Made for the USA: Union or League?
Roar Rookie
By matt manley, 20 Jul 2009 manley is a Roar Rookie
- Tagged:
- Rugby League, Rugby Union, US Rugby, USA Rugby
Rumors are swirling that professional rugby league is to hit America in 2010. With my roots in union, I got nervous. What could this mean for rugby as a whole here in the United States? How would professional League influence rugby in this country?
I watch League from time to time. I enjoy the State of Origin. I have studied up on the sport and the split of the two codes. I am familiar with how much League tactics have influenced Union over the years as well. My personal preference is Union, but that is just me.
I took a closer at how these two codes stack up against each other here in the US and tried to figure out which sport has the advantage when it comes to this impending battle for the hearts and minds of the American sports fan.
Looking at the games themselves, a few points jump out. For starters, League offers simpler rules. If you can understand how the game is played, you can move on to decoding the intricacies of the sport more quickly.
If you contrast that with Union, it is a lost cause. You have to have a series of charts and diagrams to explain Union to the novice. Don’t get me wrong, I love the complexity of Union; that complexity makes Union the game it is.
League has a simple progression of play that is easier to follow, especially if you understand (American) football. The concept of a tackle count is just like downs. The field is even marked out like gridiron with numbers every ten yards.
Both players and fans will enjoy the violence of League. One of the hardest things to get football players to do when switching to rugby is to wrap up their tackles. The shoulder charge will be a huge hit with Americans… sorry for that pun.
League has 11 clubs in the US, all concentrated on the East coast. A majority of the US rugby talent plays Union and plies their skills west of the Rockies. I have no doubt many Union players will defect. It is too enticing to play a game and collect a paycheck. I simply can’t blame them.
The problem for League is that they will need the Union boys if they want to have a decent competition. I have watched a little of the American National Rugby League (AMNRL) competition and it is probably the equivalent of Union Division II club rugby. This is not the NRL, not by a long shot.
After seeing the AMNRL for myself, I started to question what they were thinking. Apparently they are going with an ‘if you build it they will come’ mentality. However, creating a top down system is going about things a little backwards.
League doesn’t have enough current players to fill the competition with quality athletes nor do they have a grassroots structure to build for the future.
Union has an established club rugby structure all over the country. Resent years have seen an explosion of youth and high school rugby clubs as well. College clubs have proven to be the best way to develop future Eagles.
Honestly, I can see college rugby becoming USA Rugby’s possible answer to professional League. College sports are a huge business here in the States and rugby can piggyback on established brand names.
League will have to sell a market on a new team and a new sport. The fans will ask why they should care, and with good reason.
People already have a favorite college team, so the emotional connection is already there. You are essentially selling them only on a new sport.
I have to say that a majority of my feelings are rooted in envy and frustration.
My envy is from the feeling of being beaten to the punch. Rugby in the US has started to pick up speed in its growth. The focus on youth has proved fruitful and the future is bright. I want professional rugby here, but I want it on my terms.
My frustration is directed at USA Rugby. With all of the history, all of the infrastructure, all the potential, why doesn’t Union have a professional competition? Why can’t I watch the Tri-Nations on ESPN?
Rugby, Union or League, just needs to be marketed to properly and the sport would sell. The fact the League has taken the bull by the horns is something to be admired. I wish them well. The debate still rages and it seems that the US will be the latest battle ground in League vs. Union.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (198)
- Will South African rugby force a Super 21 by 2018? (172)
- Brumbies 2012: New coach, new players, new attitude (128)
- Dan Parks and the unsolved questions of expat rugby (61)
- Pocock set to be named new Force skipper (56)
- Can the ‘Tahs win the battle after losing the Waugh? (51)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
- Wales show Southern Hemisphere how to play running rugby (27)
- What opening matches of Six Nations taught us (18)
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (201)
- Clinical Chiefs cost rusty Rebels in Corio (9)
- Six Nations shows rugby is a parochial game at heart (5)
- Goose’s Super Rugby up-and-comer XV for 2012 (29)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
- Explore:
- Rugby League, Rugby Union, US Rugby, USA Rugby
True Tah said | July 20th 2009 @ 8:36am | Report comment
Matt
I wouldn’t be worried at rugby league taking over at all, as you pointed out, they have no grassroots, are not in high schools. For many years, rugby was restricted to colleges, but there has been a lot of growth at high school level. Sure Souths might have drawn a crowd over there once, but thats about it. The reality is, rugby in the US has about the same status as water polo in Australia.
I actually dont think rugby league benefits from being close to American football at all, why would an American want to follow rugby league when they have a perfectly similar game with more glitz and glamour and bigger hits already. Australian football is bigger in the USA than rugby league as well.
Chris Beck said | July 20th 2009 @ 9:22am | Report comment
Regarding unfamiliar sports such as this, the way to the American sports fan is though the collegiate ranks. That points to rugby union coming out on top as it is currently played collegiately whereas you couldn’t say the same for league.
A sport that can attach itself to existing university infrastructure – athletic departments, facilities (even if not specific to rugby), etc – would seem to have an advantage over a sport that cannot. And informing an existing collegiate fan base about a new sport would seem to be an easier task than somehow creating a fan base out of thin air for an obscure sport that lacks an obvious place for the fan to attach themselves to.
As far as marketing and television, when ESPN decides that televising the Tri-Nations will garner higher ratings than replays of Las Vegas poker from the year 2003, then perhaps you’ll be able to watch the Tri-Nations on ESPN. But don’t hold your breath. Help may be on the way in the form of television and internet coverage geared to and/or produced by specific universities or conferences. Such entities need programming to fill all of the wall clock time between football games.
Rodney McDonell said | July 20th 2009 @ 9:32am | Report comment
I’m of those who enjoy the league varient more so than the other, but will conceed in saying that both games have their benefits and which one you like the most will come down to your families interest in the game and your history with it.
I think as a league fan, all i can say is that your spot on the money. Nothing has come out of the NRL USA in a long time – although word is apparantly this is because they’ve run into a leagal mind field given their chosen name. Apparantly “NRL” just isn’t good enough
– rightfully so i guess.
You know on a good point though. How in the world will a pro rugby league be sustainable in the US? Theres no doubt they’ll need to draw on players from Australias lower grades, Englands lower grades, Rugby Union players in America and even fringe NFLs or colleague players. In fact, they may well just be looking for athletes in general whether or not your part of any particular sporting code at the moment is of little use.
The biggest problem i think they’ll find will be injuries. They’re going to have to find not only top class players but top class reserves and there are going to have to be new top class reserves every year. Problem is there just isn’t a structure from where they cam come from. Perhaps for the first few years they’ll continue to have yearly drafts wehre athletes from around the country will compete for places? That could work i suppose – it also provides an opportunity to capitalise on a potential reality tv show
.
There are particular problems with player supply that they’re goign to have to have a good plan to be able to manage effectively. Good luck to them.
My opinion is still out on whether their plan is doable. The fact we’re in a 100 in a year financial meltdown only makes it harder for the poor guys to get their funding. But i’m doubful this could succeed even if those circumstances hadn’t prevailed. They’ll need all the luck they can get.
sheek said | July 20th 2009 @ 10:20am | Report comment
Since union is practicing a form of slow suicide with its incessant penalties, & stop-start play, I reckon league will eventually sweep the USA.
Sad but true.
Pippinu said | July 20th 2009 @ 10:58am | Report comment
For the first 18 years of my life, watching all those American movies and sitcoms and they’d show that funny game with helmets, tiny balls, rectangular fields, cheerleaders, etc – I actually thought that was rugby.
Albert Ross said | July 20th 2009 @ 11:59am | Report comment
Well of course the roots of American football are in rugby.
Dennis Justice said | July 20th 2009 @ 12:07pm | Report comment
The reality is Union had their chance. If colleges are that important there would have been a pro union league long ago. Granted, organizationally, League is way behind Union, but Union is not a varsity sport in NCAA and most (if not all ) state high school athletic associations. In NC there’s only one small high school association and that’s in Charlotte.
League COULD overtake Union but not without recognizing grassroots problems. It’s hard to even buy League balls in America, I had to order some from England.
I’m now hearing there’s even a pro cricket competition coming to America this year.
Actually it can work from top-down. Look at UFC, nobody heard of it 20 years ago. Now, in a few years there are now MMA fighting schools all over the place. Dana White just announced a TV deal with Mexican television, and he envisions MMA schools in Mexico and top Mexican fighters in UFC in short order.
Either sport would benefit from having games from top leagues on American television. I can only catch games on espn360.com because I happen to have a subscription. That is how I got hooked on League. Right now, supposedly, the AMNRL is starting the NRL-US (www.nrlus.com) next year but there are questions as to trademark issues with NRL and the NRL-US isn’t helping itself not updating its websites and erasing any legitimate question as to why on their message board. (Hence my suggested website as an alternate name idea if and when the NRL-US has to change names.) I WANT it to take off big-time, but they need more people with sports management backgrounds who really understand how to make it something better than glorified semi-pro.
In my opinion, IF there’s ever a pro Union league, they should focus on soccer venues so MLS fans who hate seeing the gridiron lines and moved to a “soccer-specific stadium” won’t mind as much since Union doesn’t have many lines. However, a pro League competition should focus on football fields (that league’s schedule would chime with SuperLeague and not overlap NFL much) and just accept the lines and markers as they are. (Yes, yards instead of meters. Please forgive the blasphemy.) There’s plenty of mid-sized stadiums that would fit a League team in the States.
The way it’s being approached will work about as well as the W-USA will work, meaning it won’t work at all.
One radical idea I had was for an American League to buy 4 franchises in SuperLeague (at a premium), have the teams on the east coast of America, take a year to market (and to have the T.V. network that would broadcast the American-based games spend that year showing SL games to whet our appetites), then gradually expand franchises west, minimizing overseas travel as teams are added. I’d even have the “Magical Weekend” in Orlando at the Citrus Bowl. That would be fun. After 5 years, they break off to their own pro competition. Sink or swim. That to me is the low-risk way to doing it. SL would charge a high enough fee so the current clubs have no risk of losing money even if the experiment failed. The only real risk are the investors buying the U.S. teams, and they better have plans implemented to get the game in high schools in their states. It’s a natural Spring sport, lots of great potential football players will spend the “off-season” playing League.
BOTH codes could work frankly, they wouldn’t be gigantic leagues, but build slowly and one of them would succeed.
Cheezel said | July 20th 2009 @ 12:09pm | Report comment
The USNRL is still to be confirmed from what I have heard. The AMNRL has been around for over 10 years now so you would assume that with 11 teams there would be enough players to cover a 6 team USNRL with a few imports if it did get off the ground. In the last few years South’s, Leeds and Salford have played games in the US in front of good sized crowds. Russel Crowe has also given League good exposure in the US.
The problem is your average person in the US doesn’t know the difference between League and Union.
If the Tomahawks can qualify for the next Rugby League World Cup in 2013 then maybe the game will get a little more exposure. Having the US involved in the World Cup will be key but they also need to be able to compete against other League nations.
Working Class Rugger said | July 20th 2009 @ 5:23pm | Report comment
At the risk of incurring the wrath of the League fams on this site. I have read rumours that proposed USNRL comp won’t get up for 2010. Supposedly David Nui had said the TV deal would be finalised by March this year and nothings happened. Plus the USRL has been very quiet about any details of the competition.
I voiced the opinion that if League want to succeed in the US they should really look to build the grass roots infrastructure as the USARugby are currently.
By the way Rugby has recieved NCAA accreditation at the Women’s level. Believe it or not its not that easy to gain Varsity status. You can’t just stroll in and say ‘here we are now make us varsity’. But Rugby is making significant progress toward establishing itself in many High Schools(1,500 by 2011) and Colleges. Plus they are working on establishing the College Rugby Super League.
AndyS said | July 20th 2009 @ 5:30pm | Report comment
What I worry about is an entry of Sevens into the Olympics. My expectation is that this will place a disproportionate emphasis on that form of the game at school and college level. Thereafter, well, it has to be easier for two teams worth of ex-Sevens players to make a League team than learn the intricacies of forward play…