The unprecedented growth and surging popularity of our game in the United States has forced those of us in the rugby community to weigh our options as we progress towards the inevitable professionalization of the sport. This is evidenced by the countless articles, ideas, and forums of debate splashed across rugby websites, magazines and news lines - it is even the topic of chatter among national team stars such as USA Eagle Paul Emerick. Recently, the IRB invested millions into the North America 4 Tournament, a now yearly event meant to showcase the finest domestic players Canada and the United States have to offer. However, despite the developmental positives of this tournament, it has yet to make much of a profit, nor has it captivated the rugby community in the way officials had hoped it would. One only needs to look back at a January 28, 2006 article on narugby.com (here) to see the unbridled enthusiasm Rugby Canada and USA Rugby officials had towards the NA4 sparking a domestic league to be expanded and taken over by private investors by 2008. 

Yet, as we edge closer and closer to 2008, rugby has struggled to gain the momentum necessary to build a successful professional league. The mere fact that officials based their model on the NASL (North American Soccer League - an extinct league that only momentarily tasted success and was rampant with financial problem) and the NLL (National Lacrosse League – a league strife with its own financial difficulties and many franchise relocations and foldings) is scary enough. To hope to suddenly thrust the growth of our game into private hands is, quite frankly, a nightmare. 

As almost anyone who has ever been an officer at the club or union level in the U.S. will tell you, one of the largest problems with American rugby today is what some psychologists have labeled ‘white knight syndrome’ – this idea that someone or something will suddenly swoop in to save us and all will be well. Collegiate sides (particularly in Division II and III) often decry Title IX and wait for the school or a rich alumni to suddenly bless them with the facilities, equipment, or organization they need to suddenly attract fans and sponsors. Senior club sides often disillusion themselves with this notion that stadium access or a big sponsor will suddenly cure their attention woes. What’s missing is true goal setting and as much grit and determination off the field as on it. Most clubs leave the gist of their work to a few highly dedicated members who often spend long years burned out in hopes their hard work will come to fruition. Unfortunately, even these saints can fall folly to the plague of the white knight. 

Rugby players are some of the most loyal, dedicated, and hardworking individuals most ever come across. They sacrifice their bodies, their finances, and much of their time to play the game they love – and they often do so without the slightest bit of complaint or disgrace. Yet, we continue to struggle over the hump of professionalization even as our game explodes in growth at the high school level and colleges and senior sides become more and more stocked with experienced players. It is thus necessary that we challenge ourselves to be truly innovative in our approach to developing true top tier rugby in this country. 

The Rugby Super League has unfortunately failed in many ways to deliver us with the league we all hoped to watch. By nature, this loose confederation of top tier clubs has struggled to demand a higher level of organization from its members, and almost all the clubs lack the professional feel necessary to attract the long-term attention and awe of the locals needed to sustain upward growth. Many of you who have ever attended an RSL match will attest to this, as many clubs play in neighborhood parks or club-owned facilities that lack the enclosed, intimate feel or amenities one would come to expect at a professional event. Most matches are, in fact, on par with or inferior to youth or high school sporting events. 

Granted, none of this is meant to berate the RSL. In fact, I rather like the league, as it was the attention of the Dallas Harlequins that in part attracted me to rugby in the first place while in high school. I just firmly believe the RSL will likely never be much more than it is without serious, forced intervention by USA Rugby to demand professionalization (requirements for stadiums, website amenities, etc. would be necessary on a number of levels). Thus, the RSL is what it is: a great venture for the top tier club teams of our sport. It may eventually be more, but not without serious reform - reform that is not likely to come about anytime soon.

It is thus will all of this in mind that I propose a new system for the professionalization of rugby in our country. Nevermind the pessimists who will sell you on the idea that rugby can never be more than a ‘niche’ sport. The United States is a nation of over 300 million people! Rugby can and will be a fully successful professional system without many of the failures of other ‘niche’ sport leagues… if we do it right the first time. And we will.

The USER proposal combats several of the fundamental problems facing sport league development and sustainability, particularly as it pertains to rugby. It furthermore plays to the fine tradition and history of both our sport and our country in creating a league that won’t just draw attention… it will command it.

So… what is the USER proposal?

First and foremost, the USER proposal is clear in stating that in no way, shape, or form should the league created by any means be attached to the name ‘United States Elite Rugby.’ Rather, it is quite probable that the league would certainly be named something else, likely along the lines of other rugby league/tournament titles. Thus, one can call it anything that tickles their fancy so long as they remember that it is the title ‘USER proposal’ that unites the ideas of this document.

One thing that USA Rugby has done very well is the regulation and division of its territories to create sound environments of competition that don’t overly stress the financial or travel resources of any given team or region (for the most part). As an extension of this, teams have grown quite attached to the regions of their influence, whether they are regional territories or local area unions, and will quickly defend the honor of their territories when provoked by outsiders. Surely many of you have read with joy the success of your local or regional all-star team at a various level of competition or another – and this is most certainly a good thing.

What USA Rugby needs to do is play to this advantage – forget the green investment of the mythical white knight and plunge headfirst into development on its own accord. If we develop a league based on the already-present regional territories, we are almost assured success with time. And, better yet, by retaining ownership of its franchises, USA Rugby will be able to reinvest its profits back into the sport itself, only furthering to help better our game. Forget trying to put an extra buck in the pocket of the first line of investors willing to take a chance on rugby.  How are we to even know their rugby or business expertise anyhow? Certainly an abundance of the almighty dollar does not guarantee sharp business acumen.  Retain 51% of ownership to USA Rugby and another significant percentage to the territories, but do not allow for a hostile takeover of our most precious commodity- our game.

But how would we develop and shape this league? Simple:

-7 teams based on the 7 territories, with retention of territorial names and colors.

-A redistribution draft to spread out the talent from the confines of the West Coast and elsewhere to allow for the dissolution of competitive disadvantages.

-40 players per team pool. X number of players allowed from outside one’s territory (10, perhaps?), including X number of internationals (3, perhaps?). Depth would be supplied by the regions accordingly, in addition to giving each territory a foundation for the development of its own players. At all times 20-30 or so players must be from the territory of name. This would mean all collegiate and future dispersement/redistribution drafts would have to maintain this balance.

-Eventually (though likely not initially), a 14-week schedule with 12 games per side per season, with two byes per team during the season. Each team would have a home-and-away series with every other team.
                -in its first year, the USER proposal could begin with a 6-match schedule, only eventually expanding to 12 matches.

-7 major territorial team bases to the most qualified bidder for training, housing, and the majority of team matches.

-An option to allow for a rotation of 2-3 home matches per season throughout a given territory. This option has multiple benefits in and of itself:
                -to spread out the influence of rugby with a given territory
                -to aid any attendance woes witnessed by sustaining a full home schedule in a market not necessarily ready for a full home schedule. Often teams
                that struggle competitively in major professional sports also struggle financially in their attendance rates.
                -to heighten community awareness of local club rugby sides and gain visibility and access of resources to these clubs as a byproduct of professional
                attraction and interest.

-One game a week to have full online access, hopefully highlighting each territory at home at least once. USA Rugby did a surprisingly good presentation of the Men’s Club Championships this past weekend, and this proposal believes rugby can continue to do such a good job. These games would require American announcers with a solid knowledge of the game and a quality find in television presentation packaging that is able to quickly and easily explain the intricacies and rules of the game to non-rugby or new rugby followers.

-Men’s Club Senior All-Star, Women’s Club Senior All-Star, and Collegiate All-Star sides would have the chance to play a match before or after a select number of matches to also further develop their own sides and depth of a given region.

-The season would start the first Sunday after the Super Bowl, hoping to capitalize on post-football season America, and still conclude in time before international season.

-It could transform the NA4 by replacing the American sides with All-Star sides from the 7-Territory model and better aid the development of American international players against Canadian foes.

The benefits to this proposal are thus numerous:

-Territories could option to not schedule games during various home matches so as to increase attendance and attraction to the senior professional side. With games on Sundays, teams could also travel to other home events not schedule-halted so as to witness as much rugby as possible.

-The USER model maintains development of players through America without much struggle of coping with American geography. Club select sides have the chance to develop through select dates on the professional schedule while traveling with the pro sides and also gaining valuable experiences both on and off the pitch in the process.

-If a home market for a territory fails, the identity of a team to an entire territory allows for easy relocation without much loss of fanbase or development. Imagine if the NFL’s Houston Oilers were really called the Southern Oilers, and when they moved to Memphis/Nashville retained that name? Would the citizens of Houston be sore about the relocation? Sure, but probably not as much as they were. Especially if it was the only team in the region to begin with.

-The flexibility of match locations also provides an almost NASCAR/festival-like draw to events. If various cities or areas only got one major event per year, imagine the added interest for casual fans. If it’s “the rugby game” as opposed to “a rugby game” it provides the exclusivity of event-status that concerts and NASCAR draw huge attendance figures for. As noted earlier, it also gives a chance for local clubs to be further exposed to the surrounding area, bolstering their own attendance and recognition, and attract new players into the game.

Teams under the USER proposal with possible home bases and match locations:

Team	Home Base?	Other Match Locations?
Pacific Coast Grizzlies	San Francisco, CA	Phoenix, Seattle,  Salt Lake City
Southern California Griffins	San Diego, CA	Los Angeles, Las Vegas
West Grizzlies	Dallas, TX	Denver, Kansas City, Austin
Midwest Thunderbirds	Chicago, IL	Detroit, Minneapolis, Cincinnati, Pearl City
South Panthers	Atlanta, GA	Orlando, Nashville, Miami, Birmingham
Mid-Atlantic Sharks	Washington, DC	Philadelphia, Charlotte
Northeast Patriots	New York, NY	Boston, Hartford

Sample schedule:

February 10th	Midwest	@	Pacific Coast
February 10th	Northeast	@	Southern California
February 10th	West	@	Mid-Atlantic
February 17th	Pacific Coast	@	Northeast
February 17th	Mid-Atlantic	@	South
February 17th	West	@	Midwest
February 24th	Midwest	@	Mid-Atlantic
February 24th	South	@	Northeast
February 24th	Southern California	@	West
March 2nd	South	@	Midwest
March 2nd	Pacific Coast	@	Southern California
March 2nd	Northeast	@	West
March 9th	Mid-Atlantic	@	Northeast
March 9th	Southern California	@	South
March 9th	West	@	Pacific Coast
March 16th	Northeast	@	Midwest
March 16th	Southern California	@	Mid-Atlantic
March 16th	Pacific Coast	@	South
March 23rd	Midwest	@	Southern California
March 23rd	Mid-Atlantic	@	Pacific Coast
March 23rd	South	@	West
March 30th	Pacific Coast	@	Midwest
March 30th	Southern California	@	Northeast
March 30th	Mid-Atlantic	@	West
April 6th	Northeast	@	Pacific Coast
April 6th	South	@	Mid-Atlantic
April 6th	Midwest	@	West
April 13th	Mid-Atlantic	@	Midwest
April 13th	Northeast	@	South
April 13th	West	@	Southern California
April 20th	Midwest	@	South
April 20th	Southern California	@	Pacific Coast
April 20th	West	@	Northeast
April 27th	Northeast	@	Mid-Atlantic
April 27th	South	@	Southern California
April 27th	Pacific Coast	@	West
May 4th	Midwest	@	Northeast
May 4th	Mid-Atlantic	@	Southern California
May 4th	South	@	Pacific Coast
May 11th	Southern California	@	Midwest
May 11th	Pacific Coast	@	Mid-Atlantic
May 11th	West	@	South