt promise to raise 20 million dollars. If Roberts did get us the 20 million he said he would, I am sure things would be a lot different.
If all 80,000 CIPP members sent him an email each he would get the point.

[Number two sent me.]

Yes, he is a good coach.
Yes, he has a proven track record. The issues with the Eagles (on field) were tactical deficiencies and the player pool.
The tactical mess is not going to be solved in one assembly. The player pool will take at least one year to sort out.

The leadership has beat this thing down so far and is running up a quite a tab with the IRB that they lost their street cred.

Let's paint a true poortrait of this - this is merely a welcomed diversion to an underperforming Union.

Face it, the NA4 pool and other feeder all-star programs became a joke.

We saw how the last outsider handled it.

Is Eddie an outsider?
He will be if he loses twice to Canada.

The odds are against him, he does have to mire through that cesspool that cesspool that Johnson and Melville established.

[poor plan]

Stop kissing Melville's ass, he is pretending to be a CEO and he sucks at it.

O'Sullivan is the right coach if the plan is to continue to spend millions chasing meaningless test victories.

What we need is a real CEO and Board which can set a course for our greatness by building youth, HS and college rugby. This will in-turn create a successful national team.

This is just the latest example of short term thinking by part-time US rugby leaders.

[Old Beaver]

Eddie!!!
Eddie!!!
Eddie!!!
Eddie!!!

[Really?]

Eddie will have the same problems as Johnson and Thorburn, basic skills are lacking and the guys are not getting quality competition. Changing coaches will not fix that.

[ED]

Melville should hire O'Sullivan and hook him up with the ex-Canuck coach. If anyone would know how to beat the Canadians it would be him.

[WHAT!]

Beat Canada at all cost...hmmm....that sounds like a plan for long term success.

[Flynn Hagerty]

O'Sullivan isn't getting the glowing endorsement of many American rugby people because he's a big name coach, he's getting these endorsements because of his familiarity and hard work in the American scene for the latter half of the 90s. Comparing him to Johnson is ridiculous. Johnson had possibly never set foot in America before taking the Eagles post, meanwhile O'Sullivan has coached Super League teams, assisted Jack Clark with the Eagles and came to America as recently as this autumn. Furthermore, he has a world-class reputation as a teacher of the game - I believe the coaching manual he wrote is still used by USA Rugby and he is skillful at organizing and running clinics which will help improve the available homegrown coaching talent.

He's not just perfect for the job, he's beyond perfect - a world class coach with a genuine enthusiasm for the country who has an eye for development. If they don't get him they should just forfeit the games to Canada and save everybody's time.

[Alan Petty]

I think that Eddie would be a better choice than many other candidates because of what he did before the Ireland job. He ran Connacht and took them to new heights then the Irish U-21 squad, before coming to America. His development of the U-21 side would probably be the best job comparison to what he will see here.

While he was here, he traveled extensively in the States with George Hook and saw the strengths and weaknesses of our country. He will not show up with unworkable plans nor with unreasonable expectations. He was ahead of his time when he started his coaching career and his un-equaled success as the Ireland coach was just a flourish on his resume.

I have seen coaches come into the US game with some (currently) unobtainable plan like "let's just get some NFL washouts to play" and when that does not come to be, they have no alternate plan. It does not look like Eddie would have that preconception, or lack of options.

At the same time, there is a strong group of American coaches who could benefit from learning from him as his assistant and hopefully get ready to take over in a few years.

Hopefully the board will see this as an opportunity to secure current top-flight talent to run the team and to build a base of coaches that will improve the core of US rugby and get themselves ready to run the squad in the future. I cannot see the possibility of a better scenario at this time.

[bruce mclane]

I agree Flynn. He is beyond the perfect fit. He will prepare us in such a way that we have a real chance to beat Canada.

Gaining that America's 1 seed will save tremendous RWC qualifying travel expense.

[By George]

I wonder how the assistant coaches will be hired ? WIll it be Melville's job or will O'Sullivan bring in his own people ?

Which domestic coaches are up to it ? Surely we don't think that coaching on Tuesday/Thursday nights alone makes someone qualified ?

Shouldn't the head coach pick who he is going to work with ? What is there is a clash of ideas or personalities ?

[matt]

Having met Eddie O'Sullivan several times, both when he was technical director and more recently on one of his coachaing "tours" to the US, I think he would be a great addition to the Eagles. he really seems to like america and more importantly understands american players. He is the best coach available and the idea that he is willing to come here is great. Grab him while we can!

[Mike]

Has anyone answered the question of why Tom Billups is not coming back? Is it his decision or USA Rugby's?

[Ugly Americans]

Duh idiot. Mr Billups was born in America, therefore does not understand how to pass a ball backward, kick a ball forward, or tackle. Those skills are only developed in commonwealth countries and 3rd world nations.

Wake up morons, you can't have an American teaching inherently foreign skills like catching a ball and running.

Jeez some people are so stupid.

[e zee]

That right Ugly American, and your point was hammered home this past weekend in San Diego. It was nothing more than just dumb luck that an American coach could install a plan and build a sevens rugby team to perform well.

Just lucky I guess !

[bad plan]

This isn't about Eddie O'Sullivan as Eagles coach its about where USAR is in its overall development.

O'Sullivan is great, but we don't need another high priced coach, as part of our $3,000,000 expenditure on the Eagles. This is dumb beyond belief.

The Eagles budget should be only enough the field a team. The coach should be paid the same per-diem as the players. The Eagles will win about the same number of matches under this plan. They will qualify for the RWC. They might win a match.

Continuing to spend millions does change any of this. We will qualify and maybe win a match. If really lucky, we could win two RWC matches, but going to the quarters is not in the cards.

It is a waste to continue spending these millions in a quick fix plan.

These millions need to be spent on building US rugby from the ground up. Millions spent at the HS, college and super league level will provide a lifetime of benefit. If we build this aspect of US rugby and we will never look back. We will put good Eagles teams on the field for all of time.

We are making the biggest planning error of our history. This is short term thinking. Driven by short time commitment from Melville and Roberts.

[Pita]

This blog is supposed to be about analysis, not inane ranting. Couple of things:

Tom Billups QUIT as US coach at a particularly inopportune time. It is unlikely he would be asked to be the head coach again.

The total USA expense budget for 2008 was a little over $7 million. It is nonsense to claim the men's team spends millions. Ask any Congress member for the details on where the funds are spent.

Coach Caravelli is from Argentina and played for their national team. But who cares where he comes from, he is a very, very good coach who has built a very successful program.

Eddie O'Sullivan has great credentials, did a very good job as Technical Director, and generally did a good job with Ireland until the squad self destructed. To do the job as Eagle head coach requires a more than full time commitment -- to think otherwise is foolish.

And yes there are good coaches in the US, but are they ready to give up their careers to take a job that most professional people never heard of?

And rugby folks in this country do NOT support rugby. San Diego's venue was mostly empty. Last year's events at Infinity Park were mostly empty for the club championships. Why would a sponsor put money into a sport when their own community stays away from high end events like the plague. The knucklehead who complained about USA Rugby overusing Infinity Park and moving to the MLS stadium in Denver is ridiculous. What would about a thousand brave souls look like in a park that holds 30,000? New Zealand and Australia want to play in new venues for the simpliest of reasons -- money. Hopefully wiser heads will prevail and take these matches to a country where rugby folks fully support their sport by showing up at major events.

PITA

[Running Rugby?]

Paul,
please explain what "running rugby" is? Does that mean there is also kicking rugby? Any pro teams play "running rugby."

[Go West]

PITA,

First off, the congress knows nothing. I have spoken with over a dozen of them and they have zero idea how money is being spent.

Second, the Eagles and the HP budget which is all Eagle related (NA4, Selects, money losing events, etc) have indeed spent $3m. I mean wasted $3m.

Now we are going to change coaches and continue to waste the funds needed to grow US rugby in to a competing international nation.

O'Sullivan will be much better than Johnson and Thorburn, but the coach will still need to operate under Melville and Roberts, no easy task.

Lets say O'Sullivan wins more matches, gets the US qualified straight away by beating Canada, who cares? Qualifying for the RWC means nothing to the people on the ground. Winning a RWC match in 1987 and 2003 didn't change anything, nor will a win in 2011.

O'Sullivan is great, its the plan and budget that stinks.

By the way PITA, you typing Billups "quit" in caps is a rant, asshole. Come on Bill, you never quit at anything? Billups did all you too frighten to speak up against Arnot administrators a big favor. You could at least have the grace to say thank you. You guys would still be listening to Doug's bullshit without Tom calling bullshit on all you.

[bruce mclane]

HS and college rugby are massively important. The national team is also very important. It would be naive to say that one man in Eddie O'Sullivan would cure many years of errors, but it would be clear step in the right direction for the men's national team and with his experience in coach development and systems building both here and in Ireland, he will bring a tremendous amount to the table in terms of development for all levels. I think it would be a sound investment for USA rugby in terms of now and the future.

[Its the Plan Stupid]

Bruce,

You must be a very poor business man to believe spending millions on the Eagles is a "sound investment".

The fact is an Eagle victory has been costing USAR about $750-$1m.

If you don't understand how transformational this sum of money would be to properly building US rugby, I can't respect your opinion.

Bruce, I mostly agree with your comments on ARN, but Melville and Roberts have created a very poor plan for America's rugby future.

The Eagles are indeed important, this is why we need to use every ounce of our focus and resources to build a rugby union capable of fielding good to great Eagle teams.

We need to break away from this pattern of welfare, and the belief there is a short cut to being a world power. There isn't a short cut. The longer we spend millions chasing the odd test victory, the further we get away from reaching our potential.

[Gerry Stevens]

I read the following with interest as there isn't much rugby here in my area. I find it fascinating that no one that defends USA Rugby has ever owned up to the decisions made by Arnot, Latham, Sexton, Merrill et al.

If you go back and retrace the steps that have gotten us to this point as a rugby union, it shows clearly that a few people have driven a long series of decisions that have proven to have been horrific.

Until our rugby union is truthful and honest there will continue to be failure. No public review of budgets, income/revenue, expenses means no transparency. Who coaches will not matter.

Billups spoke the truth, but because he is an American, the truth was discounted, but it was still the truth. Why else was the high performance grant from the IRB redirected to fund the national team ?

This is all public information for those that want to see some truth and accountability in our sport and governing body. Until then is will continue to be a revolving door of bad decisions, staff turnover and money wasted.

[Ponzi s. Cheme]

Melville and Roberts are brilliant business minds. They convince the world they cannot compete. They borrow money and sell it short. They cry foul and ask for more money and it appears justified.

Currently, the Chinese own options of the Eagles (including Todd Clever's hair).

The credit line has been extended again.

When the next regime walks into the Boulder office, they will be greeted with a property lien by the new Chinese ownership. USA Rugby will have nothing left. Roberts will have sucked it dry and he and Melville will have sold everything.

Even toilet paper dispenser will be empty.

[Pita]

At the August 2008 Congress meeting, there was a hand out to the attendees on the finances of USA Rugby.Don't have one myself, so I can't provide details.

Sponsors or grant providers call the shots on where their money gets spent. That's a fact for all sports and sponsors. Some may not like the National Guard kit program, but they supplied the funds and they get what they want. Ditto with iRB funding.

High school and youth rugby should be a priority. Current programs are finally getting around to it. Late yes. Absolutely yes. I wonder if the troops will support the programs. By the way, Katie Wurst has produced a huge amount of materials for youth and high school development. If there is a problem with the material it's that there is so much of the stuff it is hard to find what you might need. High School rugby needs to be a fully accepted interscholastic sport within each state. That will provide facilities, paid coaches, continuity, insurance, training and pay for officials, admin organization, etc. We're a long way from that in almost every state.In a number of states the rugby folks really do not seem to want to be recogized by the state's interscholastic sports organization. They say they want to be main stream, but want to keep "control" themselves. They are dreaming.

And Tom Billups did speak mostly the truth, but he still quit. Arnot lacked skills that we needed at the time, but to continually blame him for the losses on the iRB sevens is not quite right. As I said before, US rugby players do not support events. The sevens featured the best players in the world - Gollings, Serevi, Cora -- and still the majority of our players stayed away. No support, no sponsors, no pro league, no money for development.

The Australians, who were closest to our situation at one time, said a number of times that although 99.?% of Australian players would never play for Australia, they all fully supported the national squad. Further that virtually all the funds of the Australian RFU came as a direct result of the men's national team. The more successful the Wallabies were, the more money flowed into the coffers.

I suspect the iRB is trying to get the Eagles to be successful. That, with a little publicity, might start sponsorship to increase dramatically.

I hope everyone recognizes that Al Caravelli has done a great job, but remember it took years to achieve that success. Fifteens is a more complicated game, and it's going to take time, commitment, funds, continuity, and patience to have a shot at success. If you disregard soccer for a moment, the countries at the top of the rugby pile have the very, very best athletes within those countries playing rugby. The USA is a very long way from that. We have some very good athletes, but no where near enough. If we could focus on development, while supporting the best we have at the moment, we'll all be better off.

[bruce mclane]

I agree the plan is not there. I am not advocating spending millions. I think that O'Sullivan will demand precise budgetary planning. It is the fact that the line items of the budget are so veiled and covered up that makes us all so infuriated.

I have never advocated welfare acceptance, it is the unfunded mandates that are the strings attached to our welfare that has helped hamstring our development.

My plan would be to give the USA office a percentage of the CIPP money (say 20-25%) and give the rest back to the group that paid them. HS, college, men, women, etc. Those groups can have a set of trustees that spend the money as they see fit. Some will tour elite, some will televise games, some will save a bit, the men may give some to other trustees of age grade levels to keep a feeder system.

I have it fleshed out and will publish it soon, but that is the gist of what I would do. Give the lions share of the dues back to the people who paid them, but let them run their own show. It would shrink the USA office to essential functions of elite rugby.

[need a better plan]

Some facts in rebuttal.

1) The IRB grants need to get redirected. The IRB's grant program is clear enough by way of objective, get the USA and the other tier two's into the RWC quarters. The problem is funding the Eagles with a few million doesn't achieve the goal. We have had four seasons of this experiment and it doesn't work. In fact the Eagles have gone backward in this plan.

The USAR Board and CEO need to show some leadership and get their lame asses to Dublin and lay out the plan which will actually get the Eagles into the RWC quarters.

The IRB needs some smart American types that understand the lay of the land to make this case. This plan is more long term, but unlike what we are doing now it will work.

2) Sorry PITA the handout wasn't acceptable. We need far more information. Combining gate receipts from money losing events with sponsorship income and grants isn't good enough.

3) Arnot not only got USAR into several bad agreements with the USA 7's, to include the Home Depot Center, he lied. He lied to the board. The board decided to not do their job and ask tough questions. This is how Arnot put the Union in crisis. No wonder these same individuals, now on congress are doing the same thing once again.

4) Tom Billups did what no one else would do, he stepped up not down. He called Arnot and his pal Latham the lairs that they are. I find more honor in this action, than I find in yours PITA.

5) There is much the same about where we find ourselves today with the Arnot period. Morale in this Boulder office is poor. Employee are quitting. Congress is being lied to and they don't care. The same individuals are defending the status-quo. The difference is loads of poorly spent IRB funds, a first time CEO making $275,000 and a Board that hasn't brought in any funds and runs their affairs like the star chamber.

[Red, White, and Blue]

Pita - interesting perspective that you have from Colorado, not accurate, but interesting.

I played for Billups and he told many of us test players directly that he felt his resigning was the only way to draw attention to the lack of national team funding, was indeed the case as we all now know.

We the players would like a better way. We feel like stepchildren being passed around by Latham and Co. First Thorburn, then Johnson, now who ?

[Old Boy]

that was a short succinct and excellent post by Kurt.

[ed schram, sr.]

Hire Eddie O. He knows American rugby better than anyone in Boulder and is a successful coach.

Congress should dismiss the current CEO and the Board.They have been ineffective.

Hire Dan Lyle as CEO. He knows how to get the job done.

Ed Schram, Sr.

[where's the roaming gnome?]

Does anyone know of the Nigel Melville induced increase in funding of the 7's program?

Is this similar to the increase in 15's %spending% wise?

There is no doubt that the 15's program would be a top 10 program if the Union was run correctly in this decade, especially with the IRB impetus.

[The Plan]

Bruce,

Here's the point. Will you join the growing group of people who belief the Eagles budget should be earned from commercial income, such as sponsorship and from donations from individuals?

This means the IRB grants need to be redirected towards building youth, HS, college and club rugby.

It also means all CIPP dues money should be spent on the same and off limited to the Eagles.

The Eagles performed better under this plan for many years.

With the million of dollars now coming in from the IRB and now raised through USAR dues, we will be making an investment of millions into the most important parts of USAR and our future.

This is where you need to get. This isn't about Eddie being a good budget manager, its about redirecting these IRB grants and the CIPP funds.

The last point is Boulder. HQ's needs to spend their days working on domestic rugby. Improving the quality of domestic rugby. We should no longer have a dozen employees working on the Eagles.

[bruce mclane]

Boulder will only do to domestic rugby what they did to the NA 4 and all the other stuff. I am not sure of parameters of IRB grant and whether money can be re-directed. NA 4 doesn't work.

Letting central gov't (boulder) into your lives to collect taxes and tell you what to do is seldom a good idea.

I would be more inclined to keep them out of as many things as possible.

As far as the eagles, it would be great if it were a commercial enterprise, but as a non profit, no one will buy it (as no one can based on the rules) and right now the sponsorship is not there to allow it to run as it did a few years ago.

I think the national team program is important for international credibility and opportunity for players. while it has been butchered a bit recently, we need to try and make strides in the right direction and stand up and sign our names and demand accountability and answers.

i know that many do not sign their names for fear of repercussions, but you should not fear them if you are standing up for what is just and correct.

[ed schram, sr.]

Hopefully, this will play out as follows:

1. Eddie O'Sullivan gets hired as National Team Coach.

2. The Congress will exert their power and summarily dismiss the current CEO and the Board.

3. Dan Lyle will be hired as President and CEO.

4. US Rugby can move on with building rugby in America from the bottom up and not the top down.

Ed Schram, Sr.

[can't have it both ways]

Ed,

This isn't about who's a good coach or who you like, its about our direction as a rugby union.

Eddie is great. But we don't need another high priced coach as part of a high priced Eagles program.

We need to change direction and spend our resources on domestic rugby and build something lasting.

It is a fantasy to think we can build USA rugby up from the bottom, with all the IRB grant funds and most of the CIPP dues income being wasted chasing test victories.

Its time for a new direction and a new focus.

Let the Eagles get by on what they can bring in, everything else goes to building from the bottom up.

[ed schram, sr.]

Agreed. You've said it better than I did. But the focus is not likely to change any time soon with current cast leading the show.

In every post I have made on this site, I've lobbied for the focus being on building the game at the club, youth and collegiate levels, as opposed to spending the majority of the available funds chasing Eagle victories. I know first-hand what it is like both funding and chasing Eagle victories.

Irrespective of how much Eddie may cost and Dan may cost, it will be far less than the money that is now being wasted by Mr.Melville and the current Board.

Both Eddie and Dan are intelligent men who have worked in the modern arena. Each have a better grasp of what needs to be done to grow the game than anyone currently on the Board.

Agreed, we not only need to spend less on the national team, we need to direct those funds toward building the game through clubs and youth rugby. The money they now provide should go directly back to them in the form of an organized Union focus on assisting more clubs in building club facilities, which in turn will provide an important base for growing youth programs. (See Golden Gate, Iowa Falls, Pearl City and Des Moines as but a few successful examples).

Suspect few if any of the Board and Mr Melville have ever seen those places. I'd like to think that they cared about what goes on at the grass roots level, but nothing that they have done would indicate that they do.

It is difficult to buy victories in any sport, as this humbled Yankee fan knows full well.

In time, this country can certainly have a strong National Team, but it will never happen under the current leadership and the current focus.

Ed Schram, Sr.

[Schram for BoD]

Now you're talkin Mr Schram.

How about you for a board position and Mr Prusmack as the chairmen.

Lets get some smart, successful American biz types, with strong US rugby backgrounds on the Board.

Still not sure we can afford Eddie in our new direction, but maybe some funds will free up when we axe that good for nothing CEO and his $275,000 contract.

[Chuck Norris]

Chuck Norris says - I nominate Ed Schram Sr. to be our delegate to the Board.

Seconds?

[ecm]

weren't the british sent packing ~200 years ago? something about taxation/no representation?...seems like there's a blueprint out there as well as a groundswell of ill- feelings towards our "sovereign"...

[Flynn Hagerty]

I find it very short sighted to not want Eddie as Eagles coach on the basis of development.

First off, someone has to coach the Eagles, and I don't think its in our best interests that we not have a coach, which is what's going to happen if the job pays the minimum. At the very least a poorly coached team will negatively affect our performances, which will retard the growth of the national team if we're getting stomped by Canada again and guys can't get professional contracts because the team is playing like crap. Isn't part of the point of development to see homegrown HS/college players shine for the Eagles and play professionally abroad? That shows a clear pathway in rugby to being a professional athlete, which is what all high school rugby players would love to be.

Secondly, O'Sullivan understands our country and its rugby culture. I think people are unnecessarily frightened that he will be another Scott Johnson who tried as much as possible to coach the Eagles from Australia. O'Sullivan has lived here before and seems to be perfectly willing to live here again.

Thirdly, coaching is one of the important parts of development and O'Sullivan is an excellent teacher in coaching. I find it very likely that he would be amenable to and excited to run coaching clinics across the US educating our local coaches.

Fourthly, we've identified over and over that our most critical areas for development are high school and college. O'Sullivan's a former schoolboy and U21 rugby coach and had success in both levels. This is a guy whose area of expertise perfectly matches up with his ability to impart knowledge which perfectly matches up with our needs.

If it makes people feel better, attach the position of National Technical Director to his coaching position. But this is a guy who is ideal for US Rugby right now.

[Rich]

Flynn - O'Sullivan has BEEN here before, but has not LIVED here. Don't confuse the two. Either way, he will be a far sight better than Johnno and I hope O'Sullivan clears out the previous staff.

While it is good that at least he knows a little of what American domestic rugby is like, I still question how we can afford to pay the salary he commands while dropping by to coach our Eagles ?

[new direction required]

OK Flynn I'll take the bait.

Nigel is such a poor manager that we will never see a job description, but assuming he did offer one and O'Sullivan was to perform the duties of Technical Director, as well as Eagles coach, hire him.

When the Eagles win or lose, nothing happens at the domestic level. It doesn't significantly help when they win, and nothing goes wrong at the club level when they lose. International success has almost nothing to do with building HS or college rugby. Therefore why the focus? Why not invest in building a rugby union from the ground up? This will build a real sport, while supporting and suppling talent for the Eagles for many years to come.

Flynn, you are a fan. You enjoy following rugby. Following America rugby from afar as I understand it. I can see why you want the best Eagle team we can have, right now today.

This is similar to the USAR leadership. None of them plan to be around long, so its all about the Eagles, the shop window. A muti-year plan is not for them. These jokers have been here for four season and they still haven't committed anything to paper. They are just making it up as they go.

But if you think about this for a moment, we have spent millions on the Eagles as of late, and have fallen 6 places. Had we spent these millions on building something lasting, the investment would be paying off by now. Instead we are in the cycle of spending millions chasing test victory that won't even be reported in an American newspaper if it were to happen. A meaningless objective, spending valuable resources.

We can't afford this lark. Its time to invest, with a plan, in American rugby.

[Flynn Hagerty]

Rich - difference of opinion I think. He spent several months on end in the US game for three years.. I suppose you could call that a working holiday, but the main gist is that he's not going to complain about the fact the hamburgers don't have a fried egg on top of them.

[Flynn Hagerty]

NDR - your points are well taken, though I think you're mistaking my position slightly.

I'm not advocating dumping millions into the Eagles no questions asked. I don't have a budget handy but I am sure there are ways to cut costs - one way I can think of off the top of my head is stop using professional soccer stadiums for games. The rents are usually exorbitant and the crowds often not big enough to justify the expense. Much maligned Balboa Park could only handle about 4,000 people, but it also cost peanuts to rent, meaning the Eagles turned a profit. USA Rugby should certainly be frugal and look to get their value for money.

But a coach is a pretty important thing (arguably the most important single expenditure in an Eagle budget) and it's worth the money to get a good coach, especially with one of O'Sullivan's skills. I was not a fan of Johnson, and I think part of our lack of success stems from not having had a good coach since Billups. I think we'd all feel better if we won more than one game every other year.

[NDR]

Flynn,

I'm not OK with spending about $2m of IRB grant income on the Eagles, its insane, bad business. If you agree say it!

These funds need to be spent on building US rugby. Once again, win two, three matches a year and nothing changes. Therefore its dumb to budget in this manor. Beat Canada in the RWCQ and nothing changes. The RWC pays for these matches so we don't earn or save money in the qualifying process. Win one or two matches at the RWC and nothing changes. Our beer taste better, but nothing changes.

As real fan and supporters of US rugby we must not fall into the same ego trip our leaders are in. This IRB money could and will dry up without a ROI to the IRB. Thus far its been a negative return. We need to get to Dublin with some smart rugby men and explain how and where money should be spent if the RWC quarters are the goal. This objective will never happen spending this $2m of HP and competition grants on the Eagles.

Melville and his handlers want the membership to have vague conversations about all this.

We need to have pin point conversations. Stop wasting millions of dollars chasing Eagles victories. Redirect 100%-75% of these IRB funds to building youth, HS, college, club, refs, coaching. Use every cent of membership dues to build domestic rugby. Stop the maddest.

[Hmmmm]

They should hire EO'S and put him in charge of U21's, HS and Youth.

Then give him Eagles duties when his younger charges have come up thru his system. This is long term thinking.