PODSLAM 80 – rofl. With SANZAR CEO Greg Peters

Interesting discussion about Super Rugby expansion into North America…

That’s where I’m at, would absolutely love to see some real push behind the sport in this country, and something like SANZAR stepping into this sports-mad market would make a huge dent. But it won’t be easy. Right now the U.S. couldn’t support a Super Rugby team; they’d make the Rebels and the Lions look like the Crusaders.

*BIG BREATH — long comment ahead*

SOME ARGUMENTS WHY RUGBY COULD/MIGHT NOT SUCCEED IN NORTH AMERICA

(To ward off eye coma, skip down to the IN SUMMARY)

The time might be right to make some moves; rugby union is the cousin of our own gridiron, and gridiron is facing some significant issues right now (as seen by the season opener of South Park, “Sarcastaball”). At the high school, NCAA and professional levels, there are some real concerns over debilitating neurological injuries that rugby just doesn’t have (at least to the same degree). A study done with the Univ. of North Carolina football team a few years back showed that even in practice, the linesmen were taking the equivalent cranial impact of a low-speed car crash again and again and again, and it’s leaving a brown sheen of scar tissue on the frontal lobes of their brains. This is leading to all kinds of unknown problems in football players later lives — Alzheimer’s-like symptoms, MS-like symptoms, ALS-like symptoms, depression, dementia, etc. It’s similar to a heavyweight boxer being punch-drunk, but to a different degree. American football players at all levels become bigger and more powerful, and the padding and helmets just aren’t keeping up with the damage done. In fact, arguably the helmets are the problem, because they mask repetitive low-level damage, for the same reason why boxers tend to experience more brain damage than mma fighters — the 16 oz. gloves do less damage than the 4 oz. mma gloves, so the boxer is more likely to recover from a hard shot and come back for more than the mma fighter, and end up with more damage over time. Similarly, the helmeted gridiron player is more likely to get up from a head knock that should have him sitting out for a game or two, and that leads to some real concerns.

Those concerns are being felt at all levels of the game, and that’s creating an opportunity for rugby to make a push in North America. Rugby isn’t the safest game in the world, but it’s a damn sight safer than gridiron, and caters to more athletic types. It requires a broader variety of skills and a different kind of strength and conditioning, which can appeal to a lot of high school age players. Gridiron also favors the biggest and strongest in each position, which leaves a lot of capable players who’d love some game time kicking dust on the sidelines. Those athletic kids who are just a few kilos shy of being able to play the front line on their football team, but are too ungainly for the darters on the soccer team, may make the perfect lock or flanker. There are plenty of running backs just a shade too small for varsity who would only need to see a Shane Williams highlight reel to see what they can do with their particular skills in rugby. Since the tackling in union requires more technique, they’re also less likely to get up maimed, which will make administrators and parents happy.

And they’ll get game time. A lot of game time. In rugby there isn’t a two-minute break between each tackle, plus time for a mandatory celebration. And in rugby, the tackle is where a huge part of the game actually begins, so they’ll know they’ve participated in a real athletic endeavor.

[Sidenote: I grew up in a Green Bay Packer country, but lost my heart to rugby after living in Ireland for a few years. Recently, after loads of ITM Cup, Pro 12, Premiership and TRC, I tried to watch a DVR'd Packers-Bears game. About an hour in, the game was only part-way into the second 15-minute quarter -- commercials skipped. Watching the game stop after every tackle was jarring, let alone the post-tackle celebration and 2-3 post-tackle replays of the 11-second play just seen. It was more like watching drills than a game, and I had to watch Counties Manukau-Otago and Ulster-Munster to cleanse the palate. I'd have even taken some league at that point.]

There’s also an untapped class of athlete in the Upper Midwest of the U.S. that would make perfect rugby players — amateur wrestlers. Speaking from experience (I did it up into college), it’s a huge sport there, especially with the advent of mma. It’s a weight class sport so you get athletes of all sizes. Wrestling’s also a winter sport, and the strength and conditioning required for rugby is just about perfect for off-season wrestling training (wrestlers generally look for off-season sports to stay in shape). And many of the skills used in wrestling translate very well into rugby — rugby tackles, the breakdown, clearing out rucks, scrummaging, all require specific skills that wrestlers use all the time. There are thousands and thousands of Upper Midwest wrestlers who want to compete in a contact sport (it’s why they’re wrestlers) and can’t/won’t bulk up to the necessary size for gridiron because that kind of size can really hurt their wrestling. Rugby could be perfect for them.

But this is all at the lower levels, not a pro level. Right now it’s unlikely the U.S. has enough players, or enough overall talent, to field a competitive Super Rugby team. They’re coming along in sevens, but if Argentina got into Super Rugby, a 15s series between that Argentinian Super Rugby team and the U.S. team (or a joint U.S./Canadian North American team) would be well-received and good jump-start. If there was a Premiership/Championship structure, then a North American side at the championship level could be possible, and might draw some of the NA players from abroad back for part of the year. North American rugby won’t grow in stature unless and until the best North American players are actually playing their best in North America, at least some of the time.

However, there’s another issue to deal with; how the game is televised in the North America. Sevens works okay because it’s tailor-made for commercial breaks, but 15s isn’t, and commercial appeal is the One Ring to Rule Them All when it comes to American sports. The sideline billboards and sponsors on jerseys would go over well, but not the uninterrupted play (see the above Packers-Bears comment). Not only would broadcasters balk at not being able to slather the programming with beer and viagra ads, but its doubtful the U.S. attention span could deal with much more than seven minutes of uninterrupted play. (More people in the U.S. watch the Super Bowl for the ads than the game.) We’re a long way off from dealing with that as a problem, but it’s a problem nonetheless. There are a total of 22 minutes of commercials for ever hour of U.S. programming; would you just cut out from the game for 22 minutes every hour? Would you just delay what’s broadcast while the game goes on in order to get all the ads in? It’s a conundrum.

IN SUMMARY:

– Gridiron football in North America is dealing with some long-term injury difficulties, and that could be a chance for rugby to step in and sweep up some players (crisis/opportunity, and all that);

– There are a lot of athletes who would like to play football but lack the specialized size for a particular position; rugby has something to offer them;

– Rugby is a more free-flowing and active game than gridiron, which can be more satisfying for young athletes looking for an outlet;

– North American amateur wrestlers could more easily pick up and be really successful at rugby;

– Rugby in North America could be very successful at the school/college level, but it’s unlikely they’re ready for Super Rugby competition, unless it was at a Championship level. (Maybe a joint U.S./Canadian side?)

– Televising rugby in the U.S. could be an issue; in general we have the attention spans of excited puppies, and broadcasters are probably more interested in selling commercial time than the programming itself, which could clutter up how we actually watch 15s.