What is the upshot of five Rugby Super League teams leaving in the past two years?
RSL hasn't aggressively pursued commercial development for the most of the past decade, so it says little about hopes of professionalizing. That's simply not been one of the league's primary objectives.
Some of the teams, notably San Francisco Golden Gate and the Chicago Lions, have successfully embedded themselves within their communities. But Life University aside, the competitors obviously aren't tied to schools. Thus the turnover says nothing about the sports education model.
It's long been evident that the country's 'best domestic players' aren't all in the league. Just 3 4 of the 12-man USA 7s squad today named for the Australia and Hong Kong tournaments are Super Leaguers, with only Zach Pangelinan having logged substantial RSL game time. (Counting Belmont Shore's Matt Hawkins and Nese Malifa, the Super League would still claim less than only half, and most of the 7 who missed the cut are from non-RSL teams too.)
Notwithstanding that the league's membership is at its lowest point since 1997, the main takeaway appears to be that RSL's model of enhanced competition through semi-nationalized travel and cost sharing remains attractive if economically burdensome. Including Life, which exited and re-entered, 9 of 14 remain from the inaugural season, and there has generally been demand for admission.
That is reason enough to acknowledge the milestone of 14 seasons.
Rugby Super League champions
2009 San Francisco Golden Gate
2008 New York Athletic Club
2007 Belmont Shore
2006 OMBAC
2005 New York Athletic Club
2004 Belmont Shore
2003 Belmont Shore
2002 Gentlemen of Aspen
2001 Gentlemen of Aspen
2000 Life University
1999 Denver Barbarians
1998 Belmont Shore
1997 Gentlemen of Aspen
United States to Australia and Hong Kong 7s
Marco Barnard (Kutztown Univ.), Mark Bokhoven (Gentlemen of Aspen Denver Barbarians), Nick Edwards (New York AC), Paul Emerick (Overmach Parma), Matt Hawkins (Belmont Shore), Valenese Malifa (Belmont Shore), Zach Pangelinan (OMBAC), Leonard Peters (Gentlemen of Aspen), Tom Saunders (Kansas City Blues), Shalom Suniula (Pearl City), Kevin Swiryn (captain Old Puget Sound Beach), Zach Test (Loughborough Univ)
Sevens is a totally different sport than XVs. Comparing which VIIs players come from RSL clubs in ridiculous. Asking the same question about which of the XVs Eagles come from RSL clubs in a far better question.
PITA
Posted by: Bill Haffner | 12 March 2010 at 19:11
Bok plays for the Denver Barbarians.
Posted by: Things that make you go hmmmmm | 13 March 2010 at 09:57
Only scores I know right now
OPSB 50 OMBAC 21
Bost 20 Old Blue 0
NYAC 32 Boston Irish 0
PAC v Charlotte postponed
Posted by: bruce mclane | 13 March 2010 at 17:11
agree with Bill, really bad study. compare the eagles 15's, take out the overseas players and possibly the kids young enough to still be in college. i will understand an arguement that we should have SL players better than college kids and better than foreign players, but in any sport you will have that scenario. Either way, my understanding is that the sl is just around to have better comp, not be pro. Many regions have only a few good teams, good games, that is the purpose.
Posted by: hammer | 13 March 2010 at 19:59
RSL is a huge success if the only goal was to provide perennial top teams better competition on a more frequent basis. Having played D1 pre-RSL through the first 6-8yrs of RSL with the big blue San Diego club, we definitely got more quality games than just our annual derbies w/ Belmont and then the obligatory USARFU final fours. Prior, we had to rely on touring international sides, tournaments (I miss these....), and one off matches with NorCal clubs to fill the void of quality opposition.
RSL is a colossal failure if the goal was to become a self-supporting, semi-pro entity which dramatically enhanced rugby's footprint in the greater US sports landscape. I believe that this was what the founding fathers of the RSL had envisioned long-term but never really achieved. There were gallant efforts in securing various short-term sponsorship deals (ie Harp, Michelob, Kooga, etc). But none were lasting as they probably saw that their ROI was negligible at best. Imprinting game balls and jerseys with their logos, setting up banners, and giving away free samples only to 50-100 family members, co-workers, wives, pets and gf's on RSL game day lost its luster real quickly with these brands.
Moreover (and worst of all), the RSL has created huge schisms within the closest-knit of clubs. There is a culture of have's and have not's between RSL and non-RSL players on the same participating club. This malaise permeates to many aspects of club rugby. For example, when the RSL side needed money for costly overnight trips for reg season matches, they usually got it from the club. Conversely, their dues-paying D1 and D2 counterparts were normally left to self-fund bus trips, playoff trips, aftermatch functions, and the like when they were needed. Didn't we revolt against the King for stuff like this back in the 1700's???
All the good people performing the thankless work at such clubs were (and are still) now even more "thanked less".....
Posted by: SD Hitman | 13 March 2010 at 23:17
Off topic, but I watched the BYU-Colorado game on BYUTV. BYU has an awesome setup and the production was very professional, but BYU's play on the field was absolutely revolting. Late hits, punches thrown, and just generally dirty play. It was worse than the national final against Cal. And I continually hear BYU supporters talking about how they don't really have an age advantage. Perhaps that is true, but it sure as hell looked like they had a number of players in their late 20s out there. I would also guess they had fewer than 5 American-born players. As for Colorado, they were very disciplined and never reacted to the dirty play by BYU. Their #8, Tom Pasque, was awesome.
Posted by: BYU-CU | 14 March 2010 at 06:13
Stop whining - get the footage of the game and send a DVD of it to the LAU and TU Disciplinary Chair with a list of times that there are incidents.
Anyone can cite a player - if you believe they were throwing punches and cheap shots then stop whining and do something about it.
Posted by: Bubba | 14 March 2010 at 06:24
I'm not whining, I'm stating that BYU is a dirty team. I have zero vested interest in who won that game. I was simply excited to watch a college rugby game on tv and was disappointed to see such dirty play from BYU. I would think that most proponents of the sport would say the same thing. But you make a good point. I will absolutely send a dvd to the West disciplinary chair. I encourage anyone else who watched the game on tv to do the same.
Posted by: BYU-CU | 14 March 2010 at 07:54
My bad, BYU is in the Pacific.
Posted by: BYU-CU | 14 March 2010 at 07:56
RSL is very average. BYU is dirty. Everyone knows these two facts. Next topic.
Posted by: next topic up | 14 March 2010 at 09:28
i watched the first half and that, at least, was clean. unless i missed something.
Posted by: college rugby | 14 March 2010 at 09:46
So all those shitty comments from "PITA" have been from Bill Haffner?
Looks like he tripped himself up this time. Bill you've said a lot of personal stuff behind your little alias.
Interesting. Are you still an employee of Bill Sexton and the west congress members?
Posted by: no dirty tricks | 14 March 2010 at 10:10
Nope.
Not employed by anyone.
And anyone who knows anything about me knows I say what's on my mind no matter who/whom I'm associated with.
From WSC - "Criticism is easy; achievement is more difficult."
And what have you achieved?
Posted by: Bill Haffner | 14 March 2010 at 10:26
I just watched the BYU/CU game on the www.byu.tv site. The first half was pretty boring but the second half approximated well-played college rugby in a rainstorm. I must be appallingly ignorant since I was unable to come to the conclusion that BYU played dirty. There were late hits, but no more so than most any super 14 game. There were many ferocious tackles, along with some pretty elegant play in very cold an rainy conditions. If you could specify some elapsed times and some particularly egregious conduct, I'd be happy to go back and see just what you're referring to. By all means, inform us.
Posted by: appallingly ignorant | 14 March 2010 at 12:34
I love when these nasty posters get caught using their real name. Remember Keeler and before that the Board member Middleton. The best is the MWRFU Congress member Jeremy somebody. This is another interesting connection between Congress and anon postings. The WRFU is big backers of this administration, wouldn't surprise me one bit that they've been behind these comments. The Boulder office staff posts on a regular basis as well. Sad really, they should all get back to work, they're having a shocker.
Posted by: eye spy | 14 March 2010 at 13:17
BYU-CU - you are full of shit - I watched the game on TV and there were some big collisions, no dirty play.
What is it with the BYU-haters out there? I have no link to the university, but BYU-TV did a great job, their facilities look terrific, and the TV anchors did a superb job.
So 'eff off BYU-CU, you loser.
OTOH, the Denver Barbarians looked terrible at Dicks Sporting Goods Park in a loss to SFGG. SF even scored a try with 14 players.
.
Posted by: Skinner | 14 March 2010 at 16:53
What is it about this website that brings out such hostility over relatively minor disagreement. A defense of waterboarding or for-profit-healthcare would hardly elicit more hostility on DailyKos or HuffPost than the sort of vitriol that we see on gainline.
Posted by: My Dinner With Andre The Giant | 14 March 2010 at 22:09
Regarding late hits and punching in rugby--I'm not condoning it, but if one thinks that a rugby match is going to go by without a a little niggly crap happening they need to become a supporter of a much different game. Having played a fair bit I've seen some of the most respected players in this country engage in some pretty underhanded tactics. And to come on a blog and whine that BYU is a dirty team is just a waste of keystrokes.
As far as the SFGG vs Denver Barbo are concerned-- What a shock. Sounds like the recruiting Denver did over the winter didn't pay off as they thought it would (so far). C'mon, Mike Graham and Mile Pulu aren't even from the same planet and Phil Bolton will be lucky to last a couple games before he comes down with a hamstring problem of some sort. Agreement to play inside Dicks Sporting Goods Stadium does not equal instant success.
Posted by: Mow-Hair | 15 March 2010 at 04:37
College Premier League story on ARN. Looks like lots of momentum, with many of the best teams already signed on. Only missing a few colleges it looks like, none of them the top teams. Maybe Army.
Posted by: CPL | 15 March 2010 at 08:35
def army. let's be real. st. mary's, uc davis, washington, some others. going to need 30+ to make it work. But this is great. If teams like PSU, Navy transition to only spring that will save a lot of money since they will only be strength training and conditioning and working on skills in the fall. So no away trips. So the idea of doing the spring super league season at the same cost that teams were spending for the whole fall/spring campaign is feasible.
Make no mistake. Jack Clark was the force behind this. So for everyone wishing for him to get off the sidelines... here we go. yay.
Posted by: college rugby | 15 March 2010 at 09:32
At last!
Posted by: Jack Sparrow | 15 March 2010 at 11:25
University of Delaware should certainly be invited as well.
Posted by: Anon | 15 March 2010 at 11:59
This would be interesting, is Delaware a one hit wonder? Assuming they make the national post season, won't it be the first time?
We shouldn't get too carried away with ranking when we'll know the MARFU teams in a few weeks.
Posted by: anon | 15 March 2010 at 12:15
Air Force Academy with three national championship should "opt in", using the Clark phrase. I don't think teams are being invited. I really do believe this is a movement led by the various teams themselves.
Posted by: Zoomie fan | 15 March 2010 at 12:35
Delaware will last 5 minutes in the collegiate Prem.
No doubting their ability right now, but after playing their first home game they'll be kicked out of the league for the behavior of the idiots on the sidelines.
Why do you think they are not invited now?
Top class trailer trash!
Posted by: Triple X | 15 March 2010 at 12:47
Regarding Delaware as a one-hit wonder, Delaware's performance over the three years that the MARFU Premier League has existed has been solid if not outstanding. Here is how their MARFU record compares against the three other major and nationally reknown MARFU sides over that three-year period counting only MARFU Premier league matches -Delaware 11 wins, 7 losses;
Penn State 13 wins, 5 losses;
Kutztown, 14 wins, 3 losses;
Naval Academy 11 wins, 6 losses and 1 tie.
Source was www.marfu.org
Posted by: Anon | 15 March 2010 at 13:07
actually UDel is going to be just fine. It is becoming a big destination for Xavier players after years of PSU dropping the ball about attracting the top players in its back yard. Literally. Xavier players are going to UDel because they dont get emails responded to from PSU.
Posted by: p.s. u suck | 15 March 2010 at 13:09
Xavier players will also start playing in the MET NY. Stony Brook university impressed a lot of people filling 300+ at a DII playoff. With their move into DI after an undefeated season in DII Xavier players, along with other local High schools are starting to see the benefit of attending a State School in a down economy. Full time coach, international speciality coaching sessions, above par facilities I think in the next few years they will be in the Eastern Region Premier League.
Posted by: cpel | 15 March 2010 at 14:15
My first intro. to American rugby was 1965 or 6 Cal vs Notre Dame in Berkley football stadium. ND was known even in far off North Rhodesia,so as a newly arrived immigrant(legal) I motored down to watch. Memory serves that there was a crowd in the thousands watching that game,and the standard of play was pretty good,even to my then critical "commonwealth " eyes.
Point is,always include ND in any major College league,if only to hype the gate . I cannot remember who won,so the result is not always that important.A little side note-one of the teams had a pro football player-a practice that was not allowed in those strict amateur days
Posted by: roland maitland | 15 March 2010 at 14:28
Now that the cat is out of the bag (so to speak) I can ask the question I've been dying to ask. Just how do you divide the country into 4 regions and still have some mid-West representation?
Pacific: Cal, San Diego State, St. Mary's, Central Washington, Davis, Cal Poly & 2 from Stanford, UCLA & Santa Barbara.
West: BYU, Utah, Colorado, Colorado State., Air Force, Wyoming, Arizona & 1 from Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State or ?
Northeast: Penn State, Navy, Dartmouth, Kutztown, Army, Delaware and 2 from Syracuse, Harvard, etc.
South:
Arkansas State, Tennessee, LSU, Texas A&M, Florida and 3 from Florida State, Auburn, etc.
So where do Ohio State, Notre Dame, Bowling Green, Minnesota, etc fit?
Posted by: Cat's out of the Bag | 15 March 2010 at 21:10
Cat-
No region is that great to not include the Mid-West or any other region for that matter.
The list of teams you offered is a ruse to get some johnny-come-lately into consideration. We're on to you.
Lets begin, Stanford is 0 for the 2000's, nice field, improving, but enough said. Santa Barbara is in last place even with their academy marketing job. Sorry its a field sport. UCLA, UC Davis, Cal Poly contenders, but there can't be room for all.
Nebraska, Oklahoma and OSU...you are high my friend, really finely high.
Syracuse fits the "you're high" bill, as well as, you are fricken crazy! Harvard has appeal, they've been to the finals, won a national championship before that in the early days. Doesn't Delaware need to have a few good, full seasons. I'm not sure one good Fall in 20 yrs counts for much. Its a reach.
Auburn, Auburn, for crying out loud you win, OK pass the J.
Posted by: reality check | 15 March 2010 at 22:11
Actually, I was just trying to suggest that there seem to be some naturally geographically concentrated centers of excellence in rugby. Remember, one of the goals of the premiere league is to incorporate some natural rivalries while spending pretty much what what they're already spending. The Midwest seems to be a bit distant from the West (Colorado to Arizona plus some from the West East) Northeast (Western Pennsylvania is the frontier here) and South. Maybe it fits best in the South. South/Midwest? I was really asking a geographical question. I don't care which teams get in originally, since promotion/relegation takes care of the entry of those on the bubble. I was just asking about the division of the country into 4 regions where costs don't get increased. The geography will really affect costs for somebody. Anybody from the West or East or South want to travel every year (or every other year) to Ohio or Minnesota or Indiana?
Remember, another goal was to ski off the readily identified branding already in place from athletically powerful universities (read: football powers). Penn State is a good example here. You don't necessarily need a lot of these, but a few sprinkled in would be a big help in (future) TV negotiations.
Posted by: Cat's out of the Bag | 16 March 2010 at 06:16
I lived in denver in 1997 and I watched the super league championship game in a park in denver.
all the talk was about rupert murdoch and fox sponsoring the super league....becuase the game of rugby just went professional overseas...
the national team coaches and selectors made it known that you must play for a super league team to get into the pool (ITT's were not enough).
ask matt alexander why he switched from Queen city RFC to the denver barbarians...
to get selected to the national team...
you guys and your revisioniist history...
Posted by: CheeseHeadRugger | 17 March 2010 at 13:19