Boston, Life University, and San Francisco Golden Gate each won to qualify for the Super League semifinals, while Arkansas State and St. Mary's clinched College Premier Division quarterfinal berths.
Dropping a snowy 12-10 contest to the Chicago Lions, New York AC became first RSL champion to miss the following season's playoffs since 2000, when the Denver Barbarians fell from the 1999 title to 3-4 and 6th place in an 8-team conference. 2011's postseason has been cut in half, to 4 contenders, because the league has been reduced to 11 teams.
Unbeaten Life handled Old Blue 34-13 and 4-1 Boston downed the Chicago Griffins 32-27. Despite moving to 3-2, the Lions cannot catch the Beantowners; Boston would claim the tiebreak due to April 2's 24-22 head-to-head win, notable for the visitors' playing most of the contest shorthanded.
In the West, 5-0 San Francisco Golden Gate nabbed a home semifinal match with a 49-29 win over the Utah Warriors. Idle this past weekend, Old Puget Sound Beach (3-1) is in the driver's seat to win the second berth, and would sew up a trip to Treasure Island with a win over the Barbos this Saturday.
Reflecting the league's abbreviated schedule, Boston meets Life a second time on April 30, in a game that will settle the East title and home field for May 14's semis. The winner of that contest will host the league's May 20 finals.
In the college ranks, 5-0 Arkansas State rolled past Notre Dame 70-21, maintaining control of its playoff hopes, while 5-1 St. Mary's downed Central Washington 22-18 on the road, grabbing the Pacific's runnerup slot.
With two weeks to go in its debut campaign, 5 of the 8 CPD quarterfinalists are already locked in. At 31 teams and 7 games per division (save for the South), it looks to be too big to be competitive week in and week out.
Topped by BYU's +469, 8 of the 31 teams have cumulative points differentials of 97 or more; while 11 have scored 97 less than allowed, led by Wyoming's -283. By this conventional measure, less than 40 percent of the league regularly plays in matches determined by less than three tries: 97 points divided 5 matches equals 19.4, or two goals and a five-pointer.
(Cal and BYU, the 2 teams which have already played 6 matches, have been winning by considerably larger margins. Oklahama, which is -97, has played only 4 games.)
With a win next weekend over 2-2 Texas A&M, the Red Wolves will finish top of the South and host the Gaels on May 7. That would send 4-1 Life University, who fell 28-26 to Matt Huckaby's troops on April 2 but have nonetheless clinched a place in the quarters, to meet Pacific champ Cal (6-0, idle).
In the East, Army and Navy each moved to 5-0, having posted 57-15 and 27-10 wins over Ohio State and Dartmouth, respectively. The service academies meet at West Point on the final weekend of April, but first the Cadets host 4-1 Penn State, the only other team still in the divisional race, while the Midshipmen travel to 2-2 Delaware.
In the West, Brigham Young (6-0, idle) has already clinched a berth and does not play again until April 30's matchup against 4-1 Arizona State, a game that also impacts 4-1 Utah. Both ASU and Utah have a pair remaining, but where the Sun Devils meet 3-2 Air Force and then the Cougars, the Utes face Colorado State and Wyoming -- both winless to date.
The East champ hosts the West runnerup, while the Western winner welcomes the East's second-place team. The CPD's semifinals are set for May 14 in Denver, while the finals are May 21 in Salt Lake City.
In British Columbia's Canadian Direct Insurance Premier League quarterfinals, the University of British Columbia Old Boys downed Burnaby Lake 35-18, while the University of Victoria upset James Bay 41-26. UBCOB now meets Meraloma, while UVic tackles the top-seeded Castaway Wanderers.
British Columbia traditionally produces the lion's share of Canadian internationals, and given the Super League's truncation, the CDI looks to be North America's top senior circuit. For international fans, it is certainly the continent's best-reported league.
It would seem that RSL should be playing games aganst CDI Teams. At a minimum the RSL Champion should play the CDI Champion each year. Are RSL teams scared of the CDI?
If the US and Canada hope to improve their world rankings, they need to have their best players competing against one another. Players from Canada should not be counted as non-US players in the US and teams in Canada should not be limited in how many US players thaey can have on a team.
Posted by: Sevens | 18 April 2011 at 10:10
In countries committed to developing players to the national team, the best CPD teams would be playing in the RSL. At the very least the CPD would be cut down to 8 teams so that it would be competitive and there would be a cup that would be a contest between the top CPD, RSL and D1 teams to add an additional competition to evaluate and develop players. Somehow the collegiate coaches are caught up in some kind of imaginary alternative reality where college rugby is going to be on ESPN and big bucks are going to flow into the collegiate game. The reality is that only 4 or 5 of the 31 collegiate teams are even a marketable sports product ready for TV.
Posted by: College Dreaming | 18 April 2011 at 10:58
Some interesting points. I completely agree that at a minimum the RSL Champion should play the CDI Champion. Also, this may be dead wrong, but to have a sponsor pay for naming rights of the tournament makes me assume that they have better sponsorship as well.
I think it would be nice if someone could land something like that for the RSL and CPD. Would be nice if it was a company involved in travel, lodging and auto rentals to help offset cost. I do think most of the CPD haters will calm down after you get matches like St. Mary's vs Arkansas State.
Posted by: benito | 18 April 2011 at 11:22
The model in Japan should be what the USA adopts, but not sure that we have the sponsorship firepower of Japan. There are 4 competitions in Japan to develop players to the national team:
1) Top League - 14 teams fully professional
2) Top Challenge Series - Semi-pro rugby that are vying to get promoted to the Top League
3) Men's Club Rugby - Amateur rugby
4) All Japan University Rugby Championship - 14 teams from 4 different regional leagues qualify through league play.
Japan National Championship - This is an annual cup played at the end of the season and made up of six Top League sides, the two top university teams, the winner of the Top Challenge Series and the Top Club team.
If you are committed to developing players for the national team, this is the type of competition that you need to have so that the top players/teams are tested on a regular basis. Cal and BYU should be playing in the RSL and not blowing out teams by 100+ points in the dream of someday having rugby be as marketable as other collegiate sports. That dream may take 10 to 20 years to become a reality, where if they competed with teams of equal quality maybe we can get more Eagle prospects right out of college rugby and into the MNT.
Posted by: College Dreaming | 18 April 2011 at 12:43
Ironically, USA Eagle Captain Todd Clever plays in the Japanese system and won the National Championship there. The Japanese invest a lot of money of foreign coaches to develop their teams.
Posted by: Sevens | 18 April 2011 at 13:09
Why does usa rugby do highlights for the CPD and not for the RSL? its ridiculous that there isnt any video presence for the RSL. we'll never get anything close to a domestic pro league until the rsl starts getting promoted correctly.
Is Bruce out there? does he or any other RSL people know if there are RSL highlights? Maybe im just missing them.
Posted by: promotion commotion | 18 April 2011 at 14:47
Every RSL game is filmed, it should get highlights, all too secret for my tastes. Would be good, matter of getting someone to do it,nyac uses www.global sports.net one word. It is free and good.
Posted by: Bruce McLane | 18 April 2011 at 15:50
Bruce,
Isn't the RSL an indepedently run championship seperate from the USARU? If so, then it should be up to the League to provide highlights via even a youtube channel as well as sources new promotional opportunities. Not USA Rugby.
Posted by: Working Class Rugger | 18 April 2011 at 16:06
In less than a year, CPD has proven to be the better run league with a better website, more availability of game footage, and broader press coverage. RSL does not look well run relative to CPD. For all the bashing of USA Rugby, RSL should be ashamed that they are even more poorly run than USA Rugby led CPD.
Posted by: Sevens | 18 April 2011 at 16:32
RSL should not be ashamed...
they are a country club league...they dont care about CPD or USA rugby,etc...
they care about competing in thier league...
thats it...
funny how not everyone understands this...
Posted by: cheeseheadrugger | 18 April 2011 at 16:40
Fair point. If RSL is not interested in developing players or promoting the game of rugby then they are doing a great job.
Posted by: Sevens | 18 April 2011 at 17:11
RSL's stated goals below. Looks like they are 0 for 10.
The Rugby Super League grew out of Rugby Super League LLC and USA Premier Rugby LLC, entities which were designed to:
a) Heighten the visibility of the sport throughout the USA
b) Enhance the competitive structure for the member teams
c) Create a higher level of club competition
d) Create a consistent schedule of matches that can be promoted on a national, regional and local basis
Other objectives include:
1) The perpetuation of rugby as one of the national games in the USA
2) To promote the common interests of its members
3) To educate the public so that rugby gains popular support and acceptance
4) To teach fair play and teamwork to young people through the medium of rugby
5) To promote civic pride in the local communities in which member clubs are located
The Rugby Super League, in conjunction with USA Rugby encourages league-wide sponsorship, licensing and broadcast agreements for the league with the purpose of promoting products and services through the medium of rugby - "The Global Game."
Posted by: Sevens | 18 April 2011 at 18:03
I agree that USA rugby need not do work and it is the RSL job to get things up, some of the other comments untrue. We all need to work to help rugby get better.
Posted by: Bruce McLane | 18 April 2011 at 18:21
Yes, I'm a stinking foreigner with an opinion about everything without knowing anything, but,the RSL and its member clubs need to take a long hard look at how the competition is structured. The current structure just doesn't appear to be sufficient. They need to seriously ask themselves whether a move to a city based league would provide greater levels of competition than the current clubs.
I'm not sure about people's opinions are regarding Utah but I believe they have got the basic formula right regarding where the league needs to go in terms of squad composition. Surely alongside the heightened level of competition it would also boost marketability and cut costs.
Posted by: Working Class Rugger | 18 April 2011 at 18:31
I'm a stupid American. What do you mean by city based league? Select sides from each city or a competition built around a city like the Sydney Premiership of the CDI in Canada?
Posted by: Sevens | 18 April 2011 at 18:46
Regional rugby competitions is where you can generate some real interest. Look at what is going on in So Cal now that the RSL teams are back in the competition. You have 8 teams playing a 14 game home/away competition and going into the final couple weeks you have had a lot of close games with a high standard of play. The next step is to create a California league with the top teams from Nor Cal joining the best teams from So Cal. Call it the California Cup and you have a great regional competition that maybe you could market.
Posted by: California Cup | 18 April 2011 at 18:53
I agree that regional development is key. Clubs need to work together to develop thousands of players in each region. Would be great if every region became as strong as SoCal D1 today. A champions league could then be formed with the top 2 teams from each region. If USAR reorganizes to 16 admin zones this would be a 32 team competion with 4 regional conference and a national playoff. Another option is to have 16 select sides compete but I can't imagine top clubs sharing their top players or providing the financing for select sides that they do not control.
Posted by: Sevens | 18 April 2011 at 19:08
@sevens
To be honest they should be looking to develop both. On a national scale to effective 'replace' the RSL in its current format a City Based League with select sides competing .i.e NY, Boston. Chicago etc. and directly below in each of those cities a similar setup to the Sydney Premiership to act as a feeder system.
Posted by: Working Class Rugger | 18 April 2011 at 19:20
You could even take it further and follow the California Cup idea and develop reasonably strong State leagues to feed into the one representative RSL squad.
Posted by: Working Class Rugger | 18 April 2011 at 19:23
Can anyone imagine Old Blue and NYAC sitting down to discuss how to form a single select RSL team to which they provide players and financing?
Posted by: Sevens | 18 April 2011 at 19:50
No.
Posted by: Pat | 18 April 2011 at 19:58
I could imagine it would be akin to my old team Randwick sitting down to with Eastern Suburbs (our most hated of hated rivals) to discuss a similar thing.
Posted by: Working Class Rugger | 18 April 2011 at 20:15
Two RSL clubs would never come together to form a city based team. If the money is there to form a real city based competition, the players would be paid and they would just jump ship to the new professional entity. NYAC and Old Blues would just be in some second tier competition suited to their dogmatic ways.
Posted by: RSL Teams | 18 April 2011 at 20:26
@RSL teams
That would suit my idea just as well.
Posted by: Working Class Rugger | 18 April 2011 at 20:41
Sadly the clubs have the money and the control. The current RSL clubs have more financial resources than USA Rugby. Rugby in other countries have government support and eventually sponsorship. USA Rugby does not have the financial resources. The new proposed RSL select sides would need to be funded by player dues, donations, and eventually sponsorship and compete against the existing RSL clubs for players and
donations and sponsorship .
Posted by: Sevens | 18 April 2011 at 20:49
You never know what future holds. With the increased levels of coverage the game is experiencing in the US the possibilitiy to break away from the clubs could become a possibility.
Posted by: Working Class Rugger | 18 April 2011 at 21:09
maybe im missing something. What has USA Rugby done so well to promote the CPD again? Their website? what site? the one you have to click through on the main site that takes forever to load, has no pictures, highlights, etc? That's the bare minimum. congrats?
Posted by: CPD! | 18 April 2011 at 21:11
Agree CPD promotion is minimal. RSL is even worse
Posted by: Sevens | 18 April 2011 at 21:19
So long as clubs do not learn to work together to develop the game it will be very difficult for rugby to grow in the US.
Posted by: Sevens | 18 April 2011 at 21:23
CPD doesn't deserve a site. Do you really want potential sponsors and broadcasters to see 100+ to ZERO scores? Highlights on fields lined for 5 sports and has traffic cones for field markers? The CPD has a long way to go before it is ready for a website, much less being broadcast.
Posted by: CPD = Meh | 18 April 2011 at 21:31
I agree, promotion and marketing for the CPD has been terrible, I believe there are highlights reels being put together, but I think it is someone independant from USA Rugby.
USA Rugby should be marketing this league to college sports fans. How hard is it to put together a legit website? No one wants to navigate thru the main site to get to what limited information is available. How hard would it be to call up the top 10 points scorers and put together some player spotlights or interviews? These are all things of minimal cost which can grow the game.
The fact that the Army-Navy game will most likely decide the top spot in the Rugby East and USA Rugby isn't heavily promoting this is inexcusable.
Posted by: CPD Fan | 18 April 2011 at 21:34
Clearly, USAR focuses just enough energy on the CPD to keep another coaches revolt from happening. Understand this: there is one single junior-level marketing guy (one level above intern) trying to keep all the pie plates spinning for women's, men's, and junior national teams, three divisions of college men's teams, three divisions of women's teams, high school, U-19, kiddie rugby, two divisions of men's clubs, 2 divisions of women's clubs, along with the CPD and the RSL. How is he going to pay attention to one CPD game (even Army-Navy) on the East coast. There just aren't enough of his resources to go around. Marketing needs to be turned over to the CPD conferences and the individual teams to market their product. So long as USAR keeps the marketing held tightly to its bosom, the marketing will be marginal at best and non-existent at worst.
Posted by: CPD is in a marketing void | 18 April 2011 at 23:35
again, the current RSL clubs have the money (budget) of $100,000 per team; to compete in the league every year.
it is self governed and they have thier own agenda....
until you accept this, these comments about how to grow usa rugby around RSL are nonsensical.. .
as a collective, they have limited (meaning almost zero) interest in rugby outside of thier own paradigm.
they do certain things to grow rugby, coach college and youth, but to thier own end.
glendale rugby, although grown from questionable funding, has grown from the ground up....there is no place for them in rugby super league = and rightly so.
Posted by: cheeseheadrugger | 19 April 2011 at 06:05
I am confused about your comment about Glendale. But anyways.....
there is so much going on with rugby that no one can agree on where to start. I think most people agree with every point, except some differing on knowledge of RSL and how that lack of knowledge affects your opinion. Like I think we can all agree that we want to see weekly highlights of RSL games but no one knows who to hold accountable.
I think all who have seen the CPD highlights on College Rugby Films (http://cr-films.blogspot.com/ ) have liked them, but I understand that a multi-use field could be frustrating.
I do think the CPD is marketable right now. I think it could be MORE marketable with some adjustments, but you just pick 1 game per week and showcase the cream of the crop. BYU v Utah, Arkansas State v Life, St Mary's v Cal, St. Mary's v Central Washington, Army v Navy, Penn State v Kutztown. Right now you don't have to insist on every game every week being on ESPN, you just need one marquee matchup on ESPNU and let it grow from there.
I think we also need to get the men's competitions all going at the same time. In stead of having 1/3 done in the fall, 1/3 competing over fall and spring and 1/3 competing in the the springs and then all teams entering the playoffs in the Spring. Then maybe you could have the traditional competitions in the Spring and a new City based league or another competition in the Fall to get more quality rugby. Maybe a select-side competition.
or maybe the fall could serve as a mix between RSL, top 2 CPD and top 2 Men's Club (number of teams subject to adjustment for numbers) and have an invitational fall tournament.
I do think we could learn from Japan and Canada and improve our own system. I just wonder if the American rugby community in general has too much pride to admit it.
Posted by: benito | 19 April 2011 at 07:24
There were marque matches on ESPNU: BYU v Utah, Cal v UBC and Army v Navy. It did not 'grow from there.' It did not grow at all. It ended up being a one time deal. Nobody at ESPN wet their pants at the idea of college rugby on tv, otherwise we'd be watching in every Saturday right now. There may come a time when we just have to realize that most sports fans don't care or aren't interested in rugby.
Anyway, if the RSL turned itself into a for profit corporation, like USA Sevens, I'm sure there would be big changes. As long as the major competitions are run by a non-profit, then that's what you'll get...no profit.
Posted by: Icanhazrugbyball? | 19 April 2011 at 09:07
right now a pedestrian "gregan" is winning over a length of the field Cal try that involved a disgusting offload and Danny Barrett running over 2 Gaels. what has the world come to?
http://cr-films.blogspot.com/2011/04/cpd-plays-of-week-vote-for-number-one.html
Posted by: stuffing the ballot | 19 April 2011 at 09:28
You know what, did Gainline, Rugby Mag, Rugby America or any other forum report that these matches were on ESPNU? Cause I completely missed it, well not the Army Navy match because that hasn't been updated yet.
I am sorry I missed watching these matches. All I knew of was BYU vs Colorado? not sure which team but it was on BYU TV and, BYU won 90something to nothing.
Posted by: benito | 19 April 2011 at 09:33
Calm down, Benito. You missed nothing. So far this season, there has been exactly 1 TV game, and you saw it. There is (almost) Zero TV exposure of U.S. rugby teams. The 3 games mentioned were in 2009 and were sponsored by the Army National Guard. Since the economic downturn, the Army has all the reservists it needs, thank you, and has dramatically reduced its recruiting budget.
Since USAR didn't recruit that sponsor itself, it didn't know how to replace it either. USAR has proven itself to be incapable of recruiting (pardon the pun) resources to sustain TV exposure of its self-declared prime asset, College Rugby.
As of this week, none of the CPD quarterfinals will be on TV, and neither will the semis in Glendale. I guess that could change, but it doesn't seem all that likely. Call Todd Bell and ask him if the quarters and semis will be Webcast by USAR, and, if so, at what resolution. It's almost as cheap and easy to Webcast in HD these days as it is to do SD.
Ah, no resources to manage this? Has USAR asked any of the host venues to plan for Webcasting facilities? Is there any planning for this or are all the eggs in the broadcast TV basket? Yes? No? What is the excuse for not having an alternate broadcasting plan? If there is an alternate plan, what is it?
Posted by: CPD on the Web(cast)? | 19 April 2011 at 10:23
As a starting point, teams should look to get their games up on the internet. The teams need to arrange this themselves. There are many students out there who would film the games to build experience. Start small. Once there is a video portfolio, teams should be looking to get local and regional TV coverage for their top match-ups. Be professional. Uniforms and fields need to look sharp. Expecting USAR to do anything is foolish. Once local and regional coverage is established, national coverage might be possible.
Posted by: Sevens | 19 April 2011 at 10:34
Solid post Sevens and CPD on the Web(cast)?. I agree with this.
Posted by: benito | 19 April 2011 at 10:43
to Sevens: There are not film students everywhere who are flocking to do a rugby Webcast. You can pay them to do this, but they ain't working for free. You are misinformed. And, since USAR owns the competition and its marketing, they must release the teams to do their own marketing and arrange for their own broadcasting, so as not to step on the toe of their own contract. And, without some central plan, there is no coordination of times (why have all four games on at the same time if fans might want to view more than one game--I'd like to watch all four). Wouldn't it be best to have them all hosted by the same site, with at least minimally similar production values?
Four games on the same day shouts for a bit of coordination, doesn't it. Just tossing the ball to the host schools to catch as catch can is just stupid! There should at minimum be a conference call about coordinating Webcasts, and, if there be Webcasts in the offing, coordinating start times seems minimally requisite.
Of course, no one at USAR would ever read this blog, so, it would be surprising if any coordination were in the offing.
Posted by: CPD Webcast coordination | 19 April 2011 at 10:51
The only reason the National Guard got those games on ESPN in 2009 was because they foot the bill. ESPN is looking for cheap programming all the time. If a sponsor meets their requirements (i.e. national reputable brand), they will bring out a production crew and put your event on one of their channels. Just need the right sponsor with their checkbook at the ready. No magic there, the magic is to get ESPN to pay to broadcast.
Posted by: Show Me The Money | 19 April 2011 at 11:28
My point is that Clubs need to do the work themselves, organize their own conference calls, whatever. Waiting for USAR to change is foolish. Get one game on the web first in an area that has film student willing to work for free. Maybe a friendly match outside of the CPD. Then go from there. Tryin to do everything everywhere at the start will never work.
Posted by: Sevens | 19 April 2011 at 11:52
The majority of the coaches in the CPD have little or no time for doing marketing or producing video content for the web. Get alumni or injured player to film the game for coaching purposes, check. Produce something like a webcast? Not going to happen. Some of these CPD sides aren't even bothered to buy some decent field equipment. What's the point when you can buy traffic cones at Home Depot or some $5.99 field flags from the soccer supply store.
Posted by: CPD | 19 April 2011 at 12:27
Sounds like many of the CPD teams are understaffed and do not have enough qualified adminstrators. Recruiting and developing coaches and administrators is as important as recruting and developing players. 10 years ago my Club had 3 people doing all the thankless administration work. Now we have over 30 people doing various work for the Club. From that strong adminstrative platform we run two tournaments, host regional and national championships, formed a 501c3, acquired access to new rugby lined fields, purchased quality field equipment and great kit, attracted sponsorship, generated donations, hired a professional coach, developed a professional Player Welfare Program, started an Academy and had our Mens and Women's team promoted to D1. We even have a guy filming a documentary on the team and a journalist writing a book. We worked with our local union and nearby clubs to improve the fields and develop youth rugby. Never once did our Board ask USA Rugby for help. It takes many people to run a quality program, more than most will admit. Recruit and develop good people and rugby will improve.
Posted by: Sevens | 19 April 2011 at 13:08
@sevens
Out of curiousity. Which club do you belong to?
Posted by: Working Class Rugger | 19 April 2011 at 14:36
@Working Class Rugger
I am with the Village Lions in New York City. BTW: We have a flyhalf out of Randwick and our Head Coach and Rugby Academy of New York staff are from Waratahs.
Posted by: Sevens | 19 April 2011 at 15:18
Really. Got any names I might recognise them (depending on age of course).
Posted by: Working Class Rugger | 19 April 2011 at 18:13
@cheeseheadrugger- I am involved with one of these SuperLeague Clubs. Where do you get this $100k number? If there is $100k for each SuperLeague team, we have been shorted all of it for at least the last 5 years. SuperLeague teams are self funded. You might have seen a "budget" as a fiscal starting point to plan, but, if there are no actual $'s to start with, that is all it is, a plan
Posted by: Concerned | 20 April 2011 at 05:59