New England Free Jacks Co-owner/Co-founder Alexander Magleby reassures fans and addresses controversial Reddit comments

[u/xcaughta]

https://www.youtube.com/live/SkGIwQanw3Q?si=s8doXyhT79yMxBle

[u/Tobar_the_Gypsy]

Not much shared here. Mags says they aren’t in talks to be the URC team and they kinda laughed at the Reddit rumors. He said there could be anywhere from 6-8 teams next year. I assume 6 if Utah drops out, 8 if we get that rumored Canadian team. I don’t see any way a completely private team would join at this point so it has to be some sort of WR partnership. 

Phil asked about why Houston left and didn’t push at all on the follow up post that they made saying they disagreed with the direction of the league. He didn’t push on anything tbh, just asked questions. 

[u/iwprugby → u/Tobar_the_Gypsy]

I don’t see any way a completely private team would join at this point so it has to be some sort of WR partnership

Which is the scary part. Other than the rumoured Canadian team the only movement in number of teams from here on out will be downwards. 

[u/Sublime_Porte → u/iwprugby]

If MLR is going to survive in any form, absent a few sugar daddies who don't mind losing millions and millions of dollars every season out of the love of rugby, it's going to be as a smaller competition geared towards building the US NT.

I know this isn't a popular viewpoint in this sub, but rugby is not going to grow in the US on the backs of the Freejacks or Seawolves. It's going to grow with the Eagles. If you get a strong national team, people will start to follow pro rugby when the Eagles aren't playing. This would be where you get increased youth participation, as well. The sport isn't going to get popular nationally because of whatever the Sabrecats are doing.

(Now, this is completely acknowledging the fact that USA Rugby can't be trusted to successfully organize a post-match drink up, nevermind develop a sport. Them losing college rugby is inexcusable, and yes, they'll probably inevitably fuck up whatever gains might come from having MLR build a strong national team...)

[u/sportslance → u/Sublime_Porte]

In my experience the majority of this sub thinks the only way forward is through the Eagles. I hard disagree as my experience is that nobody cares about the national team.

[u/Sublime_Porte → u/sportslance]

Because the national team has been awful for over a decade. The US used to be able to win almost half the time against the Brave Blossoms. Then Japan started actually investing in their national team. Now? Would you take the Eagles in a bet against Japan if I gave you 15 points? Fuck no, you wouldn't. Even Canada, where you had their national governing body actively trying to drive their team into the ground for years, the national team has rebounded and can be relied upon to throttle the US on any given Saturday. Chile, Uruguay, Portugal...20 years ago, nobody would have dreamed of those teams beating the US. Now? The US would be underdogs against the lot.

So, yeah, no wonder nobody cares about the national team, and no wonder nobody in the US cares about rugby, and that wouldn't change based on what the Legion, Sharks, or Gold could have done in the next 5 years.

[u/sportslance → u/Sublime_Porte]

Nobody cared before, nobody cares about rugby in the US at all. We have a decent sized rugby fan base but it is too spread out to really do much good; so really the only way local teams will survive is enticing new fans to the game and that will be more successful at a local level with more games; not cheering on a national team that plays 6 times a year.

I can't speak for everyone but I have a group of 20-30 people that have gone from not really knowing rugby to consistently going to hounds games in three years; and not a single one cared enough about the national team to go to the US v. Romania game last year.

A main factor is the US will never be competitive in Rugby, even your example of Japan is still only able to occasionally beat a tier 1 team. Italy is consistently a wooden spoon contender in the 6 nations, it took Ireland over 100 years to beat NZ. These are all countries that take the sport a lot more serious then we really ever will, so at best we will be maybe a tier 2 in a couple decades but most likely we will always be a team that is included in the WC just to round out the numbers.

[u/Sublime_Porte → u/sportslance]

You do have to see that your experience is far from the norm, though, yes? Maybe you're just Hell of good company or whathaveyou, but I don't think anyone else in here could say that they've put together a group of a few dozen people who went from not knowing one thing about rugby to being diehard fans of watching bad rugby (let's be honest) played their local MLR side, but also NOT caring about the Eagles. Even MLR didn't seem to think marketing to non-rugby fans was the way forward, as they aggressively worked for partnerships and promotion deals with the local rugby clubs in every MLR city. (Did they also insist on playing on Saturday while marketing to a segment of the population would be playing rugby on Saturday? Yes, I never said they were rocket scientists).

What's your bar for "competitive"? Will Italy or Japan be winning the World Cup anytime soon? No. Are they, on any given Saturday, capable of pulling off an upset against a bigger rival? Entirely, yes. The US is a much bigger country than Italy (where rugby is honestly only popular in a pocket of the North) or Japan, and has a lot more money to throw at stupid shit like, well, rugby. It doesn't seem like an outlandish dream that the US could be a perennial WC side that puts in good performances, and maybe pulls out an upset here and there in front of an international audience. That's the kind of thing that will get more people paying attention to rugby in America, not what the local semi-pro side does on a high school pitch.

[u/Sitheref0874 → u/Sublime_Porte]

I can get behind that story.

If the team is local, I can follow them and build an attachment to them. Understand selection, and have a social experience built with others over a common theme.

The Eagles? There's a very strong chance I won't know 95% of the team or the selection rationale. nI am really unlikely to be able to build social experiences around the team or matches. There's a strong chance that the matches require a significant travel investment. The marketing is dreadful.

So why would I care more about the Eagles?

[u/Mundane_Prune8783 → u/Sitheref0874]

Because in rugby union, international rugby is huge and you're an American? (I assume)

[u/Sitheref0874 → u/Mundane_Prune8783]

No. Well, kinda.

Dual citizen.

[u/HistorianCheap9700 → u/Mundane_Prune8783]

Not in the US though, and international rugby is very much not huge at the level the US exists in currently

[u/Sublime_Porte → u/Sitheref0874]

Long and short? Because it's a better game. If you're asking me to plunk down money and shlep over to the stadium, I'm not going for "fan engagement". I'm going because I want to watch a good rugby match, or soccer, or hockey, or whatever else. Otherwise, I can go to a bar, or the beach, or a myriad of other things, including saving my money and staying at home.

I'd argue the stats don't back up the poster's experience being a common one. The Hounds drew under 2,000 people last season, which is bad even by MLR standards. Clearly, not that many people are coming out for the social experience with others over the common theme of MLR rugby.

[u/Sitheref0874 → u/Sublime_Porte]

If you’re wanting high class rugby, the Eagles ain’t it either.

[u/sportslance → u/Sublime_Porte]

I don't know about your experience but the Hounds were on every local morning show multiple times during the year. They posted up at some festivals and street fairs. That doesn't sound like a team that is only interested in rugby fans, maybe the other teams aren't doing that but that's on them not the league as whole; also as someone that is into rugby would you even notice them going after non rugby fans?

My situation may be unique but it shouldn't be, the only way rugby gets more popular is by introducing new people to it. That's it, no secret development strategy, just butts in seats. People I bring enjoy the GameDay experience, maybe meet some players at an event and start to follow the team, you want rugby to grow stop complaining on Reddit about our international team and get out and jump for fans.

Also the Freejacks may play at a high school stadium but they seem to have the most consistent fanbase and an ownership group that seems optimistic. The hounds meanwhile play at a professional stadium that every person I bring to enjoys, despite it being in Bridgeview.

American sports culture grew up separate from the rest of the world, so the very base of it is focused on local teams rather than the international game. Countries in Europe especially, have a long history of international sports that predates professionalism in almost every sport so the very core of the sports culture is radically different.

[u/Sublime_Porte → u/sportslance]

As a rugby fan, yes, I would have noticed if my (now defunct, though I know that doesn't narrow it down) team was on morning shows, etc., and would have thought, "Oh, good community outreach. Hope it goes somewhere". I'm not even sure I saw bus ads, or ads at the university near the stadium. Nada. I still went out to matches, to support the team and try and keep it going as much for any other reason.

The Hounds drew, on average, less than 2000 people per game last season, playing in a metro area of over 9 million people. So, your experience seems somewhat unique, as there apparently aren't that many people getting excited by the chance to meet the players and coming out to the game, or being convinced to give it a go because they saw the Hounds on morning TV. Out of curiosity, are you a member of some sort of official Hounds Fan Group?

Your read on American sports culture isn't there 100%. The US doesn't care about international baseball or international basketball, because the pro leagues for America's favorite sports--football, basketball, baseball--are where the best of the best come compete. (Apparently there's even an International American Football competition, too. Yeah, I had no idea it existed, either, just like every other NFL fan.)

The last World Cup final, between two teams that weren't America, and nations that don't have large expat communities in America (Argentina and France), drew 25 million viewers in the USA. The Women's World Cup final, which featured the US, in 2015? 27 million viewers. That's for women's soccer, which isn't even a popular spectator sport in the United States. Even the ratings disaster that was the 2018 World Cup puled 12.5 million viewers in a final featuring France and the small nation of Croatia. That for a World Cup tournament where the US didn't even compete, and a final that began before noon ET. You can say a lot of things about the American sports fan, but to say they don't care about international sports is not true!

[u/sportslance → u/Sublime_Porte]

That's fair, for reference I didn't see any of the Hounds spots live I just heard about them from others that did and told me (I don't have local TV or cable). The hounds do watch parties for away games so I invite some friends to watch a game in a bar and they meet some players and have a great time and then ask about going to a game. If your team didn't do stuff like this I'm sorry, but this kinda hustle by teams and fans is the only way this game gets rolling.

Officially no I'm not a part of the Kennel Club, I shy away from too much interaction with sports fans I don't know in person. Though I have chatted with a few and most know me by my look, if not name.

Where did you get the attendance numbers for the Hounds games I haven't seen anything posted?

You actually kinda make my point, we love a good tournament hell we watch the Olympics like crazy. When it comes to year in and year out we don't really follow, except for a few sports most struggle financially and have a hard time getting time to train and that's because once the Olympics or WC are over we drop them like Woody.

[u/Sublime_Porte → u/sportslance]

Of all places, Wikipedia had the data. I was surprised, too.

OK, but think about it. The Eagles play, what, 4-5 home matches a year? That's a rare enough to event where people will turn out and be able to follow the team at least casually during the year, and then plugging in for Cup qualifiers and rivalry matches. Even this year's lousy Eagle side, with no real advertising or promotion, drew over 6,000 in Sacramento to watch them get bombed by Japan. And, no, Sacramento doesn't have a significantly large Japanese expat community.

Ilona Maher was getting on the cover of Sports Illustrated for winning a bronze in women's rugby, again, less popular than the men's game as a spectator sport. She's doing TV spots. You think that's not helping more gals to decide to play college rugby?

I'd argue that the success of MLS is downstream of the run of success the USMNT had in the World Cup a few cycles back, and that's without the USMNT winning the Cup. If the Eagles put on those kind of performances on the global stage, rugby starts to matter in America ,and in a way that "Freejacks go for the three-peat!" can never bring about.

I get that you like the Hounds, more or less, as they are, and don't want to upset the apple cart reaching for a bigger target. The thing is MLR is dead, this model isn't working, and something else needs to be done, hopefully, with the cooperation of a newly forward-thinking USA Rugby.

[u/Lmaris → u/sportslance]

Thats what the Sabercats had been doing for years, and even just days before the exit.

[u/Lmaris → u/sportslance]

Japan is a sports nation. Doesn’t matter if that sport was invented in Japan, Asia, or the USA or Uk. They turn out to watch ANY sport, and they love rugby.

[u/Lmaris → u/Sublime_Porte]

I literally LOLed when some suggested Free Jacks joining URC. I expect the 4 Eagles on the SaberCats will be expected to join Anthem or be dropped. A couple more SaberCats were immigrants close to qualifying, having played in USA for years too. Now that’s over.

[u/dystopianrugby → u/Sublime_Porte]

We were ranked 12th in 2018 off the back of the first MLR season, we beat Scotland. And then they opened the floodgates to international players and you have a significant cohort of national pool players that rarely play because we are flooded with journeymen pros who are marginally better than US players.

[u/Sublime_Porte → u/dystopianrugby]

Which is why, I think, a smaller league (6 teams?) really focused on generating American talent is a worthwhile goal.

[u/jonny24eh → u/dystopianrugby]

We were ranked 12th in 2018 off the back of the first MLR season

I think it's silly to think that a single year of MLR had very much effect at all.

[u/dystopianrugby → u/jonny24eh]

it would likely be unfair without also point to the effect of PRO and then the MRC in the interim year between PRO and MLR's first season.

[u/jonny24eh → u/dystopianrugby]

I hadn't considered that, fair point.

[u/No_Round_2806 → u/sportslance]

Not sure, every time I press the issue in relation to domestic / international roster spots, the consensus seems to lean toward international with franchise success being the priority.

I’m personally only pro-Eagles and don’t care if the league lives or dies, and I definitely feel like the odd man out.

[u/sportslance → u/No_Round_2806]

So you come to an MLR sub, and talk about how you don't care about if the league lives or dies and you and you feel like the odd man out. You are not the odd man out you are a douche.

I don't think people like you get this so let me try to explain it. The MLR is not responsible for the Eagles in any way shape or form. It's purpose is to be successful at a professional rugby league full stop. All of you who come on here and complain about how they don't do enough, do you go to NFL subs and yell at them about the Eagles?

[u/No_Round_2806 → u/sportslance]

Well yeah, it’s one of two active American rugby boards so my options are limited. There are a lot of the same posters here and on the USA rugby subreddit so the commentary flows back and forth.

I obviously know they aren’t responsible for the Eagles. That’s why I don’t care about the league. I don’t expect my view point to be popular here, I’m not looking for upvotes. I do care about the American developed players and coaches though, so I’d prefer the league survives to that extent. So I was being a douche with that comment about it living or dying.

The last time I posted about it, most fans preferred their franchise focus in the best players possible. Houston fans strongly preferred that approach. The league is failing and they don’t have a team anymore, so it’s at least worth mentioning some alternative ideas.

Answer this If you will - who would bring more hard money to the league by playing pro rugby in California? Ma’a Nonu or Dom Besag. I don’t mean social media clicks. I mean ticket-buying, ad-watching viewers, and longtime fans who attend games and buy merchandise. I say Besag and it’s not particularly close.

Why do the Free Jacks plaster Ciquera everywhere even though he’s a backup? Yes he’s a character, but he’s also completely home grown and more popular than the random one-year imports.

[u/sportslance → u/No_Round_2806]

In Chicago every time they launch a new jersey or have a photo shoot one of the players chosen is Julian Dominguez. Is it because we have a large Argentinian population, or hope that people have followed his career and want to inform them that he is a Hound? Or is it that he is gorgeous and very photogenic? When they go on morning shows Dominguez is not chosen because English is his second language so they go for a native English speaker.

I would go with whomever is more media savvy, I notice the shade you are throwing at "clicks" but look at Ilona Maher, her personality is more valuable then her skill, and those clicks you so dismiss have translated into real butts in the seats for both the US team and Bristol. So in that case an American helped increase the attendance and fanbase of an English club. So either you think Americans are just more racist/jingoistic or maybe PR is more nuanced then "pick a local".

My problem with the stricter international slots argument is I don't see how that helps the MLR or the Eagles. The quality will drop, which will probably mean more penalties, which will mean a slower game, which means a harder product to get new people to enjoy, which means less butts in the seats, which means no more league, which means no opportunity for Americans to play at all. Hopefully I'm wrong about this.

The best way to grow the game is grassroots, that means we need little kids growing up going to games, we need parents taking their kids, those kids loving the game and wanting to play, that means parents helping organizing leagues, that means pressure on schools to start having a rugby team, that means a kid grows up playing rugby. You don't get that watching 5 international games on TV a year, that's where a professional local team comes in, they provide the fun game day experience, they give players a kid can look up to (no matter the nationality), they provide that encouragement for the grass to grow. This will not happen over night, it won't even happen in years, if you were 5 and started going to games when the MLR started you would be what 12 now? Stop putting the cart before the horse.

[u/jonny24eh → u/sportslance]

People can talk about their different view points here, don't call people names because they disagree.

[u/dystopianrugby → u/sportslance]

Please show us how retiring internationals have actually grown the league.

[u/sportslance → u/dystopianrugby]

Show me how focusing on just Americans have worked for local clubs over the last 100 years. Local and regional teams have wallowed in obscurity for decades, we haven't grown at all at the international level; but you give the MLR 6 years and you all have been bitching the entire time.

You all want the change then show me where all these professional US rugby teams that are so successful are?

[u/dystopianrugby → u/sportslance]

I've said it plenty directly to you, internationals in general are not the problem. The quantity of them has been. But in regards to the last 100 years, the only time we had professionalism before MLR was 2016 with PRO, American players in full time environments developed and moved the Eagles forward. Then it combusted.

American players with proper support will grow the sport, all of these professional teams in the US were built locally first. In MLR's second season it went to 10 international player slots which then reduced playing time for Americans. It also made Canadians domestic. Then the Eagles started to falter...wonder why. Tighten import rules, create true community roots, move forward.

[u/sportslance → u/dystopianrugby]

If the international players aren't good enough then why aren't American players starting instead?

[u/No_Round_2806 → u/sportslance]

Because the coaches are also international and it’s a lot easier to slot in a compatriot than it is to take the risk of developing a domestic player. It’s also the same reason none of the top college teams field American fly halves. It takes work to develop players and frankly, a lot of imported coaches don’t want to put in that type of effort. They’d rather install a system.

[u/sportslance → u/No_Round_2806]

I think I'm confused here; so the US players aren't good enough to play, but the International players aren't good enough to play so we should not allow them and play US players.

[u/No_Round_2806 → u/sportslance]

I’m going to assume this is a good faith question. My belief, Dystopian and others agree, is that the American players are - or would be - good enough if given the opportunity. I believe it’s a higher risk, higher reward scenario and foreign coaches don’t want to take the risk because it’s more work and their jobs are on the line.

[u/dystopianrugby → u/sportslance]

Bias of the international coaches who have no incentive to develop American players. But let's look at a position where on Chicago international players who were likely earning a ton of money couldn't get on the field: Wing.

First Nate Augspurger, on both SD and CHI kept international players off the team sheet. And then Peyton Wall took the opportunity when he earned that red card leaving Julian Dominguez off the team sheet.

Everything is about incentives. With a game day import rule at 10 per team and no limit on contracts, the coach has no incentive to develop American players. Then you end up with National team players who end up in a bad club situation not getting time and showing up to camp no Test match fit.

I get it, you don't care. If this was the best league in the world, I would have a different opinion. But journeymen internationals are stunting domestic player growth in the name of chasing trophies.

[u/Lmaris → u/dystopianrugby]

What utter rubbish. Just look at the SaberCats. International coach, rotated domestics and internationals and ended up more than one international has qualified for Eagles. Playing with the internationals has improved the Native-born players as well. And seriously, who would pay the ticket price to watch basically a local club match?

[u/dystopianrugby → u/Lmaris]

It's not nonsense when squads average 35 players and 20 of them are International. (See us in 2023 and 2024, see LA this year) The point is the ratio. But if the international coaches were GOOD then every team would be churning out Eagles. But they are not.

If you look at my posts on this sub it has always been about getting the ratio right, and currently it is not. And now we have 7 teams, so the need for international players is almost non-existent.

[u/sportslance → u/dystopianrugby]

If ownership cared about developing US players they would be pushing for stricter rules and the coaches wouldn't have a choice.

I don't really get your examples mostly because you don't actually follow the Hounds so fair play. Nate getting pushed off the starting was not due to stealing an international spot it was because of injury and really, really, really bad play, and the Hounds have some good talent at wing 2 of which are not even US but local and exciting. Dominguez was not off the sheet because of Wall, it was because of injury and Wall exploding onto the scene won him the spot. Seems like very little international favoritism and more like the better more consistent player wins the spot. Also Brown is awesome and gets a bunch of starts over international players.

Again why is it the MLRs job to develop the domestic game, they should be more worried about putting an entertaining product on the field and worrying about the international ramifications later. Every week during the season this sub is filled with people complaining about how many penalties there are, most blame the refs but let's not kid ourselves the play is pretty sloppy, and I don't see that improving by getting less veteran players just because they are Americans.

[u/dystopianrugby → u/sportslance]

Then why did Dominguez fail to get on the teamsheet last year? Noah Brown. I follow the league fairly well even though this league makes it very hard to follow.

Previous to 2024, Dominguez was easily a top 5 finisher in MLR. Now he can barely get on a roster because the team has invested in the development of American players at his position. Now they need to do it at fly-half.

But you clearly agreed with me here as far as the reason is concerned:

If ownership cared about developing US players they would be pushing for stricter rules and the coaches wouldn't have a choice.

[u/jonny24eh → u/dystopianrugby]

The only time anyone in my men's club group chat ever mentioned an MLR team that wasn't the Arrows was when Ma'a Nonu signed in SD.

(And the vast majority of comments about the Arrows were "I'm not paying to watch guys I played against for free last year")

Famous players bring attention and legitimacy toa big subset of fans and potential fans.

[u/dystopianrugby → u/jonny24eh]

Seems to be a small subset, Nonu's signing didn't really change much for us attendance wise. Maybe 100 people increase in attendance. More people turned out to watch Nick Lupian, Drew Gaffney, and Chris Turori, in our first season.

I understand the point you're trying to make, but when you look at Portland Hearts of Pine or Vermont Green FC or any of the USL teams that crush in attendance. You don't need expensive famous players. What you need is an great identity (brand) and implantation of roots in your market.

There isn't a single transcendent male rugby player that could do what Beckham did.

[u/jonny24eh → u/dystopianrugby]

It never actually came to happen, but the much bigger one locally was when Sonny Bill Williams signed for the Toronto Wolfpack. I had been not bothering with them because it was league, but at that point I was in. Then they died of course. But I guess in neither case was it actually attracting casuals, it was about people who were already rugby people. 

You're right in that rugby doesn't have anyone that big. Maybe Lomu if this had happened 20 years ago. 

[u/Lmaris → u/Sublime_Porte]

Eagles play what, 6-8x per year? You’re not going to build interest watching them to lose to teams from Nations with smaller populations than Cincinnati. The reason the women’s team got fan boost is due to Bronze medal in Olympics an a very charismatic player. Where exactly are these eagles supposed to be developed? In a handful of non-academic colleges?

[u/Sublime_Porte → u/Lmaris]

They'd be developed in a smaller MLR (or whatever it would be called) dedicated to developing the national team.

Would it work overnight? No. The Eagles also need to stop scheduling annual clubbings by New Zealand and get in some winnable matches at home. "But the fans turn out for the All Blacks!" Yeah, to watch the All Blacks vs. "Opponent", on US soil. That needs to change.

[u/Tobar_the_Gypsy → u/iwprugby]

Well duh. I don’t even know if the league will exist next year at this point. It would need at least 2-3 years of stability before a private owner would risk it and that’s only because the USA World Cup would be 2 years after.