NOTE: This is an opinion piece from guest-writer Anton Forbes-Roberts. His bio is below.
PARK CITY , UT – Fragmented governance is limiting the growth of American college rugby. 
A unified platform could dramatically expand the sport before the United States hosts the 2031 Rugby World Cup.
PART I – US College Rugby Needs a Unified Strategy
College rugby in the United States may be the most important—and most fragmented—stage in the sport’s development pipeline. Hundreds of university teams compete across multiple governing structures, championships, and leagues, yet the business side of the collegiate game remains surprisingly small. Based on publicly available nonprofit filings, the entire U.S. college rugby ecosystem operates on roughly $4–5 million annually, a surprisingly small figure for one of the country’s largest amateur team sports. As the United States prepares to host the 2031 Rugby World Cup, that raises a strategic question for the sport: can American college rugby afford to remain divided, or does it need a unified national platform capable of attracting larger investment and scaling the collegiate game before the end of the decade?
This article argues that the sport’s current fragmented structure limits growth—and that a structured partnership between the national governing body and collegiate competition operators could significantly expand the financial and strategic impact of college rugby before the 2031 World Cup cycle.
Fragmentation is Financially Inefficient
The national governing body for the sport is USA Rugby, recognized by both World Rugby and the United States Olympic & Paralympic Committee. USA Rugby oversees national teams, player eligibility rules, member insurance coverage, and international regulatory compliance.
According to its most recent publicly available financial filings, USA Rugby reported approximately $16.2 million in revenue and $15.4 million in expenses in its most recent fiscal year. However, only a portion of that budget directly supports domestic competition structures. USA Rugby’s Form 990[1] identifies roughly $3 million in development and membership services, a category that includes youth rugby, club rugby, referee development, and collegiate programs combined. If college rugby receives even one-third of that allocation—a reasonable estimate—USAR effectively invests between $750,000 and $1.2 million annually in collegiate rugby programs. [1]
Alongside the governing body operate several independent collegiate organizations.
The largest of these is National Collegiate Rugby (NCR), which administers collegiate competitions and national championships across multiple divisions. NCR’s financials2 indicate approximately $3.1 million in annual revenue, derived primarily from membership dues, championship events, and sponsorship support.
Other organizations serve specialized roles within the college rugby ecosystem. Collegiate Rugby Association of America (CRAA) oversees elite D1A competition, while the National Intercollegiate Rugby Association (NIRA) governs NCAA varsity women’s rugby programs,; with the remainder of womens’ programs under NCR.
US College Rugby Ecosystem:
| Organization | Est. Annual Resources |
Notes |
| NCR | $3,100,000 | Based on Form 990 revenue |
| USA Rugby (college share estimate) | $1,000,000 | Portion of development budget3 |
| Other collegiate bodies
(CRAA / NAIRA) |
$500,000 | Estimated |
| Total Ecosystem | $4,600,000 |
Together these organizations sustain college rugby in the United States. But they do so without a unified financial structure or coordinated national strategy.
Fragmentation Limits Financial & Operational Scale
The financial reality of college rugby in the United States is modest. NCR’s operating budget of roughly $3 million annually represents the largest dedicated administrative investment in collegiate rugby. USA Rugby’s college-related spending likely represents a subset of its broader $3 million development budget, which must also support youth programs and adult club rugby. Taken together, the governance of the entire U.S. college rugby ecosystem currently operates on combined resources of roughly $4–5 million per year.
That is enough to sustain competitions and championships. It is not enough to fully professionalize the collegiate game or present it as a national commercial property. Fragmentation compounds the challenge. Sponsors and broadcasters typically prefer unified national platforms. Multiple championships and governance bodies make it difficult to present college rugby as a single, coherent product. (In a subsequent article, I’ll compare to USA Lacrosse and how it and the NCAA have partnered successfully to leapfrog rugby in college sports. And work with the USOPC to bring back lacrosse to LA 2028.)
College Rugby vs. Other ‘Fringe’ Sports
| Sport | Est. Annual Budget |
| USA Lacrosse | ~$35–40 million |
| USA Ultimate | ~$12 million |
| USA Rugby (total) | ~$16 million |
| U.S. College Rugby ecosystem | ~$4–5 million |
Fragmentation Limits Player Growth & Development Pathways
Currently college rugby has multiple championships, split governance, uneven marketing, and no unified national brand. In 2026 there are approximately 22,000 men’s club players, 8,000 women’s college players, and about 1,500 Varsity players for a total of about 30-32,000 players.
A unified governance approach would increase the number of programs, create more varsity upgrades, grow more women’ s programs organically and with Title IX alignment, and create actual 2031 World Cup momentum. A unified collegiate platform could realistically expand U.S. college rugby participation from roughly 30,000 players today to 40,000 by the 2031 World Cup cycle. Each additional player also produces $100-200 in ecosystem revenue from bigger competitions, larger audiences, and more broadcasted games.
The current fractured governance also complicates development pathways. College rugby is one of the primary environments for identifying future USA National Team players. Yet when collegiate competitions operate outside the formal governance structure of the national body, the connection between domestic competition and elite player development becomes less direct. As of March 2026, USAR Performance Pathway representatives do not attend NCR competitions nor invite NCR athletes; and NCR has a separate All-Star system from NIRA and the CRAA; and separate seasonal play from the CRAA.
Finally, financial fragility within the broader rugby ecosystem adds another layer of complexity. USA Rugby entered Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in 2020 before restructuring its finances and returning to operational solvency. While the organization has reported modest operating surpluses since then, its balance sheet remains relatively thin compared with major international rugby unions. NCR has an arguably stronger balance sheet but is still undercapitalized. In such an environment, duplicated college administrative structures are an unnecessary use of limited resources. Only with alignment can we rationalize governance, and create the conditions to grow.
A Partnership Opportunity
One possible path forward is a structured partnership between the national governing body and the primary collegiate competition operator. This is how many NGBs like USA Lacrosse operate together with the NCAA and other entities that govern college competition. Such a partnership would not require either organization to abandon its identity. Instead, it would align their complementary strengths.
Under this model:
- The collegiate competition operator would continue administering leagues and championships. • The national governing body would maintain responsibility for Team USA national team eligibility standards and pathways and international regulatory compliance.
- Sponsorship and media rights could be jointly marketed as a unified national collegiate rugby platform.
Financially, the potential upside is significant.
If the current fragmented ecosystem represents roughly $4–5 million in annual collegiate rugby investment, a unified commercial strategy could plausibly grow that platform to $10 million or more by the end of the decade, particularly as the United States approaches the 2031 Rugby World Cup.
Importantly, this growth would not necessarily require dramatic new spending. Much of the gain could come from reducing duplication, aligning championships, and presenting sponsors with a clearer national platform.
US College Rugby: 2031 Upside Model
| Category | Amount | Notes |
| Current Ecosystem (midpoint) | $4,600,000 | Total NCR, est. USAR college spend, CRAA, NIRA |
| Unified sponsorship platform | $2,000,000 | Typical national sponsorships run $1.5-$3M |
| Championship growth | $1,000,000 | Ticketing $300K, Sponsorship $400K, Media $300K |
| Media / streaming | $700,000 | Unified ESPN+, FloSports, RugbyPass. $500K-$1M/yr |
| Participation growth | $1,000,000 | ~$100-$200 x 10K additional players |
| World Cup cycle sponsorship | $1,000,000 | National sponsors with grassroots access |
| 2031 Platform Potential | $10,300,000 |
Alignment Means Efficiency and Growth
College rugby in the United States is sustained by a network of organizations that collectively keep the sport functioning—but not yet fully aligned. With the 2031 Rugby World Cup approaching, the opportunity exists to present college rugby as a unified national platform that strengthens both the domestic game and the pathway to international competition.
A structured partnership between the national governing body and collegiate competition operators could transform a fragmented $4–5 million ecosystem into a coordinated national platform approaching $10 million in annual investment. Whether the sport chooses that path—or continues with the current structure—will shape the trajectory of American college rugby for the next decade.
Part II will examine the incentives and governance realities that would determine whether such a partnership is actually achievable.