USA Rugby:Question for non-US rugby fans

[vulturesrow]

How is US rugby perceived overseas? Obviously they have a long way to go as far as being able to compete at the highest level. But do the rugby superpowers think the US has any promise or what? Just curious. I keep my fingers crossed that rugby will catch on in the states. It actually has a fairly large amateur following but it hasnt translated yet into mainstream popularity yet.

[Voltron87]

Most foreigners laugh at USA rugby, but love to meet american players.

Soccer is by far "the world game' and while it has grown here is still a 3rd tier sport. I love to watch rugby, my father (who is Irish) played when he grew up. I really doubt it will ever be mainstream, I think it will get a pretty good amateur following and but never catch on for the same reasons soccer never got big.

[brendons31]

In New Zealand it is percieved that USA are very weak in rugby, and it would be considered a big suprise if USA got withing 100 points a a team like NZ or Australia. To be honest I don't think USA has much promise and is gonna be a a threat in the near future.

The reason I think this is because american sport tends to be dominated by $ through tv. Rugby isn't a profitable sport for TV networks compared to games like NFL basicly because rugby doesn't have a break after every play, and there are no time outs, which means minimal advertising is available. America sports looks as if they are totally dominated by $. How do u guys watch NFL, its pathetic, so much padding, breaks after every play, and an offensive and defensive team. Until american sport is less dominated by $ and tv networks, i can't see US rugby improving.

[vulturesrow]

I think your analysis about why it isnt catching on as much is spot on. Its unfortunate because the game has all the elements that American sports fans love. Perhaps if it continues to grow at the grassroots level it will eventually break through into the mainstream.

[Voltron87]

I pretty much agree with everything you said. It's like putting the NZ baseball team up against any US team. Even the Mets, it would be 15-1 or so.

It's mostly money. Its much more lucrative to advertise bastketball, baseball, and football than soccer and rugby, for the lack of commercial breaks.

Americans also dont have soccer or rugby in their culture, like the english, aussies, kiwis, wallabies, etc. we do have baseball, football in it. If youre a kid growing up in ireland, NZ or australia, you watch rugby and if youre an athletic kid youll play it and fall in love with it. everyone is exposed to it, like everyone is exposed to baseball and football here. when athletic people get exposed to rugby in the states they love it, because its an awesome sport, they just dont find it until theyre 25 or whatever.


Compared to rubgy, us football is kind of pathetic. rugby players are so much more well rounded. you dont have the specialization you have in football. in football, one guy throws, one guy catches, one guy blocks, it doesnt work that way in rugby. plus the no breaks thing means you have to be much more athletic to play rugby. there are tons more injuries in us football because of the padding though. guys end up using it as weapons (the helmets) and as a reason to go in for more dangerous tackles, which wont hurt the person with the pads but can really hurt the person receiving the blow. if you did it without pads the tackler would be risking a huge injury.

[Voltron87]

I think its mostly because kids arent exposed to it at a young age. They are exposed to football and baseball. Kids in NZ are exposed to rugby. All the American kids who never played rugby in high school find it when theyre 30 or so, and think its awesome. its not that they dont like it, they just never were exposed to it.

[poker-penguin]

How US Rugby is percieved by the rest of the world depends on how many eyes the people you ask have.

One-eyed farming town people who support some stupid cowbell ringing no hope province (like brendon /images/graemlins/tongue.gif) will give you some sort of rant about padding and how NZ is the greatest ever. But that's what you get when you live in the wops (and yes, Hamilton is the wops).

Actually, his post had a lot of good points, I just haven't been a JAFA [censored] for a while, just a generic forum [censored].

Anyway, obviously, nobody expects the US Rugby team (even if they are the Olympic champions) to be competitive with the big five (the Tri Nations, England, and France) or even the stronger second tier nations (Wales, Scotland, Ireland, Fiji, Samoa, Tonga, Argentina, Italy).

However, they've been getting stronger, and if the grass roots keeps growing, as it might, given the number of college programs I know of that are starting to put an effort in. I would say that whichever of Canada / US make it to the 2007 tournament have a shot at the 2nd round.

Basically, depending on just who the "second" team in their group is, an upset against Tonga (for example) is possible and could propel Canada or the US into the second round.

By The Way, the best thing that could happen for North American rugby is a Canada-US co-hosting for 2011. But the IRB are a bunch of Euro-centric morons who don't want to grow the game if it means losing thier stranglehold on the reins of power. /rant

PS - the NZ mens fastpitch softball team is very good, but I doubt an NZ baseball team could come within even 30 runs of any MLB team (even the Mets /images/graemlins/smile.gif) unless there was a mercy rule in effect. Similarly, the NZ Ice-Hockey Team would lose to any Junior B team in Canada, and probably lower. It's the way of the world.

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
I think its mostly because kids arent exposed to it at a young age. They are exposed to football and baseball. Kids in NZ are exposed to rugby. All the American kids who never played rugby in high school find it when theyre 30 or so, and think its awesome. its not that they dont like it, they just never were exposed to it.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is certainly true. And it goes back to the point about all the money already in American pro sports. I didnt start playing until my freshman year in college. But there are kids leagues out there now which is encouraging.

[Jack of Arcades]

[ QUOTE ]
I think its mostly because kids arent exposed to it at a young age. They are exposed to football and baseball. Kids in NZ are exposed to rugby. All the American kids who never played rugby in high school find it when theyre 30 or so, and think its awesome. its not that they dont like it, they just never were exposed to it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really; lots of US children play footy, but it hasn't really caught on much at all.

[vulturesrow]

Like I said, I think the money already in the popular American pro sports has a lot to do with it. But exposure plays a role too.

[KDawgCometh]

[ QUOTE ]
By The Way, the best thing that could happen for North American rugby is a Canada-US co-hosting for 2011. But the IRB are a bunch of Euro-centric morons who don't want to grow the game if it means losing thier stranglehold on the reins of power. /rant



[/ QUOTE ]

as much as I would love to see rugby take off in teh us, football(soccer) needs to be the first concentration. FOotball has grown a lot since the MLS's inception to where teams are now drawing decent numbers consisitently. I was also watching teh galaxy/earthquakes match and was loving that the supports for san jose had a bunch of passion in booing landon donovan, I don't think we would've seen that type of passion three years ago. As far as RWC 2011, I think Japan needs to be the next nation that the IRB tries to help out. THey have all of the resources and $$$ and passion to eventually have something good going there. I'd like to see the IRB also help out argentina too as rugby has tradionally been the second sport in south america's second largest nation. I also think that Samoa, Fiji, and Tonga should fully go with the Pac Island Warriors side as the normal test side. I think they would then be able to keep some of their better players and as a group would be much stronger. Look at how strong the West Indies test team in cricket is, and they wouldn't be nearly as strong if they were seperate nations

[poker-penguin]

I said the best thing that could happen for North American Rugby. For world rugby, the best thing would be a massive restructuring of the IRB. Preferably restructuring with an AXE. I hates the IRB.

Anyway, Japan and Korea put on a good show for the soccer world cup, so Japan could definately throw together one hell of a RWC. I'd like to see it go to Argentina though because they are close to becoming top tier (they beat France in a test series last year) and it would be one hell of a party (even if I will be 31 /images/graemlins/crazy.gif)

LOL - you think the IRB try to help people other than themselves out. I bet you think the Olympic bid process is clean too.

As for the Pac Island Warriors, it's a great idea and they'd get better results, more money, and better player retention. But then where would the next generation of All Blacks come from? /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[KDawgCometh]

[ QUOTE ]
I said the best thing that could happen for North American Rugby. For world rugby, the best thing would be a massive restructuring of the IRB. Preferably restructuring with an AXE. I hates the IRB.

Anyway, Japan and Korea put on a good show for the soccer world cup, so Japan could definately throw together one hell of a RWC. I'd like to see it go to Argentina though because they are close to becoming top tier (they beat France in a test series last year) and it would be one hell of a party (even if I will be 31 /images/graemlins/crazy.gif)

LOL - you think the IRB try to help people other than themselves out. I bet you think the Olympic bid process is clean too.

As for the Pac Island Warriors, it's a great idea and they'd get better results, more money, and better player retention. But then where would the next generation of All Blacks come from? /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]


well, I probably am being naive on the IRB. One thing argentina desperately needs is to have SANZAR bring them in as a fourth nation. If the Pac Island Warriors were to stay as a test team, then a southern hemisphere 5 nations would be great. I also don't think that players would mind traveling to Beunos Aries or to Fiji. SANZAR really missed out by not creating a Pasifika team in the expanded Super 14. South Afric certainly will be helped out most as Perth is a rugby town, though its more of a rugby league town, still its rugby heavy.

[poker-penguin]

Yeah, Sanzar (especially the SA and AUS parts although NZ isn't much better) are ass clowns too. They had a golden opportunity to give the pacific islands a big boost and make the competition much better instead decided to add teams to the two weakest super 12 areas.

How many South African teams even made it to the playoffs in all the years of Super 12?
How many times did an Australian team win?

[RacersEdge]

[ QUOTE ]
I think your analysis about why it isnt catching on as much is spot on. Its unfortunate because the game has all the elements that American sports fans love. Perhaps if it continues to grow at the grassroots level it will eventually break through into the mainstream.

[/ QUOTE ]


I seriously doubt it. What Americans love is great indidual play - like a homerun, or a great catch in football, or a 3-point shot in hoops, etc. It's the discrete individual plays that make for a good spectator sport. That's why soccer has/will never be recognized as a major sport here - too general/too team based.