May 11, 2005 — We have been awaiting, quietly, the allocation of the IRB's £18 million (that's about $34 million) grant to Tier 2 nations to increase the competitiveness of the Rugby World Cup, and the criteria involved in doling it out.

Here at GoffonRugby we had our concerns. Would the money simply be given out without caveat, divided among the seven or so Tier 2 nations with best wishes? We certainly hoped not, since that would guarantee in the USA way too much political wrangling and also the inevitable pissing away of much of said funds on pork barrel projects.

No, there had to be strings attached, and, lucky for the USA, the string is a good one. Say what you will about growing the game at the grass roots level (getting anyone and anybody to play), and the youth game (lowering the average age of the beginning player); those are all good and noble pursuits and there is evidence that USA Rugby has done well in those areas in recent years. But those pursuits don't bring in the big bucks. And they don't necessarily raise the profile of the sport in your home country.

The IRB already gives youth development grants. Now they are giving out profits from the Rugby World Cup with the express purpose of making the tournament more competitive, and as such they want to see improvement on the international level.

So it is that former Australian Olympic medalist Daniel Collins will be visiting seven rugby nations this year, specifically their national team setups, to examine how they prepare and treat their athletes and to give them a High Performance Audit.

High Performance. That's right. For all those who have fought a battle between "grass roots" and "high performance," thinking that they are at odds with one another, the IRB disagrees. What the IRB wants is proof that these nations have a clue as to how to build a high performance team. They want to see preparation systems, game plans, post-test-match recovery programs, and player identification, analysis, and feedback processes. All of this, by the way, is right up the Eagles' alley.

"If there is anything we are very prepared for, it is an evaluation of our understanding of high performance rugby," said USA Rugby Director of Operations Dan Lyle.

Personally I find this immensely interesting. Because we have seen a battle waged among many in American rugby. Elite-level (read "elitist") rugby is frowned upon. Aspiring to play at a high level; taking oneself seriously; doing more than just "having a go," is seen by some as anathema to the sport. One board member quit a couple of years ago because he didn't want to be a part of supporting elite-level rugby.

But there are those who believe that if you do something, it's worth doing well (you all know them, they're the guys who are always at training, even when it's raining like a monsoon and your next game isn't for two weeks). That if you provide opportunities for higher performance, then more players will come to the game. It's not about eliminating the participation-only side of rugby, it's about acknowledging that many, men and women alike, kids and adults and older players alike (Team American doesn't go to Bermuda every year just for the parties), want a greater challenge.

And in the midst of all that, some stand like those rocks on the Oregon coast poking out of the ocean. They have said steadfastly that elite isn't bad. Working toward high performance – raising the bar, creating training systems, creating a program – is a good thing. Tom Billups, Barb Fugate, Jack Clark, Fred Khasigian, Kathy Flores aren't the only ones, but they are some of the more well-known.

And the IRB agrees! The IRB is sending a consultant who has worked with elite sports organizations (IRB's wording) in tennis, both rugby codes, and cycling to examine our rugby nation "in areas such as: individual and team performance/behavioral management; analysis of individual and team performance; implementation and facilitation of training programs; and implementation of strategies to increase team performance."

Collins will meet with the USA men's team (as well as Canada, Japan, and Romania) while they are in Japan for the Super Powers Cup and he and NAWIRA Regional Development Manager Tom Jones will attend the USA v. Wales game, after which Collins will remain with the Eagles for three days, getting access to everything.

"I would welcome Daniel Collins to all of our meetings and sessions," said Billups. "We have a model we are pretty proud of and we're more than glad to give him a look under the hood."

Billups, and Clark before him, have used the term "high performance" for ages. They started video analysis before anyone else. They, despite swimming against a funding and political tide, have preached a systematic, analytical, performance-based approach to rugby football for years. This could turn out to USA rugby's benefit.

Why? I'll give you 34 million reasons. What I hope is that the IRB really, really means it when they imply that a nation's funding level will be tied to its commitment to high performance models. I hope they tie funding to who has a real plan. Because say what you want about these guys, they have a plan.

If it's just lip service, oh well, that's too bad. They might be sending Collins around just to put the fear of God into Fiji, Tonga, Samoa, USA, Canada, Japan and Romania, and then divide the money seven ways and that's it. Perhaps they will use Collins' observations to graduate the money a little, in which case I am confident the USA will get more than the average of just under $5 million over three years. But what about $8 million? That's right, what about $8 million to the national teams of the United States for the next three years. Just imagine what they could do with that.

And the best part? Anyone small-minded enough to begrudge those teams that money wouldn't be able to touch it.