• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

USA vs All Blacks - 01/11

Yep crowd was loud for me too. Good turnout and spirit.



Eagles got what was expected. Played well for about 20mins. Good effort imo. Look at it this way, what would you expect if the Seahawks played an AU/NZ 11 in Gridiron?
 
Watched almost the whole game. Almost nothing except low level chatter and an occasional shout when the Kiwis scored. Rest of the crowd
just seemed to sit and watch. Nothing remotely like an NFL or college football game...and excitement is what Yanks want.

You must have had an odd audio feed from somewhere. On SkyTV in NZ, the crowd was very loud and very boisterous, lots of cheering when the Eagles were on attack, lots of oohs and ahhs when some of the big hits were made.
 
You must have had an odd audio feed from somewhere. On SkyTV in NZ, the crowd was very loud and very boisterous, lots of cheering when the Eagles were on attack, lots of oohs and ahhs when some of the big hits were made.


exactly what i was going to say, ground sounded like it exploded when they got that intercept.

Thought the eagles attack was actually pretty good, a little one dimensional but pretty good ball retention, would be interested to see what a top defensive coach could do with them
 
In the US we all pay to have television - be it basic cable or satellite. However, the three main networks (ABC, NBC, CBS) are included in all basic cable/satellite packages, so therefore basically 'free' in that if you have any sort of television programming, you will get those channels (and the match aired on NBC, so it was available to anyone who wanted to watch).

Really? I didn't know that. Here in Canada you can still use the ol' tv antenna, but you have to have a newer TV or a digital converter box. We still pick up Fox and ABC and we don't pay anything for TV, just antenna.
 
Really? I didn't know that. Here in Canada you can still use the ol' tv antenna, but you have to have a newer TV or a digital converter box. We still pick up Fox and ABC and we don't pay anything for TV, just antenna.

That's what you get for being well behaved colonials... Her Madge call pull some pretty sweet strings.
 
Have to side with the "this isn't going to do much for USA rugby" party. The game was played in almost absolute silence. No cheering, no excitement. Yeah, you can say the purpose
was to give Yanks a chance to see the best in the world, but now that the novelty's over what next? If they scheduled a rematch a year from now I can't see who'd be interested. Neither
Yanks nor Kiwis would wanna bother with another mismatch. Could have had a lower quality opponent, but no one wants to see Canada or Kenya. England, SA, Aussies would also have
been a mismatch. Should have just been a match without the USA team. Some Yanks may have gone away energized about rugby after this but a lot probably went away thinking "why bother with
a sport the rest of world is just going to hammer us at." But keep plugging away. Would rather watch rugby than that horrendously boring soccer.

It was a success for New Zealand because it made us a lot of money.

You say people won't be interested in another mismatch. Maybe that is true but at the same time we can just play in a different part of America. The USA is a massive country and if Chicago isn't interested we will find somewhere that is.

This is your biggest mistake: 'Some Yanks may have gone away energized about rugby after this but a lot probably went away thinking "why bother with a sport the rest of world is just going to hammer us at."'

If some Americans didn't like it then they simply won't watch rugby. The thing is these people didn't watch rugby before! If some Yanks go away energised and some didn't like it then that is a huge success. This isn't going to grow rugby by itself but it is a step in the right direction.
 
@ProgrssvThinker hey man, welcome to the forum.
Listen, soccer worked out in the US because it's a world wide attraction and it was only a matter of time given both the cultural widespread magnitude of the phenomenon and (as always in this wonderful world) the money money money. It was bound to occur that the "stubborn US" would give in to it - just a matter of time. Rugby may be spread throughout many big, 'important' countries but within those countries it isn't nearly as big as soccer, and isn't as distributed around the world anyways.
The other thing is the US don't have a sport similar to soccer. Soccer, ice hockey, basketball...they're their own thing. You guys have NFL football, so that takes up all the potential interest space for, let's say, "another football", i.e. Rugby Union.

Then you say the US needs more exposure and matches against top tier teams. Not going to happen out of nothing, that's one. Two, the sole fact alone of playing big teams doesn't make you better. Examples are legion out there of regular fixtures with one good team smashing the smaller ones, in contexts that have been ongoing for decades. And today, decades later, still the same result: small country, still as modest and mildly interested, and still gets smashed. And if the Eagles don't win, the Americans don't watch. Simple as that, apart from the odd fan who, as we all understand, isn't a part of this conversation.

Appreciate it. However, I don't think you know how tough it was for soccer to eventually break into America's households. MLS almost folded, constantly being made fun of on ESPN and other sports channels, etc It still hasn't broken into American's mindset yet, a couple of weeks ago, I saw an ESPN dude on sportscenter being obviously condescending towards the sport and it's very clearly a tier below the Top 4 (NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL). Used to be worse though, so the future looks bright for that sport here in the US, I won't be surprised if MLS catches up to to the NHL in terms of popularity and revenue by 2025.

I will also disagree that RU is 'another' football. It's different as hell to me, and I'm sure to a lot of other folks as well. As stated, I have only been watching rugby on/off for about a year (and some highlights at the 2011 WC), and I was still confused by some of the ref calls and rules. Heck, you can say hockey is soccer with sticks on ice if you want to say that rugby is 'another football'. Or that handball, field hockey, soccer, ice hockey are all very similar sports since you're putting the ball (or puck) into a goal.

And I never said the US playing against top tier nations would happen out of nothing, just something that needed to happen. USA Rugby needs to be aggressive in going after those match ups. Ideally having one or two at home every October/November, like I said. That's not the only thing, grassroots, getting it as a high school and NCAA varsity sport, and having a professional league are all imperative steps. It's not just one thing that will make the US competitive, it's a combination of the things I mentioned, IMO. One thing I know for sure, we'll never be competitive when one of our star players is a math teacher by day and our captain is apparently not playing any minutes out there in the Japanese league.
 
Really? I didn't know that. Here in Canada you can still use the ol' tv antenna, but you have to have a newer TV or a digital converter box. We still pick up Fox and ABC and we don't pay anything for TV, just antenna.

Okay - I *think* in urban/suburban areas that may be possible here in the States, too (I think the digital conversion went through two/three years ago, and at that time people had to get conversion boxes in order to pick up signals). However since most Americans live too far from broadcasting centers (cities, et al), it's necessary to pay for cable or satellite connections. Sure, you CAN sometimes pull in a signal, but it's most likely to be crap and not worth the effort, so we just pay for it.


das
 
US rugby IMO needs to find there Eddie Jones, Someone who will not only help the Senior team but look at the grassroots.

It's all well and good saying they just need the top 3-4% of college players who didn't make the NFL but then is that to late for people to be learning just the basics of the game?

You're kind of overstating Eddie Jones' role within the JRFU bud... we're talking about the JRFU here they are a mess and the whole organisation of the sport there is a disaster.

Then you haven't listened or heard what Nigel Melville the USAR CEO has said in his big interviews and articles quite recently. He's specifically said that they have targeted getting more young people in the game at youth level as well as high school level. College will organically take care of itself, the Olympics have helped a lot in that regard. However it isn't a NCAA varsity sport for men and that holds back a lot of funding and prestige.

The main problem for the national side, probably more so for them even than any other t2 side, including the PI nations is preparation time and access to professional contracts. Their players have huge issues getting contracts overseas because of foreign player restrictions and Visa issues.

So a professional league and more money and status within the college game are pretty big deals for USA rugby over the next few years. These and every thing else will only come with more money being put into the sport, not just by USAR though.
 
http://www.nzedge.com/rugbys-rising-us-popularity-helped-blacks/

Rugby's Rising US Popularity Helped by All Blacks

The match between the All Blacks and USA Eagles marked the largest-ever audience for an international rugby contest on American soil; signaling the sport's growing U.S. popularity.

"People do really like watching rugby in America," said Nigel Melville, chief executive officer of USA Rugby. "They just don't see enough of it."

The competition on the home field of the National Football League's Chicago Bears follows record U.S. television viewership of the soccer World Cup, and comes as domestic-abuse cases and head-injury litigation hammer the reputation of American football.

Rugby, which will join the Olympics in Rio de Janeiro in 2016, has been the fastest-growing U.S. team sport in the last five years, according to the Sports and Fitness Industry Association.

TV ratings are also climbing; the average viewership for two USA Rugby telecasts on NBC this year rose 14 percent compared with 2013, according to the network.

NBC started producing matches in 2009, when Olympics officials announced that it would be part of the Summer Games, said Jon Miller, president of programming at NBC Sports and NBC Sports Network.

"We're bullish on the sport," Miller said in an interview. Rugby "is huge around the world, but is late coming to this country. And we're happy to be part of its growth."

...

Rugby will be added to the Olympics program for the 2016 games in Rio, featuring seven players on each side, a shorter, higher-scoring form than the 15-a-side game being played at Soldier Field. Rugby was last in the Olympics in 1924 as a 15-man game, with the US winning that tournament.

Rugby rosters are growing. In the five years through 2013, average annual U.S. participation increased 14 percent, according to a May report by the Silver Spring, Maryland-based Sports and Fitness Industry Association, a trade group whose members include Nike and the NFL.

It was the biggest growth rate among team sports for players ages 6 and up, according to a survey in January and February.

...

But rugby is catching up partly because the sport, which uses no hard helmets or other protective equipment, is more economical and safer than football, said Tom Feury, who started youth programs in New Jersey in 1999 with about 25 children. Today, the program has about 2,000.

Fewer concussions occur in rugby, said Robert Cantu, a researcher of brain injuries at the Boston University School of Medicine.

"Without pads and without helmets, players are taught to tackle with their arms and shoulders, and keep their head out of the tackle," Cantu said.

Feury, 54, who started playing as an undergraduate at Rutgers University, attended the Chicago match with about 40 people from Morris Rugby, his club in New Jersey about 45 miles west of Manhattan.

"To have it on our own soil and to have a sell-out stadium, that's a big deal," said Feury, who has been to six Rugby World Cup matches overseas.

"It's got to be good for the economy with all the hotel rooms, dinners out, Second City shows. It's good for rugby, but it's probably great for Chicago."

U.S. players expressed excitement about how the exposure will advance the sport in America, regardless of the winner.

"It's going to be very difficult," Hayden Smith, a lock for the USA Eagles said before the match. "And really it's just going to be a great day for USA Rugby."


Still trying to find actual ratings for the broadcast, but can only find prime-time ratings (8-11 pm).



das
 
Last edited:
Lets be honest here...In the United States Rugby is a foreign sport that is growing. There are now high schools that offer Rugby as a primary sport and they even feed some of the major colleges now playing rugby. Is Rugby going to suddenly take off and become a top 3 sport here? No more than American football will become a top 3 sport in New Zealand. But the sport is growing and that's great to see.

I liked the analogy that was made about the original Olympic Dream Team (basketball)... Every team they played knew they were about to get a beat down...but every team wanted to play them because that was the best team ever assembled. Same thing here. The Eagles wanted this game, and if they don't want to play the All Blacks again next season then I would question the goals of USA Rugby. Why not play against the best in the world? That's the standard we need to play at to become one of the worlds elite. (No, doesn't happen over night) If you continue to only play 2nd and 3rd tier teams, you'll never develop beyond a 2nd or 3rd tier team. Bring on the best....play them every year and continue to develop towards that standard of play. Its a long road to travel, but that's the price you pay if you want to raise the level of the National Game to the elite level. Just my opinion. HAVE A GREAT DAY!
 
The US doesn't need to play and get destroyed by the ABs every year. And the ABs don't need to waste their time destroying the US every year either. Playing and getting trashed against top of the line competition won't do much besides making you feel humiliated. NZ could play USA in basketball, football, or hockey every year but that won't make them better unless they start developing their game at the youth level and a pro competition at home. And that's what we should strive for rugby in the US.

We need to play better competition every year, yes, but it doesn't have to be the ABs every year. Just counting mid-year and end-year tests, we played Scottland this year and Ireland last year for mid year tests and the ABs this year for end year test. So in the past year and a half, the US played 3 tier one teams (and the Maori All Blacks). We also will play 4 tier 2 teams for tests during that period (Georgia, Romania, Tonga, Fiji). I agree with this schedule and I think that's the way forward, 2 tier 1 teams per year for tests (one mid year and one end year) and 4-5 tier 2 teams. In the future, that can be revised, but that's where we are right now. If I were in charge and could pick teams, I would go with Argentina/Italy for mid year test next year in Houston or LA (StubHub) and England or South Africa for end year at FedEx Field in DC or NY (MetLife).
 
It was a success for New Zealand because it made us a lot of money.

You say people won't be interested in another mismatch. Maybe that is true but at the same time we can just play in a different part of America. The USA is a massive country and if Chicago isn't interested we will find somewhere that is.

This is your biggest mistake: 'Some Yanks may have gone away energized about rugby after this but a lot probably went away thinking "why bother with a sport the rest of world is just going to hammer us at."'

If some Americans didn't like it then they simply won't watch rugby. The thing is these people didn't watch rugby before! If some Yanks go away energised and some didn't like it then that is a huge success. This isn't going to grow rugby by itself but it is a step in the right direction.

The game's not going to go anywhere in the USA unless you can get Yanks interested in the game on a more on-going basis.
If they just watch one game out of curiosity and then have nothing more to do with it you haven't really accomplished anything. BTW, I don't know who's the 18th ranked basketball
team in the world but I doubt they'd lose as badly to the Dreamteam as the Yanks lost to the Kiwis.
 
Top