NFL knows US professional rugby union could be a very good deal indeed (MLS mentions/comparisons)

Well that would be the answer to the 20min matches. You know, Houston comes to SA on Saturday and the play a 2 out of 3 (60min) to garner the full result or whatever.

 

Speaking of which, the collegiate Sevens championship is at PPL Park again, June 1-2. That could be fun, but it's a long trip for some of us.

 

These guys are serious and get it.

The UFC has grown very quickly in the US because it was high-grade from the start.

 

GAA or Aussie Rules would be a better sport to sell to us Americans if it had more traction in our land.

I mean why play rugby football when you already have a version of rugby in our gridiron rules that allows the standard rugby (option) toss up and down the field all you want AND as well let's you throw the ball forward and the best part of our version of rugby...being able to down field block?

 

I agree that American Aussie Rules would be great!

 

Are you suggesting that because of a lack of a forward pass that rugby is slow? Because I can assure you it's not, it's more fluid than American football and can also see runs the length of the field and flowing team moves from end to end. Sure it can also bog down in a grindfest in the middle but hey that's all part of the fun. Of course it'll never catch on in the States because it's too similar but que sera.

 

One thing that amuses me about football fans is that they go absolutely apeshit when someone does a lateral or when a team has to do a series of laterals in a game because there's no time on the clock...those kinds of things always make the highlight reels - yet, in rugby that's pretty much mostly how the ball gets moved down the field. Are they dazzled by laterals because they're rare and risky in football or is it because the movement is exciting? You would think if sports fans like those type of plays so much, that rugby would get more attention in the US.

I like football too, this is not to be condescending. I just find that observation strange.

 

No, it will never catch on because Americans aren't going to go for a sport when kicking the ball deliberately out of bounds or punting it as far as you can when no one is in the same time zone as you, or the way to respond to a punt is to punt it right back, is a common tactic.

If any version has a chance here, it's rugby league, chiefly because it shares common themes with American football.

 

It's because laterals are risky. Possession and field position are way more important in football. Once the other team gets the ball it's hard/impossible to get it back especially late in the game. Possession and field position are important in rugby but laterals are a necessary risk. Sort of like the foward pass in football, risky but necessary, so no one makes a big deal out of throwing the ball any more.

 

I think the kicking aspect will confuse neophytes but it is not a death sentence.
I like Rugby League but I don't see that getting the push to happen here. It's really only big in Australia and I just don't see the money behind trying to develop it in the U.S.
Union is already played all over the country. There are over 1,000 high schools with teams and 1,000 more colleges.

 

laterals are the way the game is played in rugby--so to a rugby fan they dont really represent anything special. Kind of like the same way the forward pass is viewed in football. As newtex said the reason people go gaga over laterals in football is that they are extremely risky. Any lateral risks being a fumble or getting intercepted at any moment (that and the fact that it reminds everyone of playing football as a kid in the playground where the lateral is always tried as a trick play!!)

In football it is more important for a team to hold on to the ball, while in rugby it is more important that the ball always be moving among the team because a tackle does not necessarily mean the end of the play. Because the play ends when you're successfully tackled in football, it has developed into a much more straight up and down game where ball security is prized above all else and runners that can bowl over defenders standing in front of them are prized, whereas in rugby it is acceptable to pass the ball backwards in order to free it up and advance forward.

 

Huh, there are still people who insist on writing the team name "Fire" in ALL CAPS? Useful to know it hasn't grown any less annoying.

 

FIRE!!!!!!

 

Remember when several NFL ownership groups considered starting a soccer league in the US?

 

If people want to watch a sport that's similar to American football, they can just watch American football.

 

Currently there's exactly one ICB international level cricket oval in the United States. MLS rents it for their annual pre-SuperDraft combine. It seats about 5,000.

The biggest problem with professional level Aussie Rules in the U.S. is lack of cricket ovals with spectator seating.

 

I grew in the Big 8 in the 1970s and 80s. We called that the Wishbone offense with the triple option. I'm guessing there might've been games where Nebraska or Oklahoma attempted no forward passes.

 

Is the NFL actually involved in this at all? The articles kept saying they were, but the only things they mentioned were using an NFL stadium (which anyone who is willing to pay the rent can do, as MLS teams with no other connection to the NFL used to) and being shown on NFL Network (which already shows college and Canadian football, and could be a time-buy for all we know).

 

I just want to reiterate that sevens blows.

 

Back when the Big whatever conferences knew how to count?

 

I'm not sure what I'd rather watch. Rugby, baseball, or paint dry.

 

One of the promoters makes it clear in the comments on this espnscrum story (http://www.espnscrum.com/scrum/rugby/story/182636.html) that they have no affiliation with the NFL outside of the game being shown on NFL Network.

Also seems from his twitter that they don't have any great connections for getting college football players to try out. I wonder if they are largely hoping to make money by charging fees to attend "combines".

 

1. Think big? Destined to fail.

2. 18 years of slow growth on the back of a World Cup, millions playing the game for decades, exposure to best leagues, Fifa videogames, large Latin American community etc vs what US rugby landscape looks like. You dont have to be Rich Lukic to know how this will end.

3. Playing the nichest of sports in NFL stadiums is absurd. We all know what that eventually leads to. Really, theyll have to use "our" stadiums.

4. Contrary to what people strongly seem to believe, having a sport resemble something else IS NOT a good thing. Rugby union and rugby league fans HATE each others sports, and the differences are far smaller than rugby and football.

Basically this will fail big time, NFL support or not. Rugby cannot sustain a professional league in this country, its just too damn small, way smaller than what soccer even was when back in the 90s.

 

Errr ... seriously ?

You have to have stopped after the word pass to have come up with this ....

 

=If NFL shows any interest in this, its simply to fill their way too big empty stadiums with something to do.
=This is where MLS has an advantage, if Lacrosse or Rugby need a place to play, MLS stadiums are much better size wise. Same for many concerts, high school sports etc. Our model is good on this. = As for Rugby, I love 7 and find 11 boring. Its no wonder the forward pass was added !
I find more running and athleticism in 7's, versus strength in 11's much like gridiron.