« 2011 in Review: Q1 | Main | Cal superleague exit spurs conference gains »

27 December 2011


Here we go. Current Eagles converting to rugby league.



Old (fake) news buddy.


Don't know if Thiel is going to actually play League, but I do know that he retired from Union after the RWC.

Fake as in a story about a former Eagle playing a little leage doesn't warrant an article purporting to report that a former eagle has jumped ship from union to league.

The dude is 27 years old. He has another RWC in him if he stays playing competitive rugby. Pathetic. The Eagles coach should be speaking with him....oh yeah. Never mind.

Pathetic? That's ludicrous. It's his life. If he wants to do things with it that you wouldn't, what business is it of yours? He doesn't owe us a damn thing. It sounds like career and family mean more to him than rugby. Is that pathetic?

Interesting that We Are Rugby likes to run down Union so much (particularly American Union), and yet happily reports that Thiel thinks that playing international League is less demanding than playing for Life.

Seems Eddie O has a thing for Scott J's old jobs.

Kurt -

It has been a week and you haven't commented on he announcement by Cal that they are out of the premier competition (call it what you want) and it begs me to question.

1) Are you holding back and hiding behind the Cal PR tactic to make the announcement late on the Friday before a back-to-back holiday week?

2) You're going to go at this issue with the same vigor and commitment you go after USA Rugby. Surely you have access to JC for an interview. Would you be willing to accept questions from readers, or are you so much in bed with Cal Rugby that you can't do anything as a journalist. Thus making you irrelevant?

"Fess" - What's your beef? USARFU is a dues collecting national governing body with elected officials, Cal is a college rugby team. If you don't get the difference you are beyond lost.

As a customer of USARFU we have a right (obligation) to ask questions. On the other hand we can agree or disagree with what Cal does, but they aren't obligated to answer my or your questions.

Jack Clark did a podcast on rugbymag on wed night. alex should have it posted pretty soon.

He was very forthcoming and answered virutally all the questions as to what and why and from there you can draw your own conclusions, but it was very informative.

Or maybe, since Kurt hasn't done a "real" post since 12/19 (just a couple of collections on links), maybe he's got things to do over the holidays. This is, of course, true cowardice. Right?


I just finished listening to the podcast... I think the only thing he really said that I agree with was that he was heavily involved in the creation and the structure. but other than that.... they guy said nothing. I think you need to listen to it again and see how he answers your guy's questions. He talks so long that you think he's answering them, but in reality and just ran you guys around the block and you moved on to the next question.

One of his main reasons for leaving NOW, was because of money and the other was the possible creation to the PAC12.

First of all, his first reason... money... So let me get this straight. He would spend more money playing against teams in the "Pacific Conference" (Central Wash, Davis, St Mary's and UCLA) than if he started the PAC12 conference, where he would have to travel to Utah, Arizona, ASU, Colorado...etc...? ok got it. THEN he starts talking about playing teams in Japan, and he wants to play Notre Dame, Army and Navy... Does he have a teleporter that only works when traveling to the East Coast and Japan but not playing teams in the CPD? Where will the money come from to play these teams in the Midwest and East Coast..? INSANE!

Secondly, the PAC12... quick note Jack... Arizona, ASU, Colorado, UCLA and Utah are also schools who are currently in the D1A and would be moving to the PAC12. Why didn't they drop out NOW? There was no need to drop out now for this PAC12 reason. this could have waited until after the spring season.

Im actually all for a conference alignment. I think it is a great thing to sell to PAC12 Network. But his reasons he gave you guys for leaving NOW are BS. I think you can create a tier'd system and have the top 6 teams in the PAC12 compete in D1A and the lower 6 like Oregon, OSU, Washington, USC, WSU and Colorado can play in D1AA.

All this move by Jack tells me is that the title sponsor they had all lined up for the D1A, backed out. That is the ONLY reason he would leave now. THE ONLY REASON.

The Tier 2 rugby presidents will be meeting in the USA in February to discuss a possible tournament. Seems someone is planning something...


I didn't listen to the show yet. I hear what you. He essentially did what he felt was best for his situation and whether people agree or disagree, he gave rationale without throwing stones, which rightfully wouldn't have been fair to do so he didn't.

I'll listen and maybe i'll change my mind, but after the show, I remember pat, alex, and i being pretty happy with the result.


JC ran circles around the three of you faux journalists. His answers were spin or just an articulate ramble to avoid a real answer and you guys just ate it up like lemmings.


What spin was there in particular and how exactly would you have handled it. also, i certainly never claimed to be a journalist and alex and pat are pretty fair minded journalists in my opinion.

Why do so many people care what Cal does? The comp will go on without them. If BYU is unhappy they can schedule a "friendly" against Cal, but again why are so many of you webruggers bent out of shape?

I would certainly admit that Cal will still be the benchmark of collegiate rugby even if they played an entire schedule of friendlies. They remain the gold standard and the teams that wish to be "measured" will pick up a phone and schedule a match, who cares about the comp they are in
Get over it and get a life!


I listened to the podcast and enjoyed it, but ultimately I don't think the important questions (at lease for me) were asked. 1) is Cal more interested in playing friendlies than playing for National Championships, even though much of what they sell advertises their national championships? 2) why did Cal wait so long to make the final determination on pulling out of D-1A? (regardless that Jack said they should have done so 3 weeks ago, that is far after the schedules have been released and does a huge disservice to the other teams involved). 3)if Cal seems not to be so concerned with championships, are they in fact paying their CIPP's to USA Rugby? This is not a guarantee and I would like Jack to answer that question. 4) the success on USA collegiate rugby hinges on all parties, in particular Cal, does he feel that this decision was in the best interests of college rugby? I understand that he said that he is responsible to UCB admins and not USA Rugby (Boulder), but without appropriate USA Rugby referees, teams, etc, Cal may not be as strong without those resources.


My sense is that JC looked at the potential final 4 teams which include Life and Arkansas State and said i dont think so. Talk about the least marketable programs on the planet. I think it was a reasonable decision for Cal.


Some follow up questions after JC didn't answer the initial question would have been nice. Maybe a question about why he initiated the CPD and then quit at the 11th hour after the inaugural year. Or, considering he took all the steam out of the emergent coaches association, which is why USA Rugby hired Todd Bell to administer collegiate rugby, with his initiating of a CPD that is a commercial product does he feel he hurt the development of the game. Let's be honest after one year of CPD folly we would have been better off if JC supported a collegiate coaches association instead of selling a CPD dream that was way premature. Of course that wouldn't have put dollars in Cal's pocket, which is all it appears he cares about.

Let's hope Todd Bell puts JC in his place and doesn't let him compete in D1-AA this year and hopefully next. The tail can't be wagging the dog.


While Clark didn't directly and immediately answer the first question, he said there were a multitude of issues which he got to later. He also wasn't placing blame elsewhere and accepted responsibility for his decision.

He spoke about the poor timing

I actually never thought of getting into the coaches association as it wasn't a strong enough movement to warrant discusssion since it was dropped so easily. (it can't be blamed on Clark, since one man can't stop a movement with committed members)

Cal is out of CPD and existing members really now have no one to blame and scapegoat for things anymore, they can do all the things it was claimed Cal held them back from doing.

I am not saying I agree with the decision (I don't) and would have played the season as promised (there was a 2 year gentleman's agreement and a drop dead date for leaving that had passed), but that said, I don't know all (or many) of the facts.

I don't think it is the role of USA Rugby to "put JC in his place" Cal and he have done a lot to aid in the development of the sport. I am not sure what Cal is doing this year as we podcasted soon after announcement.

In the Mid-late 80's Jack Clark gave a talk at a coaching clinic in philly on how to work with your admin on getting money and campus support from the school. I used that model as closely as i could I went to the talk in feb of 86 or 87 and we went from 2k my freshman year, to 6k my soph year, to 18k my junior year, to 28k my senior year and that was 1989. In 1990, the kids wanted to be more recreational and fired the coaches we recruited (to become professional to the university as per the model), and they went back to 2k of support. It can be said that Penn St became a major beneficiary of that since the primary allotment of money to their program came from one if those coaches (6 figures).

Clark has been open as to how it was done in articles, talks, etc. anyone could copy and modify it. I did at 18-19 years old. I would suggest 25 years later that others do the same, the model hasn't changed much and it still works, he even discussed it briefly on the podcast.

In listening to the pod cast, it seems the cal ad in agreeing to keep varsity status for men's rugby, the team has to fund 2 women's collegiate sports!

My guess is tha Cal now has the most expensive rugby program in the country, so if you have fully tap'ted into the alum, the next and only move is to get broadcasting to raise additional funding.

I/we may not like what Cal did for this year, but if JC can restructure a competition that is TV ready in a few years, it will benefit us all.

Also, will USAR or could USAR get something like this done?

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