<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Invitees to HS Nationals Named</title>
		<description>Discuss Invitees to HS Nationals Named</description>
		<link>http://www.rugbymag.com/boys/3627-invitees-to-hs-nationals-named.html</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 02:43:25 --500</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.rugbymag.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_content/3627/10.html" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>Good Idea... for now says:</title>
			<link>http://www.rugbymag.com/boys/3627-invitees-to-hs-nationals-named.html#comment-11268</link>
			<description><![CDATA[At the end of the day Rugby is still a sport that is attempting to gain popularity in the United States, many that play it will claim it to be the greatest sport on earth, to which I would agree. But the issue is it is still only growing in popularity. The opportunity to compete at a national level is like no other, anyone else who has been there will agree with me, but for the sport to gain popularity it needs to stay local for a while, make State just as important as State is in every other High School sport, make regional as competitive and elite as it really should be. The idea of a high school national invitational is perfect for the sport at the moment, it brings attention to the elite, without making it the only spectacle for the sport. High School rugby needs to be local for it to flourish, over extension has the possibility to deter young people from gaining an interest, and has the possibility of preventing clubs and high school teams from forming due to financial issues]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Good Idea... for now</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 19 Mar 2012 21:18:51 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.rugbymag.com/boys/3627-invitees-to-hs-nationals-named.html#comment-11268</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>East Coast Rising says:</title>
			<link>http://www.rugbymag.com/boys/3627-invitees-to-hs-nationals-named.html#comment-10972</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Gkrazy is crazy. By sheer force of numbers? You think football players out number soccer players? No way. "According to NCAA reporting on varsity team participation[34] after football (64 thousand), the most popular participatory college sports are baseball/softball (47 thousand), track and field (46 thousand),[35] soccer (43 thousand), basketball (32 thousand), cross-country running (25 thousand), and swimming/diving (20 thousand). The most popular sport among female athletes is soccer, followed closely by track and field." You can assume soccer in high school matches this college data or does even better.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>East Coast Rising</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 08 Mar 2012 11:19:56 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.rugbymag.com/boys/3627-invitees-to-hs-nationals-named.html#comment-10972</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>gkrazy says:</title>
			<link>http://www.rugbymag.com/boys/3627-invitees-to-hs-nationals-named.html#comment-10958</link>
			<description><![CDATA[so how do other top mainstream sports go about developing players? easy, through highschool sports with one notable exception - soccer. the latter sport has now moved to a the euro-south american concept of 'development academies' or club based play. the big 3 sports can get by because of the sheer numbers of kids playing those sports (i.e. many top level athletes that do no peak til their mid to late 20's get left behind but it still works for the big 3 because of numbers alone). rugby for better or worse is still much more like soccer. a full and open discussion needs to occur to decide where the focus should be made to develop the game, how to structure age grade rugby, standardize the seasons, etc, etc. this piecemeal approach throughout all levels of rugby simply does not work.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>gkrazy</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 08 Mar 2012 00:36:13 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.rugbymag.com/boys/3627-invitees-to-hs-nationals-named.html#comment-10958</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>relax people says:</title>
			<link>http://www.rugbymag.com/boys/3627-invitees-to-hs-nationals-named.html#comment-10945</link>
			<description><![CDATA[This process is ultimately best as it removes teams that do not want to be in nationals or considered for nationals. There are numerous teams out there that have no interest in competing in nationals. And they can focus on their state championships. For the teams that desire that national championship, they can follow the process and elect to be invited as these teams above did. If a team is unhappy for not being selected and did not apply, they have no leg to stand on. If a team is unhappy for not being selected and DID apply, then they should aim to win their state's championship and play a tough schedule (when possible) in order to hopefully get selected next year.If anything, by having a selection committee I'd make the argument that this makes us MORE in-line with sports like college basketball where this is a yearly occurrence. Big diff though which I'll grant- it's tough if your team gets hot this year and does well out of the blue.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>relax people</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 07 Mar 2012 14:30:53 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.rugbymag.com/boys/3627-invitees-to-hs-nationals-named.html#comment-10945</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>East Coast Rising says:</title>
			<link>http://www.rugbymag.com/boys/3627-invitees-to-hs-nationals-named.html#comment-10912</link>
			<description><![CDATA[to reiterate, what separates rugby from other high school sports is everything that makes rugby the best sport on Earth. We don't need a national championship that no other sport has (wrestling does) in order to "separate our sport." It's not even a valid concern. I dont think anyone in America would confuse rugby with another sport. Not having the previous system will spark growth in every state in the union. The growth curve will accelerate. This is a good thing! should be obvious. the only teams/people that care are those affiliated with the traditional teams who have competed for this prize. I feel bad about the one goal that fueled your program's energy for its entire existence being taken away, but it had to happen.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>East Coast Rising</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 06 Mar 2012 15:49:08 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.rugbymag.com/boys/3627-invitees-to-hs-nationals-named.html#comment-10912</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>NolaDirt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.rugbymag.com/boys/3627-invitees-to-hs-nationals-named.html#comment-10911</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Does Highland no longer exist? That's the only reason I can imagine for them not to be included. Unless it's a no-Sunday thing.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>NolaDirt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 06 Mar 2012 15:23:06 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.rugbymag.com/boys/3627-invitees-to-hs-nationals-named.html#comment-10911</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>East Coast Rising says:</title>
			<link>http://www.rugbymag.com/boys/3627-invitees-to-hs-nationals-named.html#comment-10905</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I think most people are done with rugby being separated from other sports, thank you very much. State championships and big name friendlies are the future. Adapt or die.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>East Coast Rising</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 06 Mar 2012 13:39:19 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.rugbymag.com/boys/3627-invitees-to-hs-nationals-named.html#comment-10905</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>take my comment says:</title>
			<link>http://www.rugbymag.com/boys/3627-invitees-to-hs-nationals-named.html#comment-10895</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I like having Nationals. It's what sets rugby apart from other sports. They tried to afford teams the opportunity to raise funds for the trip and find cheaper flights. Unfortunately, they did it at the expense of traditional qualification methods thus lessening the 'national championship' aspect. For some, a state championship isn't sufficient. With 6-8 teams in a state, what does a team gain by winning state? This tourney allows them to see how they stack up against the best of the best. It would be nice if there was more time between qualifying and playing for nationals. I think USAR decided to address just one issue, money. And as we all know, money makes the world go 'round, not competition. IMO, this is one of the major hurdles USA faces. The geography hurts cohesion on all levels of rep-side rugby. The logistical problems facing these teams wouldn't occur in NZ, ENG, etc. Everywhere is a short bus ride away. thanks for reading]]></description>
			<dc:creator>take my comment</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 06 Mar 2012 04:52:04 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.rugbymag.com/boys/3627-invitees-to-hs-nationals-named.html#comment-10895</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>rja1 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.rugbymag.com/boys/3627-invitees-to-hs-nationals-named.html#comment-10883</link>
			<description><![CDATA["This is why rugby is not a major sport in the u.s.a. Politics." Rugby is not a major sport in the U.S. because we're not at the participation or spectator levels necessary to make it so. There's pictures on the internet of the attendance from the Cal-Utah game at Rio Tinto Stadium this past weekend if anyone thinks rugby is a major sport. But then this is where the sport's lack of depth comes back to haunt if you just have a state-based system. Rugby though I guess I'd learn toward not having a national championship at least for high schools. You're not going to please anyone, the idea of regional championships is foreign to high schools built on "winning state" if you want rugby to become more mainstream, I know when my club's youth side made regionals last year it was a pain for them to get the money to lessen player expense and a national championship would be one further fundraiser on top of that for schools and clubs that don't have huge endowments.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>rja1</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 05 Mar 2012 19:10:06 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.rugbymag.com/boys/3627-invitees-to-hs-nationals-named.html#comment-10883</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>notpayingtocomment says:</title>
			<link>http://www.rugbymag.com/boys/3627-invitees-to-hs-nationals-named.html#comment-10875</link>
			<description><![CDATA[What other HS sport has a national championship? Most team sports end with the state competition, while some have regional competitions. I can't think of a single team sport that has a national championship (track and cross-country are individual championships, not team-based). So if no one else at the HS level does, why does rugby have to? It's great to watch, and great experience for the kids, but winning a state championship can be a great experience for a kid too. This is a cost saving move - invite teams that can afford to pay and/or give them plenty of time to come up with the money. It's also a stop-gap until the SBROs are capable of having better championships on their own. Once they do, this invitational will disappear.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>notpayingtocomment</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 05 Mar 2012 11:58:32 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.rugbymag.com/boys/3627-invitees-to-hs-nationals-named.html#comment-10875</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
