AHC: Make rugby as popular in the United States as in the rest of the Anglosphere

Maybe have Union go professional sooner could help. However there are three pillars needed for success:
Good local grass roots clubs
A strong regional/states competition
International competitiveness.

Foundation has always been built on strong local clubs and grow on from there.
 
In the minds of many, the roots of this ran deep. Gridiron football and rugby were well known for being cut from many of the same cloths, but as the NFL and many senior college football programs placed more emphasis on passing quarterbacks and wide receivers (legendary QBs like Peyton Manning and Tom Brady who were known for their arms epitomized this), many of the better runners made their way into rugby, where the rules mandated that the ball could not be thrown forward. By the mid-1980s, college rugby leagues were growing in popularity, and while these competitions had nothing like the popularity of gridiron football, by this time America produced a great many excellent players, and even a few which dabbled in both sides - Heisman Trophy-winning NFL quarterback Tim Tebow was one famous example of this, playing in the NFL in 2010-2012 before he found himself out of it, but transitioning to Rugby union, signing with the Miami Hurricanes in the North American Rugby Union league in 2013, proving to be so good at it that he was one of the "American Monsters" who smashed and crashed their way to victory in the 2015 Rugby World Cup. The NARU, which was founded in 1995 after the IRB's decision to remove restrictions on payments to players, had by 2010 gained more than a little measure of respectability, even in markets where the NFL existed. (Some NFL teams even drew running-position players from the NARU, with the Seattle Seahawks, who won Super Bowl XLVIII in 2014 on the strength of a bruising defense and fast runners, being one of the most prolific at this - they had six guys on their Super Bowl team, including starting quarterback Russell Wilson, who had played in NARU games.) The image that Rugby was for football players who couldn't play football didn't last long, as the interconnection between the NARU and NFL, CFL and college football programs made sure that more than a few players jumped between the sides.

In TheMann's excellent timeline "The Land of Milk and Honey: An American TL", he mentions in the above quote that due to increased global economic growth and air travel, more people from the US are able to travel around the globe easier and thus more changes come into American society, such as sports.


https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...-milk-and-honey-an-american-tl.320056/page-10
 
Canada is a regular at the World Cup and made the quarterfinals in 1991. They're also a 'core team' in the World Rugby Sevens series.

Doesn't change the fact that Rugy is not particularly more popular in Canada than in the US. As has been point out here already it was arguably rule changes in Canada that spurred the developments that would result in American football.

If were talking "mid-level" popularity sports leaving out the major leagues. Lacrosse and certainly Curling are a good deal more popular in Canada than Rugby is.
 
Doesn't change the fact that Rugy is not particularly more popular in Canada than in the US. As has been point out here already it was arguably rule changes in Canada that spurred the developments that would result in American football.

If were talking "mid-level" popularity sports leaving out the major leagues. Lacrosse and certainly Curling are a good deal more popular in Canada than Rugby is.

Fair enough, was just saying that there is something of a rugby culture in Canada (or seems that way to an outsider).
 

Czar Kaizer

Banned
The major Californian Universities switched from football to rugby for a while because of safety issues. In fact from 1906-1914 the Big Game between Standford and Berkeley was a rugby game and it was just as popular. They were actually not that bad, both Stanford and the University of California had beaten the Australians when they toured the US and Canada in 1912. A combined US team also came really close to beating Austarilia while the same Australasian team also lost all their games in Canada.
For a while many believed that Rugby would replace football because of safety issues and also more importantly before the introduction of the forward pass in football, rugby was a much faster free flowing game and was easy to see why many thought that it would eventually replace football.
The problem was that no major schools outside of the west coast adopted rugby, which left the West Coast schools being isolated from the rest of America, there was a major push to go back to football to compete with other American Universities.
Another major event that hurt rugby in the US was the 1913 All Black tour, where New Zealand thrashed every single team they played in North America, even back then New Zealand was a cut above the rest but the humiliation that the US teams suffered lead to the public and press becoming disenchanted with rugby.
To fix this I would say that it is extremely important to have a few Major Universities in the East drop football and adopt rugby instead.If there is a wider geographic spread there is less of a reason for rugby to feel isolated from the rest of America. Secondly avoid the All Blacks tour. Third keep rugby at the Olympics , the US won gold in 1920 and 1924 with teams made up of former college rugby players, wider coverage of this team would help cement rugby in the public image.
 
Doesn't change the fact that Rugy is not particularly more popular in Canada than in the US. As has been point out here already it was arguably rule changes in Canada that spurred the developments that would result in American football.

If were talking "mid-level" popularity sports leaving out the major leagues. Lacrosse and certainly Curling are a good deal more popular in Canada than Rugby is.
By "a good deal more" you mean we televise our Curling and Lacrosse matches, but I have never seen a Rugby Game, on TV or otherwise, in my life, than yeah, it is.
 
I've always wondered why rugby isn't a popular sport in the United States, when it has insane popularity in the UK and the Anglosphere (Australia, NZ, South Africa, Canada to a lesser extent), and even in several non-English-speaking countries influenced by Britain like Argentina or Japan.

What POD can you use to make rugby a mainstay American sport? How can we make the Rugby World Cup as big as the Superbowl?

Polo has the highest television rates currently.
I've always wondered why rugby isn't a popular sport in the United States, when it has insane popularity in the UK and the Anglosphere (Australia, NZ, South Africa, Canada to a lesser extent), and even in several non-English-speaking countries influenced by Britain like Argentina or Japan.

What if Polo is the most popular sport in America ? The most televised event, with polo players incredibly famous and rich ?
 
It is essentially a rougher version of American football(padding is for wimps). I cannot picture that being viewed in a good light in less enlightened times.
Football is far more rough, the rate of concussions and permanent brain trauma acquired is far higher in football than in rugby (in rugby only tackles below the waist are permitted)
 
Football is far more rough, the rate of concussions and permanent brain trauma acquired is far higher in football than in rugby (in rugby only tackles below the waist are permitted)

Which is directly linked to the fact that the players are wearing body armour and can withstand more reckless challenges, is it not?
 
Which is directly linked to the fact that the players are wearing body armour and can withstand more reckless challenges, is it not?
Yes, I'm not sure what ponjt you're trying to get across(or was it just a question)
 
Yes, I'm not sure what ponjt you're trying to get across(or was it just a question)

That the armour is absorbing most of the impact, it's not like the tackles are simply more painful than rugby tackles.
The concussions and brain trauma is more of an issue in a similar way to how boxing gloves may have led to increased brain injuries, even if it's blunting the pain, it's not stopping the kinetic impact on the brain.


Seems like football is getting bigger and bigger in the US around the World Cup periods, greater levels of promotion during international rugby fixtures and tournaments might similarly spark more interest.
Everyone loves a chance to see their country shine.

Was there much mainstream coverage of US matches during the 2015 Rugby World Cup?
 
Last edited:

Czar Kaizer

Banned
Football is far more rough, the rate of concussions and permanent brain trauma acquired is far higher in football than in rugby (in rugby only tackles below the waist are permitted)
That's not something to be proud of, personally as a rugby fan I don't understand why rugby supporters constantly try to emphasize how much rougher the game is, it's nonsense and untrue. Rugby fans should be proud of the fact that rugby administrators actually make safety a priority unlike football where there is no desire to make the game safer and it's so over commercialized that its not really sport and more of a giant advertisement.
Football doesn't have the tradition and history and rivalry of the 6 nations and Rugby Championship or even the 7's World Series.
Rugby at an amateur level is a game for all shapes and sizes where no matter your body type there will always be a place for you on the team.
Football doesn't have community or club rugby where people play for the love of the game.
All these things and and a lot more would be much better responses than the "football is for sissies" nonsense.
 
How about in the early 1880's before US Football has a strangle hold on the States one of large East Coast newspapers say the Times recruits a Rugby Team from the best of the east coast Ivey league colleges calls them the TIme American All Stars and sponsor them to tour the UK playing the local teams. Reports cover all the games sending back glowing stories of our valiant lads beating the Brits and they return to a ticker tape parade and headlines proclaiming them world champions.
 
Football is far more rough, the rate of concussions and permanent brain trauma acquired is far higher in football than in rugby (in rugby only tackles below the waist are permitted)


not sure what rugby you're watching to say 'only tackles below the waist are permitted'

??
 
That's not something to be proud of, personally as a rugby fan I don't understand why rugby supporters constantly try to emphasize how much rougher the game is, it's nonsense and untrue. Rugby fans should be proud of the fact that rugby administrators actually make safety a priority unlike football where there is no desire to make the game safer and it's so over commercialized that its not really sport and more of a giant advertisement.
Football doesn't have the tradition and history and rivalry of the 6 nations and Rugby Championship or even the 7's World Series.
Rugby at an amateur level is a game for all shapes and sizes where no matter your body type there will always be a place for you on the team.
Football doesn't have community or club rugby where people play for the love of the game.
All these things and and a lot more would be much better responses than the "football is for sissies" nonsense.
I play rugby I agree :/
 
not sure what rugby you're watching to say 'only tackles below the waist are permitted'

??
And yeah that was badly communicated I don't know how to express the way they work only to say football esque tackles aren't permitted. I learned how to tackle in Rugby by playingthe sport
 
Top