By matt manley -
December 23rd 2009 @ 3:39am
Get a Roar profile
Loading ...Use American players in Super Rugby
With the impending expansion of the Super Rugby competition, I think it’s time USA Rugby switches its focus on how it develops the Eagles squad.
A lot has been said about the importance of the American varsity sports structure. It is the best talent identification and training system in the world.
Athletes filter into high school sports and then on to college.
This is the model which rugby must mold itsself into if we are to become a successful Test rugby nation.
However, it begs the question of what to do once an athlete is out of college?
The USA lacks a quality competition where our elite level athletes can continue to develop and mature into seasoned Test caliber players.
This hasn’t been a problem for Argentina and I feel it should no longer be a problem for the USA.
USA Rugby needs to take on the role of agent and guide its elite level players to clubs overseas, where the rugby competition is quality. Get these boys on a contract and as agent, take a small portion of their contract and put it back into the rugby at home.
Argentina has become a quality Test side because the players have gained experience at the highest level of club rugby and therefore are able to make that leap to Test rugby.
The USA has the athletes, they just need the time.
This is where I will get picky.
I don’t think it is good enough to send American rugby players to any old place.
The mega-rich European clubs do make the most sense economically, but at what cost in terms of the style of play? This is where Super Rugby comes into the picture.
Rugby in the Southern Hemisphere is played differently. I don’t really need to make too much of a stink about it, but who are the top three Test rugby nations in the world?
I rest my case.
The quality of the professional competition is not really the issue. It is more about the style of play and level of intensity.
Super Rugby would move American rugby up by leaps and bounds. They style of play suits our athletic abilities and the intensity brings players up to Test level much more quickly.
Even sorry teams like the Reds and Cheetahs produce outstanding Test players by virtue of the competition.
I know the Melbourne side will try its best to fill the roster with name-brand rugby talent, but I would urge them to look State-side to help fill the roster.
You don’t need to look much further than Todd Clever to know that we can produce the talent here in the States.
Give these boys a chance and watch out.
Going to the Waratahs v Brumbies blockbuster at ANZ Stadium, Saturday 24 April? If you're keen to meet up with other Roarers, register you interest and we'll keep you informed on the place to meet. Register now.
Get Australia's best Rugby opinion emailed daily.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(37)
Working Class Rugger said | December 23rd 2009 @ 8:04am | Report comment
Matt Manley
Todd Clever has opened the door just that little bit more for American Rugby player’s in the Southern Hemisphere. I agree with your point of getting more down here. Melbourne will be probably the next best opportunity to do so. Could possibly get a couple. A player of the likes of Kevin Sweryn should definitely be getting in there faces. But they’ll (hopefully alongside USARugby) have to chase the opportunities not be chased.
Interesting point on using USARugby as an agent. They really should. As you stated the best way to elevate US Rugby is to get more Rugby and a much higher level. Young blokes of the likes of Zach Test and the No.8 from the USA U20’s team that competed in Kenya could both in the right program become very good player’s and more importantly very good internationals.
JT said | December 23rd 2009 @ 8:06am | Report comment
WOuld that be the same Todd Cleaver who played for the Lions in this season’s S14?
Mostly off the bench from what I could see – not sure if that is more a reflection of the franchise he played for or his ability. I think probably the priorbased on the mess that was the Lions this season.
Would liek to see how he would go playing for a real team.
King of the Gorganites said | December 23rd 2009 @ 12:18pm | Report comment
cleaver started for the lions against the lions (british) has a big game.
i remember one super 14 game where he was put on the wing (he is a loose forward). he held his own. good player.
Crashy said | December 23rd 2009 @ 9:03am | Report comment
yes JT he is the long haired chappy and quite a busy player.
From memory the yanks have some biiiigg boys who love nothing more than pushing scrums around so Melbourne could look at recruiting one of them for a bit of a cult following amongst the fans in Melbourne.
( you can’t half tell I am a front rower!)
Mike G said | December 23rd 2009 @ 10:01am | Report comment
Good piece MM…Something I’d not seriously considered before, but one i think has real merit. Of course, from an aussie perspective teams can only get 2 overseas players (i marquee + i youth I think is the basic rule), but it looks like Melb are going to be given concessions & yes, what a great idea to have at least 1 of the overseas players come from the states!!
Fact is the game needs a pick me up and a feel good story (such as a front rower from the US), could be a good angle to write about…
rugbyfuture said | December 23rd 2009 @ 11:30am | Report comment
yeh i have the same notion as some of the other people here, super rugby teams only have a couple of spots for foreigners, because it is still seen as a major basis point for the development of our national teams, so if US rugby players were to join there’d be no room for the real big guns, although the Melbourne team may give them a go if the US catch onto this article
allblackfan said | December 23rd 2009 @ 11:37am | Report comment
The NZ and SA teams all allow for the signing of non-eligible players if there is no depth to cover the position in question (think Caucau, Michalak, Brown, Bobo, Vunibaka) not to mention I think NZ will be taking on Argentinian players in the expanded format.
The Mellbourne team need to walk a fine line between competitiveness and locally relevant.
It’d be a good compromise between development and financial considerations.
JT said | December 23rd 2009 @ 11:50am | Report comment
while you are right about the others Bobo is born and bred South African … The Beast, Chavanaga and Mujati however are not – they are Zimbos…now whether they count as non-eligible is another debate.
As far as I know I don’t think there is a policy in SA about ‘international’ signings … it is down to whether they can afford to pay international players a market rate ..what with the p*ss weak Rand and all that. There is a historic precend for International imports playing in domestic comps – dating back to the bad old days. Including Murray Mexted and other players like Peter Winterbottom.
rugbyfuture said | December 23rd 2009 @ 11:54am | Report comment
poor zimbabwe, if they werent taken by a fascist and civil wars they would be just as strong at rugby
JT said | December 23rd 2009 @ 11:56am | Report comment
well lets say that they could field a decent 7’s team or front row ; )
San Jorge said | December 23rd 2009 @ 4:32pm | Report comment
Yes, RF that is surely the greatest tragedy of Mugabe’s regime
rugbyfuture said | December 24th 2009 @ 12:23pm | Report comment
EXACTLY
allblackfan said | December 26th 2009 @ 8:14pm | Report comment
Sorry, I was talking about Sireli Bobo, the Fijian winger who formerly played for the Hurricanes!
Sam said | December 23rd 2009 @ 3:41pm | Report comment
I thought for NZ there was an exception for Pacific Island players only? I know that provincial teams can sign whoever they want, but not at Super rugby level.
allblackfan said | December 26th 2009 @ 8:17pm | Report comment
NZ has flagged its intention to selectively sign on Argentinians for its sides in a S15 competition.
King of the Gorganites said | December 23rd 2009 @ 12:19pm | Report comment
good point about getting a few americans down here. will help there national team and create some interest from local medi here. see the coverage mike pike (great name) got in sydney
Yanqui said | December 23rd 2009 @ 12:22pm | Report comment
Good piece, Mr. Manley. If there’s anything that these players need to be able to reach their potential is a professional daily training environment. Look at Clever, or Dan Lyle before him, or even Z Ngwenya at Biarritz.
Right now, they train two nights a week with their clubs, where they’re usually far above their teammates and not really challenged like they need to be; do weight and fitness training on their own; and get together with the Eagles a couple times per year. This isn’t enough to develop and nurture their talent. They need day-in and day-out professional training, being pushed to the limit all the time and receiving top-level coaching.
One question: does anyone know what the professional athlete work visa limitations are in Oz? I know in Europe, if you don’t have an EU passport, it’s VERY difficult for an American to go over and play.
klestical said | December 23rd 2009 @ 1:08pm | Report comment
I’ve always thought that one way the Super14 can distinguish itself and improve its stature on Australia’s domestic sporting stage is by playing to its strengths………..and that is trying to get as many different countries/nationalities playing in our comp.
football does this wonderfully – where it recruits from all over the world. Super 14 needs more pacific islanders, japanese, canadians, americans, argentinians, romanians, etc as possible!
katzilla said | December 23rd 2009 @ 1:18pm | Report comment
Just identify your up and coming players in their early high school days and send videos to one of the many elite rugby schools in NZ, who go out of their way to secure talent for their teams. Once in there its a natural progression through the ANZC if good enough, then maybe a couple will make it to the super 15.
rugbyfuture said | December 23rd 2009 @ 1:29pm | Report comment
not to mention the Australian schools too
Yanqui said | December 23rd 2009 @ 2:13pm | Report comment
…and then, after their three-year residency is complete, they turn out for NZ like all the Islanders do!
Sam said | December 23rd 2009 @ 3:43pm | Report comment
All? That is a lot less common than many people think – especially those outside NZ.
katzilla said | December 23rd 2009 @ 3:54pm | Report comment
Stephen Jones! I wondered when you would make your way over here.
Good to have you onboard
Amateur Hour said | December 23rd 2009 @ 2:09pm | Report comment
“Even sorry teams like the Reds and Cheetahs produce outstanding Test players by virtue of the competition. ” Hahahaha – love it!!
matt manley said | December 23rd 2009 @ 2:23pm | Report comment
Thanks for the great comments.
I didn’t consider the limitations on foreign born players within the Aussie sides. Perhaps they should consider a change?
If look at how the home nations have struggled with developing talent in recent years, so I understand the necessity for keeping rugby talent in Oz. The European practice of importing talent into the club competitions keeps the teams interesting, but youth doesn’t get a chance to develop.
I enjoy the intensity and variety of the Heineken Cup. The teams at the top might always be the same, but there personel changes from year to year. It keeps things fresh for the viewer.
Where Super Rugby can get stale is seeing the same players squaring off year after year. SANZAR would be smart to shake up the Super comp by allowing players to be drafted from all countries involved, along with a few outside players.
I think of things interims of college football/basketball here in the States. Allow teams to pull from all over to create a different vibe within a team. Of course a core of players might need to come from the team’s nation of origin.
I guess it begs the question of what is more important: a strong test development OR a exciting professional competition.
pothale said | December 24th 2009 @ 6:43am | Report comment
“If look at how the home nations have struggled with developing talent in recent years, so I understand the necessity for keeping rugby talent in Oz. The European practice of importing talent into the club competitions keeps the teams interesting, but youth doesn’t get a chance to develop.”
Is that really true for the Home Nations? And how does that make you understand the necessity for keeping rugby talent in Oz?
Who says that youth doesn’t get a chance to develop because of European practice of importing talent? It all depends on how it is applied at club level in a particular union and the policy and motivations driving it. In France, the backlash is starting to emerge with the creation of a salary cap in a league that imports talent from everywhere, including Eastern Europe. Nevertheless, the French manage to develop young talent and give it time and opportunity.
Ireland hasn’t had a better depth of talent in its squad and across its four provinces in the history of the sport. Clubs have benefited from the presence of players from Cook Islanders, Maori, Australia, South Africa, Argentina, but talent like Kearney, Bowe, Sexton, Healy, Humphreys, McLoughlin, O’Brien has still been given a chance to develop and shine.
Wales has adopted a similar policy albeit later in the day. It has made a mistake in being enslaved to the demands of the historic clubs underpinning them in trying to sustain four regions to compete at Magners and European level. It can’t, and it is importing players to paper over the cracks across them all, as opposed to nominating one of the regions as a development side – similar to Connacht has become in Ireland – and concentrating their test talent across 2-3 teams.
Scotland? They have so many problems – I’m not sure importation of talent would be top of their list of problems.
Crashy said | December 23rd 2009 @ 3:13pm | Report comment
Amateur Hour
Ummmmm Will Genia and Digby Ione are 2 I can think of.
Pajovic said | December 23rd 2009 @ 7:09pm | Report comment
‘The mega-rich European clubs do make the most sense economically, but at what cost in terms of the style of play? This is where Super Rugby comes into the picture’.
Matt, have you not see the try fest that is the HC this year? Plus, why would S14 play untested and unproven athletes from the States? Anywhere can produce an athlete. Esp the Pacific islands. Not everywhere can produce players like McCaw, Drico, Giteau, Carter, Kearney etc.. It’s all about skills and they can only be developed at home domestically. Then polished in foreign leagues. In any case, S14 is a springboard for Tri nation teams to develope their own platers. Not foreigners. Ask Eddie O Sullivan to find a solution! The Argentinians have a solid schools rugby system that produces many quality players coupled with a decent expansion programme. Why dont the US set up some sort of Varsity competition that is actually worth something? A platform for future players? Surely some chap has a few quid over there that can be thrown at it? Maybe Glazier or Lerner might be able to spare a few quid? As for the top 3. I rate Ireland and even an inconsitent France ahead of Australia. It’s not all about the ’stats’.
Ian Whitchurch said | December 23rd 2009 @ 8:08pm | Report comment
Matt,
Whichever makes the most money. I mean where have you *been* ?
Katipo said | December 26th 2009 @ 5:29pm | Report comment
I like this suggestion. SANZAR has overlooked rugby’s international flavour and their tournaments have become stale. I agree that having more international players in the Super tournament would create interest. It would help a few lucky American individuals develop their playing experience. However, USA rugby can not rely on SANZAR to provide sustained high-level competition for it’s players. Frankly, the SANZAR administrators aren’t losing any sleep about your development problems or those of the pacific island nations or Argentina.
USA would be best served by investing in a long term sustainable solution of it’s own: a higher level rugby tournament at home. How would you do that? Create your own super tournament with franchises (actually I hate the franchise idea… let’s call them ‘clubs’) from Canada, USA, Argentina and Uruguay competing. I guarantee that every year the tournament standard would get better. In a decade you would have your own super conference and multi-million dollar broadcasting agreement. USA rugby would be the master of it’s own destiny. And… the winner of the American super tournament could play the SANZAR champ in a “rugby super-bowl”… what do you think?
allblackfan said | December 26th 2009 @ 8:22pm | Report comment
There are two ex-NFL players who’ve made the switch to rugby — Joe Tuineau (former US College NFL player now Otago and Highlander rep) and a bloke named Steve (?), who played for Chicago (?) but made the switch to rugby sevens months ago and played at Dubai.
To hasten their development, these topline players from the US should be allowed to develop their game in the Super comp (or the NPC/CC failing that!)
I am aware that NZ does this with some upcoming US players at a club level already!
Jimmy Nellis said | December 28th 2009 @ 12:21pm | Report comment
“Joe Tuineau (former US College NFL player now Otago and Highlander rep) ”
Tuineau played football in college at SE Missouri St. Taking out divisions, they may be #400 on the list of rankings for college teams in the US.
He never made it to the NFL, he was cut by the Jacksonville Jaguars in summer camp.
Each year there are 864 Joe Tuineau’s that get cut to go on to “normal jobs”.
“and a bloke named Steve (?), who played for Chicago (?) but made the switch to rugby sevens months ago and played at Dubai.”
His name is Leonard Peters. He “played” for the Chicago Bears. I use quotations because he could practice with the team, but not play in games. They are “in case of emergency” sorts in case injury creates a need for them to be signed. They make $5,200.00 a week. If you are on an NFL squad the minimum you must be paid is $310,000.00 for the season. Not bad.
Only in the most technical of terms could he be construed as an “NFL Player” yet to hear the announcer speak of him you’d think he was Chris Johnson…..not even same solar system.
I write this because American rugby has no outreach to the 864 cut each year by the NFL. Were USA Rugby to scout and pursue some of these athletes and put them into a training program they could do it for a song. Why wouldn’t you want to sign a $50k developmental deal vs. being a doorman at a tavern? Not to mention similar NBA wannabes that go their own way.
Bootstraps/youth programs are nice, but getting these sorts of physical specimens at their peak, intermingled with some who have played rugby for years is the fastest track to jumpstarting US Rugby….almost overnight.
allblackfan said | December 28th 2009 @ 12:44pm | Report comment
You know more about this than I do, JN — not hard:-) — but I had heard that Kansas SU was knocking on Tuineau’s door — they wanted him. And while Tuineau may not be good enough for the NFL, he may be what NZ rugby needs — a big, strong, mobile backrower (aka in the Brad Thorn mould).
As for Peters, I read that he had played a total of six games for the Bears but got cut. Again, I openly admit I am on very shaky ground here.
But from what I read about US Rugby (the governing body as much as the code), they are starting to make some inroads at college level (women’s and men’s).
This was the point made in the article; those players who fail to secure an NFL deal just fall by the wayside. And it’s these players US Rugby wants to sign up. There are several ways to achieve this; one way is for the likes of Tuineau and Peters to lead the way. If they do well, MAYBE some others in the NFL system may start to understand that failure to make the NFL is not the end-all be-all.
I read an interview with Peters after his return from the Dubai 7s, and his comments were interesting especially coming from someone who had made up his way up (however high) in the NFL system.
While US rugby is growing in its own right, a shot in the arm never hurts.
I reckon the All Blacks should live up to their commitments and play a Test in the US. I’ve heard Miami wants to host a NZ-Argentina game. (Given the fact that Invictus opened just recently in the US, I’m a little peeved that the NZRU and SARFU did not capitalise on this marketing moment by playing a Test there!)
Stash said | December 27th 2009 @ 12:41pm | Report comment
You would have to think that if someone is talented (ala McCaw, Gits, Carter type of talent) then surely the real money is in the US in another sport. Even second stringer NFL players get the big car, shiny sparkly rings, free nightclub passes, extra casting into rap videos and instant posse. In New Zealand you get a “good on ya” from the little old lady at the corner diary and 50% discount on your pie at lunchtime.
Then if your really good at rugby…deserving a run on in a Super 14 team – you can never play beyond the local level outside of the US.
Granted rugby is more evolved in the SH than the US – but what is exactly the motivation for the US players.
Nick said | December 29th 2009 @ 8:55am | Report comment
Good piece. Remeber the World Rugby Corporation 1995? Their blue print was to have teams based in the USA. Isn’t funny it is nearly 15 years past and still we have not emrbaced North America as a serious player in world rugby. I saw Todd Cleaver play at Suncorp earlier this year against the Red’s. Thought he had an outstanding game. The talent is there!
The home unions (England) should for the betterment of rugby abdicate their rights to host 2015 and give it North America or even Asia. Will they? Of course not. IRB and World Cup commitee must broaden the specturm as football does. If we keep revolving the Rugby world cup between UK/Ireland/France/Italy, SA, NZ/AUST are we really exapanding the game?
Asia and North America deserve world cups if we fair dinkum!
Jimmy Nellis said | December 29th 2009 @ 12:48pm | Report comment
There is always the talk that the US (or wherever but typically US is cited) is a “sleeping giant” when it comes to rugby.
But sleeping things, be they dogs or giants….really don’t want to be disturbed.
The US sporting public couldn’t give a wit about rugby. Yes, it has niche popularity-but it’s trivial compared to the big sports.
I think the opportunity is not for the US but for the rest of the world in mining the talent that exists in the states-for rugby.
It would take but a pinch of money and admin skills and a bucket of showmanship but my idea goes like this:
Have a Kerry Packer type from some region where rugby is popular and invest 1/100th of the amount he put together for the creation of Super Rugby.
Have a US based scout and coaching team sign NFL/NBA/College Wrestlers dropouts that show promise to a contract ($75-$125K US-beats working a club door) and get a 30-40 strong squad together in extensive US based training.
After a year or so have a team entered in an overseas league-Currie/NZ, even S14 or Magners. US players would not be 100%-sprinkle in some key skill positions with non-US seasoned pros (flyhalf, etc).
The point being the attraction of ex-NFL/NBA etc. players from US going head to head with real rugby pros.
If they’re competent as a side the buzz would be unreal. Just as kids imagine who would win a Lion vs a Tiger and so on such would be the allure. But they would have to perform. I know attendance for S14 rugby has not been “all that” of late, this would certainly provide some sizzle.
All that said, if this team ever came to fruition-watch the ENORMOUS interest generated stateside to rugby. It can only be real to an American fan if a guy they followed on the Steelers or Packers sheds the pads to go rugby. The media would go nuts and Americans would finally get a view to the game of rugby. They would appreciate just how hard it is from an endurance standpoint and it would get critical mass.
Or you can do the “grass roots” thing and cross your fingers that in 100 years it turns out well.
Matt Manley said | December 29th 2009 @ 4:35pm | Report comment
The one problem is that USA Rugby couldn’t pour piss out of a boot without directions on the heel.
They are clueless as to hoe to make rugby function on all levels. USA Rugby needs to focus on one area of the game.
As it works right now, every player and coach pays dues to USA Rugby and we get little in return. Essentially, we make a donation to the Eagles program.
Youth and High School age rugby is where I would put my effort if I ran USA Rugby. The College (University) age rugby should be run outside of USA Rugby in an effort to gain varsity status with the NCAA.
Unfortunately, all this would still leave a whole for developing Test level players after college. My point was that a partnership with Southern Hemisphere countries would better serve that purpose for my tastes. I prefer how rugby is played down there and want to see my country play like that.
Much of my frustration is born out of the fact that we put too much importance on foreign influence on American rugby. The thinking is that “if you have an accent, you must be good a rugby” is a bunch BS. The Eagles had a better record with an American coach then with the last the foreign coaches combined.
IF USA Rugby wants to put an emphasis on foreigners helping us out, I would simply prefer to have that help come from the South.