College plans put National Guard outcome in context

The forthcoming college 7s tournament and 15s 'premier league', promising as they are, presently underline the disappointment of USARFU's lapsed National Guard sponsorship.

Each project is precisely the kind of endeavor that could have used the Guard's multimillion-dollar underwriting as well as full-time staff work, and each would have advanced the service arm's marketing goals. But in both cases, intellectual and entrepreneurial leadership lies outside the union. Meanwhile, there is little to show for the monies that flowed through USARFU's coffers in 2008-09.

A quarterfinal berth at the 2007 World Cup, contracted athletes and regional 'high performance' centers, or even $20 million in annual revenue: Such goals were adopted at the behest of the International Rugby Board and embraced mainly by folks with shallow domestic experience. But the collegiate rugby's real assets attract many of our best and brightest, and so missed opportunities are the more disappointing.

The National Guard may renew its involvement in rugby later this year or in 2011, according to people familiar with the matter. To the degree to which the most interesting developments are not driven by the union, however, any sponsorship might bypass the union in part or in whole.

Announced in fall 2007, the National Guard deal was initially touted as delivering jerseys and equipment to teams, as if solving shortages had been identified as a catalyst for player or commercial growth. Naturally some teams took advantage of the free gear, but the kit was not much seen on top-tier campuses and the college segment's growth rate (as measured by CIPP registrations) essentially matched the decade-long average.

The deal, brought to the union by a rugby parent in the service, also entailed title sponsorship to a number of USARFU 'game of the month', playoff, and international events. Some were dubious, such as the jamboree-like 2008 collegiate round of 16 in Albuquerque; regardless, the union kept all the revenue, failing to offset the schools' event, travel, or lodging costs. 

That would be inconceivable for the NCAA, which is contemplating dilutive expansion of its basketball tournament in order to pay out an additional 32 teams. But as it happened, the main byproduct of the National Guard sponsorship appears to have been servicing USARFU's cash-hungry international program. Much the same can be said of the skewed ratio of collegiate dues paid to services rendered.

Some USARFU assets still identify the National Guard as a sponsor, notably the web site's media center (located at http://usa-rugby.tampadigital.com/) and college rankings. Both are dated to the end of the spring 2009 season. Additionally, the staff roster lists a dedicated account manager.

A college premier league is mentioned in USARFU's strategic plan, while the 7s tournament is implicit. The document speaks of 'explor[ing] the creation of a new elite division 1 competition' and of 'develop[ing] a strategy for college 7s rugby'. Thus has the USARFU product been criticized as 'a plan to make a plan'.

Meanwhile, some 15 teams have committed to a 2011 premier league launch, while NBC has announced it will broadcast a tournament this June. Combined with the inability of any incoming college director to play a role until next season, USARFU's lack of policy and detail means key collegiate decisions will be shaped outside a governing body that is supposed to represent all its members. This is a meaningful part of the US College Rugby Association's critique of USARFU: that dues payers get little substantive attention and have no effective say in their own affairs.

Comments

[JC & the boys]

So, the pregnant question is (drum-roll, please) are JC & the boys talking or going to talk to Lt. Col. Mark Drown, whose rugby-playing daughter (if I'm not mistaken) was the impetus for the whole National Guard sponsorship?

Since JC has a reputation for being more than a step ahead of the rest of us, and since the relationship between JC & the USAR leadership is, how shall we say, "strained", but likely not too much more strained that that between the National Guard and USAR, maybe it's the right time for discussions to open between the U.S. National Collegiate Championships and JC & the boys for a television sponsorship package for the league and playoffs. What think ye?

[Tea Party Activist!]

Revolt and Revolution is in the wind! High School and College Rugby revolt against the money blood suckers at USARFU! Break away and start your own organization that caters to your needs!

[Politics]

My understanding is that the NG budget for the year has not been approved by congress because of infighting between the dems and repubs. It was supposed to happen in Oct. That is why there is no action on the sponsorship. I am told that the NG was getting quotes from rugby suppliers in late summer for hundreds of team kits, but put a hold on the bid process when their budget was put into limbo.

[MDWahoo]

As a National Guard Officer and active rugby player, I hope any new agreement would include outreach to Club rugby. It seemed to be a hugh miss for recruiting efforts when most Club rugby players are in their 20s.