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


Home » RSD » RSD Posts » Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once
Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2760] Wed, 15 October 2008 09:37 Go to next message
andrews.megan
Messages: 8
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
I'm sick of Cultimate ignoring women's ultimate. I've had enough,
Skip. It was enough of a slap in the face when you ran Stanford Invite
and failed to notice that you covered up the Superfly logo on our own
tournament t-shirts. Oh, and you forgot to bring water and bagels to
our fields (that were never anywhere CLOSE to frisbee central) until
the 3rd round. I know you hate watching women's ultimate and you think
it's boring--but have a little respect. Please.

Try listening. Just once. Try cooperating with your community instead
of acting unilaterally. Realize that it's not just a bunch of Florida
guys and you sitting around in a room who can change everything in the
community.

Oh, and next time you choose a business partner, you might want to
look into the way he handles his money...or his team's...
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2767 is a reply to message #2760] Wed, 15 October 2008 09:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wally
Messages: 16
Registered: September 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 15, 12:37 pm, andrews.me...@gmail.com wrote:
> I'm sick of Cultimate ignoring women's ultimate. I've had enough,
> Skip. It was enough of a slap in the face when you ran Stanford Invite
> and failed to notice that you covered up the Superfly logo on our own
> tournament t-shirts. Oh, and you forgot to bring water and bagels to
> our fields (that were never anywhere CLOSE to frisbee central) until
> the 3rd round. I know you hate watching women's ultimate and you think
> it's boring--but have a little respect. Please.
>
> Try listening. Just once. Try cooperating with your community instead
> of acting unilaterally. Realize that it's not just a bunch of Florida
> guys and you sitting around in a room who can change everything in the
> community.
>
> Oh, and next time you choose a business partner, you might want to
> look into the way he handles his money...or his team's...

While I am unsure of exactly how to respond to CUltimate's newest
creation, Conference 1, I can't say that I'm particularly upset that
C1 isn't happening in the women's division. It is true that CUltimate
does have a rumored history of ignoring women's ultimate as a whole
and as individual teams. I cannot speak for my whole team, but there
have been multiple occasions where I have felt that CUltimate has
misguided intentions with women's ultimate as a necessary but
uninteresting cohort of open. Women's ultimate is the ugly stepsister
of open. This treatment won't change for a long time (regardless of
CUltimate). If women's ultimate is unsatisfactory for CUltimate, I
would have guessed that skip & co would attempt to reform it in the
same massive way it's attempting to reform college open ultimate.
However, as a captain of a women's team right on the brink of national
success in the last five years, I'm relieved that women's ultimate
won't be stratified in the way C1 proposes to do with open.

Part of me believes that C1 is a great idea, at least on paper, but
isn't that what they always say about communism? If it works, I can
only hope that they will expand to include the women's division
(hopefully in a more judicious and even-handed manner than what they
have employed thus far) in future years. There are a lot of things
that seem promising, and I wish them the best. While well-wishing for
them, I am glad that women's ultimate in general, and my team in
particular, don't have to be guinea pigs for the social experiment
that is C1. Until then, let's just run our tournaments this spring
without the financial and competitive conflict with CUltimate. I am
excited to see how this goes, whether it crashes and burns or soars.
The proof will be in the pudding.
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2768 is a reply to message #2767] Wed, 15 October 2008 09:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
andrews.megan
Messages: 8
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 15, 9:53 am, Wally <walfo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 15, 12:37 pm, andrews.me...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > I'm sick of Cultimate ignoring women's ultimate. I've had enough,
> > Skip. It was enough of a slap in the face when you ran Stanford Invite
> > and failed to notice that you covered up the Superfly logo on our own
> > tournament t-shirts. Oh, and you forgot to bring water and bagels to
> > our fields (that were never anywhere CLOSE to frisbee central) until
> > the 3rd round. I know you hate watching women's ultimate and you think
> > it's boring--but have a little respect. Please.
>
> > Try listening. Just once. Try cooperating with your community instead
> > of acting unilaterally. Realize that it's not just a bunch of Florida
> > guys and you sitting around in a room who can change everything in the
> > community.
>
> > Oh, and next time you choose a business partner, you might want to
> > look into the way he handles his money...or his team's...
>
> While I am unsure of exactly how to respond to CUltimate's newest
> creation, Conference 1, I can't say that I'm particularly upset that
> C1 isn't happening in the women's division. It is true that CUltimate
> does have a rumored history of ignoring women's ultimate as a whole
> and as individual teams. I cannot speak for my whole team, but there
> have been multiple occasions where I have felt that CUltimate has
> misguided intentions with women's ultimate as a necessary but
> uninteresting cohort of open. Women's ultimate is the ugly stepsister
> of open. This treatment won't change for a long time (regardless of
> CUltimate). If women's ultimate is unsatisfactory for CUltimate, I
> would have guessed that skip & co would attempt to reform it in the
> same massive way it's attempting to reform college open ultimate.
> However, as a captain of a women's team right on the brink of national
> success in the last five years, I'm relieved that women's ultimate
> won't be stratified in the way C1 proposes to do with open.
>
> Part of me believes that C1 is a great idea, at least on paper, but
> isn't that what they always say about communism? If it works, I can
> only hope that they will expand to include the women's division
> (hopefully in a more judicious and even-handed manner than what they
> have employed thus far) in future years. There are a lot of things
> that seem promising, and I wish them the best. While well-wishing for
> them, I am glad that women's ultimate in general, and my team in
> particular, don't have to be guinea pigs for the social experiment
> that is C1. Until then, let's just run our tournaments this spring
> without the financial and competitive conflict with CUltimate. I am
> excited to see how this goes, whether it crashes and burns or soars.
> The proof will be in the pudding.

Good point. It's hard to find a college women's team that genuinely
thinks that Cultimate runs a great tournament for their division. I
think Cultimate has actually had some great ideas and has been
"thinking outside the box" when the UPA hasn't been speedy enough at
times to make big changes, but he's basically giving the UPA a huge
middle finger.And he's relying on a few college men's teams to be
seduced by his scheme, but it's going to take a hell of a lot more
support than that.
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2773 is a reply to message #2760] Wed, 15 October 2008 10:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Handy
Messages: 79
Registered: September 2008
Member
On Oct 15, 9:37 am, andrews.me...@gmail.com wrote:
> I'm sick of Cultimate ignoring women's ultimate. I've had enough,
> Skip. It was enough of a slap in the face when you ran Stanford Invite
> and failed to notice that you covered up the Superfly logo on our own
> tournament t-shirts. Oh, and you forgot to bring water and bagels to
> our fields (that were never anywhere CLOSE to frisbee central) until
> the 3rd round. I know you hate watching women's ultimate and you think
> it's boring--but have a little respect. Please.
>
> Try listening. Just once. Try cooperating with your community instead
> of acting unilaterally. Realize that it's not just a bunch of Florida
> guys and you sitting around in a room who can change everything in the
> community.
>
> Oh, and next time you choose a business partner, you might want to
> look into the way he handles his money...or his team's...


You make a good point but then cheapen it with that silly shot at
Cyle. I'm not one "of them" I bear no love for Cyle, but that passive
aggressive behavior makes you sound whiny instead of reasonable.

If you want a women's division, get someone to offer to start it up.
My guess is that they're struggling mightily as it is just organizing
one division from scratch, get some friends together, offer to make a
difference. Is it that CUltimate isn't listening or is it that there
isn't enough clamoring for a women's division to bother? They're
taking a huge monetary risk here if this idea fails, the idea of
"fairness" takes the backseat to losing your house on running a failed
venture, right? Take on the risk yourself, join CUltimate and make a
women's division, and leave the ad hominem attacks for the immature.

-Handy
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2783 is a reply to message #2773] Wed, 15 October 2008 10:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
andrews.megan
Messages: 8
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 15, 10:18 am, Handy <Xck...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 15, 9:37 am, andrews.me...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > I'm sick of Cultimate ignoring women's ultimate. I've had enough,
> > Skip. It was enough of a slap in the face when you ran Stanford Invite
> > and failed to notice that you covered up the Superfly logo on our own
> > tournament t-shirts. Oh, and you forgot to bring water and bagels to
> > our fields (that were never anywhere CLOSE to frisbee central) until
> > the 3rd round. I know you hate watching women's ultimate and you think
> > it's boring--but have a little respect. Please.
>
> > Try listening. Just once. Try cooperating with your community instead
> > of acting unilaterally. Realize that it's not just a bunch of Florida
> > guys and you sitting around in a room who can change everything in the
> > community.
>
> > Oh, and next time you choose a business partner, you might want to
> > look into the way he handles his money...or his team's...
>
> You make a good point but then cheapen it with that silly shot at
> Cyle.  I'm not one "of them" I bear no love for Cyle, but that passive
> aggressive behavior makes you sound whiny instead of reasonable.
>
> If you want a women's division, get someone to offer to start it up.
> My guess is that they're struggling mightily as it is just organizing
> one division from scratch, get some friends together, offer to make a
> difference.  Is it that CUltimate isn't listening or is it that there
> isn't enough clamoring for a women's division to bother?  They're
> taking a huge monetary risk here if this idea fails, the idea of
> "fairness" takes the backseat to losing your house on running a failed
> venture, right?  Take on the risk yourself, join CUltimate and make a
> women's division, and leave the ad hominem attacks for the immature.
>
> -Handy

Handy,

First of all, I think it's important to call out Skip's judgement. I
don't know all the details of Cyle's history so maybe that was a cheap
shot, but it's worth paying attention to who is behind this
operation...especially since its so risky (monetarily) for all parties
involved. College teams have to commit to attending these tournaments,
and Cultimate has to commit to making the entire thing work. I just
don't see how there can be a lot of trust going into this endeavor
given the personnel of Cultimate, the way in which they announced
their plan and broadsided the UPA, and Cultimate 's history of acting
unilaterally in their efforts to make the college game more
competitive. To me, it looks like Cultimate is greedy more than
anything else. I don't see a well thought out business plan that is
inclusive of, and beneficial for, the entire ultimate community.

-Megan
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2791 is a reply to message #2767] Wed, 15 October 2008 10:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Playmaker
Messages: 8
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
Handy,

I agree with you. If you want change don't ask for it. BE IT

Wally,

I love you! Every 6 feet 3 inches of you!
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2792 is a reply to message #2783] Wed, 15 October 2008 10:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Theodore Hex
Messages: 32
Registered: September 2008
Member
> I don't see a well thought out business plan that is
> inclusive of, and beneficial for, the entire ultimate community.

How COULD a business plan be inclusive for the entire ultimate
community? Seems like Cultimate is trying to offer some teams
something better than what they have gotten out of the UPA series.

And they did not broadside the UPA.
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2793 is a reply to message #2792] Wed, 15 October 2008 10:44 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Jessica Manley
Messages: 2
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 15, 10:35 am, Theodore Hex <calmerthanyou...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I don't see a well thought out business plan that is
> > inclusive of, and beneficial for, the entire ultimate community.
>
> How COULD a business plan be inclusive for the entire ultimate
> community? Seems like Cultimate is trying to offer some teams
> something better than what they have gotten out of the UPA series.
>
> And they did not broadside the UPA.

Who are you? Have you participated in women's ultimate? Do you know
what it feels like to be ignored at "elite" tournaments even if you
are the women's equivalent of the open "elite" teams? As far as I can
tell, this Conference 1 operation came out like a big secret and
whether or not it divides the National scene of Ultimate, it will most
certainly divide men's and women's teams of the same school. Women's
teams aren't even invited to the same tournaments. But maybe that's
the way you men want it.
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2797 is a reply to message #2792] Wed, 15 October 2008 10:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
andrews.megan
Messages: 8
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 15, 10:35 am, Theodore Hex <calmerthanyou...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I don't see a well thought out business plan that is
> > inclusive of, and beneficial for, the entire ultimate community.
>
> How COULD a business plan be inclusive for the entire ultimate
> community? Seems like Cultimate is trying to offer some teams
> something better than what they have gotten out of the UPA series.
>

By "entire" I mean men's and women's ultimate--whose programs are
usually extremely intertwined and dependent on each other in college.
Fundraising is really tough for college kids who don't have a solid
income and spend all of their time out on the field playing ultimate.
A division between men's and women's teams in college is a huge
concern. Cultimate needs business plan that's sustainable and
supportable by 'college programs'--not just the open division.
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2806 is a reply to message #2783] Wed, 15 October 2008 11:05 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jacob
Messages: 576
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
"I don't see a well thought out business plan that is inclusive of,
and beneficial for, the entire ultimate community."

Is the plan not beneficial because it is not inclusive, or is it not
beneficial in addition to not being inclusive? If the latter, why do
you care about being excluded from something which is not beneficial?
You're better off not being included, right?

Also, are you opposed to any for-profit ultimate league, or just this
specific for-profit league because it excludes women? If you are
opposed to any for-profit ultimate league, then that's another
conversation for another day. If you are opposed to this specific for-
profit league because it excludes women, then why not sincerely try to
get women's ultimate included?

Either:
1) you want C1 to include women, which is at least tacit support for
C1, or
2) you do not support C1 regardless of whether women can play, in
which case, you don't really protest the fact that it excludes women,
or
3) you think C1 is a lame idea and the guys running it are sexist and
you just want to vent

I'm not arguing for or against any of these three options; it's just
tough to tell exactly where you stand.

I hear you on the water/bagel thing. Tournament directors need to
provide that stuff. As far as not playing near frisbee central; you
need to let that go. Plenty of male players have been shunted off to
remote fields, at Stanford Invite and at other tournaments.
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2819 is a reply to message #2806] Wed, 15 October 2008 11:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
andrews.megan
Messages: 8
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 15, 11:05 am, jacob <jacobsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "I don't see a well thought out business plan that is inclusive of,
> and beneficial for, the entire ultimate community."
>
> Is the plan not beneficial because it is not inclusive, or is it not
> beneficial in addition to not being inclusive?  If the latter, why do
> you care about being excluded from something which is not beneficial?
> You're better off not being included, right?
>
> Also, are you opposed to any for-profit ultimate league, or just this
> specific for-profit league because it excludes women?  If you are
> opposed to any for-profit ultimate league, then that's another
> conversation for another day.  If you are opposed to this specific for-
> profit league because it excludes women, then why not sincerely try to
> get women's ultimate included?
>
> Either:
> 1) you want C1 to include women, which is at least tacit support for
> C1, or
> 2) you do not support C1 regardless of whether women can play, in
> which case, you don't really protest the fact that it excludes women,
> or
> 3) you think C1 is a lame idea and the guys running it are sexist and
> you just want to vent
>
> I'm not arguing for or against any of these three options; it's just
> tough to tell exactly where you stand.
>
> I hear you on the water/bagel thing.  Tournament directors need to
> provide that stuff.  As far as not playing near frisbee central; you
> need to let that go.  Plenty of male players have been shunted off to
> remote fields, at Stanford Invite and at other tournaments.

1. I disagree with the Cultimate plan because it doesn't involve the
UPA (or anyone, really) in a cooperative effort to really think about
what's best for the new direction of ultimate. Yes, you can have good
ideas. No, you cannot act unilaterally and expect to see those ideas
supported and accepted. In order for this be more like an NCAA level
of play, the schools need to get involved. You can't just bring in a
third party in a profit-making venture without the funding and
organization of ultimate changing on a a school-wide level. This is
moving more towards a varsity-style sport with Cultimate, which I
think could be awesome, but teams are still trying to deal with club-
level funding. There's a fundamental issue here that ignores how
ultimate is recognized by each school.

2. I agree that ANY plan going forward to make ultimate more
competitive should include men and women. Hands down. That should be
obvious. I can both disagree with Cultimate's plan and also assert
that women should be involved with any venture moving forward that
genuinely has the best interests of competitive college ultimate in
mind. What bothers me is that Cultimate is announcing this plan and
claiming that they have the best interest of collegiate ultimate in
mind, when they really have ignored half of its participants.

3. I am venting about Cultimate's poor treatment of women's teams
because women's teams need to voice their opinions here. Creating this
chasm between the open and women's divisions on a collegiate level
will create havoc for school ultimate program's fundraising efforts.
Until ultimate is more than just a club-level sport, the men's and
women's team really have to operate under a larger ultimate "program".
You can already see the Stanford and Texas men's and women's teams
bickering over how to run their tournaments in this scenario...the
open division cannot move forward on its own. And based on Skip's
utter lack of attention to women's teams in the past, I don't trust
him to bring in the women's division effectively even if his plan is
successful.
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2821 is a reply to message #2819] Wed, 15 October 2008 11:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jacob
Messages: 576
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
Thanks for the well-written clarification.
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2823 is a reply to message #2793] Wed, 15 October 2008 11:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
swillaholic
Messages: 78
Registered: September 2008
Member
On Oct 15, 1:44 pm, Jessica Manley <manley.jess...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 15, 10:35 am, Theodore Hex <calmerthanyou...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > I don't see a well thought out business plan that is
> > > inclusive of, and beneficial for, the entire ultimate community.
>
> > How COULD a business plan be inclusive for the entire ultimate
> > community? Seems like Cultimate is trying to offer some teams
> > something better than what they have gotten out of the UPA series.
>
> > And they did not broadside the UPA.
>
> Who are you? Have you participated in women's ultimate? Do you know
> what it feels like to be ignored at "elite" tournaments even if you
> are the women's equivalent of the open "elite" teams? As far as I can
> tell, this Conference 1 operation came out like a big secret and
> whether or not it divides the National scene of Ultimate, it will most
> certainly divide men's and women's teams of the same school. Women's
> teams aren't even invited to the same tournaments. But maybe that's
> the way you men want it.

Whoa...Hold on.

"Us men" want "you women" to play ultimate.
If that entails "us men" doing what "you women" want, then "us men"
may not agree with "you women".
"Us men" are willing to work with "you women", but let's not confuse
"collaboration" with "entitlement".

And for the record, "us men" most certainly do not want to be divided
from "you women".

Bests,
"us men"
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2836 is a reply to message #2823] Wed, 15 October 2008 12:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Jessica Manley
Messages: 2
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 15, 11:39 am, swillaho...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Oct 15, 1:44 pm, Jessica Manley <manley.jess...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 15, 10:35 am, Theodore Hex <calmerthanyou...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > I don't see a well thought out business plan that is
> > > > inclusive of, and beneficial for, the entire ultimate community.
>
> > > How COULD a business plan be inclusive for the entire ultimate
> > > community? Seems like Cultimate is trying to offer some teams
> > > something better than what they have gotten out of the UPA series.
>
> > > And they did not broadside the UPA.
>
> > Who are you? Have you participated in women's ultimate? Do you know
> > what it feels like to be ignored at "elite" tournaments even if you
> > are the women's equivalent of the open "elite" teams? As far as I can
> > tell, this Conference 1 operation came out like a big secret and
> > whether or not it divides the National scene of Ultimate, it will most
> > certainly divide men's and women's teams of the same school. Women's
> > teams aren't even invited to the same tournaments. But maybe that's
> > the way you men want it.
>
> Whoa...Hold on.
>
> "Us men" want "you women" to play ultimate.
> If that entails "us men" doing what "you women" want, then "us men"
> may not agree with "you women".
> "Us men" are willing to work with "you women", but let's not confuse
> "collaboration" with "entitlement".
>
> And for the record, "us men" most certainly do not want to be divided
> from "you women".
>
> Bests,
> "us men"

I didn't think separation was wanted. I don't think I'm for
separation, but it is proposed with C1. I'm ready for some men to
stand up to Skip and tell him that you are, in fact, interested in
women and perhaps the fact that some of us also play ultimate.
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2837 is a reply to message #2819] Wed, 15 October 2008 12:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
BJ
Messages: 197
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 15, 1:25 pm, andrews.me...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Oct 15, 11:05 am, jacob <jacobsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "I don't see a well thought out business plan that is inclusive of,
> > and beneficial for, the entire ultimate community."
>
> > Is the plan not beneficial because it is not inclusive, or is it not
> > beneficial in addition to not being inclusive?  If the latter, why do
> > you care about being excluded from something which is not beneficial?
> > You're better off not being included, right?
>
> > Also, are you opposed to any for-profit ultimate league, or just this
> > specific for-profit league because it excludes women?  If you are
> > opposed to any for-profit ultimate league, then that's another
> > conversation for another day.  If you are opposed to this specific for-
> > profit league because it excludes women, then why not sincerely try to
> > get women's ultimate included?
>
> > Either:
> > 1) you want C1 to include women, which is at least tacit support for
> > C1, or
> > 2) you do not support C1 regardless of whether women can play, in
> > which case, you don't really protest the fact that it excludes women,
> > or
> > 3) you think C1 is a lame idea and the guys running it are sexist and
> > you just want to vent
>
> > I'm not arguing for or against any of these three options; it's just
> > tough to tell exactly where you stand.
>
> > I hear you on the water/bagel thing.  Tournament directors need to
> > provide that stuff.  As far as not playing near frisbee central; you
> > need to let that go.  Plenty of male players have been shunted off to
> > remote fields, at Stanford Invite and at other tournaments.
>
> 1. I disagree with the Cultimate plan because it doesn't involve the
> UPA (or anyone, really) in a cooperative effort to really think about
> what's best for the new direction of ultimate. Yes, you can have good
> ideas. No, you cannot act unilaterally and expect to see those ideas
> supported and accepted. In order for this be more like an NCAA level
> of play, the schools need to get involved. You can't just bring in a
> third party in a profit-making venture without the funding and
> organization of ultimate changing on a a school-wide level. This is
> moving more towards a varsity-style sport with Cultimate, which I
> think could be awesome, but teams are still trying to deal with club-
> level funding. There's a fundamental issue here that ignores how
> ultimate is recognized by each school.
>
> 2. I agree that ANY plan going forward to make ultimate more
> competitive should include men and women. Hands down. That should be
> obvious. I can both disagree with Cultimate's plan and also assert
> that women should be involved with any venture moving forward that
> genuinely has the best interests of competitive college ultimate in
> mind. What bothers me is that Cultimate is announcing this plan and
> claiming that they have the best interest of collegiate ultimate in
> mind, when they really have ignored half of its participants.
>
> 3. I am venting about Cultimate's poor treatment of women's teams
> because women's teams need to voice their opinions here. Creating this
> chasm between the open and women's divisions on a collegiate level
> will create havoc for school ultimate program's fundraising efforts.
> Until ultimate is more than just a club-level sport, the men's and
> women's team really have to operate under a larger ultimate "program".
> You can already see the Stanford and Texas men's and women's teams
> bickering over how to run their tournaments in this scenario...the
> open division cannot move forward on its own. And based on Skip's
> utter lack of attention to women's teams in the past, I don't trust
> him to bring in the women's division effectively even if his plan is
> successful.

other club sport programs exist separate of each other. perhaps a
split is in order. good luck!
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2858 is a reply to message #2837] Wed, 15 October 2008 12:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
tal1286
Messages: 25
Registered: September 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 15, 3:34 pm, footbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> I figured Id join in with my own rant. I played mens college ultimate
> btwn 2002-2007.
>
> I certainly understand being upset about poor tournament conditions.
> If you invite teams, men or women treat them the same. I completely,
> agree with that sentiment. However, I think this C1 thing is a
> completly different issue. I am in no way affiliated with C1 and know
> very little about the details. But just because a private company
> offers a service to only a certain men its somehow DIVISIVE? Does the
> NFL, NBA or MLB simultaneously promote women's football? Should it?
> does that make financial sense? This is a decision for CULTIMATE, not
> you. If you dont like because it doesnt include women, ok dont
> participate. Maybe it will suceed, maybe it wont but that is just like
> any business. You act as though you have a RIGHT to an ultimate
> tournament from CULTIMATE? What the hell did you do for them? GO START
> your own LEAGUE that includes MEN AND WOMEN if you think that would
> work better. This is a BUSINESS, this is not the UPA or even the NCAA
> that is run for some greater goal of "promoting ultimate as a whole".
> I am guessing these guys like college ultimate, like running
> tournaments and want to make some money, suddenly that is wrong? They
> run a tournament and do something positive and you blame them for not
> including you? If women get left behind it is not CULTIMATE's fault,
> blame the UPA, other women's teams or yourself for not doing enough.
> Take initiative and DO SOMETHING yourself!

not really taking issue with your post. Don't want to get involved in
this argument. But, for the record, the NBA runs the WNBA and loses a
ton of money on it.
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2860 is a reply to message #2837] Wed, 15 October 2008 12:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Vickie
Messages: 2
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
For starters, I have yet to decide if the advent of C1 is good or bad,
but the interesting question is...Is the timing right? Why now?

Just because where you come from shapes who you are.....I'm not a stud
ultimate player or even wily veteran, but just a no-name grad student
who is just now experiencing her college ultimate playing days.
(Thanks to the UPA and NCAA being two separate entities.) With that
perspective........from my freshman year of college (fall of '01) to
the current freshman class (fall '08) the number of kids (women) who
come to campus having played organized ultimate has dramatically
increased. (Even comparing my undergrad experience where frisbee is
virtually a religion and now at a university without historic
powerhouse elite mens/womens programs.) Aside from my qualitative
analysis, there are probably statistics to cite that show increases in
the number of juniors playing, but I'm too lazy to find them. The
question becomes is the number of students walking onto college campus
with ultimate experience big enough to support a multi-tiered system?
If tiers are formed now, will all juniors players choose to attend
schools only in the C1 league and not take a risk on a rebuilding
program or a cusp-team?

Once multi-tiered systems are implemented it can very quickly widen
the margin between the powerhouses and all the rest. I recognize that
the top juniors players and even 5th year players choose the elite
programs already. I won't lie, ultimate was factor in my school
choice. Had there been one league seperate from the others, I would
probably have opted to take my six years of playing experience to one
of those C1 schools.

So.....are we ready to create an college ultimate experience that puts
a quasi-stop to frosh who walk onto a college campus, pick up a disc
for the first time, and after gaining experience thrive as seniors for
elite programs? In the long term, ultimate will probably turn into any
other sport....where to succeed at the college level you have to be
playing since the age of 3 and can't pick up the sport in the fall of
your freshman year. (I know my kids may be using discs as their first
plates to eat food from and will have forehands by five. But that's a
few years down the line....)

Needless to say, do we want to expedite that transition now?

Second, as a captain for a women's college team (who ventures to
nationals every couple of years), I'd fear our team would be left off
the "elite" status. This might be the reason I'm more than happy to
leave this experiment up to the men....sit back, take notes, and see
how it all turns out. It's a shame to create a divide between the
ladies and the men, but the number of men's college teams far exceeds
the number of women's. We (the women) are probably not ready for a
clear-cut multi-tiered system. We don't have enough teams nor enough
jr women to go around. Like it or not, the ladies are usually a step
behind the men....however, it often means we get to learn from their
mistakes and do it right the first time.

Just food for thought.
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2861 is a reply to message #2837] Wed, 15 October 2008 12:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
footblock
Messages: 119
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
I figured Id join in with my own rant. I played mens college ultimate
btwn 2002-2007.

I certainly understand being upset about poor tournament conditions.
If you invite teams, men or women treat them the same. I completely,
agree with that sentiment. However, I think this C1 thing is a
completly different issue. I am in no way affiliated with C1 and know
very little about the details. But just because a private company
offers a service to only a certain men its somehow DIVISIVE? Does the
NFL, NBA or MLB simultaneously promote women's football? Should it?
does that make financial sense? This is a decision for CULTIMATE, not
you. If you dont like because it doesnt include women, ok dont
participate. Maybe it will suceed, maybe it wont but that is just like
any business. You act as though you have a RIGHT to an ultimate
tournament from CULTIMATE? What the hell did you do for them? GO START
your own LEAGUE that includes MEN AND WOMEN if you think that would
work better. This is a BUSINESS, this is not the UPA or even the NCAA
that is run for some greater goal of "promoting ultimate as a whole".
I am guessing these guys like college ultimate, like running
tournaments and want to make some money, suddenly that is wrong? They
run a tournament and do something positive and you blame them for not
including you? If women get left behind it is not CULTIMATE's fault,
blame the UPA, other women's teams or yourself for not doing enough.
Take initiative and DO SOMETHING yourself!
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2870 is a reply to message #2860] Wed, 15 October 2008 13:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jacob
Messages: 576
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
"Like it or not, the ladies are usually a step behind the
men....however, it often means we get to learn from their mistakes and
do it right the first time."

Now I don't feel so bad about all those mistakes I've made. Thanks to
me, you probably know not to try the "pull my finger" trick 90 minutes
after washing down a giant sized burrito with a six pack. Or were you
referring to some other type of mistake?
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2871 is a reply to message #2861] Wed, 15 October 2008 13:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wally
Messages: 16
Registered: September 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 15, 3:34 pm, footbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> I figured Id join in with my own rant. I played mens college ultimate
> btwn 2002-2007.
>
> I certainly understand being upset about poor tournament conditions.
> If you invite teams, men or women treat them the same. I completely,
> agree with that sentiment. However, I think this C1 thing is a
> completly different issue. I am in no way affiliated with C1 and know
> very little about the details. But just because a private company
> offers a service to only a certain men its somehow DIVISIVE? Does the
> NFL, NBA or MLB simultaneously promote women's football? Should it?
> does that make financial sense? This is a decision for CULTIMATE, not
> you. If you dont like because it doesnt include women, ok dont
> participate. Maybe it will suceed, maybe it wont but that is just like
> any business. You act as though you have a RIGHT to an ultimate
> tournament from CULTIMATE? What the hell did you do for them? GO START
> your own LEAGUE that includes MEN AND WOMEN if you think that would
> work better. This is a BUSINESS, this is not the UPA or even the NCAA
> that is run for some greater goal of "promoting ultimate as a whole".
> I am guessing these guys like college ultimate, like running
> tournaments and want to make some money, suddenly that is wrong? They
> run a tournament and do something positive and you blame them for not
> including you? If women get left behind it is not CULTIMATE's fault,
> blame the UPA, other women's teams or yourself for not doing enough.
> Take initiative and DO SOMETHING yourself!

College ultimate is just that, for college teams. It certainly should
not be run like the NFL, NBA or any other professional sports
organization. The players are not paid, they are enrolled in school.
They are not funded in nearly the same way professional teams are
funded, with most fees coming out-of-pocket from players. The NCAA,
which as a governing body should be much more relatable than the NFL
to a college ultimate governing body, governs over both men's and
women's divisions, so why can't CUltimate? The NCAA includes specific
clauses requiring schools to follow title IX laws which enforce gender
equality in sports participation. While the title IX system is
absolutely flawed, and CUltimate obviously doesn't have to abide by
these rules, I can't believe that it is unreasonable or unsurprising
that women are disapproving of the CUltimate system. I understand that
Conference 1 must start small, with a select group (hence 25 open
teams), but when a BUSINESS, as you so emphatically described it,
introduces itself to the public, it needs to have a BUSINESS plan that
entails more than the next 9 months. No word has been released
regarding potentially opening up the conference to women's teams or
more than 25 teams, and given CUltimate's record of poor treatment
among women's teams, I think women's players are right to be
protesting and questioning the motives and plans CUltimate has for
ultimate frisbee. If CUltimate doesn't have the future of COLLEGE
ULTIMATE (men's and women's alike) in mind, perhaps teams should
reconsider.

I think CUltimate has a good idea in Conference 1. It certainly has
its flaws (as does the UPA, as did the MLU), but if CUltimate really
wants to succeed, I think women's ultimate as a whole needs to make it
clear that we want answers about our future. Regardless of what those
answers may be, details and plans need to be released to the public to
scrutinize, argue over, and decide upon. Transparency, people.
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2903 is a reply to message #2871] Wed, 15 October 2008 13:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
BJ
Messages: 197
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 15, 3:02 pm, Wally <walfo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 15, 3:34 pm, footbl...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > I figured Id join in with my own rant. I played mens college ultimate
> > btwn 2002-2007.
>
> > I certainly understand being upset about poor tournament conditions.
> > If you invite teams, men or women treat them the same. I completely,
> > agree with that sentiment. However, I think this C1 thing is a
> > completly different issue. I am in no way affiliated with C1 and know
> > very little about the details. But just because a private company
> > offers a service to only a certain men its somehow DIVISIVE? Does the
> > NFL, NBA or MLB simultaneously promote women's football? Should it?
> > does that make financial sense? This is a decision for CULTIMATE, not
> > you. If you dont like because it doesnt include women, ok dont
> > participate. Maybe it will suceed, maybe it wont but that is just like
> > any business. You act as though you have a RIGHT to an ultimate
> > tournament from CULTIMATE? What the hell did you do for them? GO START
> > your own LEAGUE that includes MEN AND WOMEN if you think that would
> > work better. This is a BUSINESS, this is not the UPA or even the NCAA
> > that is run for some greater goal of "promoting ultimate as a whole".
> > I am guessing these guys like college ultimate, like running
> > tournaments and want to make some money, suddenly that is wrong? They
> > run a tournament and do something positive and you blame them for not
> > including you? If women get left behind it is not CULTIMATE's fault,
> > blame the UPA, other women's teams or yourself for not doing enough.
> > Take initiative and DO SOMETHING yourself!
>
> College ultimate is just that, for college teams. It certainly should
> not be run like the NFL, NBA or any other professional sports
> organization. The players are not paid, they are enrolled in school.
> They are not funded in nearly the same way professional teams are
> funded, with most fees coming out-of-pocket from players. The NCAA,
> which as a governing body should be much more relatable than the NFL
> to a college ultimate governing body, governs over both men's and
> women's divisions, so why can't CUltimate? The NCAA includes specific
> clauses requiring schools to follow title IX laws which enforce gender
> equality in sports participation. While the title IX system is
> absolutely flawed, and CUltimate obviously doesn't have to abide by
> these rules, I can't believe that it is unreasonable or unsurprising
> that women are disapproving of the CUltimate system. I understand that
> Conference 1 must start small, with a select group (hence 25 open
> teams), but when a BUSINESS, as you so emphatically described it,
> introduces itself to the public, it needs to have a BUSINESS plan that
> entails more than the next 9 months. No word has been released
> regarding potentially opening up the conference to women's teams or
> more than 25 teams, and given CUltimate's record of poor treatment
> among women's teams, I think women's players are right to be
> protesting and questioning the motives and plans CUltimate has for
> ultimate frisbee. If CUltimate doesn't have the future of COLLEGE
> ULTIMATE (men's and women's alike) in mind, perhaps teams should
> reconsider.
>
> I think CUltimate has a good idea in Conference 1. It certainly has
> its flaws (as does the UPA, as did the MLU), but if CUltimate really
> wants to succeed, I think women's ultimate as a whole needs to make it
> clear that we want answers about our future. Regardless of what those
> answers may be, details and plans need to be released to the public to
> scrutinize, argue over, and decide upon. Transparency, people.

make your own!!!!
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2908 is a reply to message #2858] Wed, 15 October 2008 13:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Handy
Messages: 79
Registered: September 2008
Member
On Oct 15, 12:43 pm, tal1...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Oct 15, 3:34 pm, footbl...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > I figured Id join in with my own rant. I played mens college ultimate
> > btwn 2002-2007.
>
> > I certainly understand being upset about poor tournament conditions.
> > If you invite teams, men or women treat them the same. I completely,
> > agree with that sentiment. However, I think this C1 thing is a
> > completly different issue. I am in no way affiliated with C1 and know
> > very little about the details. But just because a private company
> > offers a service to only a certain men its somehow DIVISIVE? Does the
> > NFL, NBA or MLB simultaneously promote women's football? Should it?
> > does that make financial sense? This is a decision for CULTIMATE, not
> > you. If you dont like because it doesnt include women, ok dont
> > participate. Maybe it will suceed, maybe it wont but that is just like
> > any business. You act as though you have a RIGHT to an ultimate
> > tournament from CULTIMATE? What the hell did you do for them? GO START
> > your own LEAGUE that includes MEN AND WOMEN if you think that would
> > work better. This is a BUSINESS, this is not the UPA or even the NCAA
> > that is run for some greater goal of "promoting ultimate as a whole".
> > I am guessing these guys like college ultimate, like running
> > tournaments and want to make some money, suddenly that is wrong? They
> > run a tournament and do something positive and you blame them for not
> > including you? If women get left behind it is not CULTIMATE's fault,
> > blame the UPA, other women's teams or yourself for not doing enough.
> > Take initiative and DO SOMETHING yourself!
>
> not really taking issue with your post.  Don't want to get involved in
> this argument.  But, for the record, the NBA runs the WNBA and loses a
> ton of money on it.

But made loads of money for myriad years without a women's division.
When C1 is raking in millions they can certainly take a loss on the
WC1.

Jessica and Andrews, I reiterate, if you don't like it, write up a
proposal for Cultimate. If you can demonstrate how it makes financial
sense for Cultimate to include a women's division, Skip would be
insane not to include it, right? If you can't, and you're just saying
that this isn't fair while ignoring the financial burden of someone
who has a normal job like any of us and is just trying to make
something work, do you really think that is more fair?

Again, I'm not throwing my hat in the ring for this program, but I am
suggesting that you need to do better than being outraged by it, you
need to show why it's wrong and why we should change. And no, it
shouldn't just be because women like to play. I do in fact love the
ladies and have watched much women's ultimate, hell, I even have
coached a women's college team, but I don't see why you're giving this
such a stink eye.

Ignoring half of college ultimate? They're ignoring much more than
that, they're ignoring all the men's teams below the cut as well. In
fact, as crazy as this sounds, it's not going to affect most teams in
college AT ALL. The women that I coached, as well as most of the
women in the division wouldn't have an opportunity here either.
Really, it's 30 womens teams, tops, that should be unhappy, and that's
even if they want to be involved, which I suspect many will not.

But hey, prove me wrong, I would love to see you create a successful
program or help CUltimate be more responsive to the ladies, and I
invite you to do so.

-Handy
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2917 is a reply to message #2760] Wed, 15 October 2008 13:50 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Peterson
Messages: 82
Registered: September 2008
Member
On Oct 15, 12:37 pm, andrews.me...@gmail.com wrote:
> I'm sick of Cultimate ignoring women's ultimate. I've had enough,
> Skip. It was enough of a slap in the face when you ran Stanford Invite
> and failed to notice that you covered up the Superfly logo on our own
> tournament t-shirts. Oh, and you forgot to bring water and bagels to
> our fields (that were never anywhere CLOSE to frisbee central) until
> the 3rd round. I know you hate watching women's ultimate and you think
> it's boring--but have a little respect. Please.
>
> Try listening. Just once. Try cooperating with your community instead
> of acting unilaterally. Realize that it's not just a bunch of Florida
> guys and you sitting around in a room who can change everything in the
> community.
>
> Oh, and next time you choose a business partner, you might want to
> look into the way he handles his money...or his team's...

It is silly to expect a business to be all things to all people. I
wish my local coffee shop sold fishing gear so I would only have to
make one stop on the way to the boat but somehow I doubt it is in
their best interest to do so. Time will tell.

Peterson
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2921 is a reply to message #2903] Wed, 15 October 2008 13:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ultimatephotography
Messages: 422
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
three things.

1. are the open teams for some schools really going to let the women's
team sit behind? I'm talking to you, Carleton. will the schools
themselves allow this type of decision by its teams (even where they
are club)?

2. ok - so cultimate is a private, for profit org (i'd assume) so the
following language doesn't apply to them directly - No person in the
United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from
participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to
discrimination under any education program or activity receiving
Federal financial assistance. - but there may be a way to get to this
as a cause of action since we are, after all, dealing with college
students. even where there is equal funding at the college level, is
there "exclusion from participation?" i don't know. just wondering.
Especially about prong two: Demonstrate a continual expansion of
athletic opportunities for the underrepresented sex i don't really
know much about this title.

3. if this were a post-educational thing - i would worry less about
gender inequity, but since it is college related, gender inequity is
an issue that makes this deal something that might fit into the
morally wrong sphere (i haven't thought this through very carefully -
argue this point if you'd like). oh yes - the upa provides a college
series that is separately still there, and maybe even equal.
separate, but equal. hmmmnnn.
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2924 is a reply to message #2921] Wed, 15 October 2008 14:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ryan Thompson
Messages: 364
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 15, 1:59 pm, ultimatephotogra...@gmail.com wrote:
> three things.
>
> 1. are the open teams for some schools really going to let the women's
> team sit behind?  I'm talking to you, Carleton. will the schools
> themselves allow this type of decision by its teams (even where they
> are club)?
>
> 2. ok - so cultimate is a private, for profit org (i'd assume) so the
> following language doesn't apply to them directly -  No person in the
> United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from
> participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to
> discrimination under any education program or activity receiving
> Federal financial assistance.  - but there may be a way to get to this
> as a cause of action since we are, after all, dealing with college
> students.  even where there is equal funding at the college level, is
> there "exclusion from participation?"  i don't know. just wondering.
> Especially about prong two: Demonstrate a continual expansion of
> athletic opportunities for the underrepresented sex  i don't really
> know much about this title.
>
> 3. if this were a post-educational thing - i would worry less about
> gender inequity, but since it is college related, gender inequity is
> an issue that makes this deal something that might fit into the
> morally wrong sphere (i haven't thought this through very carefully -
> argue this point if you'd like).  oh yes - the upa provides a college
> series that is separately still there, and maybe even equal.
> separate, but equal. hmmmnnn.

I think the Supreme Court settled that one back in 1896.
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2925 is a reply to message #2861] Wed, 15 October 2008 13:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
andrews.megan
Messages: 8
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
But just because a private company
> offers a service to only a certain men its somehow DIVISIVE? Does the
> NFL, NBA or MLB simultaneously promote women's football? Should it?
> does that make financial sense? This is a decision for CULTIMATE, not
> you. If you dont like because it doesnt include women, ok dont
> participate. Maybe it will suceed, maybe it wont but that is just like
> any business. You act as though you have a RIGHT to an ultimate
> tournament from CULTIMATE? What the hell did you do for them? GO START
> your own LEAGUE that includes MEN AND WOMEN if you think that would
> work better. This is a BUSINESS, this is not the UPA or even the NCAA
> that is run for some greater goal of "promoting ultimate as a whole".
> I am guessing these guys like college ultimate, like running
> tournaments and want to make some money, suddenly that is wrong? They
> run a tournament and do something positive and you blame them for not
> including you? If women get left behind it is not CULTIMATE's fault,
> blame the UPA, other women's teams or yourself for not doing enough.
> Take initiative and DO SOMETHING yourself!

Wow. You're missing the entire point. As someone else mentioned,
college sports are not professional sports. That's what I'm saying
here--college ultimate teams are still club sports. They're not even
varsity! It's insane to think that we should all go out and start our
own leagues for women and for men. The NCAA is a governing body, much
like the UPA, that works with the schools to set guidelines for
eligibility, rules, requirements, and regulations for varsity college
sports. And they govern over both men's and women's programs. I assume
that you just don't "get it" that this is fundamentally the wrong way
to go about making changes to the sport of ultimate. There's
technically no room for BUSINESS in college sports--that's why they
have the pros. College sports are not supposed to be run for profit.
Yes, they make money. But it goes right back into the Athletic
Department of the school, and not into the pocket of a third party
company. If you want college ultimate to more closely resemble varsity-
level competition, you simply can't do it without involving the
schools (and probably eventually the NCAA). Title IX may be flawed in
its implementation but the idea of equality is important and should
not be lost on ultimate. Men's and women's leagues should both exist
and have certain regulations in place to make sure that the
OPPORTUNITY to participate is equal for both genders. Forging ahead
with two separate leagues when we're only a collegiate club-level
sport makes absolutely no sense and will dissolve the ultimate
community and jeopardize its chances of becoming a varsity sport in
the future.

"They run a tournament and do something positive and you blame them
for not including you?"

How bout this: "They run good tournaments for men's teams and crappy
tournaments for women's teams under the guise of trying to make
college ultimate more competitive and I blame them for completely
ignoring what is appropriate and necessary to forge ahead with a new
model of collegiate ultimate."

If these two guys enjoy running tournaments and want to make money off
of it, they should do it on the club level. It's completely
inappropriate on the collegiate level.
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2930 is a reply to message #2925] Wed, 15 October 2008 14:16 Go to previous messageGo to next message
MC
Messages: 19
Registered: September 2008
Junior Member
there should be more danceoffs. This would obviously make things more
legitimate.

Perhaps a Male vs. Female danceoff to determine who gets more support
from Cultimate?
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2931 is a reply to message #2925] Wed, 15 October 2008 14:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
footblock
Messages: 119
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
> If these two guys enjoy running tournaments and want to make money off
> of it, they should do it on the club level. It's completely
> inappropriate on the collegiate level.- Hide quoted text -

As it stands now, college teams get little or no support from their
respective schools. Most college teams are essentially the same as
Club teams in ultimate. They pay for everything out of their own
pockets as a personal hobby. CUltimate is providing a service, a
league and tournaments that people may want to play in. (whether or
not its a good plan is a different matter) I dont see the NCAA
providing this, and the UPA may not be providing it to a level the
elite teams like. Our situation is not like that of college basketball
or soccer.

You pay your college to go to school, they make money and pay teacher,
coach salaries and get big endowments? So it is wrong for me to pay
someone to provide me a service? Its wrong to pay someone to run a
good tournament? You pay for tournaments now to the UPA or another
College team who uses the money to fund their team. WTF IS THE
DIFFERENCE! B/c CUltimate tries to make a profit and is PRIVATE!?

In the end, I may agree with you that CUltimate is runs its
tournaments poorly and disrespects women's and non-elite mens teams.
But is that their responsibility? Is it the elite teams'
responsibility to bring along women's ultimate? No. They play for
themselves, just as you play for yourself. I dont imagine that you
play women's ultimate just so mens ultimate can exist?
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2933 is a reply to message #2921] Wed, 15 October 2008 14:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jacob
Messages: 576
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
"separate but equal" is only unconstitutional with regard to race, not
to sex. That is why it is legal to have men's and women's only
bathrooms. It's also why it's legal to have men and women compete in
separate athletic divisions. This is not to say that all sex
discrimination is constitutional; it's just less scrutinized than race
discrimination.

I think Title 9 governs what schools have to do within its own
programs to make sure girls and women aren't being cheated out of
their shot to play sports. I don't think it would govern Cultimate or
compel a school to actively forbid its men's team from competing in a
men-only league.

Use of school field space for a men's-only league might implicate
Title 9, though. Where is Cultimate going to run these events?
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2949 is a reply to message #2925] Wed, 15 October 2008 14:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Handy
Messages: 79
Registered: September 2008
Member
> college sports are not professional sports. That's what I'm saying
> here--college ultimate teams are still club sports. They're not even
> varsity! It's insane to think that we should all go out and start our
> own leagues for women and for men. The NCAA is a governing body, much
> like the UPA, that works with the schools to set guidelines for
> eligibility, rules, requirements, and regulations for varsity college
> sports. And they govern over both men's and women's programs. I assume
> that you just don't "get it" that this is fundamentally the wrong way
> to go about making changes to the sport of ultimate. There's
> technically no room for BUSINESS in college sports--that's why they
> have the pros. College sports are not supposed to be run for profit.
> Yes, they make money. But it goes right back into the Athletic
> Department of the school, and not into the pocket of a third party
> company. If you want college ultimate to more closely resemble varsity-
> level competition, you simply can't do it without involving the
> schools (and probably eventually the NCAA). Title IX may be flawed in
> its implementation but the idea of equality is important and should
> not be lost on ultimate. Men's and women's leagues should both exist
> and have certain regulations in place to make sure that the
> OPPORTUNITY to participate is equal for both genders. Forging ahead
> with two separate leagues when we're only a collegiate club-level
> sport makes absolutely no sense and will dissolve the ultimate
> community and jeopardize its chances of becoming a varsity sport in
> the future.
>
> "They run a tournament and do something positive and you blame them
> for not including you?"
>
> How bout this: "They run good tournaments for men's teams and crappy
> tournaments for women's teams under the guise of trying to make
> college ultimate more competitive and I blame them for completely
> ignoring what is appropriate and necessary to forge ahead with a new
> model of collegiate ultimate."
>
> If these two guys enjoy running tournaments and want to make money off
> of it, they should do it on the club level. It's completely
> inappropriate on the collegiate level.

"It's insane to think that we should all go out and start our own
leagues for women and for men."

Why?

"The NCAA is a governing body, much like the UPA, that works with the
schools to set guidelines for eligibility, rules, requirements, and
regulations for varsity college sports. And they govern over both
men's and women's programs."

But the NCAA wants nothing to do with us. So...

"this is fundamentally the wrong way to go about making changes to the
sport of ultimate."

OK, let's say women are included, do you still think so? If you do
still think so, why are you complaining about lack of involvement? If
you wouldn't be complaining, what do you care how they do it? They're
making much more change than the college division has seen in years,
you may not agree with the changes, but it seems like a great way to
affect change, no?

"College sports are not supposed to be run for profit."

Do you think that college football teams spend millions on their coach
so that they can look good, or because they realize the incredible
amount of money they will receive from TV contracts, Bowl prizes,
season ticket holders, visitors to the college towns with good teams,
etc... College sports are run for profit everyday. Huge corporation
make tons of money off of them, TV stations make loads of money,
sports media makes an unholy amount of money off them and the schools
do too.

"There's technically no room for BUSINESS in college sports--that's
why they have the pros."

Technically, olympians are supposed to be amateurs, many aren't
allowed to compete if they have sponsorships or pro status,
particularly in the winter olympics. Clearly they want to avoid
business. But if you think the Olympics aren't run as a business, and
an incredibly profitable one at that, I think you're the one who
doesn't get it. Pros aren't an outlet for collegians who want to make
money in sports, they're the next level, there's no competition or
outlet, it's a progression.

"will dissolve the ultimate community and jeopardize its chances of
becoming a varsity sport in the future."

The NCAA isn't even remotely considering making us a varsity sport.
Why do you think that is? Honestly, why? And do you really think
that organization and more professional approach is going to hurt our
efforts there? The NCAA doesn't care if we have equal divisions, if
they took us on, they'd slap Title IX on us and we'd have to provide
for both, but in the meantime, not a hurdle. What is a hurdle is that
we're perceived as a bunch of pot smoking hippies playing a fake sport
with no refs, and that's a fact. And anything that moves us away from
there, if your goal is really for us to get varsity status someday, is
a good one.

"They run good tournaments for men's teams and crappy tournaments for
women's teams..." under the guise of trying to make college ultimate
more competitive and I blame them for completely ignoring what is
appropriate and necessary to forge ahead with a new model of
collegiate ultimate."

How many women's tourneys have you been to that they run? You seem to
have intimate knowledge here, I'd love to hear about it.

"under the guise of trying to make college ultimate more
competitive..."

Is it a guise, doesn't it actually promote better competition?

"I blame them for completely ignoring what is appropriate and
necessary to forge ahead with a new model of collegiate ultimate."

What is necessary, and why aren't you doing it? What have you done in
the past to promote this new path? Pay your UPA dues? Maybe even
vote for a BoD candidate? What have you organized? Who have you
spoken with about ideas for this new path? Cribbing "On Civil
Disobedience": Saying you're for something is nothing more than hoping
that it works out and giving yourself an out if it doesn't. Forget
voting and calling your local congressmen or BoD member on the UPA.
What have you done for the women's division? Have you done anything
more than cultimate? Put together a tournament? Organized even a
small summer league? Go out there and do something or quiet down and
take what you're given.

-Handy
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2956 is a reply to message #2921] Wed, 15 October 2008 15:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Handy
Messages: 79
Registered: September 2008
Member
On Oct 15, 1:59 pm, ultimatephotogra...@gmail.com wrote:
> three things.
>
> 1. are the open teams for some schools really going to let the women's
> team sit behind?  I'm talking to you, Carleton. will the schools
> themselves allow this type of decision by its teams (even where they
> are club)?
>
> 2. ok - so cultimate is a private, for profit org (i'd assume) so the
> following language doesn't apply to them directly -  No person in the
> United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from
> participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to
> discrimination under any education program or activity receiving
> Federal financial assistance.  - but there may be a way to get to this
> as a cause of action since we are, after all, dealing with college
> students.  even where there is equal funding at the college level, is
> there "exclusion from participation?"  i don't know. just wondering.
> Especially about prong two: Demonstrate a continual expansion of
> athletic opportunities for the underrepresented sex  i don't really
> know much about this title.
>
> 3. if this were a post-educational thing - i would worry less about
> gender inequity, but since it is college related, gender inequity is
> an issue that makes this deal something that might fit into the
> morally wrong sphere (i haven't thought this through very carefully -
> argue this point if you'd like).  oh yes - the upa provides a college
> series that is separately still there, and maybe even equal.
> separate, but equal. hmmmnnn.

You're grossly hijacking those quotes. There are myriad lawful
reasonable examples of those things not occuring (women's football and
men's field hockey come to mind) in college.

"Demonstrate a continual expansion of athletic opportunities for the
underrepresented sex"

The UPA is doing this. CUltimate is providing an opportunity for a
small group, most people will be unaffected. I imagine women will be
included within the next season or two if this proves to be
profitable. Meanwhile the women will be featured on CSTV at UPA
Nationals and the women's revolution continues with discounted or free
kits given to new teams. CUltimate doesn't have to supply equally,
the sport of Ultimate, particularly it's governing body, does have to
supply equally. They are doing so, and thus for 98% of all members of
this community (2% might even be high for 20 something men's teams)
everyone has an equal shot. Why aren't there bowl games in any
women's sports? Shouldn't they get the opportunity to compete in
front of millions for huge championships? Why don't holiday or
preseason tournaments in college basketball have to invite women's
teams? Shouldn't they be able to go to the same tournaments?

Again, I'm not saying I agree with the CUltimate decision, but these
arguments against it are specious, at best.

-Handy
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2958 is a reply to message #2921] Wed, 15 October 2008 15:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wally
Messages: 16
Registered: September 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 15, 4:59 pm, ultimatephotogra...@gmail.com wrote:
> three things.
>
> 1. are the open teams for some schools really going to let the women's
> team sit behind?  I'm talking to you, Carleton. will the schools
> themselves allow this type of decision by its teams (even where they
> are club)?
>
> 2. ok - so cultimate is a private, for profit org (i'd assume) so the
> following language doesn't apply to them directly -  No person in the
> United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from
> participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to
> discrimination under any education program or activity receiving
> Federal financial assistance.  - but there may be a way to get to this
> as a cause of action since we are, after all, dealing with college
> students.  even where there is equal funding at the college level, is
> there "exclusion from participation?"  i don't know. just wondering.
> Especially about prong two: Demonstrate a continual expansion of
> athletic opportunities for the underrepresented sex  i don't really
> know much about this title.
>
> 3. if this were a post-educational thing - i would worry less about
> gender inequity, but since it is college related, gender inequity is
> an issue that makes this deal something that might fit into the
> morally wrong sphere (i haven't thought this through very carefully -
> argue this point if you'd like).  oh yes - the upa provides a college
> series that is separately still there, and maybe even equal.
> separate, but equal. hmmmnnn.

I can only answer question 1 with a resounding yes. I can name
multiple schools with men's teams who are already guilty of an utter
lack of support for their women's teams. As a fourth-year player at a
school whose ultimate program has had more than its share of problems,
I don't think that, generally speaking, any men's team wants to screw
over their women's team intentionally. Regardless of intention, it
happens at all levels of college ultimate, from elite to casual (see:
unequal practice/tournament facilities, little tournament oversight on
women's side, what have you). Not only that, but the University system
(now I'm speaking directly to my university system) has done little to
enforce equality and compassion between teams. The university will not
deny our men's team the right to play for the C1 championship or any
other championship, for that matter, because the body of ultimate
frisbee has always had loose boundaries. As long as there is a season
or series culminating in a national championship (which C1 and the UPA
provide), the school will continue to fund each team (albeit with
VASTLY different finances).
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2967 is a reply to message #2933] Wed, 15 October 2008 15:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
andrews.megan
Messages: 8
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 15, 2:27 pm, jacob <jacobsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "separate but equal" is only unconstitutional with regard to race, not
> to sex.  That is why it is legal to have men's and women's only
> bathrooms.  It's also why it's legal to have men and women compete in
> separate athletic divisions.   This is not to say that all sex
> discrimination is constitutional; it's just less scrutinized than race
> discrimination.
>
> I think Title 9 governs what schools have to do within its own
> programs to make sure girls and women aren't being cheated out of
> their shot to play sports.  I don't think it would govern Cultimate or
> compel a school to actively forbid its men's team from competing in a
> men-only league.
>
> Use of school field space for a men's-only league might implicate
> Title 9, though.  Where is Cultimate going to run these events?

There might be serious issues for ultimate programs who receive any
support or funding from their schools. Even though some teams pay
mostly out of pocket for their expenses, they're still under the
umbrella of the club sports program and must abide by certain rules in
order to compete while representing their school. Whether they get
$500/year or $50,000/year, they're still being sponsored by their club
sports program. As you mention, they use the school's fields and
facilities, and they are affiliated with the school's athletic
program.

There can be separate leagues for men and women but again, this comes
back to who the governing body is running these sports. Every varsity
collegiate sport is divided by gender.But they also have the NCAA to
govern each sport. Men's and women's professional leagues are a
different discussion. NBA/WNBA, MLS/WPS (soccer), football, etc--they
are designed to make revenue by paying professional athletes to
participate. Yes, women's professional leagues face a huge challenge
to turn their own profit. The WNBA still isn't a successful model,
despite its 12 year existence, because it is heavily propped up by the
NBA. But we're comparing apples and oranges here. Collegiate sports
and professional sports are different entities.

Again, the point is that college ultimate is "college" ultimate. If
Open teams are to continue to receive school funding, they might not
be able to participate in the Cultimate series if you really dig into
the legal restrictions. I'm not an expert here so I'll have to do some
research. But a for-profit third party company running a collegiate
championship series which excludes women seems to be the real issue
here.
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2975 is a reply to message #2933] Wed, 15 October 2008 16:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
MrPinto
Messages: 601
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 15, 2:27 pm, jacob <jacobsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Use of school field space for a men's-only league might implicate
> Title 9, though.  Where is Cultimate going to run these events?

There isn't a men-only league. I'm sure that Cultimate would allow
Florida to put a woman on their roster in the OPEN division. It's not
a Title IX issue since it isn't under the college's AD. It might be
that C1 schools have to forgo their university connection entirely,
losing whatever budget they're currently getting, but even that is far
from clear. Not sure how much of a loss that would be for the schools
in question.

~p
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #2983 is a reply to message #2858] Wed, 15 October 2008 16:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Fish
Messages: 46
Registered: September 2008
Member
On Oct 15, 12:43 pm, tal1...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Oct 15, 3:34 pm, footbl...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > I figured Id join in with my own rant. I played mens college ultimate
> > btwn 2002-2007.
>
> > I certainly understand being upset about poor tournament conditions.
> > If you invite teams, men or women treat them the same. I completely,
> > agree with that sentiment. However, I think this C1 thing is a
> > completly different issue. I am in no way affiliated with C1 and know
> > very little about the details. But just because a private company
> > offers a service to only a certain men its somehow DIVISIVE? Does the
> > NFL, NBA or MLB simultaneously promote women's football? Should it?
> > does that make financial sense? This is a decision for CULTIMATE, not
> > you. If you dont like because it doesnt include women, ok dont
> > participate. Maybe it will suceed, maybe it wont but that is just like
> > any business. You act as though you have a RIGHT to an ultimate
> > tournament from CULTIMATE? What the hell did you do for them? GO START
> > your own LEAGUE that includes MEN AND WOMEN if you think that would
> > work better. This is a BUSINESS, this is not the UPA or even the NCAA
> > that is run for some greater goal of "promoting ultimate as a whole".
> > I am guessing these guys like college ultimate, like running
> > tournaments and want to make some money, suddenly that is wrong? They
> > run a tournament and do something positive and you blame them for not
> > including you? If women get left behind it is not CULTIMATE's fault,
> > blame the UPA, other women's teams or yourself for not doing enough.
> > Take initiative and DO SOMETHING yourself!
>
> not really taking issue with your post.  Don't want to get involved in
> this argument.  But, for the record, the NBA runs the WNBA and loses a
> ton of money on it.

and they should stop. the wnba is retarded.
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #3000 is a reply to message #2975] Wed, 15 October 2008 16:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
andrews.megan
Messages: 8
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 15, 4:06 pm, "MrPi...@gmail.com" <MrPi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 15, 2:27 pm, jacob <jacobsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Use of school field space for a men's-only league might implicate
> > Title 9, though.  Where is Cultimate going to run these events?
>
> There isn't a men-only league.  I'm sure that Cultimate would allow
> Florida to put a woman on their roster in the OPEN division.  It's not
> a Title IX issue since it isn't under the college's AD.    It might be
> that C1 schools have to forgo their university connection entirely,
> losing whatever budget they're currently getting, but even that is far
> from clear.  Not sure how much of a loss that would be for the schools
> in question.
>
>      ~p

I hope CUltimate really thought this through because it brings up some
huge issues.

1. CUltimate needs a system of eligibility for its college teams and
players. If they don't use the already formed UPA system, they have to
invest in a new method to determine this. That doesn't seem very
feasible...they're better off tapping into the system that's already
in place with the UPA. It's take a huge amount of effort to make sure
that players are eligible for the series.

2. They'll be running college tournaments, with fields and facilities
provided by the schools and universities, to make their own profit.I
can only assume that if club sports programs found out that their
facilities were being used to benefit a third party and not the school-
affiliated club team, they would pull funding for those teams. What
would this look like? Would college teams who want to participate in
C1 have to dis-associate from their colleges and school funding? And
if that's the case, what would it even mean to have a "college
series"? The teams would no longer be school-affiliated.

At least as far as Stanford's funding is concerned, this would be a
HUGE blow to their cash flow. All expenses, travel and otherwise,
would be completely out of pocket. College kids need fundraising
opportunities through their schools and whatever small amount of
funding they can get for their program to exist. And it would be
moving in the exact opposite direction of having schools take ultimate
more seriously. They would essentially pull funding and wish us the
best of luck...and I'm not sure how that could ever make ultimate more
competitive for college students.

3. The sport is still growing. It's still young. Eventually we can get
to a place where we're taken more seriously, but it certainly doesn't
reflect well on the ultimate community if they're moving away from the
direction of a governing board which cooperates with universities and
colleges. In fact, that would probably enforce the age-old stereotype
that ultimate is a bunch of pot-smoking, disrespectful hippies who
don't care to regulate their activities in any official sense. Why
should the NCAA consider ultimate if we have such serious divisive
maneuvers taking place in our own community?

4. Just to clarify, I'm not a man-hater. I just don't feel respected
by CUltimate and I can't IMAGINE that they're doing any of this with
the "betterment of ultimate" in mind. They want to make money off of
this, and they're not considering the implications. They want to make
men's ultimate more competitive but they're not considering the
context of our college programs, funding, and participants. I have
first hand experience with 4 of CUltimate's tournaments and I've never
once been impressed with their handling of the women's bracket. I even
heard Skip say, out loud, during Stanford Invite, that he didn't care
if the women's games were near frisbee central because he didn't care
to watch them. THAT is disgusting.
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #3035 is a reply to message #3000] Wed, 15 October 2008 19:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ryan Thompson
Messages: 364
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
"2. They'll be running college tournaments, with fields and facilities
provided by the schools and universities, to make their own profit.I
can only assume that if club sports programs found out that their
facilities were being used to benefit a third party and not the
school-
affiliated club team, they would pull funding for those teams. What
would this look like? Would college teams who want to participate in
C1 have to dis-associate from their colleges and school funding? And
if that's the case, what would it even mean to have a "college
series"? The teams would no longer be school-affiliated."

Stanford club sports already knows that we run Invite through an
"event management company." It doesn't affect us at all.

Also, I don't think that any tournaments will be run on a college
campus, except possibly Centex.
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #3036 is a reply to message #2975] Wed, 15 October 2008 19:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Fraggle
Messages: 1
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 15, 4:06 pm, "MrPi...@gmail.com" <MrPi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 15, 2:27 pm, jacob <jacobsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Use of school field space for a men's-only league might implicate
> > Title 9, though.  Where is Cultimate going to run these events?
>
> There isn't a men-only league.  I'm sure that Cultimate would allow
> Florida to put a woman on their roster in the OPEN division.  It's not
> a Title IX issue since it isn't under the college's AD.    It might be
> that C1 schools have to forgo their university connection entirely,
> losing whatever budget they're currently getting, but even that is far
> from clear.  Not sure how much of a loss that would be for the schools
> in question.
>
>      ~p

It becomes a Title IX issue whenever government funds are involved at
any level for any reason, not just the college. Therefore, Title IX
applies to all non-profits, including the UPA, since tax-exemption is
considered to be a form of sponsorship or subsidy by the government.

Since Cultimate is a for-profit business, I'm not sure if it would
apply, but it certainly could depending on field usage or even team
funding sources.
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #3038 is a reply to message #3036] Wed, 15 October 2008 19:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ryan Thompson
Messages: 364
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 15, 7:26 pm, Fraggle <fraggl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 15, 4:06 pm, "MrPi...@gmail.com" <MrPi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 15, 2:27 pm, jacob <jacobsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Use of school field space for a men's-only league might implicate
> > > Title 9, though.  Where is Cultimate going to run these events?
>
> > There isn't a men-only league.  I'm sure that Cultimate would allow
> > Florida to put a woman on their roster in the OPEN division.  It's not
> > a Title IX issue since it isn't under the college's AD.    It might be
> > that C1 schools have to forgo their university connection entirely,
> > losing whatever budget they're currently getting, but even that is far
> > from clear.  Not sure how much of a loss that would be for the schools
> > in question.
>
> >      ~p
>
> It becomes a Title IX issue whenever government funds are involved at
> any level for any reason, not just the college.  Therefore, Title IX
> applies to all non-profits, including the UPA, since tax-exemption is
> considered to be a form of sponsorship or subsidy by the government.
>
> Since Cultimate is a for-profit business, I'm not sure if it would
> apply, but it certainly could depending on field usage or even team
> funding sources.

I got the impression that the final product will be a non-profit
college governing body equivalent.
Re: Cultimate -- I dare you to think about the women for once [message #3107 is a reply to message #3038] Thu, 16 October 2008 06:50 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
CBrowning
Messages: 190
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
> However, if C1 goes
> through and I go to cultimate tournaments this year my elite womens
> team will be helping pay for the elite guys teams playing for free and
> having their jerseys subsidized. It's not like for other mens teams
> where they have the possibility of eventually playing the in C1
> nationals or being in C1 next year. Womens teams will get nothing out
> of it, even the best ones.

This seems to be one of the major objections to the C1 plan. "My
money will be paying for them and I get nothing out of it." This kind
of thing happens all the time in sports and in life. Hundreds of
teams pay to join the UPA knowing that they have no real chance of
making it to nationals and some even regionals. Technically possible
and really possible are vastly different things. "Technically" the
Birmingham High School ultimate team we helped put together had the
opportunity to make it to club nationals this year, but "really" they
were not going to make it to regionals.

Stupid people subsidize the education of people with scholarships.
Men's collegiate sports subsidize women's collegiate sports. Non-
athletes help pay for scholarshipped athletes to go to school. The
question you should ask is not "Is it fair that they are not paying
for tournaments when I have to?" You should ask yourself "Is what I
am paying for this tournament commensurate with the quality of the
tournament?"

If Cultimate does jack up the prices of their tournaments then maybe
the answer to that question will be "No, it does not." Maybe they
will start neglecting the non-C1 portions of their tournament and the
answer will again be "no." Some of the women seem to feel that they
already neglect them at tournaments so the answer may already be
"no."

Perhaps Cultimate has been putting away money from the other
successful tournaments they have hosted that will allow them the funds
to do this little experiment. I have said in other posts, I would be
very surprised if this first year is the final format that they
envision for college ultimate, so to say that non-C1 players will
always be paying for the tournaments of C1 players seems premature.
Previous Topic:2009 College Season Proposal
Next Topic:Pada, WAFC and ultimate community mourns Fred Schroeder at Mosh
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Wed Apr 1 22:24:33 PDT 2020
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

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