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


Home » RSD » RSD Posts » The problem(s with Conference 1
The problem(s with Conference 1 [message #3131] Thu, 16 October 2008 08:09 Go to next message
Wagenwheel
Messages: 323
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
1) Timing: By timing I don't mean that they've given teams too
little time to plan and attend the required events sponsored by
Cultimate, although I do see that as problematic. The timing is the
occurrence of the event championship and season in relation to the UPA
series. Why would they try to compete with the UPA. Why not instead
set it up for fall? That seems more logical to me. Now you have
students having to decide whether to play with some club team or do
they use conference 1 to prep for UPA series in the spring.

2) Wrong teams: This coincides with timing. If they do it in the
spring it is obvious they should go the club team route. Short
season, sponsored events, with the top talent pools in the nation. I
believe it is important not to directly compete with entities that
have a loyal following like the UPA.

3) College Students: They are in college to get an education and
this format seems too advanced for the developing minds, too
restrictive for their "fight the man" mentality. Not to mention the
travel requirements that would be unprecedented in a college season.
Yes, I am aware that teams travel bi-coastal to play Ultimate, but
rarely more than 2 or 3 times per year.

4) Risk: Conference 1 is untested. Yea the website is cool and so
is the marketing pitch. It is all very exciting. But they have put
the cart before the horse in my opinion. All it takes is for one team
to back away and the rest will follow like lemmings to the sea.

In closing, keep the dialogue going conference 1, don't compete
directly with known entities with a loyal following, and for the love
all that is holy, use teams that can catch and throw and the highest
levels, not college kids who are more likely to swill it up, no
offense kids. I was once college kid too and believed I was gold,
Jerry, gold.
Re: The problem(s with Conference 1 [message #3132 is a reply to message #3131] Thu, 16 October 2008 08:16 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Seamus
Messages: 32
Registered: October 2008
Member
Wow-- that is actually one hell of an idea-- a separate fall
championship based on last year's top 25.
Allow no graduated players, but 3-5 rookies, make the tourney schedule
into two instead of the whole spring... THAT would be fucking
exciting. Turnover makes a huge difference, we get a taste of what
the spring will look like... props, Ed.


On Oct 16, 8:09 am, Wagenwheel <ewagensel...@ec.rr.com> wrote:
> 1)  Timing:  By timing I don't mean that they've given teams too
> little time to plan and attend the required events sponsored by
> Cultimate, although I do see that as problematic.  The timing is the
> occurrence of the event championship and season in relation to the UPA
> series.  Why would they try to compete with the UPA.  Why not instead
> set it up for fall?  That seems more logical to me.  Now you have
> students having to decide whether to play with some club team or do
> they use conference 1 to prep for UPA series in the spring.
>
> 2)  Wrong teams:  This coincides with timing.  If they do it in the
> spring it is obvious they should go the club team route.  Short
> season, sponsored events, with the top talent pools in the nation.  I
> believe it is important not to directly compete with entities that
> have a loyal following like the UPA.
>
> 3)  College Students:  They are in college to get an education and
> this format seems too advanced for the developing minds, too
> restrictive for their "fight the man" mentality.  Not to mention the
> travel requirements that would be unprecedented in a college season.
> Yes, I am aware that teams travel bi-coastal to play Ultimate, but
> rarely more than 2 or 3 times per year.
>
> 4)  Risk:  Conference 1 is untested.  Yea the website is cool and so
> is the marketing pitch.  It is all very exciting.  But they have put
> the cart before the horse in my opinion.  All it takes is for one team
> to back away and the rest will follow like lemmings to the sea.
>
> In closing, keep the dialogue going conference 1, don't compete
> directly with known entities with a loyal following, and for the love
> all that is holy, use teams that can catch and throw and the highest
> levels, not college kids who are more likely to swill it up, no
> offense kids.  I was once college kid too and believed I was gold,
> Jerry, gold.
Re: The problem(s with Conference 1 [message #3137 is a reply to message #3132] Thu, 16 October 2008 08:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
abe
Messages: 13
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 16, 10:16 am, Seamus <shane.ama...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Wow-- that is actually one hell of an idea-- a separate fall
> championship based on last year's top 25.
> Allow no graduated players, but 3-5 rookies, make the tourney schedule
> into two instead of the whole spring... THAT would be fucking
> exciting.  Turnover makes a huge difference, we get a taste of what
> the spring will look like... props, Ed.
>
> On Oct 16, 8:09 am, Wagenwheel <ewagensel...@ec.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > 1)  Timing:  By timing I don't mean that they've given teams too
> > little time to plan and attend the required events sponsored by
> > Cultimate, although I do see that as problematic.  The timing is the
> > occurrence of the event championship and season in relation to the UPA
> > series.  Why would they try to compete with the UPA.  Why not instead
> > set it up for fall?  That seems more logical to me.  Now you have
> > students having to decide whether to play with some club team or do
> > they use conference 1 to prep for UPA series in the spring.
>
> > 2)  Wrong teams:  This coincides with timing.  If they do it in the
> > spring it is obvious they should go the club team route.  Short
> > season, sponsored events, with the top talent pools in the nation.  I
> > believe it is important not to directly compete with entities that
> > have a loyal following like the UPA.
>
> > 3)  College Students:  They are in college to get an education and
> > this format seems too advanced for the developing minds, too
> > restrictive for their "fight the man" mentality.  Not to mention the
> > travel requirements that would be unprecedented in a college season.
> > Yes, I am aware that teams travel bi-coastal to play Ultimate, but
> > rarely more than 2 or 3 times per year.
>
> > 4)  Risk:  Conference 1 is untested.  Yea the website is cool and so
> > is the marketing pitch.  It is all very exciting.  But they have put
> > the cart before the horse in my opinion.  All it takes is for one team
> > to back away and the rest will follow like lemmings to the sea.
>
> > In closing, keep the dialogue going conference 1, don't compete
> > directly with known entities with a loyal following, and for the love
> > all that is holy, use teams that can catch and throw and the highest
> > levels, not college kids who are more likely to swill it up, no
> > offense kids.  I was once college kid too and believed I was gold,
> > Jerry, gold.
>
>

Now you have College competing with the Club series. Also, getting you
college team's shit together in time to be prepared for serious
tournaments in the fall is tough. I know that many college teams play
in the fall series, but college teams focus on the Spring.

In short, there are no 6 minute ab workouts. It takes 7 minutes. 7's
the key number here. Think about it. 7-Elevens. 7 doors. 7, man,
that's the number. 7 little chipmunks twirlin' on a branch, eatin'
lots of sunflowers on my uncle's ranch.

I like the C1 idea, though I don't think that it will take off this
year. I agree with you that they need to incorporate the UPA series.
Re: The problem(s with Conference 1 [message #3139 is a reply to message #3137] Thu, 16 October 2008 08:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Fetch
Messages: 28
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
>3) College Students: They are in college to get an education and
>this format seems too advanced for the developing minds, too
> restrictive for their "fight the man" mentality. Not to mention the
> travel requirements that would be unprecedented in a college season.
>Yes, I am aware that teams travel bi-coastal to play Ultimate, but
> rarely more than 2 or 3 times per year.

I think you nailed it with number 3. Plus the fact that women are
excluded makes it so teams are not going to tournaments with their
womens team. That sounds kind of lame for a lot of players. Many
schools actually travel with their womens teams I am sure...oh wait
that would be Conference 2 and 3 teams.

Fetch
Re: The problem(s with Conference 1 [message #3143 is a reply to message #3137] Thu, 16 October 2008 08:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wagenwheel
Messages: 323
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 16, 11:27 am, abe <froma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 16, 10:16 am, Seamus <shane.ama...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Wow-- that is actually one hell of an idea-- a separate fall
> > championship based on last year's top 25.
> > Allow no graduated players, but 3-5 rookies, make the tourney schedule
> > into two instead of the whole spring... THAT would be fucking
> > exciting.  Turnover makes a huge difference, we get a taste of what
> > the spring will look like... props, Ed.
>
> > On Oct 16, 8:09 am, Wagenwheel <ewagensel...@ec.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > > 1)  Timing:  By timing I don't mean that they've given teams too
> > > little time to plan and attend the required events sponsored by
> > > Cultimate, although I do see that as problematic.  The timing is the
> > > occurrence of the event championship and season in relation to the UPA
> > > series.  Why would they try to compete with the UPA.  Why not instead
> > > set it up for fall?  That seems more logical to me.  Now you have
> > > students having to decide whether to play with some club team or do
> > > they use conference 1 to prep for UPA series in the spring.
>
> > > 2)  Wrong teams:  This coincides with timing.  If they do it in the
> > > spring it is obvious they should go the club team route.  Short
> > > season, sponsored events, with the top talent pools in the nation.  I
> > > believe it is important not to directly compete with entities that
> > > have a loyal following like the UPA.
>
> > > 3)  College Students:  They are in college to get an education and
> > > this format seems too advanced for the developing minds, too
> > > restrictive for their "fight the man" mentality.  Not to mention the
> > > travel requirements that would be unprecedented in a college season.
> > > Yes, I am aware that teams travel bi-coastal to play Ultimate, but
> > > rarely more than 2 or 3 times per year.
>
> > > 4)  Risk:  Conference 1 is untested.  Yea the website is cool and so
> > > is the marketing pitch.  It is all very exciting.  But they have put
> > > the cart before the horse in my opinion.  All it takes is for one team
> > > to back away and the rest will follow like lemmings to the sea.
>
> > > In closing, keep the dialogue going conference 1, don't compete
> > > directly with known entities with a loyal following, and for the love
> > > all that is holy, use teams that can catch and throw and the highest
> > > levels, not college kids who are more likely to swill it up, no
> > > offense kids.  I was once college kid too and believed I was gold,
> > > Jerry, gold.
>
> Now you have College competing with the Club series. Also, getting you
> college team's shit together in time to be prepared for serious
> tournaments in the fall is tough.  I know that many college teams play
> in the fall series, but college teams focus on the Spring.
>
> In short, there are no 6 minute ab workouts. It takes 7 minutes. 7's
> the key number here. Think about it. 7-Elevens. 7 doors. 7, man,
> that's the number. 7 little chipmunks twirlin' on a branch, eatin'
> lots of sunflowers on my uncle's ranch.
>
> I like the C1 idea, though I don't think that it will take off this
> year.  I agree with you that they need to incorporate the UPA series.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

If I were king, I would have the C-1 culminate in a Championship at
Club Nationals in a showcase format, showing off the future of the
sport. Club players love to watch college players battle, especially
alumni. Obviously you can't do a whole pool play format. Top 4 teams
get to compete at Club Nat'ls in showcase format based on a point
system for wins during C-1 season. This puts emphasis on every game
the teams play. Every game counts! Top 4 point leaders get to go to
Sarasota and get to play in front of the big boys and girls. What a
thrill. I used to love it when NY players came to watch us play.
Makes college kids play their best.

I disagree with competing with club series. Yes, college players do
play with club teams, but only because they do not have a better
alternative. Plus, not all college players can make the cut for club
teams though, so the format still works. This weekend there is a
college tourney in Wilmington, during the club season, and yet it is
not in direct competition with UPA. It could work, and could be a
great thing to watch on Thursday and Friday nights at Sarasota! C-1 &
UPA hook it up Fall 2009! You gots 1 year to plan it out.
Re: The problem(s with Conference 1 [message #3144 is a reply to message #3137] Thu, 16 October 2008 08:50 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wagenwheel
Messages: 323
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 16, 11:43 am, Seamus <shane.ama...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The knee-jerk picture in my head was more of a novelty tournament than
> the pinnacle of a season, however short-- but a good number of players
> at those schools are in shape from club, and the rest would get in
> shape over the course of three months.
>
> Mmm... fantasy college ultimate.
>
> On Oct 16, 8:27 am, abe <froma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 16, 10:16 am, Seamus <shane.ama...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Wow-- that is actually one hell of an idea-- a separate fall
> > > championship based on last year's top 25.
> > > Allow no graduated players, but 3-5 rookies, make the tourney schedule
> > > into two instead of the whole spring... THAT would be fucking
> > > exciting.  Turnover makes a huge difference, we get a taste of what
> > > the spring will look like... props, Ed.
>
> > > On Oct 16, 8:09 am, Wagenwheel <ewagensel...@ec.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > > > 1)  Timing:  By timing I don't mean that they've given teams too
> > > > little time to plan and attend the required events sponsored by
> > > > Cultimate, although I do see that as problematic.  The timing is the
> > > > occurrence of the event championship and season in relation to the UPA
> > > > series.  Why would they try to compete with the UPA.  Why not instead
> > > > set it up for fall?  That seems more logical to me.  Now you have
> > > > students having to decide whether to play with some club team or do
> > > > they use conference 1 to prep for UPA series in the spring.
>
> > > > 2)  Wrong teams:  This coincides with timing.  If they do it in the
> > > > spring it is obvious they should go the club team route.  Short
> > > > season, sponsored events, with the top talent pools in the nation.  I
> > > > believe it is important not to directly compete with entities that
> > > > have a loyal following like the UPA.
>
> > > > 3)  College Students:  They are in college to get an education and
> > > > this format seems too advanced for the developing minds, too
> > > > restrictive for their "fight the man" mentality.  Not to mention the
> > > > travel requirements that would be unprecedented in a college season..
> > > > Yes, I am aware that teams travel bi-coastal to play Ultimate, but
> > > > rarely more than 2 or 3 times per year.
>
> > > > 4)  Risk:  Conference 1 is untested.  Yea the website is cool and so
> > > > is the marketing pitch.  It is all very exciting.  But they have put
> > > > the cart before the horse in my opinion.  All it takes is for one team
> > > > to back away and the rest will follow like lemmings to the sea.
>
> > > > In closing, keep the dialogue going conference 1, don't compete
> > > > directly with known entities with a loyal following, and for the love
> > > > all that is holy, use teams that can catch and throw and the highest
> > > > levels, not college kids who are more likely to swill it up, no
> > > > offense kids.  I was once college kid too and believed I was gold,
> > > > Jerry, gold.
>
> > Now you have College competing with the Club series. Also, getting you
> > college team's shit together in time to be prepared for serious
> > tournaments in the fall is tough.  I know that many college teams play
> > in the fall series, but college teams focus on the Spring.
>
> > In short, there are no 6 minute ab workouts. It takes 7 minutes. 7's
> > the key number here. Think about it. 7-Elevens. 7 doors. 7, man,
> > that's the number. 7 little chipmunks twirlin' on a branch, eatin'
> > lots of sunflowers on my uncle's ranch.
>
> > I like the C1 idea, though I don't think that it will take off this
> > year.  I agree with you that they need to incorporate the UPA series.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I can see that. You have season points leader. And Season champs. A
lot to work out. The other benefit is college kids seeing ultimate at
its highest level.
Re: The problem(s with Conference 1 [message #3146 is a reply to message #3137] Thu, 16 October 2008 08:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Seamus
Messages: 32
Registered: October 2008
Member
The knee-jerk picture in my head was more of a novelty tournament than
the pinnacle of a season, however short-- but a good number of players
at those schools are in shape from club, and the rest would get in
shape over the course of three months.

Mmm... fantasy college ultimate.


On Oct 16, 8:27 am, abe <froma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 16, 10:16 am, Seamus <shane.ama...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Wow-- that is actually one hell of an idea-- a separate fall
> > championship based on last year's top 25.
> > Allow no graduated players, but 3-5 rookies, make the tourney schedule
> > into two instead of the whole spring... THAT would be fucking
> > exciting.  Turnover makes a huge difference, we get a taste of what
> > the spring will look like... props, Ed.
>
> > On Oct 16, 8:09 am, Wagenwheel <ewagensel...@ec.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > > 1)  Timing:  By timing I don't mean that they've given teams too
> > > little time to plan and attend the required events sponsored by
> > > Cultimate, although I do see that as problematic.  The timing is the
> > > occurrence of the event championship and season in relation to the UPA
> > > series.  Why would they try to compete with the UPA.  Why not instead
> > > set it up for fall?  That seems more logical to me.  Now you have
> > > students having to decide whether to play with some club team or do
> > > they use conference 1 to prep for UPA series in the spring.
>
> > > 2)  Wrong teams:  This coincides with timing.  If they do it in the
> > > spring it is obvious they should go the club team route.  Short
> > > season, sponsored events, with the top talent pools in the nation.  I
> > > believe it is important not to directly compete with entities that
> > > have a loyal following like the UPA.
>
> > > 3)  College Students:  They are in college to get an education and
> > > this format seems too advanced for the developing minds, too
> > > restrictive for their "fight the man" mentality.  Not to mention the
> > > travel requirements that would be unprecedented in a college season.
> > > Yes, I am aware that teams travel bi-coastal to play Ultimate, but
> > > rarely more than 2 or 3 times per year.
>
> > > 4)  Risk:  Conference 1 is untested.  Yea the website is cool and so
> > > is the marketing pitch.  It is all very exciting.  But they have put
> > > the cart before the horse in my opinion.  All it takes is for one team
> > > to back away and the rest will follow like lemmings to the sea.
>
> > > In closing, keep the dialogue going conference 1, don't compete
> > > directly with known entities with a loyal following, and for the love
> > > all that is holy, use teams that can catch and throw and the highest
> > > levels, not college kids who are more likely to swill it up, no
> > > offense kids.  I was once college kid too and believed I was gold,
> > > Jerry, gold.
>
> Now you have College competing with the Club series. Also, getting you
> college team's shit together in time to be prepared for serious
> tournaments in the fall is tough.  I know that many college teams play
> in the fall series, but college teams focus on the Spring.
>
> In short, there are no 6 minute ab workouts. It takes 7 minutes. 7's
> the key number here. Think about it. 7-Elevens. 7 doors. 7, man,
> that's the number. 7 little chipmunks twirlin' on a branch, eatin'
> lots of sunflowers on my uncle's ranch.
>
> I like the C1 idea, though I don't think that it will take off this
> year.  I agree with you that they need to incorporate the UPA series.
Re: The problem(s with Conference 1 [message #3157 is a reply to message #3131] Thu, 16 October 2008 09:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
joadntoad
Messages: 1411
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 16, 11:09 am, Wagenwheel <ewagensel...@ec.rr.com> wrote:
 I was once college kid too and believed I was gold,
> Jerry, gold.

but in reality you were just a hack like banyah???
Re: The problem(s with Conference 1 [message #3198 is a reply to message #3131] Thu, 16 October 2008 11:38 Go to previous message
Alan Hoyle
Messages: 51
Registered: September 2008
Member
On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 11:09:09, Wagenwheel wrote:

> 3) College Students: They are in college to get an education and
> this format seems too advanced for the developing minds, too
> restrictive for their "fight the man" mentality. Not to mention the
> travel requirements that would be unprecedented in a college season.
> Yes, I am aware that teams travel bi-coastal to play Ultimate, but
> rarely more than 2 or 3 times per year.

Other issues with college kids:

3a) having prizes kills any chance of having NCAA athletes cross-over
and "double-dip." There probably aren't too many of these, but I am
aware of a few players on local college teams who played NCAA sports
part of the year and ultimate during their off-seasons.

3b) There are likely to be serious legal hurdles to having a club
sport at the vast majority of universities play in this kind of series
and have the university's name associated with the team/event. I'm
not saying those are insurmountable, but at all of the universities
I'm aware of, signing any kind of legal contract as a representive of
the university will require signifcant review by campus legal
departments, and they are particularly stringent about for-profit
entities using a university's name.

-alan


--
Alan Hoyle - alanh@unc.edu - http://www.alanhoyle.com/
Previous Topic:A Proposal
Next Topic:DAMN!!!!!
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Wed Feb 19 23:04:52 PST 2020
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

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