Forum Search:
RSD No Spam
rec.sport.disc without the spam


Home » RSD » RSD Posts » USAU is hurting women's teams (Problems with the Club series restructure)
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135923 is a reply to message #135887] Fri, 13 September 2013 18:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
anakin gerics
Messages: 1362
Registered: November 2009
Senior Member
> yes. the series is not a developmental series. we agree.
>
> but you, for some strange reason, think it once was. it
>
> never was. ever. ever.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


---huh?
this guy must be another one of them johnny come lately ground tappers.
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135924 is a reply to message #135894] Fri, 13 September 2013 19:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
anakin gerics
Messages: 1362
Registered: November 2009
Senior Member
> > but also try to deny my point that the membership fee is
>
> > a barrier to participation
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


---if you must know......
a membership fee......
....is the GATEWAY to participation.


know what.....my kids pay a membership fee to pleasure island soccer in order to participate.
one pays a membership fee, along with her parents, to participate in wilmington leagues.
etc etc.
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135925 is a reply to message #135898] Fri, 13 September 2013 19:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
anakin gerics
Messages: 1362
Registered: November 2009
Senior Member
> Man, Trent, for a self proclaimed "spokesperson" for the
> average player, you do get a lot of things wrong.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


----bzzzt.
the 'average player' DOES get a lot of things wrong!
thus....insane uneducated brainwashed support for idiotic things like.....the ground tap.
abolish the ground tap.
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135926 is a reply to message #135901] Fri, 13 September 2013 19:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
anakin gerics
Messages: 1362
Registered: November 2009
Senior Member
> 1) USAU allowing non sanctioned tournaments on their website
> is new.
~~~~~~~~~

---bzzt.
guess again.
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135928 is a reply to message #135907] Fri, 13 September 2013 19:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
anakin gerics
Messages: 1362
Registered: November 2009
Senior Member
> 1)Like I said, not real argument or proof here, just wrong.
> When USAU first came into being, they did not allow non
> sanctioned tournaments to be posted on their website.
~~~~~~


--i feel pretty certain that this is not the case.
anyone?
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135935 is a reply to message #135928] Fri, 13 September 2013 20:16 Go to previous messageGo to next message
southwestultimate
Messages: 184
Registered: May 2009
Senior Member
One of the very first things USAU did was eliminate the website which contained a comprehensive list of tournaments. Then they said that sanctioned tournaments and leagues only could list themselves on their website. Sorry you missed it. Once again, just because you didn't know or don't remember, doesn't make it true.

If some teams used it as a developmental tool, then it was a developmental tool. Logic really isn't that hard

My college team and plenty of others just like us used it as a developmental tool. We didn't go to club sectionals because we thought we could win a national championship, we played to get better. And we paid the UPA for the privileged of doing so. You seem to be hung up on what the series was intended to be, rather than what most people used it for. Why?
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135936 is a reply to message #135935] Fri, 13 September 2013 20:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
thefan
Messages: 1059
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
Quote:
You seem to be hung up on what the series was intended to be, rather than what most people used it for. Why?


because the people who govern it are only responsible for making what it is INTENDED to be. if people are also able to use it for something else then that's a plus but it does not mean that the people who govern and organize it have any responsibility to cater to people who USED it for something else, which is what you are suggesting.

that's why.
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135937 is a reply to message #135926] Fri, 13 September 2013 20:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Oldand slow
Messages: 121
Registered: March 2010
Senior Member
anakin gerics wrote on Fri, 13 September 2013 19:11
> 1) USAU allowing non sanctioned tournaments on their website
> is new.
~~~~~~~~~

---bzzt.
guess again.


I think 2010 is the first year the USAU had sanctioned non-series tournaments. Here's the Score Reporter page for 2010 Mixed: http://scores.usaultimate.org/scores2010/#mixed/tournaments

Yep, includes non-sanctioned tournaments. As far as I know Gerics' tournaments are the only ones the USAU have ever denied listing on Score Reporter.
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135939 is a reply to message #135937] Fri, 13 September 2013 21:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Jughandle10
Messages: 109
Registered: April 2011
Location: Mercer County New Jersey
Senior Member
Trent,

you're kind of embarrassingly wrong on all of these things, in spite of being generally right on the general direction the usa-u is going. (though, like most of the other posters here, I strongly agree that the usa-u is right in denying the petition). This is problematic because it allows people to nitpick your details one by one.

As for some specific points, it's plausible that every team could qualify for regionals if it was less than 16, but there are two issues at hand, given the goal is of regionals is to qualify people for nationals.

1) The format for 11 teams and 13 teams for example, is much less fair than the format for 16 teams or 12 teams. At sectionals there's no choice so there are some goofy formats, but at regionals, all pools being the same size kind of matters to a greater extent, as well as the general average opposition strength. Thus the bid guidelines have been outlined by usa-u, which generally, in small regions, aim to give half of the teams or more a trip into regionals. If you are a worse than bottom half team in your section, your odds ain't too good of making nationals, or even giving the contenders a real game, so if you sneak in great, but only your parents will be saddened when you don't qualify.

2) Regionals is most definitely not a developmental tournament. It's also not a tournament that's really designed for learning. In many formats, it's double elim. You say $50 is big barrier to entry. I say that's just not true.

Looking at my own team, where we are lucky enough to drive everywhere, we will be going to our 6th tournament of the year in two weeks.

Average tournament fee per player: $15 bucks
Average hotel cost: $25 bucks over 2 nights, factoring in some tournaments we didnt need hotels.
Average gas cost: $30 per player per tournament
Average overage in food cost/gatorade what have you: call it $20 per weekend.

90 bucks x 6 is 540. Add in $75 for uniforms for non vets, gas and travel cost with practices, the one pair of cleats per year you might buy (I have 2-3 pairs, and each pair usually but not always lasts more than a year, but typically I buy a new pair every year to replace my turfs or my bad weathers or whatnot.

I'd say the non-captains cost per year on my team is close to $750 (captains pay more for weird reasons). And I'm on a team that typically doesn't fly anywhere... yet.

So the $50 in usa-u dues... chump change, less than the cost of a tournament for the most part.

Now here's the catch. Regionals is a 6 hour drive lets say. The cost of that weekend will be much more than the usa-u dues, which in spite of all of the bs, are still relatively a good value.

Just letting everyone into regionals hurts the format of the event, and also from a money standpoint isnt necessarily bang for the buck. USA-U membership is surprisingly good value, in spite of all the things they do wrong, evenif you go to but one sanctioned tournament a year.

ANd anyway, this arguing is irrelevant, because this petition has no chance. In some ways i'm not sure if it was some elaborate troll job, and if it was, well played pwc...

Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135941 is a reply to message #135939] Fri, 13 September 2013 21:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
southwestultimate
Messages: 184
Registered: May 2009
Senior Member
Dan?

I don't think I said anything about the petition, and I certainly haven't been wasting all this time trying to convince people to support it. I made one comment and one suggestion in response to somebody telling PWC to go out and recruit more teams that they could beat at Sectionals so that they could go to Regionals.

I've been being attacked ever since then by people who refuse to admit that the $50 is a barrier for some teams. The fact that you don't think it is a barrier and that you pay a lot more than that per season is completely irrelevant to the discussion.

What is a barrier to some people may not be a barrier to others, that doesn't change the fact that some teams don't play the USAU series because they don't want to pay the $50 per person extra. You have fallen into the trap of my other detractors of trying to prove a negative.
I'm not saying the $50 is a logical barrier or that the people who avoid the series because of it are right, I'm just stating the facts.

You also criticize my idea of all teams advancing to regionals even though it wasn't even my idea in the first place, I just explained how it could work if the organization were willing to be flexible in their formats.

I would like to hear why you think USAU membership is a good deal, if you don't support the direction the organization is heading.

The new point I would like to make is this. If the current USAU series is not a developmental series, and I think we have all agreed that it is not, (Unless Colin is ready to comment yet?) then why would those 2 other hypothetical teams have agreed to play Sectionals so that PWC's section could get another bid. Even more importantly, why should those two teams even be allowed into the series.
As a corollary point, why should any regional in any division be 16 teams? Surely nobody thinks that any region legitimately has 16 teams that are Nationals caliber in any division.
What if a Truck Stop player got injured playing the 16 seed or the 12 seed at Regionals? It's not worth the risk, lets just limit all Regionals to 8 teams or in most cases 6.

Dan, thanks for the breakdown of costs for a season. Its not really relevant for this discussion, but please bring it out during the next discussion about how Ultimate players are so cheap about their tourney fees. (Apparently $60 was a ridiculous player fee for the US Open)

Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135943 is a reply to message #135941] Sat, 14 September 2013 00:17 Go to previous messageGo to next message
colinmcintyre
Messages: 1256
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
southwestultimate wrote on Sat, 14 September 2013 00:54
Dan?

I don't think I said anything about the petition, and I certainly haven't been wasting all this time trying to convince people to support it. I made one comment and one suggestion in response to somebody telling PWC to go out and recruit more teams that they could beat at Sectionals so that they could go to Regionals.

I've been being attacked ever since then by people who refuse to admit that the $50 is a barrier for some teams. The fact that you don't think it is a barrier and that you pay a lot more than that per season is completely irrelevant to the discussion.


Wait, are you trying to play the "completely irrelevant to the discussion" card? Once a card gets played on you, are you allowed to fish it out of the discard pile and play it on someone else? And is that a packet of "victim" cards poking out of your sleeve?

You made one comment about bid allocation. Discussion continued about bid allocation. Then you said, "Everybody saying that Regionals should be earned and that not everybody should make it would have a great point if it wasn't for the elephant in the room which is the membership fee," and you got corrected on that. Because "Regionals should be earned" is a great point by itself, and there is no elephant in the room. After you were corrected on that, you insisted, "we aren't talking about PWC or other teams that had already joined USAU, we are talking about all the teams that didn't show up at Sectionals, or no longer exist because USAU keeps adding more and more hoops to jump through." And that didn't make sense either. And you were corrected on that, too.

And I guess you suggested that, "if USAU was serious about growing women's Ultimate," they'd offer a reduced membership rate for new members joining in the fall. And then you became more-informed and discovered USAU already does that (and therefore might be at least kinda serious about growing Ultimate?) and gracefully back-pedaled to a position that was not so strongly-worded.

I hope you're not counting those corrections as attacks, or suggesting that those corrections just came out of the blue (like the elephant comment and the "we're not talking about" comment). But they shouldn't be left out, either. They are an important component of the length of this thread.

Attacks are more like, "the rest of your points would probably seem more valid if you didn't start off with such an incomplete and incorrect point" or "based on your previous intelligent comments in other threads, I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you are being obtuse on purpose" or "i'm really starting to put together a picture of the whack job on the other end now."

Getting Back on Topic...

Now what was this thread about again? Bid allocation? So the old system just had the size bids from Sectionals to Regionals. I guess that wouldn't have helped the women's team in this case. And then in response to years of feedback, the strength bids got introduced, but the Regional scaling also got introduced.

But there's an issue because when a highly skilled unranked pickup squad swoops in and steals a bid desired by a team ranked higher than 4 of 5 teams in the other section, the ranked team is upset. At USAU. So it's bad for that unranked squad to be allowed to participate. But refusing to let them participate would be bad for growth, too. One team fewer. So they just shouldn't be allowed to advance to Regionals. But not allowing teams that earned it to advance to Regionals is also bad for growth.

So Regional scaling is bad for growth. But without Regional scaling, Sectionals and Regionals would be redundant. But we shouldn't eliminate Sectionals because that would be bad for growth, creating travel-distance-related barriers of entry for new teams wanting to enter the Series.

This is getting complicated. And this room is getting kinda smelly. Definitely doesn't smell like elephant, but I think there may be some dead horses in here. I suppose we can agree that Southwestultimate was wrong about a bunch of things, and we don't need to continue to remind about that, so long as he doesn't pull out any more victim cards. And We can agree that the topic of the thread is the bid allocation system, thoughtfully included in the subtitle by the original poster.

So what is the solution to what the original poster identified as a problem "with recent USAU restructuring of their strength bid system"? Regional scaling is probably more the issue than it is the strength bid system, but maybe both are at play. So what's the solution?

1) Improved ranking algorithm that will also determine the strength of teams that don't participate in the regular season (i.e. provide no data)?
2) Added requirements that every team participating in the Series play 10 sanctioned regular season games?
3) Restrictions on how far unranked teams can advance in the Series?
4) Restrictions on how good unranked teams can be? Maybe a point system based on player ratings?
5) Don't worry about the redundance point and make Sectionals a Regionals warm-up rather than a Regionals qualifier?
6) Create an application process through which deserving teams/Regions can apply for an expanded Regionals tournament?

Lots to talk about here. I don't think we need to get distracted too much by PWC's Sectionals performance. It's not a situation where they should have beaten 13ossypants but didn't, or at least, that's not critical to the discussion. Let's just assume for discussion (and without offending anyone) that 13ossypants is clearly superior to PWC, and PWC is clearly superior to the teams in the other section.

Sounds like the basic complaint is that the system did not get the 8 strongest teams to Regionals, because 13ossypants' strength didn't get factored into the bid allocation. The 8 strongest teams are the ones who "deserve" to go to Regionals, but the 5th best team doesn't get to go. The system doesn't factor in the strength of unranked teams in the bid allocation, but those teams are still allowed to participate and eliminate "deserving" teams. It is not an unreasonable issue to raise (is this reminiscent of Capitols' participation at Regionals a year or two ago?), it's just also not a simple issue to resolve, without potentially upsetting some group or another.

One question I have, just to understand the perspective of the original poster. If we could go back in time and redo the bid allocation prior to Sectionals, it have been an acceptable situation if PWC's Section got an extra bid and the other Section got one bid fewer? In that case, with a true understanding of the strength of the teams involved, the "deserving" (by strength) teams would get the bids to Regionals.

-Colin


Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135944 is a reply to message #135943] Sat, 14 September 2013 01:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
southwestultimate
Messages: 184
Registered: May 2009
Senior Member
Colin, no matter how many times you repeat your claims, and no matter how many other posters agree with you, you can't change the facts. USAU charging full price for players to participate in their fall series is hurting participation. Its a fact
You can try to change the discussion, and you can quote attacks against me again "I'm really starting to put together a picture of the whack job on the other end" wasn't anything I said, but thanks for proving my point.
I'm actually quite tired of correcting you, so I guess congratulation, you wore me out.

I didn't bother to read the second half of your message since you wasted so much of my time on the first half, but I will assume you made some good points, cause you typically do when you are attacking, defending, or being a USAU apologist.
I am still waiting for your opinion on whether or not the USAU club series is currently or was ever a developmental series. But I will do you the courtesy of starting a new thread on that subject since this one has become a dead horse. The entire thread should have been yeah, that sucks for PWC, no system is perfect, better luck next year. Good luck to everybody who still feels the need to regurgitate on this one.
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135945 is a reply to message #135935] Sat, 14 September 2013 04:16 Go to previous messageGo to next message
anakin gerics
Messages: 1362
Registered: November 2009
Senior Member
> My college team and plenty of others just like us used it as
>
> a developmental tool. We didn't go to club sectionals
>
> because we thought we could win a national championship, we
>
> played to get better. And we paid the UPA for the
>
> privileged of doing so.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


---my college teams played in the fall series because we were all already members of the upa from the season before....and thus didn't have to sign up just for the fall.

we went to club sectionals....to fuck up the seasons of the older vet squads that thought they had a chance against us
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135946 is a reply to message #135937] Sat, 14 September 2013 04:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
anakin gerics
Messages: 1362
Registered: November 2009
Senior Member
On Friday, September 13, 2013 11:43:02 PM UTC-4, Oldandslow wrote:

> Yep, includes non-sanctioned tournaments. As far as I know
> Gerics' tournaments are the only ones the USAU have ever
> denied listing on Score Reporter.
~~~~~~~~~


---whoa...not even close(regarding events i've run)...unless you know something i don't know...

i've never had trouble getting my events posted on their site.
from Easterns, the WUFF War, WUFF Coed Nationals, Beasterns and even UOA events.

i DID, however, eventually stop even trying....when i stopped trying...is when my events weren't there.
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135951 is a reply to message #135944] Sat, 14 September 2013 06:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mgd.mitch
Messages: 1207
Registered: January 2009
Senior Member
southwestultimate wrote on Sat, 14 September 2013 04:30
Colin, no matter how many times you repeat your claims, and no matter how many other posters agree with you, you can't change the facts.
says the guy ignoring links to items that disprove your version of the facts.

it's like toad learned to spell, but the same poor logic and misinformation.
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135952 is a reply to message #135951] Sat, 14 September 2013 06:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
anakin gerics
Messages: 1362
Registered: November 2009
Senior Member
> it's like toad learned to spell, but the same poor logic and
>
> misinformation.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


---except toad was probably right about everything.....and his vision of the future continues to unfold in front of us.......
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135954 is a reply to message #135944] Sat, 14 September 2013 09:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
colinmcintyre
Messages: 1256
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
southwestultimate wrote on Sat, 14 September 2013 04:30
Colin, no matter how many times you repeat your claims, and no matter how many other posters agree with you, you can't change the facts.


And neither can you. The difference is, I don't need to. I provided the context of what you posted and why it made no sense in this thread. I quoted what you said, in order, and showed how it made no sense. No elephant. And we're talking about PWC and teams at Sectionals. Totally clear. Your "I'm right, I can't hear you, LA-LA-LA-LA" defense isn't cutting it.

southwestultimate wrote on Sat, 14 September 2013 04:30
you can quote attacks against me again "I'm really starting to put together a picture of the whack job on the other end" wasn't anything I said, but thanks for proving my point.


I know what I quoted. Attacks. Two from you, one from thefan. You're not a victim here. You jumped in trying to insert your personal agenda into a discussion where it didn't belong, you were wrong about all kinds of stuff, got corrected, continued to whine about it and insist you weren't totally out of place (and wrong), attacked different folks, and then eventually got attacked yourself. And played the victim card.

southwestultimate wrote on Sat, 14 September 2013 04:30
I'm actually quite tired of correcting you, so I guess congratulation, you wore me out.


Another invitation for you. Can you please quote where you corrected me and were right about it? Or are you just too tuckered out to go on a wild goose chase? Should have just admitted you were wrong, instead of spending two days searching in vain for how you might be right. No wonder you're tired and still making no sense. Get some sleep!

southwestultimate wrote on Sat, 14 September 2013 04:30
I didn't bother to read . . .


Yeah, this seems to be the trend.

southwestultimate wrote on Sat, 14 September 2013 04:30
The entire thread should have been yeah, that sucks for PWC, no system is perfect, better luck next year.


Yeah, or possibly some brainstorms over how to treat unranked teams for bid allocation purposes, when and whether Regional scaling is appropriate, and discussion of the various policy factors at play. And exploring what options the original poster and/or PWC would prefer, considering all the different factors. Or even strategies PWC might use to get their desired outcome in future years. Because aside from the knee-jerk "you lost, go home" reaction, I think people are very supportive of this kind of developmental team that provides a quality playing opportunity for women who want to get into the sport or continue to develop their skills. But then you jumped in and derailed it with your nonsense.

-Colin (on behalf of myself only)
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135955 is a reply to message #135954] Sat, 14 September 2013 10:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ryan3thompson
Messages: 51
Registered: July 2012
Member
In response to Colin's good rundown of the actual issues regarding PWC and 13ossypants, and the issue of teams that don't participate in the regular season participating in the postseason:

1. Don't let teams that didn't play in the regular season play in the postseason.
2. Announce Regionals dates and locations far in advance of the Series registration deadline.
3. Only allow teams that agree to attend Regionals to attend Sectionals.
4. Fine teams that qualify for Regionals but do not attend (or ban players from USAU events for 1 year, or don't allow the team to exist the following year).

Bravo! A real postseason series! Formats and bid allocations that actually make sense.

And maybe "club" tournaments can continue all year round for players who just want to play ultimate. I think we're at the point where we can separate teams that treat the postseason series as a real "postseason" and teams that are just looking for more tournaments. If there's a demand for more tournaments, they will arise (see Trent's spirit series).
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135956 is a reply to message #135955] Sat, 14 September 2013 10:17 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ryan3thompson
Messages: 51
Registered: July 2012
Member
And on the subject of more tournaments after the series starts: I love the Virginia Fusion tournament that Without Limits is running. It's not sanctioned, but it allows high-level womens teams and other teams in the area to play instead of / in addition to Sectionals in September.
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135957 is a reply to message #135955] Sat, 14 September 2013 11:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
colinmcintyre
Messages: 1256
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
ryan3thompson wrote on Sat, 14 September 2013 13:12
In response to Colin's good rundown of the actual issues regarding PWC and 13ossypants, and the issue of teams that don't participate in the regular season participating in the postseason:

1. Don't let teams that didn't play in the regular season play in the postseason.
2. Announce Regionals dates and locations far in advance of the Series registration deadline.
3. Only allow teams that agree to attend Regionals to attend Sectionals.
4. Fine teams that qualify for Regionals but do not attend (or ban players from USAU events for 1 year, or don't allow the team to exist the following year).

Bravo! A real postseason series! Formats and bid allocations that actually make sense.


Cool. A thoughtful possible solution that greatly increases predictability and simplicity for organizers. Fairly aggressive, and illustrative of the challenge of not being able to please everyone, but a clear plan for approaching the Series in a given way.

For this thread, I guess the question for PWC is, 1) would you be willing to commit to attending Regionals anywhere in the Region (fairly small region, geographically), and 2) would it be ok for you if 13ossypants wasn't allowed to play Sectionals?

Getting Regionals dates and locations announced far in advance is a good thing to do, regardless. I know in the Great Lakes, we have a couple organizers who have already put in their requests for 2014 Regionals sites. But this year, getting a Regionals site and TD was a big challenge. There's a lot that we can do as organizers and as a community to make this part better. Players in Regions who have organizers that are consistently on top of this are very fortunate.

I think 3) and 4) would be very helpful for both teams and organizers. It's a huge hassle to scramble at the last minute to replace a team that bails, and having the whole schedule and format in limbo until the situation is resolved. This solution is also on the heavy-handed side, and wouldn't be popular with some folks. I think in my Region (max drive to Regionals ~8 hrs) it might be ok, but I can see issues with such a firm requirement elsewhere.

1) is the tough one. It eliminates a traditional notion, which many people expressed was very important, that any team can show up at Sectionals and have the chance to compete for a National Championship. Maybe that's just not a good fit, but folks indicated it was important as of pretty recently. It definitely makes things more predictable from an organizing standpoint, knowing how many fields you'll need for Sectionals, etc. It also probably leaves some people very upset, "banned from the series," or whatever. I think in the interim, there's good incentive for teams locally to sort out some of this, knowing it's an issue for a strong team to show up late and "steal" bids. In our section, we had a strong team form late in the summer and worked to get them to attend one tournament and play a little round robin to get their 10 games and count in the rankings, in hopes of avoiding the issue in this case. More work than some teams are interested in, but it was easy enough, the teams had fun, and it was good for the community -- got an extra local playing opportunity out of it.

Anyway, good ideas, Ryan. I know the complexity of it isn't lost on you. But I appreciate a concise presentation of one approach (conciseness -- not my strength).

-Colin
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135961 is a reply to message #135957] Sat, 14 September 2013 13:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
thefan
Messages: 1059
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
i'm starting to get the idea that this southwest ultimate guy is just jacking with us for fun. there's no way he actually believes everything he's written so far. i think he's even changed sides a few times.

well played, sir. well played. you had us all going for a while.
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135980 is a reply to message #135901] Sun, 15 September 2013 14:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
donovd
Messages: 241
Registered: April 2009
Senior Member
southwestultimate wrote on Fri, 13 September 2013 15:57

3) The series used to be a developmental series. I made no comment on whether it was intended that way or not, simply said that it used to be a series that teams used as a developmental tool.

TIL Trent Simmons calls apples - pipes and water jugs - gravity bongs. Does it upset you to see someone eat an apple? Or recycle a water jug without first cutting the bottom off? Do bottling companies have an obligation to not change the design of a bottle in such as way that would make it harder for you to get high?


Oh and to the point of money being a barrier- USAU could pay teams to attend sectionals instead of charging, and yeah we would probably get more teams there. But I and probably most posters on here, would rather USAU spent money on other things than just one free tourney a year.
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135987 is a reply to message #135980] Mon, 16 September 2013 00:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
southwestultimate
Messages: 184
Registered: May 2009
Senior Member
I'm not upset about any of this, my apologies if you got that impression. I'm just commenting. Seems like all the emotion is on the other side. Smile
If more people were using apples as pipes than were eating the apples, then the apple companies should probably consider their opinion before making changes.
If more people were using water jugs to make gravity bongs then were using them to hold water, then the water jug companies should probably consider that before they change the design. At least they would consider that if they were good business people.

Who said anything about a free tournament, all I suggested was that they make their already existing one time fee an option for series events. Revolutionary, I know.

new summary of this thread. comment, comment, comment, etc.
Then I say "The sun rises in the east"
Response "No it doesn't"
I say "yes it does, I saw it this morning"
response "Well, I didn't see it, so I don't believe it"
I say "have you ever seen it rise anywhere else"
Response "No"
I say "thanks for admitting my point"
response "You can call it east if you want, but there is going to be a lot of things that happen in the east in your lifetime"
I say "ok"
new response "technically the sun doesn't rise, the earth spins, blah blah blah"
I say "ok"
response "I don't think it matters that the sun rises in the east, because our team doesn't start practice til noon"
I say "your opinion about whether or not it matters is irrelevant"
"blah, blah, blah, irrelevant card, victim card, blah, blah, blah"
more arguing,
more arguing
more arguing
"lets compare apples to gravity bongs"
I say "ok, lets"

Again, my apologies if this analogy was too complex for you or if I didn't include your comments. At this point, I am writing for the amusement of all the people who have bothered to read this entire thread and all its redundancies and attempted revisions. Sure wish I had a gravity bong right now, whatever that is. Have a great week everybody and btw, I'm fairly confident at this point that nothing worthwhile will be added to this thread, including this post. Smile

p.s. donovd: I've been informed that here in Colorado nobody uses apples or milkjugs anymore. Apparently its all about vape pens now. Didn't want you to look foolish in front of the kids on your next visit.
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135996 is a reply to message #135987] Mon, 16 September 2013 06:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Knappy
Messages: 830
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
From Trent's bio on freefallseries.com

"When he isn't working on Ultimate projects in the US and abroad, he coaches Ultimate, makes flower pots by burning the middles out of stumps, and tries to spend quality time with his girlfriend and chocolate lab."

There is no way that a dude who makes flower pots out of stumps does not know what a gravity bong is.
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #135998 is a reply to message #135996] Mon, 16 September 2013 07:37 Go to previous messageGo to next message
thefan
Messages: 1059
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
knappy, do you wake up awesome or do you have to get a cup of coffee in you first?
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #136001 is a reply to message #135987] Mon, 16 September 2013 09:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
donovd
Messages: 241
Registered: April 2009
Senior Member
Are you trying to make the case that most teams use the series as a developmental series?!?!

Most teams view the series as the culmination of their season. They want to see how well they can do and they use it as a measuring stick when they set goals at the beginning of the season. Much less than half of the teams playing the series are using it to develop. I would argue that PWC isn't even using it as a development series although they do use the d word. USAU does not need to cater the CLUB SERIES to developing COLLEGE teams.

And as for the free/fee discussion- by your logic any fee whatsoever is a "barrier" to someone, so I just took your argument to it's conclusion- yes USAU could get more teams to play in the series if they made it free (or really really cheap), but do the members of the organization think that is a good use of resources? Almost everyone on here seems to think not.
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #136002 is a reply to message #135998] Mon, 16 September 2013 09:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
southwestultimate
Messages: 184
Registered: May 2009
Senior Member
Knappy, I'm flattered by the personal attention. You may not be aware of this, but Colorado has the most vibrant community of nature artists in the country, of which I am but a nascent member. And not everybody in Colorado smokes a lot of pot. I have honestly never used nor seen a gravity bong. Somebody try to describe on to me once, but it sounded like an awful lot of work.
So I guess I could dance around in circles chanting "You're wrong cause I said you are" or "you sure make a lot of assumptions" but is has finally quit raining here in Colorado, so I am in a great mood. Actually, it just started clouding up again, but I'm going to stay in a great mood, cause we made it through the storms with only minor damage and discomfort. And we recruited a few new state coordinators over the weekend, so that is going great. Still need somebody in NC btw, any suggestions? Have a great week
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #136004 is a reply to message #136002] Mon, 16 September 2013 10:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
thefan
Messages: 1059
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
Quote:
Still need somebody in NC btw, any suggestions?


o, the hilarity.

you should try scrounging up Rich Franck. I bet this shit is right up his alley. or some of the mountain frootloops out west.

gravity bong too complicated. but you're putting together a 50 state free fall series. man, I got to step outside and get some fresh air.
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #136005 is a reply to message #136004] Mon, 16 September 2013 10:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
southwestultimate
Messages: 184
Registered: May 2009
Senior Member
You said too complicated, I said not worth the effort

You think its hilarious that anybody in North Carolina would be interested in organizing a State Championship tournament that emphasized SOTG.

Actually, just got a phone call from someone who wants to run the NC tourney. Smile This day keeps getting better and better. Probably looking at a mid October date. Anybody know of any other tourneys around that time that need to be scheduled around. Thanks
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #136006 is a reply to message #135892] Mon, 16 September 2013 10:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
donovd
Messages: 241
Registered: April 2009
Senior Member
rrudnic wrote on Fri, 13 September 2013 14:41

I think you are the one that needs a history lesson. Score Reporter did exist previously, although I'm not sure if it was called score reporter or not, but it was basically the exact same thing it is now. It listed all the tournaments, teams, had a nice team comparison matrix (which needs to be added again), and was only slightly less functional than the current low functionality version. It also specified which tournaments were sanctioned or not, and back then it listed hat tournaments and other fun things like that. Everybody that was moderately involved in ultimate at that time knew it existed because its all there was, there was no ffindr, or leaguevine, or any of the other sites that have since popped up. Even now it is still the single biggest source for tournament information. It has considerably more tournaments listed than any other site out there, and it still lets you list any tournament you want regardless of if its USAU sanctioned or not, I have 4 tournaments listed right now, none of which are sanctioned.


I might be off I this but I think:
Score reporter which was scorereporter.net, it was built outside of USAU (UPA at the time) and maintained by a member (Rodney Jacobsen of the mixed club team Enough Monkeys and coach of Hanover, NH's HS team) but not controlled by USAU/UPA. I think it first was used pretty extensively in 2004, or at least that's how old the records are on the current site.

Fun trivia-RRI stand's for Rodney's Ranking Index.

When UPA re-branded to USAU in 2010, they brought the site in house and Rodney basically functions as a consultant now.

For as long as I have been playing (since 2006) I was using it as a tool to find tournaments. It had much more up to date info than the UPA's Where to Play site which relied on member input and had tons and tons of outdated things like pickup games and teams that no longer existed.

When the UPA re-branded to USAU and the main site changed, the "Where to Play" or whatever it was called back then was dropped I think.

Now USAU has re-added the "Where to Play" and is populating it with more up to date info.

As for the team comparison tool, it still exists just not in a super user friendly manner:
When looking at the list of tournaments click on the link in the "Teams" column (4th column over) :
http://scores.usaultimate.org/scores/#open/seeding/13127

Then click on the box comparing the two teams in the chart:
http://scores.usaultimate.org/scores/#open/compare1600to1667 4

DanD
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #136007 is a reply to message #136005] Mon, 16 September 2013 10:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Knappy
Messages: 830
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
Trent, can't help you, I am in PA. NC teams used to be our most heated out-of-state rivals, at least in mixed & masters. (Ring won open seemingly every year.) That was back in the UPA days, before they got bought out by the USAU.



Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #136008 is a reply to message #136004] Mon, 16 September 2013 11:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
southwestultimate
Messages: 184
Registered: May 2009
Senior Member
donovd:
You keep using the present tense. My argument all along has been that it used to be a developmental series in part, and that now it is not. Although your last comment has made me question that second part

I say "teams want to use the series to develop their teams"
You say "They want to see how well they can do and they use it as a measuring stick when they set goals at the beginning of the season"
If your goal going into the series is anything other than winning the National Championship, then you are either playing to see how good you are, or playing to get better and develop your team.

It is possible for something to be more than one thing: a hammer or an axe can be a tool OR a weapon depending on who is wielding it.

I think the point you all are trying to make is "The USAU series is designed primarily as a championship series, and not as a developmental series so its perfectly okay for USAU to make changes based solely on the championship aspect, and they have no obligation to cater to teams wishing to use is as a developmental series."

Does anybody have any objection to that statement?
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #136009 is a reply to message #136008] Mon, 16 September 2013 11:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
thefan
Messages: 1059
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
do we have anyone in Colorado that can confirm whether or not a light just came on?
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #136010 is a reply to message #135698] Mon, 16 September 2013 11:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Manzell Blakeley
Messages: 28
Registered: August 2009
Junior Member
The topic of this thread kind of chaps my hide. While there could be a mountain of things that USAU could be doing better with regards to the women's game, the allocation of bids to regionals is most assuredly NOT one of them.

To say that USAU is "hurting" (active tense) women's teams by not allocating enough play opportunities in the series indicates that in some way, more playing opportunities are offered in the men's series. As there are significantly more men's/open teams at every level (club, college, and juniors), a smaller proportion of those teams advance to regionals (or Westerns, etc). The topic implies some type of gendered difference in the amount of play opportunity. A significantly high proportion of female players make regionals than male players - It's a backwards argument.
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #136011 is a reply to message #136010] Mon, 16 September 2013 12:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Knappy
Messages: 830
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
"The USAU series is designed primarily as a championship series, and not as a developmental series so its perfectly okay for USAU to make changes based solely on the championship aspect, and they have no obligation to cater to teams wishing to use is as a developmental series."

Q: Does anybody have any objection to that statement?

A: Yes, it is a run-on sentence.


Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #136014 is a reply to message #136011] Mon, 16 September 2013 13:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
southwestultimate
Messages: 184
Registered: May 2009
Senior Member
Your contributions as always are helpful. I'm going to ASSUME that since you read the statement and commented on it that you have no further issues with that statement. Glad we could find some common ground. If you are Mike G'ing it and only posting one comment at a time, I apologize for interrupting
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #136019 is a reply to message #136008] Mon, 16 September 2013 14:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
donovd
Messages: 241
Registered: April 2009
Senior Member
southwestultimate wrote on Mon, 16 September 2013 14:03

I think the point you all are trying to make is "The USAU series is designed primarily as a championship series, and not as a developmental series so its perfectly okay for USAU to make changes based solely on the championship aspect, and they have no obligation to cater to teams wishing to use is as a developmental series."

Does anybody have any objection to that statement?


Change it to: The USAU (formerly UPA) series is and was designed...

Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #136021 is a reply to message #136019] Mon, 16 September 2013 14:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
southwestultimate
Messages: 184
Registered: May 2009
Senior Member
Well, the UPA was started as a communication vehicle in order to connect all of the ultimate teams/players to one another.
Natural outgrowth of that was everything else including the Championship series AND fostering newer teams.

The UPA, doing business as USAU, and the original UPA are two very different organizations. So I think it may be a bit controversial to link them together as you have in your revision.
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #136030 is a reply to message #136021] Mon, 16 September 2013 20:37 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mgd.mitch
Messages: 1207
Registered: January 2009
Senior Member
southwestultimate wrote on Mon, 16 September 2013 17:38
The UPA, doing business as USAU, and the original UPA are two very different organizations. So I think it may be a bit controversial to link them together as you have in your revision.
The UPA in 2009, as the UPA, is pretty much the same as the UPA, calling themselves USAU, in 2010. They aren't VERY different organizations. USAU is very different than the UPA of 1979, but so was the UPA of 2009. Nothing controversial here, just a natural evolution. Perhaps you should seek employment with Geico?
Re: USAU is hurting women's teams [message #136032 is a reply to message #136002] Mon, 16 September 2013 21:26 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
josh[1]
Messages: 71
Registered: October 2009
Member
southwestultimate wrote on Mon, 16 September 2013 09:45
And we recruited a few new state coordinators over the weekend


Wow! In mid-September?
Previous Topic:The best deals on sublimated jerseys
Next Topic:Enter to win a Team Pizza Party from SAVAGEultimate
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sat Oct 19 19:59:23 PDT 2019
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.0RC2.
Copyright ©2001-2009 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software