Fair enough, for they owe USARFU no favors. Boulder has never made club competition a priority.
Some 15 years ago, teams across the country banded together to create a more challenging regular-season schedule. Now, weary of heavy first-team expenses and the opportunity costs to the whole of their organizations, leading lights in California and New York are choosing different objectives.
The idea that the country's top players all compete in RSL, assuaging the IRB and its consultants, has never been supported with union monies or substantive third-party sponsorships. To the contrary, this decade Boulder has gone to court against RSL's championship and also scheduled internationals on top of the normally exciting final, among other slights.
By contrast, the Super League has agreed to run its income and expenditures through USARFU's books, embellishing the union's turnover.
If it is fair to say that there's not much Boulder could have done to slow the steady stream of clubs who have left the Super League, it's also legitimate to ask why its test-centric strategy should not be accountable for the state of the so-called top league. After all, Boulder has also (and surreptitiously) disbanded the All-Star Championship (nee Inter-Territorial Tournament). What else is there by way of player development?
Describing the North American 4-turned-Americas Rugby Championship as substitutes is laughable. Both are far smaller and alien to the way rugby is played in the US.