On HS eligibility: quality not quantity

'There is no other sport in America where [the] varsity plays games against players not in high school.'

That single line, drawn from one of many emails regarding USARFU's revised high school eligibility rules, encapsulates one of the two principal objections to allowing graduates and non-students compete for a 'single school' team.

But the second point -- that playing numbers do not equate to quality -- may be the more significant.

In 2009, Boulder hopes to reach 100,000 youth 'participants' including players, parents, and volunteers. That's a notable goal. Yet there is little evidence -- certainly not from the Under 19 team's trajectory -- that steady numerical gains improve the caliber of the youth / high school level.

By contrast, varsity high school sports assess quality in terms of school affiliation, facilities, coaching, medical and training support, attention given to league and championship play as well as key rivalries, budgeting, parental support, and so on. As a practical demonstration: parochial school after parochial school competes with much bigger public schools by hewing to these categories.

As in the collegiate environment, running a varsity team is essentially a zero-sum endeavor: they fight for the best athletes and resources. Therein lies USA Rugby's big chance.

The deepening recession is causing public-school budget cuts, crippling sports that are reliant on athletic department funding. But American rugby, which has ever been self-supporting, has (slowly) been adopting varsity traits with little or no help from school institutions.

Rugby teams that have been behaving like varsity programs are now set to move past some formally recognized sports. Coupled with the fact that parochials -- generally home to our strongest single-school teams -- will not necessarily be caught in the downdraft,  it's apparent that next 12-30 months represent a once-in-a-generation opportunity to grow high school rugby.

Instead of leaping at this golden chance to plug into the US school sports system, USARFU appears to be distancing itself through byzantine eligibility policy, while clinging to 'key performance indicators' that have not produced notable gains.

Related: HS champs: Dilution more worrying than elimination

Comments

[please save us Lord]

Kurt,

This of course make sense if you understand US sports.

But if this world is foreign to you because you are foreign to America...they will NEVER get it. Not in a million years.

Only God can help us now.

[pathway,like a funnel]

Good point Kurt.

Let's say that the unders programs were chock full of former players/present coaches offspring and those kids that picked up a ball at a young age.

Where does that put us in the grand scheme of things?

When will all understand that the pathways needs to be about about the elite athlete we will become competitive. Talking about the guy who is physically capable of dunking a basketball, beating up the school bully and outpacing his class during sprints - all in the same day.

The current crew of unders is chock full of 5.0 guys that can't jump over the Sunday paper, and would tap out in less than 8 seconds.

[Numbers game]

Pathway - Good post, however, you need adequate numbers to be able to funnel into smaller more elite numbers. If rugby is seen as a viable sport, ala the lacrosse explosion that is going on around us as we speak, then more 'elite athletes' will come to it. We just held a camp for U15 all the way to U-20 players with literally hundreds there. Last year, there was half that turn out. Some real athletes were found that are being fast tracked to play with age grade rep teams against teams from across the pond. All of us need to work to beat the bushes and uncover these players and give them an opportunity to be evaluated on an apples to apples playing field.

[I like Kurt, but the rest of you kill me]

Too much negativity found within these comments

[anon]

I like everybody and I'm positive in all aspect of US rugby except for the fact I firmly believe Melville, Roberts and this board have screwed US rugby for years to come.

If they were gone it would be easy to spread the love, with them screwing US rugby daily I'm thinking about kicking the dog.

[Alan Petty]

The problem with the U-19 model is that in our area, where we have connections to local high schools, an injury to a sophomore by a HS grad is a bad deal....like end of program bad. Where teams are just getting going, it makes sense.

The second issue in that regard is the the teams lose players that they do not know they would have gotten. When a 15 year old kid sees older 19 year olds, he chooses to not even come out. When teams have made the transition from multi-school U-19 to single school teams, the number of players in those programs have dramatically increased. This is counter-intuitive until you consider the kids that are young and intimidated by the thought of playing "graduate students."

However for rep play, the age grade teams are the way of the world and some of the camps that are being run are pretty first rate. HS kids who are worthy of consideration of a Red, White and Blue jersey are not going to run from competing with older guys. My compliments to the people who are keeping these fires lit.

[FireMelvilleRoberts.com]

Alan, all of you,

Why make apologies for these clowns. This is America, we have the largest and best HS to pro, athlete development system in the world.

The mere fact these foreign executives are running forward with a plan to dilute HS sports with this U19 plan, is grounds for their collective dismissal.

The plan is to connect the sport of rugby to the system. If they don't understand this basic principle they need to be replaced.