It was announced on Christmas Eve that the California Golden Bears will not be participating in the USA Rugby Division 1-A competition this spring. The official press release and a Q&A style interview with Cal Head Coach Jack Clark can be read at their website.

Several rugby blogs have exploded over the past 48 hours - most people are shocked and dismayed at the decision. I have had a few emails from within our rugby community and other friends from further afield that have expressed mixed opinions. Most were stunned by the timing and many are asking how will this will effect collegiate rugby going forward?

From a personal standpoint, I was happy with the news. It further shows the level of legitimacy with which the new college conference system is gaining. And I believe it is another step towards collegiate rugby being able to make more and more decisions for itself that are right for the college game. If the best collegiate team in the country wants in to this system, then who are we to argue?

It does raise many questions though - What about nationals? What about teams not in a conference? Who is responsible for the running of these conferences? And there is always the question of money?

When the College Premier Division was being floated I was very happy because it allowed those teams within traditional school conferences, like ours, to organize themselves. For the most part it has been a success - those conferences that are thriving all have  stakeholder involvement at every level. Some have gained sponsors, partial sponsors and now raise their own dues rather than giving them to Territorial and Local Area Unions. The secret appears to be that success is garnered from within.

Well thats all fine and dandy for the likes of us who are settled nicely in the ACRL. What about the smaller schools, especially those that have got strong support and in some cases varsity status at their university? If we all corral ourselves in ring-fenced conferences, what about teams like Life, Arkansas State or St. Marys. Or the new kids on the block like Davenport, Lindenwood or Wheeling Jesuit? 

Conferences should not be forced into accepting anyone but for the system to be successful there has to be a league or conference available for every team from D1 down to D4 - a place for everyone that wants it. It is going to be hard work, and next to impossible to make everyone happy - but somehow we have got to make it happen. I see no reason why parts of the CPD cannot function as conferences in their own right.

I know my view on nationals is going to raise some hackles; there are some of my own club officers who disagree with me. But I think, at this moment in time, we should relieve USA Rugby of this responsibility and they should be halted for now. I know this would be terrible for those student athletes who will miss out on the chance of nationals while they were at school. I understand that its easy for someone like me, who has never been to nationals, to say that it should be shelved. 

Nationals are a massive strain on resources for USA Rugby and for teams that have to pay thousands of dollars to travel there. This money can be better utilized within individual teams and conferences. If an external organization like USA Sevens came along and wanted to buy the rights then great - I'm sure a mutually beneficial deal could be struck. I'd love to see a repeat of last years Cal-BYU game - with some of the revenue coming back to the collegiate game. Some kind of cross-conference bowl games might work as well. But at the moment, while the re-shaping of collegiate rugby is taking place, nationals should stop - they are not furthering the cause of collegiate rugby.

Where money is concerned, I think its time that collegiate teams stopped paying Cipp dues to USA Rugby. Without nationals, why pay between $2-3,000 a year? It should be left up to conferences to seek their own sponsorship deals, TV rights and player insurance if needed. USA Rugby doesn't seem to be doing a great job of raising money at any level - the lack of CPD (D1A) sponsorship is testament to this. So you have to ask, would the conferences do any worse themselves?

I'm not against having a NGB, every organized collegiate sport needs one. If we were sure that revenue from the hundreds of universities was being used for the benefit of the game, I'd be happy to pay dues to it. But right now, there appears to be no accountability and no budget for the college game.

Lets be under no illusions here, Cal made this decision for the betterment of rugby at Cal. They believe that their future is best served in a conference with other schools from within the PAC 12. But isn't this what every coach or administrator is doing at their school right now? 

Cal's decision shouldn't effect what other teams still in the CPD are going to do. Although there might be some travel involved, but I see no reason why a conference that involved Life, Arkansas State, Davenport, Lindenwood, Jesuit Wheeling and any other new varsity type team, couldn't be formed? It would take some organizing but you have some great leaders and coaches there that are mostly full-time, and this conference would surely rank as one of the best in the country. Again, the success could come from within?

I think its time that we took charge of our game and moved forward. I think, rather than shouting from the rooftops about Cal's decision, those that have a stake in the game should plan to make it happen for their own team and conference, as Cal appears to have done.

Santa Claus has already read this post and offered me a place to hide for a week or two!

I've experienced being part of a close-knit group before - belonging to organizations where the bonds of friendship and comradary run deep is just the legacy of many years spent in the military and time around rugby clubs and teams. But the tragic events that started last Thursday and culminated yesterday with the funeral of Virginia Tech police officer Deriek Crouse have left me with a new sense of what it is to be a part of a family much bigger than one person or one team.

Tragedy struck the campus here once more, but the feeling you get from those in the Hokie community, here in Blacksburg and from around the world, is that there is a renewed sense of pride and collective strength. One that is even stronger than before, one that is only born out of the kind of adversity that our community has had to face.

Although this strength has come from within, support from the wider community has again helped enormously. The sight of 30 Virginia Military Institute cadets ready to stand with ranks of Hokie students at the funeral was uplifting. They were joined by the bikers of the Patriot Guard, there to drown out the vile noise of intolerance that had threatened to violate such a solemn occasion. Almost a thousand police cars were on campus. Police officers came from as far away as Canada. Most police forces from within the state were present, as well as police from our ACC rivals at the University of Virginia and Wake Forest University. The procession from Cassell Coliseum to the cemetery stretched for miles.

Thousands of Hokies attended a candlelit vigil on Friday night. Hundreds bombarded the editor of the Daily Press after an insensitive article was run on Friday, which has resulted in the article being removed from their website. Students immediately set up an account for the family of officer Crouse, that after just 5 days, now stands at over $85,000. Nearly a thousand students had promised to stand in silent protest with the VMI students and the Patriot Guard at the funeral. Social media has been awash with messages of solidarity and support.

It was a tragic event, and I can only imagine the emotions felt by those who were here in 2007. But the family that is Virginia Tech appears to even stronger than before, and one I'm very proud to be a part of.

Yes, they are all of players carrying the ball wearing a USA Eagles shirt, and yes, they are all of Eagles playing for the Sevens team in the Sevens IRB World Series. Correct on both accounts. Anything else that is striking or that stands out? Besides the fact that I got the photographs from our friends at Rugbymag.com?

What about, that in all three cases, the ball is being carried in one hand?

Anyone familiar to my ramblings will be only too painfully aware that I am a great believer in coaching players to use clever footwork before contact. What you do before contact is directly linked to what kind of ball is produced after it. I still strongly believe that. And we can have a discussion (as a good friend of mine and I have just done via email) concerning the merits of carrying the ball in one hand or two until the sun goes down. But unless your name is Sonny Bill Williams, you are not going to be able to consistently pass the ball out of the tackle if it is in one hand.

Some players may lose the ball if its in two hands and I get the argument (thanks Pat) that there are occasions that some of your ball carriers are better served by keeping the ball close to their bodies, especially when driving forward to set up a ruck as part of your game plan. But thats in fifteens!