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


Home » RSD » RSD Posts » BoD position statement
BoD position statement [message #3293] Thu, 16 October 2008 17:29 Go to next message
Fetch
Messages: 28
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
My position statement is the following:

If in fact the UPA is not an agent of change and is stagnant then it
should be of no consequence to work with the UPA. If both the UPA and
Cultimate have Ultimate players heart at interest then the two
organizations will work together. Currently Cultimate in my view has
no real leg to stand on unless the top teams join. I don't think this
will happen for a variety of reasons but we will see.

Doing this without the UPA's help is something I am not for. The UPA
has done an excellent job at reaching the goals of it's mass members
and just because a minority of people want referees, or have the
loudest voice, or speak the most often, doesn't mean that is best for
the organization or the sport itself.

There are many more positive things about Ultimate than there are
negative. I feel strongly that to abandon the UPA's ideals and goals
would be extreme and not be good for our sport in any way. There is
plenty of change that can be done within the boundaries of a
sustainable framework.

Division and class. We can promote the sport without division and
class of teams. We should treat each other as equals and to separate
us from others and say that some people don't have a CHANCE to be
better is fundamentally wrong, and is a poor reflection of sport, and
of Ultimate. To only pick 25 teams who can win a national
championship is not favorable to most of the Ultimate players in
college. Also we see division amongst males and females, the sport of
Ultimate should always be a model of what sport can and should be.

Without the UPA Cultimate would not be in existence. The UPA gave
structure to Ultimate and continues to allow Ultimate the opportunity
to grow - this includes Cultimate. The UPA continues to grow and that
shows that more people are loving Ultimate the way it is. To change
things drastically would be foolish for the growth of the sport and
disrespectful to many.

Cultimate is a capitalistic model and that requires growth. They have
to grow, and to remain stagnant is contrary to their needs in this
model. Cultimate needs to grow bigger than the UPA and this growth
model dangerous to the sport.

The UPA should talk to Cultimate once I hear more then my position may
change based on the outcome of the meeting and more information I
learn in the future.


David "Fetch" Janinis
BoD Candidate at Large
Re: BoD position statement [message #3370 is a reply to message #3293] Fri, 17 October 2008 06:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
joadntoad
Messages: 1411
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 16, 8:29 pm, Fetch <discoscalien...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> My position statement is the following:
>
> If in fact the UPA is not an agent of change and is stagnant then it
> should be of no consequence to work with the UPA.  If both the UPA and
> Cultimate have Ultimate players heart at interest then the two
> organizations will work together.  Currently Cultimate in my view has
> no real leg to stand on unless the top teams join.  I don't think this
> will happen for a variety of reasons but we will see.
>
> Doing this without the UPA's help is something I am not for.


dont ya mean "control". And if the upa would have been more in tune
with the "wants and needs" of the membership AND were more progressive
and proactive in their programing THEY would be contorling in now and
this wouldnt even be an issue.
------------------------------------------------------------ ----------




 The UPA
> has done an excellent job at reaching the goals of it's mass members



pfft....THATS A FULING JOKE!!!!... )ver 70% of the membership are only
provided ONE competitive playing opportunity......and thatsfarmed out
to independent tds that do ALL the work. And NOW it seems they cant
facilitate for the top competitive end of its membership either. SO
HOW IN THE FUCK DO YOU FIGURE THIS?????
-------------------------------------------------
> and just because a minority of people want referees, or have the
> loudest voice, or speak the most often, doesn't mean that is best for
> the organization or the sport itself.

exactly.....its best for the people that want em........which seem to
be the top college teams at this juncture......AND from the reasearch
i did......the vast majority of male club players are supportive of
refs as well.......hardly "a minority".
------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------
>
> There are many more positive things about Ultimate than there are
> negative.  I feel strongly that to abandon the UPA's ideals and goals
> would be extreme and not be good for our sport in any way.

yep, thats what all them folksy old traditionalists said when dylan
went electric......and ya yknoiw what dylan said......"your old world
is rapidly fadin, get out of the new one if ya cant lend a hand, for
the times they are a changin".
------------------------------------------------------------ -----------



 There is
> plenty of change that can be done within the boundaries of a
> sustainable framework.

what the fuck does that even mean???? Is that jus another way of
sayin that the upa admin MUST control every aspect of ultimate?
------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------
>
> Division and class.  We can promote the sport without division and
> class of teams.

please.....theres already division and class.....Its a fuckin
popularity contest with you people. C1 wants to bring it more into a
modernized sport form. The ego on you to try and imply that ultimate
in general, and the upa series, is not exclusive. ITS ALWAYS BEEN
EXCLUSIVE!!! If it werent there would have been tIered comp from the
beggining of the establishment of the upa.
------------------------------------------------------------ --------------



 We should treat each other as equals and to separate
> us from others and say that some people don't have a CHANCE to be
> better is fundamentally wrong, and is a poor reflection of sport, and
> of Ultimate.


great......lets start by rewarding the worst teams to advance on to
regional and national comp, programmed and facilitated by
administraitors using everybodys collective dues to do so, for the
next 40 years......you know......to make things equal and all.
----------------------------------------------------------



 To only pick 25 teams who can win a national
> championship is not favorable to most of the Ultimate players in
> college.  Also we see division amongst males and females, the sport of
> Ultimate should always be a model of what sport can and should be.


you just need to get over that shit. things arent all equal and fair
in the real world (nor are they in your present "ultimate"
world......but you are in denial of that). the best people in ANY
field always rise to the top and get more in exchange for that
skill.....be it rocket science, building houses, playing football or
being a promoter of ultimate. THATS how shit works in the real
world.......why you dont want ultimate to become a full member of that
world is beyond me.
------------------------------------------------------------ -------------
>
> Without the UPA Cultimate would not be in existence.

with out all the footsoldiers that runn this sport AND all the
independent tds and locall organizers bringin members to the table the
upa wouldnt exist. And how well would the org be able to run without
the membership rev of all tha sorely neglected elliminated
sectionalists that b provide over 70% of its budget.
------------------------------------------------------------ ---------



 The UPA gave
> structure to Ultimate and continues to allow Ultimate the opportunity
> to grow - this includes Cultimate.

so what......that dont mean they have to control everything......and
why is it that the upa dont give a fuck about tinna in amherst
competing with youth clinics? they seem only to be concerned when it
comes to facilitating the small minority of teams and players that are
at the top of the competitive food chain. Fetch man, this just sounds
like typical upa loyalist desperation spew. So i guess we all know
all you want to do is maintain the status quoe as a potential board
member. Oh yea, and become deeply involved with field aqisiton......a
dynamic that the upa admin cant really do shit to help localized
communities with.
------------------------------------------------------------ ---



 The UPA continues to grow and that
> shows that more people are loving Ultimate the way it is.

bullshit.....how many times do i have to quote swill...."dont mistake
tolerance for approval". And the fact that the upa was only able to
drum up less than 10% membership feedback on an aggressive and
expensive "needs and wants" assessment should tell ya about the
massive disconnect between the admin and the membership. And C1 is
just more proff of this.
------------------------------------------------------------ -------------



 To change
> things drastically would be foolish for the growth of the sport and
> disrespectful to many.

well things wouldnt need to "drastically change" if the upa werent so
fuckin far behind the times. As far as disrespect......how about the
upas' disrespect towards ultimate as a true sport.
------------------------------------------------------------ --------
>
> Cultimate is a capitalistic model and that requires growth.  They have
> to grow, and to remain stagnant is contrary to their needs in this
> model.  Cultimate needs to grow bigger than the UPA and this growth
> model dangerous to the sport.

no, this is where you are wrong. a free and open market makes for
heatly compoetition which in the end will insure a better product for
the consumers. what kind of communistic babble is that you are
spewing?
-----------------------------------------------------------
>
> The UPA should talk to Cultimate once I hear more then my position may
> change based on the outcome of the meeting and more information I
> learn in the future.


MINE WONT.(but then again, i anit no flim flammer)


TODD LEBER........08 BOARD CANIDATE FOR UPA

AND AN ASPIRING BOARD CANIDATE FOR C1
Re: BoD position statement [message #3378 is a reply to message #3370] Fri, 17 October 2008 06:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Alex Bottiglio
Messages: 9
Registered: September 2008
Junior Member
>   To only pick 25 teams who can win a national
>
> > championship is not favorable to most of the Ultimate players in
> > college.  Also we see division amongst males and females, the sport of
> > Ultimate should always be a model of what sport can and should be.
>
> you just need to get over that shit.  things arent all equal and fair
> in the real world (nor are they in your present "ultimate"
> world......but you are in denial of that).  the best people in ANY
> field always rise to the top and get more in exchange for that
> skill.....be it rocket science, building houses, playing football or
> being a promoter of ultimate.  THATS how shit works in the real
> world.......why you dont want ultimate to become a full member of that
> world is beyond me.


"the best people in ANY field always rise to the top..."

Who says that CUltimate should decide who should be at the top? Is
Ohio State better than Dartmouth? Is Kansas better than Arizona?

Some guy at CUltimate is throwing darts to pick teams for an exclusive
National Championship, thats not "rising to the top".

"THATS how shit works in the real world"??? and THATS the dumbest
thing I've ever heard.
Re: BoD position statement [message #3382 is a reply to message #3378] Fri, 17 October 2008 07:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
joadntoad
Messages: 1411
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 17, 9:58 am, B0TTiG <bottigli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >   To only pick 25 teams who can win a national
>
> > > championship is not favorable to most of the Ultimate players in
> > > college.  Also we see division amongst males and females, the sport of
> > > Ultimate should always be a model of what sport can and should be.
>
> > you just need to get over that shit.  things arent all equal and fair
> > in the real world (nor are they in your present "ultimate"
> > world......but you are in denial of that).  the best people in ANY
> > field always rise to the top and get more in exchange for that
> > skill.....be it rocket science, building houses, playing football or
> > being a promoter of ultimate.  THATS how shit works in the real
> > world.......why you dont want ultimate to become a full member of that
> > world is beyond me.
>
> "the best people in ANY field always rise to the top..."
>
> Who says that CUltimate should decide who should be at the top? Is
> Ohio State better than Dartmouth? Is Kansas better than Arizona?
>
> Some guy at CUltimate is throwing darts to pick teams for an exclusive
> National Championship, thats not "rising to the top".
>
> "THATS how shit works in the real world"??? and THATS the dumbest
> thing I've ever heard.

cmon.....thaere is no way that cultimate would leave out a team that
would have a realistic shot at winning the present 16 team nationals
format......is there???
Re: BoD position statement [message #3385 is a reply to message #3370] Fri, 17 October 2008 07:17 Go to previous messageGo to next message
MrPinto
Messages: 601
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 17, 6:22 am, joadnt...@ec.rr.com wrote:
> On Oct 16, 8:29 pm, Fetch <discoscalien...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > once I hear more then my position may
> > change based on the outcome of the meeting and more information I
> > learn in the future.
>
> MINE WONT.(but then again, i anit no flim flammer)

Reason number 9874239847 why Toad is a Republican and just doesn't
know it. Better to be wrong than a flip-flopper.

~p
Re: BoD position statement [message #3407 is a reply to message #3382] Fri, 17 October 2008 08:36 Go to previous messageGo to next message
MrPinto
Messages: 601
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 17, 7:12 am, joadnt...@ec.rr.com wrote:
> cmon.....thaere is no way that cultimate would leave out a team that
> would have a realistic shot at winning the present 16 team nationals
> format......is there???

On what are you basing this faith? The obvious example is Zona, a
quarters team from last year. Not a pre-season #1 or anything, but
there are only a handful of teams (C1 or otherwise) that would be
favored in a match against them. Zona beat Florida (#2) last year and
took Wisco to the wire (universe point, right?). All three squads
lost very important players, so it's hard to tell how things would
work out this year. If C1 happens as planned, we'll never know.

Surely there are other up-and-coming squads that might make noise at
nationals if C1 doesn't take place. UNT and Dartmouth wouldn't be
favorites to make semis, but they're surely within the top 25 teams in
college ultimate. As I've noted elsewhere, C1 appears to include
15-20 of the top teams, and 5-10 based on popularity. In addition to
Zona, I believe that Claremont also has a winning record against C1
teams.

I've noted this elsewhere as well, but the fact that the C1 list sucks
is a symptom. The sickness is that the list was generated by two
dudes brainstorming, not by actually playing games. How do you know
who the top 25 are? You play the fucking games. How often does a
team that wasn't in the pre-season top 8 make a BCS bowl? Every
fucking year.


HTH.

~p
Re: BoD position statement [message #3452 is a reply to message #3382] Fri, 17 October 2008 11:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Fetch
Messages: 28
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
> cmon.....thaere is no way that cultimate would leave out a team that
> would have a realistic shot at winning the present 16 team nationals
> format......is there???

Easy there Bush.

There is no way the UPA will leave out a team that has a shot at
winning it either.

I would like to hear how you propose college students fund travel to
all these tournaments. How competitive is Conference 1 going to be if
1/3 the team can't afford to fly somewhere AGAIN. I would much rather
pay $15 dollars for a tournament, and $30-50 for a uniform at the
start of my season, and $80-120 for food and travel then $260 (times 4
or 5) for a plane ticket alone plus a rental car plus...etc.etc. Tell
me how that works and if you do then I think Conference 1 might
deserve to be looked at a little closer. That is excluding the fact
that there are many teams who are legit who are not in conference
one. Doesn't add up. The sentiments are good, to make Ultimate more
competitive but the methods are not sound.

Also to say SOTG is something people don't want is really not true.
Re: BoD position statement [message #3454 is a reply to message #3452] Fri, 17 October 2008 11:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ryan Thompson
Messages: 364
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 17, 11:02 am, Fetch <discoscalien...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > cmon.....thaere is no way that cultimate would leave out a team that
> > would have a realistic shot at winning the present 16 team nationals
> > format......is there???
>
> Easy there Bush.
>
> There is no way the UPA will leave out a team that has a shot at
> winning it either.
>
> I would like to hear how you propose college students fund travel to
> all these tournaments.  How competitive is Conference 1 going to be if
> 1/3 the team can't afford to fly somewhere AGAIN.  I would much rather
> pay $15 dollars for a tournament, and $30-50 for a uniform at the
> start of my season, and $80-120 for food and travel then $260 (times 4
> or 5) for a plane ticket alone plus a rental car plus...etc.etc.  Tell
> me how that works and if you do then I think Conference 1 might
> deserve to be looked at a little closer.  That is excluding the fact
> that there are many teams who are legit who are not in conference
> one.  Doesn't add up.  The sentiments are good, to make Ultimate more
> competitive but the methods are not sound.
>
> Also to say SOTG is something people don't want is really not true.

Playing C1 would be cheaper for Stanford than playing in the UPA
series.

And spirit of the game isn't going anywhere, and, for the time being,
neither is self-officiation.
Re: BoD position statement [message #3527 is a reply to message #3452] Fri, 17 October 2008 18:04 Go to previous messageGo to next message
joadntoad
Messages: 1411
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 17, 2:02 pm, Fetch <discoscalien...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Also to say SOTG is something people don't want is really not true.



people dont even agree as to what the fuck sotg means to begin with.
I'm sure you view it has self officiation.....where as most view it as
practicing good sportsmanship.
Re: BoD position statement [message #3556 is a reply to message #3527] Fri, 17 October 2008 22:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
MrPinto
Messages: 601
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 17, 6:04 pm, joadnt...@ec.rr.com wrote:
> > Also to say SOTG is something people don't want is really not true.
>
> people dont even agree as to what the fuck sotg means to begin with.
> I'm sure you view it has self officiation.....where as most view it as
> practicing good sportsmanship.

This is probably beyond the purview of your experience, but there are
also people who claim to be in love and yet can't come up with a
working definition of what love is. What was that old SC line about
porn? "You know it when you see it?"

Explaining spirit to you would be like explaining red to a blind man,
but that doesn't mean that there aren't sighted folk among us.

~p
Re: BoD position statement [message #3563 is a reply to message #3556] Sat, 18 October 2008 06:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
joadntoad
Messages: 1411
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 18, 1:26 am, "MrPi...@gmail.com" <MrPi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 17, 6:04 pm, joadnt...@ec.rr.com wrote:
>
> > > Also to say SOTG is something people don't want is really not true.
>
> > people dont even agree as to what the fuck sotg means to begin with.
> > I'm sure you view it has self officiation.....where as most view it as
> > practicing good sportsmanship.
>
> This is probably beyond the purview of your experience, but there are
> also people who claim to be in love and yet can't come up with a
> working definition of what love is.


uhm.....is that why there arent any "love clauses" in other sports as
well. Maybe ultimate just needs a "love clause". Actually i better
shut up....i dont want to give the admin any ideas. BUT....from all
i've herd about love.....there is only one rule......which is "all's
fair". Is there an "all's fair" understanding in sotg too?????
----------------------------------------------------



 What was that old SC line about
> porn?  "You know it when you see it?"
>
> Explaining spirit to you would be like explaining red to a blind man,

awe c'mon......give it a shot anyways......seems like a lot of us out
here in the ultimate world are losing our sight.
------------------------------------------------------------
> but that doesn't mean that there aren't sighted folk among us.


amoung who??? spirit zealots???? news flash for ya.......we aint
all spirit zealots.
Re: BoD position statement [message #3564 is a reply to message #3454] Sat, 18 October 2008 06:48 Go to previous message
joadntoad
Messages: 1411
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 17, 2:14 pm, Ryan Thompson <thomp...@stanford.edu> wrote:
>
> And spirit of the game isn't going anywhere

dosent that depend on what ones definition of sotg is.......especially
if its synonomous with NO REFS???
-----------------------------------------------------------




, and, for the time being,
> neither is self-officiation.


well, from what inside sources tell me, its going somewhere in C1
comp........and that "somewhere" IS "down the fuckin road"!
Previous Topic:Goosebowl 2008
Next Topic:The Joint Press Release
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Tue Feb 25 10:31:15 PST 2020
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

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