« All-Americans 60 New Zealand Universities Under-21 17 (halftime All Americans 33-5) | Main | New Zealand Universities Under-21 23 All-Americans 20 (halftime: All-Americans 10-7) »

13 July 2011


Whoever made the last comment, you are welcome to resubmit if accompanied by a real email address.

USAR is just pushing the colleges out the door even more quickly than the orchestrators of the restructure plan envisioned.

Whoever this announcer is for the AAs game is an idiot. More interested in talking to the girls than comment on the game. Didn't even mention when replacements were brought into the game. The guy is pathetic.

Or, is USA Rugby using the AA broadcast to push the women's U20 tourney? WTF is wrong with our nation when it comes to rugby?

The commentary was embarrassing. So was the singing of USA national anthem.

Lets say for a moment this dues increase for reasons of primary insurance wins. This will mean that 10-20k (or more) college student will be required to purchase something they have already bought.

Further ripping off college student to the tune of another couple hundred grand is unthinkable.

Throw in high school students and this is an epic rip off.

Had USAR just raised the dues, we could only have bitched. Doing it the way they have, by over pricing unneeded college and HS insurance attempting to divert funds to the pay role it will bite them...big time.


Note to Congress: "NO" vote on dues hike until USAR produces financials AND budgets for the last three years.

Note to College and HS players/parents: If Congress fails to represent your interests withhold dues until USAR explains how they spend CIPP revenue.

Note to College and High School club sports administrators: No checks this year to USA Rugby until they show you how they spend CIPP money.

Note to USOC: Audit USAR and guide us in converting the mess we have into a transparent, responsive, progressive USOC member.

The concern about college players is a very real and valid one. However, I would consider this a necessary subsidy for growth of the youth game and, for what it is worth, the senior game as well (less important in my eyes).

This policy would be HUGELY beneficial for the development of high school rugby, particularly in low income areas. The fact is that many kids cannot or are not allowed to play rugby because they do not have health insurance or they have insurance that does not cover 'voluntary injury' in things like rugby. This policy would open the door for many of these players and remove one more road block to increasing high school participation.

Again, for college students I can definitely sympathize, but if the goal is growth of rugby at the youth level this is a very reasonable price to pay to help spur that growth on.

Well If they would take the $10 from the college kids and invest it back into youth in the area from where the money came from I'd be all for it. But you and I both no they wont do that. This money will go to the Eagles team and to help pay for the ridiculous amount of money we pay the CEO...

@John Mc:
You don't pay, you don't play. So I don't see how your brilliant plan helps anyone. You just look like a seven year old pouting in the corner because he didn't get his ice cream.

It would be nice if the dues increase and the need for accident medical insurance could be debated independently. Unfortunately it appears they can't be. Our sport needs the opportunity to purchase some type of accident medical coverage if we are serious about providing rugby playing opportunities to everyone in our community.

The logic of "look around"'s argument is problematic. While poor kids might be allowed to play, if they get injured, $2500 deductible might as well be $100,000. They have no way of raising that much money either. And that's before the insurance pays a dime. Their working single mom is going to say "no way!" do you take that risk to our already fragile finances. Unless the local union or SBO or some other funding entity can pony up the $2,500 when a kid needs knee surgery, poor kids are still going to be locked out of the player pool. This insurance idea might work for working adults, but not for disadvantaged youth.

I am all for medical insurance for rugby players with the fees negotiated in aggregate and paid for via CIPP, but I think it should be voluntary and the actual cost transparent. This is mandated insurance for the insured! We don't need Melvicare for HS and college rugby players and coaches. They need coaching clinics, administration best practices documentation, fundraising programs/ideas/support, established player well being standards, equipment and facilities grants/loan programs, etc, etc, etc.

Where are the teabaggers when you need them?

Initial reaction was an absolute no vote on any CIPP fees, until we started soliciting member feedback. Of the over 100 emails received from within the TU, only 5 have been against (yes, I've been keeping a tally).

50% of the responses have been from collegiate players and coaches. I don't know if this group is a bunch of 8th year seniors who have aged out of their parents' policies, but the overwhelming response is that they would appreciate this.

20% have been from high school coaches and parents, and while 4 of the 5 negatives came from this group, most have been very much in favor of it.

As much as the haters would like to suggest otherwise, not all congress members are out of touch with the membership. I am very much involved with both the collegiate and high school levels. This response, however, caught me very much off guard.

The draft resolution that congress is putting together to present to the board is very much concerned with how the extra funds will be used/held. If BOD chooses to ignore that and use the funds for MNT or WNT expenses, then I don't think there can be any other resolution than a no-confidence vote.

Regardless of your feelings about congress or the BOD, I think the overwhelming membership response is going to dictate where this vote goes. My TU members' responses were certainly not the exception.

Where you need to hold congress to the fire is in making sure the excess, if any, isn't misused.


Congress relinquished their power a couple years ago, and are now just a facade for the criminals running USA Rugby. You're part of the problem.

I'm an insurance agent. Grab the plan.

Unfair to colleges and HS? Possibly, but more cover is better than none.

As to premium increases, simple, but it out to bid every year. Openly.

$10 is cheap. Cheap is problematic for a reason....it is cheap. USA RU complains about money, complains about being a viable sport, yet continues to put cheap options on the table. They pay the USA RU staff horribly low salaries, they struggle each year on numerous business principles, they have 3 people (who don't know much about quality, cost effective insurance coverage) making decisions, and it repeats. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and over expecting different results. Time to clean house at the USA RU. Time for personnel to take over who properly work within the legal requirements of a non-profit structure!

Bring Back Doug Arnott!!!!

He's A Clown We Can Trust

Lowe is at it again


Everything rugby union is negative, even a win, but rugby league can do no wrong.

My problem is that this isnt being offered at-cost to the membership. Isnt that the whole point of being a member of a non-profit organization.

That is confirmed right? That this benefit will cost less than $10 a head? IM fine if it was at-cost. It is a deal with an insurance company. USAR isnt managing it, so they shouldnt be making a profit on this new benefit. IF they are, then we need to know what the plan is for that increase in revenue before signing off on this.

Got one question for Todd Bell: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2SoWNMNKNeM

College... you are an effing moron. Let's see you learn how to run college athletics with the same amount of BS and politics that college rugby has... and see if you get off to a cracking start your first year. College... I mean, John Macnemera.. you already failed at one thing...don't hide behind an alias and throw stones.

Just read Brian Lowes report on AA game. That seemed to be a fairly accurate assesment, so whats the beef? Not a fan of rugby league, but saw no bias there?
I thought the game was ragged, and the ref slowed it down a little. Never seen so many socks around ankles by both teams ,even at the lower levels. AA coaches did good job on defensive patterns, also fairly good lineout and scrum work, but players to rucks a little slow and weak. The NZ #9 was very erratic ,surprising for a kiwi. Nice to see that crisp dropgoal fom AA. Tiberio sure has a nose for the intercept, but not the boot for a fullback
All together a promising two games for both the AA team and the coaching staff. Too bad they cant be kept together for a future series against a slightly stronger opponent. Looking forward to Saturdays game at Stanford.

@Shut the EFF up, I am not John McNamara, who seems pretty comfortable commenting under his own name. Your response is a bit unhinged to what was supposed to be only semi-serious.

Todd Bell gets paid 100k to do what? He won't answer that as he has repeatedly said no to going on Rugby Mag's podcast. If you listened to their recent podcast, no one in the CPD has any idea what is going on there and you'd think Bell would have some responsibility there. Like the video asks, what does he do? The only thing I've seen is telling college d1 to reorganize itself. There hasnt been a lot of (or any) leg work from what I've seen.

I was excited when I saw he got hired. Had a college football background. I assumed he was coming in with ideas and would be given some freedom to do good things. I havent been able to fine evidence that he has really done anything. Is it because he doesnt have ideas or because he is being hamstringed by Boulder. Either way I think college rugby needs answers. Someone with ideas and free reign could do a lot of good (especially if they were getting paid a friggin 100k)

On to John McNamara, since you reminded me about him and since I saw he posted here recently. John, USCRA kinda went quiet after not getting the support it needed to get away from USAR. Ok, so you lost. But I thought there was going to be a coaches association that was going to help support college programs. Where are the best practice manuals and all the other support stuff USCRA promised. Not delivering on that stuff makes it seem likely that they were false promises to get everyone to jump ship. USCRA could still be a great and productive organization that might eventually be provided with another opportunity to make a big move with college rugby. Just sad to see yet another rugby venture be competently executed.

Look how shamelessly the rugby league community co-ops rugby union to their advantage.


Can anyone see AA webcast, I can't get it

same Bruce. 1 out of 3 aint bad thought right? If USA Rugby was a big leaguer they would have been playing in the all-star game last week. so there's that

Yeah, I am disappointed 15-14 to USA in 2nd half sometime

20-17 USA not sure time left

20 all 17to go, USA on a yellow

20-20 19 min to go

updates are on twitter


23-20 nz

ugh. Oh well. good competition though whatever people say. It was good competition for our AAs.

Bruce, great podcast with Pohlidal/Sitton and a much deserved calling out of Todd Bell and USAR's overall leadership in terms of the CPD. Is the sequel to it coming sooner than later?

We all do a followup, we actually recorded we'd before game 2, sometimes they are delayed if bronk, the host of ruggamatrix int'l takes a while to record.

We will def follow up and need to. We commented a bit and previewed our thoughts on AA. I was horribly wrong. I figured more excellence and blowouts. Pat and Alex were right, closer contests.

Ideas for shows are welcome. We will definitely follow up as things shake out.

I meant if bronk takes a while to post.

We will keep trying with Bell, I think we spoke about Todd bell a bit this week.

Dues increased passed Congress vote, close to unanimously.


@allow all to play. I agree if this was offered to us at-cost. Im willing to pay more to be more inclusive. on the other hand, if USAR is making 6 more dollars/per member in revenue because of this I am going to be p.o.'ed unless they announce that money is going into HS/College growth

Taxation whatever way you look at it.

Wouldn't be so pissed if it was coming back into the game. But it is medical coverage that most don't need...

The Eagles first mentality isn't working and won't work...

Time for Nigel to pack up and leave!

Most likely Zurich North America, company handling the insurance, is kicking down something to the board.

The comments to this entry are closed.


About Comments

  • Gainline.us values readers' thoughts and wisdom. While correspondents are encouraged to use given names, aliases in combination with a valid, publicly accessible email are acceptable. Profanity will be edited and unverifiable identities unpublished. Thanks to all who write in for helping to advance our collective understanding of American rugby, as it is and could be.

Corrections & Amplifications

  • Gainline.us values accuracy and fairness. If we fall short of the goal, we promptly correct errors or oversights. Strikethroughs denote text which has been replaced. *Asterisks* denotes text added after the initial post.
My Photo