Gainline.us

Cal: the Eagle forward factory

Cal produces the most persistently excellent Eagle forwards, judging from the roster of cap leaders by position.

Eight Bears stand amid the 23 men who rank in the USA's top 5 at prop, hooker, second row, flanker, or number eight. Two claim honors at more than 1 position.

They are Mike MacDonald, with 67 tests at prop to his name, Ray Lehner (38, prop), Eric Fry (36, prop), Kirk Khasigian (37, hooker), Chris Biller (28, hooker), Lou Stanfill (25 at lock and 23 at flanker), Kort Schubert (32 at flanker and 18 at eightman), and Rob Lumkong (28 at eightman). MacDonald is America's all-time cap leader, while Stanfill is 6th and Schubert 10th.

Another 5 of the all-timers can be described as collegiate All-Americans from sundry other schools, and the remainder issue from senior clubs. To date, none of the all-time forwards has been drafted into the American test team without having played domestically, nor mostly played overseas.

Among the all-time US backs (which I will treat separately), there is a far greater diversity.

The predominance of Cal forwards is interesting in two respects. First, all of them played the majority of their international rugby after graduation, but only half were long-term professionals (MacDonald, Fry, Stanfill, and arguably Schubert). This suggests training habits and performance standards survive the transition to different environments.

Second, with the US test calendar since 1995 averaging 8 games per year, top 5 players generally started over 5-plus seasons. But the average coaching tenure over the same period is 3 seasons. The Cal standouts have been first choice regardless of the head man.

Jack Clark, Cal's longtime head coach, of course lead the Eagles for 48 games over 1993-99. Six of the 8 all-timers started their test careers after his departure. Tom Billups, who joined Clark in Berkeley after his retirement, led the US for 33 games over 2001-05. Of the 4 who played during Billups' US tenure, 3 played for at least 1 more Eagle coach while the last wrapped up before Billups finished.

This underlines that the college, not the international, environment is where Clark and Billups have had the most influence. 

Unsurprisingly, only 5 of the 23 all-timers played prior to 1995, when there were fewer tests: Chris Lippert (38, prop), Billups (44, hooker), Kevin Swords (36, lock), Brian Vizard (20, number 8), and Lumkong. All but the latter, plagued by injury, captained the US.

	Position caps	All caps
Prop
Mike MacDonald *	67	67
Chris Lippert	38	38
Ray Lehner *	37	38
Eric Fry *	36	36
Mate Moeakiola	32	32
Hooker
Tom Billups	44	44
Kirk Khasigian *	37	37
Phil Thiel	33	36
Chris Biller *	28	28
Matt Wyatt	16	16
Lock
Luke Gross	61	62
Alec Parker	54	58
Kevin Swords	36	36
Hayden Smith	29	29
Lou Stanfill *	25	56
Flanker
Todd Clever	50	64
Dave Hodges	32	54
Kort Schubert *	32	50
Lou Stanfill *	23	56
Scott LaValla	21	32
Eightman
Dan Lyle	31	45
Rob Lumkong *	28	29
Brian Vizard	20	22
Kort Schubert *	18	50
Nic Johnson	15	18

* Univ. of California

Note: Following international convention, 'All Caps' acknowledges a player may have entered games as a replacement for another position, regardless of where he actually lined up. Then again, he may also have started and/or played another position.

On immigrants and imports

The decision not to retain Mike Tolkin raises the possibility USARFU will hire another foreign-born national team coach, making it four of five since 2006.

If so, three of the union's top four coaches would be from overseas, as Mike Friday (men's 7s) and Pete Steinberg (women's 15s) hail from England. Have the ends justified the means?

Steinberg's background, featuring nearly two decades coaching Penn State, points up a crucial distinction. An immigrant is a foreign-born player or coach who participates in domestic competition and rises to the top on merit, the same as any native. An import is arbitrarily moved to the head of the line.

America, a society uniquely dedicated to equality of opportunity, has normally been willing to recognize the contributions of first-generation citizens. Long may it be.

In the rugby world, New Zealand, France, and sometimes England have embraced large numbers of immigrant players, but the dynamic is more economic and competitive. Nobody moves to American to make a living playing rugby. But several of the greatest Eagles -- Vaea Anitoni, Phil Eloff, Mark Williams -- were already fine players and came to the US to make a better life.

The surging number of 'America qualified' players turns this convention upside down. JJ Gagiano and dozens more have had nothing to do with college or club competition before stepping right into Eagle camps. For every Chris Wyles -- who in fact lived in America until a preteen -- there is another Courtney McKay or Tyler Coppedge, the rugby leaguer.

The problem is threefold. First, wholesale importation doesn't provide domestic competitors a head-to-head shot. Second, it signals no confidence in the environment that yields those who are being passed over: it dispirits the community.

Third, with specific regard to coaches, imports do not, cannot, be prepared for the worldview of the athletes they are to lead. So, it is harder to succeed. Indeed, Friday's first-year success may owe a lot to his awareness of the multiple American subcultures enmeshed in the 7s Eagles squad.

Herein a final predicament. Any given import could well be superior to domestic alternatives, and there should always be room for judicious exception. But four of five is not a case of 'can't pass this up', it's a bad habit.

Related:
Friday's Eagles aiming at mental toughness 
USARFU exec, board look to have cut Tolkin loose

Dartmouth, Harvard in Ivy shootout

Harvard invades Dartmouth's Brophy Field tomorrow in a battle of unbeatens likely to decide the Ivy Conference title.

The Big Green are favorites to claim an 9th consecutive crown, judging by comparing scores against 3d- and 4th-placed Cornell and Brown.

Only a few years ago, the Ancient Eight were urged to move to springtime in the interests of a unified national season. But winning a full slate of Ivy matches is more rewarding than capturing a weekend tournament, and in the Northeast a fall calendar is necessary for a 7-game schedule.

Beyond the championship's intrinsic value, the matchup serves to remind team competition is a primary measure of player development -- not the other way around. Many if not most Ivy players remain neophytes, and as rosters turn over every four or five years, match play indicates whether the schools are refining individual athletes and shaping them to contribute to the XV's performance.

In this respect, Dartmouth and Harvard are foremost among New Englanders, if not more broadly.

Dartmouth, the smallest of the Ivies, is an anchor Varsity Cup team and twice a Collegiate Rugby Championship 7s champion. From the viewpoint of a teenager, few if any high school programs are more advanced than the St. Mary's of the East.

But the converse is true of senior teams. Though the athletes may be stronger and more skillful, most do not cultivate players' talents so well -- especially if progress is measured on a four-year trajectory.

Like Hanover, Cambridge is a place where Olympic hopefuls walk the campus. And so it is 7s has reshaped the worldview of the student-administered club. Harvard now puts more energy into springtime 7s, in hopes of returning to the CRC.

Perhaps this has redounded to the benefit of the 15s side. After a losing 2014 season, Harvard renewed its approach to fitness, trained longer, and consequently sees itself as capable of playing more aggressively.

Harvard's 2007 edition was the last to wrest honors from Hanover. Senior flyhalf Will Collins leads the Crimson, while eightman Jack Braun captains the hosts.

On rugby's commercial appeal

During the World Cup, mainstream media debated rugby's appeal to Americans, reaching very different conclusions.

The Wall Street Journal and The Atlantic argued the US public has been missing out because it's narrow minded. 'Rugby, I believe, is the future for a country that learns each day how much more impossible it is to turn our backs on the rest of the world', opined the Journal's Matthew Futterman.

Fortune contended the game doesn't suit American sporting tastes. 'The sport is so close to our football, it’s not different enough to be fascinating here', according to a sports marketing executive quoted by Daniel Roberts.

The Journal and the Atlantic used sociological argument. Fortune interviewed media professionals as well as rugby enthusiasts, and so better portrayed market dynamics. 'Though the sport has grown in populariity ... at the youth and college level, it hasn't translated to more eyeballs for the sport at a professional level on television', Roberts concluded.

With Monday's PRO Rugby launch announcement, the question remains current. Business requires deep understanding of the target market, allied with an effective operating model. Above all, it requires customers.

USARFU exec, board look to have cut Tolkin loose

If Mike Tolkin wants to stay on as national team coach, he'll have to reapply for it, the same dubious choice Eddie O'Sullivan faced in 2011. 

USARFU yesterday put its top coaching job out to public notice, pointedly saying it's searching globally. 

A new hire would be the USA's fifth head man in ten years, and could be the fourth import. Such a record indicates problems extend beyond the coach's box to 10-year chief executive Nigel Melville and the several directors with half a decade under their belt.

But the men above the test team are apparently not accountable for the material the Eagles have to work with.

Although better resourced than during the nadir of 2005-08, the 15s budget has scarcely grown in 15 years, and the national squad has become more isolated from American senior and collegiate competition.

The Super League was run into the ground after 2012, while the College Premier League faltered after one season, splintering the top university teams. There is no longer representative competition at either level, the North American 4 having crowded out the Inter-Territorial Tournament before itself failing. 

The trajectory cannot be ascribed to Tolkin, O'Sullivan, or their predecessors. Alex Magleby was appointed high performance director only this past February, while Melville has carried the title of president of rugby operations since his 2006 appointment.

Last week, Melville told the board in an email 'our preparation [for the World Cup] was the best we have ever had'. 

Yesterday morning, in a splashy scoop given to London's Guardian, he touted a licensing deal for a pro competition hoping to launch in 2016. Later in the day, news of Tolkin's fate emerged in a subordinated release.

In it, Boulder signaled it would again be looking abroad. Last week World Rugby chief executive Brett Gosper said the Dublin organization would be seeking to place coaches in 'tier 2' countries such as the US. With its 2014 balance sheet still nearly $350,000 underwater, USARFU is dependent on WR for routine activities.

Magleby and Dan Payne, a 2007 World Cup eightman turned coach and then athletic director at Atlanta's Life University, are to join Melville choosing the next coach by the end of next month.

Related:
Pro league, Eagle coaching decision on tap
In reprise of Clever affair, Tolkin left in lurch
National team audit due in three weeks

Pro league, Eagle coaching decision on tap

USARFU is renewing its quest for a professional league and a winning XV.

PRO Rugby is today expected to announce details of a 6-team competition beginning play in April 2016. The New York startup has been sanctioned by Boulder, similar to the license granted Bill Tatham last decade.

Meanwhile, over the weekend USARFU's board of directors received a report on the 2015 World Cup, a second winless world championship in the last three editions.

With the chairman in place since 2002 and the chief executive from 2006, both professionalization and the national team belong to this administration's record. Next year's Rio de Janeiro Olympics is set to bring rugby's abbreviated version to a far larger TV audience than the 15s championship. The question is whether 2015's fine 7s season or disappointing 15s campaign is more indicative of the American high performance trajectory.

Of immediate import is the 15s coach. Beginning February, the Eagles are to play a five-match slate against three four South American teams and Canada, in a new competition announced last April. Ranked ahead of all but Argentina, the US will be expected to finish in the top half of the so-called Americas Six Nations.

Mike Tolkin, 11-1-23 from 2012-15, would like to continue, contending groundwork laid over the past four years would bear fruit in the coming quadrennial.

But Brett Gosper, World Rugby's chief executive, recently indicated the international body is looking to place foreign coaches in 'tier 2' countries. '[World Rugby] will be involved in strength and conditioning, we’ll be involved in coach selection too. We have a say in those coaches, we help them find the right coaches', Gosper told London's Guardian newspaper a week ago.

When US chief executive Nigel Melville arrived in 2006, he was charged to nurture a generation of domestic coaches. But three of his 15s coaches, plus the current 7s head man, have been foreign. Dependent of WR's annual stipends, USARFU could be hard-pressed to resist.

One expected benefit of a US pro league is opportunity for domestic coaches and players. The idea is athletes and sideline men alike require higher-caliber daily training environments such as exist in Europe and the Southern Hemisphere countries. At present, only the very best of the university teams as well as national team 7s at the Olympic Training Center approach such conditions.

The union originally intended to professionalize the North Americas 4, launched in 2006 with WR funds. Then it set itself the target of a domestic pro league debuting in 2014.

Under Melville and chair Bob Latham, Boulder has abandoned representative play. The rationale is periodic competition has proven insufficient for international-grade players. One practical effect has been to curtail higher-level opportunity even as more players are coming into youth and collegiate grades.

Led by Doug Schoninger, PRO Rugby looks to have a broad charter, from raising capital to managing franchises, events, and media to contracting players and staff. The former securities industry professional has little evident background in the game. Stephen Lewis, with experience at New York's Old Blue and also the Northeast 7s Olympic Development Academy, is responsible for rugby operations.

Grounding our clubs the right way

by Derek Sagehorn

England's Rugby Football Union stands to earn £15 million ($23 million) from the World Cup, a portion of which is earmarked for maintaining, expanding, and building facilities for its constituent clubs. Decisions about allocating the money will be far easier because the union has adopted a National Facilities Strategy.

Covering pitch and clubhouse standards, priorities like youth rugby and floodlit fields, and resources and capital for facility development, the NFS is a four-year plan through 2017. It identifies national lottery money and increased private investment as well as RWC 2015 profits as revenue streams. Maintenance and development projects are to be funded with interest-free loans and grants.

NFS establishes a competitive process for grants and scores projects based on criteria derived from union priorities. For example, projects that incorporate youth and women programs may rate higher than those that do not. In addition, there are best practices for entitlement acquisition, pitch maintenance, disability issues, and so on.

Overall, the RFU has created a thoughtful plan to guide clubs wanting better places to train and compete.

Unfortunately USA Rugby doesn't have a plan for facilities, at least not a public one. The member resources listed on the USARFU website are extensive, but there is no guidance on how to develop facilities or even maintain a pitch. The need is obvious. Earlier this year, a Pacific Rugby Premiership match at a middle school was abandoned after a serious injury prompted school officials to evict the host club mid-match.

Every match played with incorrect dimensions or on a lacrosse-lined field undermines the game with the mainstream public. Also, the proliferation of youth and club rugby played on narrow, gridiron fields retards player ball-handling skills, as they are rewarded for playing tight, 10-man rugby.

Obviously there are differences between RFU and USARFU in terms of players, resources, and political power. The latter lacks the capacity to underwrite land acquisition and grading for individual clubs. But Boulder could guide and inform individual clubs that wish to own their home or improve existing facilities.

Currently, purpose-built and even correctly lined rugby pitches are the exception rather the rule in America. Those clubs that have built facilities have worked hard and leveraged a diverse array of resources, including public investment, rentals and purchases of public or institutional land, and real estate gifts. Among non-university teams, Glendale Rugby sets the standard with Infinity Park. Charlotte Rugby Club's Skillbeck Athletic Grounds, the Pittsburgh Harlequins' Founders Field, the Chicago Lions' Hope Field, or San Francisco Golden Gate's Ray Sheeran Field may be a more achievable model.

Consideration must be given to the practical differences between locales and their attendant facilities strategies: building a rugby pitch in metro Philadelphia is a far different proposition from building one most anywhere in Indiana. A plan that identifies national standards, priorities, and best practices could help guide clubs to make that first step towards building dedicated facilities.

To be sure, USARFU is busy right now, evaluating the national team's World Cup performance, preparing for 7s at the Rio Olympics, and awaiting a domestic professional rugby competition. But long-term planning for its dues-paying member clubs is a low-cost, high-value endeavor. A national facilities strategy would ensure that clubs are well-positioned to reap the benefits of American rugby's growth.

Derek Sagehorn, a graduate of the University of California and University of San Francisco School of Law, works in housing development in Oakland. He coaches forwards at Alameda High School.

Ideas for a productive USARFU

Everyone wants to be proud of American rugby, and so should want USARFU to succeed. But the governing body is unloved.

For Boulder to become productive and even admirable, what kind of organization should it aspire to be? Three things come to mind: strategy, entrepreneurship, and transparency.

Strategy
USARFU’s 2013-15 plan assembles blue-sky objectives, best practices, and organizational to-dos. Seemingly at the behest of World Rugby and US Olympic Committee, it mimics every other rugby union or sports governing body. So it is unlikely to create competitive advantage.

Even if follow the leader is the right organizational approach, the plan lacks focus and fails to specify how objectives are converted to action. As UCLA professor Dick Rumelt points out: 'The core of strategy work is always the same: discovering the critical factors in a situation and designing a way of coordinating and focusing actions to deal with those factors.'

For example, USARFU’s chairman recently observed the national team will improve if more Americans compete professionally, and the Eagles play more games. That’s a start — but it’s been the same for a decade, and for whatever reason the union hasn’t been able to execute. What has changed since 2006, and how has the leadership adjusted its thinking?

Entrepreneurship
USARFU holds that professional competition and management are indispensible to accelerated progress. The evidence suggests achievement is explained by personal energy more than economic arrangements.

Since 2006, the union's board has comprised corporate types, lacking real experience of the domestic game. Its national office has steadily grown in size and cost.

More and more, initiative and innovation in American rugby come from outside Boulder, from organizations that are better aligned with the community. United World Sports embeds recreational tournaments at the USA 7s while midwifing the game’s TV presence on NBC. NIRSA NSCRO created and manages diverse, vibrant division 3 collegiate play. And so on.

The disconnect can’t be laid at the feet of congress. After supplanting the territories in 2013 in hopes of seeding geographic unions run by paid staff, USARFU remains in a drawn-out transition. About one-third of US states including Colorado, Illinois, Ohio, and western Pennsylvania presently lack representation.

Transparency
Americans believe the country’s greatness is enshrined in its constitution, which begins ‘We the people’. Power inheres in individuals, who delegate it to government in order ’to promote the common welfare’.

USARFU behaves as if it's just the opposite. Although it is a non-profit run for the benefit of its members, the organization’s decision making and finances are secretive. Athletes can’t play rugby unless they pay taxes (i.e., CIPP) and fees (medical insurance).

Once, the union published its budgets, status reports, and board minutes. In the past five years, Boulder has created fundraising and commercial arms which members can’t access.

Maybe that’s acceptable in the Commonwealth, but not here. To establish trust and to situate itself in the American mainstream, USARFU has to behave as if it’s an organ of players and referees.

Most Americans enjoy rugby on a part-time, recreational basis, on terms of their choosing. Those who volunteer as administrators don’t like sending dollars to Boulder. They believe the money could be better spent at home.

Many, if not most, of the problems we see in American rugby point to shortcomings in these areas. Values aren’t the best guideline for management effectiveness, because they are difficult to measure. But a culture that’s friendlier to and better serves its members ought to help the union reach its performance goals.

In reprise of Clever affair, Tolkin left in lurch

USARFU's leadership could be distancing itself from Eagle coach Mike Tolkin, more evidence the World Cup performance review should extend to the boardroom.

In a San Jose Mercury account of Todd Clever's summertime dismissal from the national team, chief executive Nigel Melville and chair Bob Latham skirt around endorsing Tolkin's authority. Normally in professionalized sports, management either declines to be interviewed on grounds that personnel decisions are the coach's province, or restates something to that effect -- unless it has sided with the player and the coach is on shaky ground.

'Mike Tolkin and [Clever] obviously had some issues. It wasn't working out. It is a difficult one, isn't it?', Melville told the mainstream daily.

Next Friday, the board of directors is to receive a performance review of the 2015 World Cup cycle, led by high performance director Alex Magleby. Tolkin, who posted an 11-23-1 record mark, hopes to continue at the national team helm.

Melville promoted Tolkin from assistant coach in 2011, touting his credentials as a native-born coach who won American championships with Xavier High School and New York Athletic Club.

Hired in 2006, Melville has supervised four 15s coaches who have collectively logged a 20-46-1 mark, including a 1-11 record over three World Cups. He's also had four 7s coaches, the most successful being the latest, Mike Friday, who led 2014-15 edition to 6th place on the world 7s circuit and beat Canada to qualify for the 2016 Olympics.

Tolkin is the first 15s coach to survive a full World Cup quadrennial since 1999. In major American sports, a succession of coaching changes is often interpreted as failure by the general manager, athletic director, or someone else higher up the chain.

Disconnects between Tolkin and his superiors has been frequent enough over the past four years. Of direct import to the national team, USARFU's board of directors all but abandoned representative play, allowed the national senior competition to collapse, and saw leading college teams break away to form rival 15s and 7s championships. A pro competition, originally to spring from the North American 4, remains in the offing.

Latham, who joined USARFU's board in 1994, has operated as chair or vice chair since 2002. Since the stormy 2005 departure of coach Tom Billups and then Doug Arnot, Melville's precedessor, the USA's record against fellow 'Tier 2' nations has declined to 26 percent (10-29) from 42 percent (27-2-37).

None of USARFU's other eight directors have been at the helm nearly so long as Latham or Melville. The union's bylaws limit the tenure of board members to eight consecutive years. Magleby, the HP director, was appointed to the role in February 2015.

James Gillenwater, who sits on the union's Athlete's Advisory Council, is quoted by the San Jose Mercury article in support of Clever.

What happened to 2012's championship U20 team?

Argentina fielded 7 players aged 23 or less in Sunday’s semifinal, all of them training at home.

Whatever happened to their American contemporaries? None of the 27 who won the 2012 Junior World Rugby Trophy made the USA’s World Cup squad.

Over the past 8 seasons, as more teenage players have come into the game, USARFU has shifted its focus from collegiate representative play to 'scouting combines’. The effect has been to narrow the selection lens.

Some 7 American under-20 players have become full internationals, 2 of them (Cam Dolan and Titi Lamositele) traveling to England this fall. But the 2015 World Cup team’s average age was 27.3, up a full year from 26.3 in 2011, and the contrast with Pumas is highly unfavorable. It seems Boulder is either picking players who don’t project to the test level, or its direct supervision is ineffective.

Despite Scott Lawrence’s 2012 success, U20 coaching changes since 2008 have been frequent. Twice in the past 5 6 years the team has failed to qualify for the JWT, meaning America is regularly outside the top 20.

Of course, World Rugby’s age-grade competition itself poses significant problems. First, most of America’s better teenage players are college students, so mid-spring competition falls at a poor time. Second, the ‘pay to be seen’ combines put the burden on individuals — local unions and territories now being out of the picture — so the opportunity costs are high.

In the bygone debate over Collegiate All-Americans or U20s, talking points favoring the latter included helping the Eagles become younger and plugging into the international system. The Latham-Melville administration may have settled the discussion, but has not delivered the goods.