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


Home » RSD » RSD Posts » calling out the new c1 teams
calling out the new c1 teams [message #8838] Sun, 21 December 2008 19:42 Go to next message
illuminatibird
Messages: 5
Registered: December 2008
Junior Member
Yeah you - duke, maryland, notre dame, michigan state, n. texas,
washington u., ubc, arizona, dartmouth..you know who you are. the
girls left off the dance floor and now being invited back to the pad
for a little grabass after all the other cool chicks left the bar.

i imagine that you were hurt, sullen and pissed when cultimate left
you out in the cold earlier this fall. who would help you now that
you were not in the c1 cool gang? and western washington got a pass?
really you had to be pissed. you probably called up your boys right
away and said "did you see?"

and now, weeks later you're groveling at the cultimate altar and
planning on going to their events. i imagine you're saying "gotta go
to because they really want us now that plan 1 and plan 2 failed.
third times the charm, they like us now and if they don't overcharge
too much and host tournaments in the great white bumfuck this will be
a great season!"

so, see you guys at the oregon trail. no, i mean the oklahoma
corral. no wait, we'll be at the seattle thing or the providence
tourney and maybe st. louis. Yeah. actually the ok corral is my
fave. see you homies there. we can get some fivesixseveneight
ultimate gear together.

when we see each other i won't bring this up, i'm sure it makes you
feel uncomfortable with the flip flopping.
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #8839 is a reply to message #8838] Sun, 21 December 2008 19:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Douglas T Lilley
Messages: 674
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Dec 21, 10:42 pm, illuminatib...@gmail.com wrote:
> Yeah you - duke, maryland, notre dame, michigan state, n. texas,
> washington u., ubc, arizona, dartmouth..you know who you are.  the
> girls left off the dance floor and now being invited back to the pad
> for a little grabass after all the other cool chicks left the bar.
>
> i imagine that you were hurt, sullen and pissed when cultimate left
> you out in the cold earlier this fall.  who would help you now that
> you were not in the c1 cool gang?  and western washington got a pass?
> really you had to be pissed.  you probably called up your boys right
> away and said "did you see?"
>
> and now, weeks later you're groveling at the cultimate altar and
> planning on going to their events.  i imagine you're saying "gotta go
> to because they really want us now that plan 1 and plan 2 failed.
> third times the charm, they like us now and if they don't overcharge
> too much and host tournaments in the great white bumfuck this will be
> a great season!"
>
> so, see you guys at the oregon trail.  no, i mean the oklahoma
> corral.  no wait, we'll be at the seattle thing or the providence
> tourney and maybe st. louis.  Yeah.  actually the ok corral is my
> fave.  see you homies there.  we can get some fivesixseveneight
> ultimate gear together.
>
> when we see each other i won't bring this up, i'm sure it makes you
> feel uncomfortable with the flip flopping.


Just beat them when you play them. That'll make the point. And I
hope you do, should be a little more incentive, if Ulty had locker
rooms, I'd hang that shit on the walls for your people to see before
the game.
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #8841 is a reply to message #8839] Sun, 21 December 2008 20:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
illuminatibird
Messages: 5
Registered: December 2008
Junior Member
On Dec 21, 10:58 pm, 3janemariefrancetessierashpool <q3j...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> On Dec 21, 10:42 pm, illuminatib...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Yeah you - duke, maryland, notre dame, michigan state, n. texas,
> > washington u., ubc, arizona, dartmouth..you know who you are.  the
> > girls left off the dance floor and now being invited back to the pad
> > for a little grabass after all the other cool chicks left the bar.
>
> > i imagine that you were hurt, sullen and pissed when cultimate left
> > you out in the cold earlier this fall.  who would help you now that
> > you were not in the c1 cool gang?  and western washington got a pass?
> > really you had to be pissed.  you probably called up your boys right
> > away and said "did you see?"
>
> > and now, weeks later you're groveling at the cultimate altar and
> > planning on going to their events.  i imagine you're saying "gotta go
> > to because they really want us now that plan 1 and plan 2 failed.
> > third times the charm, they like us now and if they don't overcharge
> > too much and host tournaments in the great white bumfuck this will be
> > a great season!"
>
> > so, see you guys at the oregon trail.  no, i mean the oklahoma
> > corral.  no wait, we'll be at the seattle thing or the providence
> > tourney and maybe st. louis.  Yeah.  actually the ok corral is my
> > fave.  see you homies there.  we can get some fivesixseveneight
> > ultimate gear together.
>
> > when we see each other i won't bring this up, i'm sure it makes you
> > feel uncomfortable with the flip flopping.
>
> Just beat them when you play them.  That'll make the point.  And I
> hope you do, should be a little more incentive, if Ulty had locker
> rooms, I'd hang that shit on the walls for your people to see before
> the game.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

you're reading my shit but you ain't reading my shit. i said nothing
about how they play.

i said they've gone from being shit on to a buying mexican lunch for
the guy thats shitting on them and then showing their friends their
new shit t-shirt.
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #8843 is a reply to message #8838] Sun, 21 December 2008 20:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ilikedisc
Messages: 11
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
> when we see each other i won't bring this up, i'm sure it makes you
> feel uncomfortable with the flip flopping.

It'll probably hard for them to recognize you what with you posting
this anonymously and all.
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #8845 is a reply to message #8843] Sun, 21 December 2008 20:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
illuminatibird
Messages: 5
Registered: December 2008
Junior Member
On Dec 21, 11:31 pm, iliked...@gmail.com wrote:
>  > when we see each other i won't bring this up, i'm sure it makes you
>
> > feel uncomfortable with the flip flopping.
>
> It'll probably hard for them to recognize you what with you posting
> this anonymously and all.

maybe. i should take a queue from you. but i couldn't find your
name? nothing like a troll to bring out the trolls..

i would rather take this to the super secret cultimate chat board.
meet me there and we can exchange stories of cyle telling us how great
we are. by the way, when are our checks due? Do we make them out to
wisconsin or to florida?
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #8847 is a reply to message #8845] Sun, 21 December 2008 21:50 Go to previous messageGo to next message
morfin
Messages: 59
Registered: October 2008
Member
> i would rather take this to the super secret cultimate chat board.
> meet me there and we can exchange stories of cyle telling us how great
> we are.  by the way, when are our checks due?  Do we make them out to
> wisconsin or to florida?

You should make them out to Wisconsin, because you can't beat them and
their jerseys are sweet!
I wish they would finish that stupid documentary as well.
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #8861 is a reply to message #8847] Sun, 21 December 2008 23:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
rcheskin
Messages: 19
Registered: December 2008
Junior Member
On Dec 21, 11:50 pm, morfin <bjmale...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > i would rather take this to the super secret cultimate chat board.
> > meet me there and we can exchange stories of cyle telling us how great
> > we are.  by the way, when are our checks due?  Do we make them out to
> > wisconsin or to florida?
>
> You should make them out to Wisconsin, because you can't beat them and
> their jerseys are sweet!
> I wish they would finish that stupid documentary as well.

Goddamn that is a good post. I have always been a fan of yours and
your dedication to the sport, but seriously finish up the Blue Print!

-Robinho
WashU #36
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #8903 is a reply to message #8838] Mon, 22 December 2008 14:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
andrew.feierman
Messages: 21
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Dec 21, 10:42 pm, illuminatib...@gmail.com wrote:
> Yeah you - duke, maryland, notre dame, michigan state, n. texas,
> washington u., ubc, arizona, dartmouth..you know who you are.  the
> girls left off the dance floor and now being invited back to the pad
> for a little grabass after all the other cool chicks left the bar.
>
> i imagine that you were hurt, sullen and pissed when cultimate left
> you out in the cold earlier this fall.  who would help you now that
> you were not in the c1 cool gang?  and western washington got a pass?
> really you had to be pissed.  you probably called up your boys right
> away and said "did you see?"
>
> and now, weeks later you're groveling at the cultimate altar and
> planning on going to their events.  i imagine you're saying "gotta go
> to because they really want us now that plan 1 and plan 2 failed.
> third times the charm, they like us now and if they don't overcharge
> too much and host tournaments in the great white bumfuck this will be
> a great season!"
>
> so, see you guys at the oregon trail.  no, i mean the oklahoma
> corral.  no wait, we'll be at the seattle thing or the providence
> tourney and maybe st. louis.  Yeah.  actually the ok corral is my
> fave.  see you homies there.  we can get some fivesixseveneight
> ultimate gear together.
>
> when we see each other i won't bring this up, i'm sure it makes you
> feel uncomfortable with the flip flopping.

still no tufts?

i can see how objective the selection process was....
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #8922 is a reply to message #8839] Mon, 22 December 2008 19:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
joe.m.segal
Messages: 185
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Dec 21, 10:58 pm, 3janemariefrancetessierashpool <q3j...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> Just beat them when you play them.

I thought the point of c1 was that nobody else got to play those
teams. Makes it pretty hard to prove you're better than them.
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #8923 is a reply to message #8922] Mon, 22 December 2008 19:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mdvdmn
Messages: 3
Registered: December 2008
Junior Member
On Dec 22, 9:29 pm, joe.m.se...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Dec 21, 10:58 pm, 3janemariefrancetessierashpool <q3j...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Just beat them when you play them.
>
> I thought the point of c1 was that nobody else got to play those
> teams.  Makes it pretty hard to prove you're better than them.

stop bitching about c1 stuff. no matter what happens, in either a 25
team or 40 team set up, some teams are going to feel slighted by
cultimate. you know what teams left out should do. train hard, win the
d1 or whatever system they will have in place, and earn a chance to
play in c1.
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #8925 is a reply to message #8923] Mon, 22 December 2008 20:20 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ryanthompsor
Messages: 10
Registered: December 2008
Junior Member
On Dec 22, 7:33 pm, "mdv...@aol.com" <mdv...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Dec 22, 9:29 pm, joe.m.se...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > On Dec 21, 10:58 pm, 3janemariefrancetessierashpool <q3j...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > Just beat them when you play them.
>
> > I thought the point of c1 was that nobody else got to play those
> > teams.  Makes it pretty hard to prove you're better than them.
>
> stop bitching about c1 stuff. no matter what happens, in either a 25
> team or 40 team set up, some teams are going to feel slighted by
> cultimate. you know what teams left out should do. train hard, win the
> d1 or whatever system they will have in place, and earn a chance to
> play in c1.

....

Or win Sectionals/Regionals/Nationals.
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #8926 is a reply to message #8925] Mon, 22 December 2008 21:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Andrew Dickerson
Messages: 14
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Dec 22, 11:20 pm, ryanthomp...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Dec 22, 7:33 pm, "mdv...@aol.com" <mdv...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 22, 9:29 pm, joe.m.se...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 21, 10:58 pm, 3janemariefrancetessierashpool <q3j...@yahoo.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > Just beat them when you play them.
>
> > > I thought the point of c1 was that nobody else got to play those
> > > teams.  Makes it pretty hard to prove you're better than them.
>
> > stop bitching about c1 stuff. no matter what happens, in either a 25
> > team or 40 team set up, some teams are going to feel slighted by
> > cultimate. you know what teams left out should do. train hard, win the
> > d1 or whatever system they will have in place, and earn a chance to
> > play in c1.
>
> ...
>
> Or win Sectionals/Regionals/Nationals.

dude, most of us can only play for for years, i dont want to waste 1,
2, or 3 of them trying to get in to an "elite" division. maybe my
best chance to do well is this year. why should we have to waste it
in the lower division just cuz a few florida douches wanna make some
money by "furthering the sport"?
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #8929 is a reply to message #8838] Mon, 22 December 2008 22:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
soffer801
Messages: 17
Registered: December 2008
Junior Member
On Dec 21, 9:42 pm, illuminatib...@gmail.com wrote:
> Yeah you - duke, maryland, notre dame, michigan state, n. texas,
> washington u., ubc, arizona, dartmouth..you know who you are.  the
> girls left off the dance floor and now being invited back to the pad
> for a little grabass after all the other cool chicks left the bar.
>
> i imagine that you were hurt, sullen and pissed when cultimate left
> you out in the cold earlier this fall.  who would help you now that
> you were not in the c1 cool gang?  and western washington got a pass?
> really you had to be pissed.  you probably called up your boys right
> away and said "did you see?"
>
> and now, weeks later you're groveling at the cultimate altar and
> planning on going to their events.  i imagine you're saying "gotta go
> to because they really want us now that plan 1 and plan 2 failed.
> third times the charm, they like us now and if they don't overcharge
> too much and host tournaments in the great white bumfuck this will be
> a great season!"
>
> so, see you guys at the oregon trail.  no, i mean the oklahoma
> corral.  no wait, we'll be at the seattle thing or the providence
> tourney and maybe st. louis.  Yeah.  actually the ok corral is my
> fave.  see you homies there.  we can get some fivesixseveneight
> ultimate gear together.
>
> when we see each other i won't bring this up, i'm sure it makes you
> feel uncomfortable with the flip flopping.

I am the captain of the B-team of one of those 2nd round teams you
mentioned. Trash talk if you must, but get your facts straight. Our
entire team has been pro-C1 from the start. We've done no flip-
flopping. C1 is a great way to promote Ultimate as a sport into the
general public. Though I will likely never play as a part of C1, I
fully support the ideas it was founded upon.
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #8931 is a reply to message #8926] Mon, 22 December 2008 23:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ryanthompsor
Messages: 10
Registered: December 2008
Junior Member
On Dec 22, 9:22 pm, Andrew Dickerson <soccert...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Dec 22, 11:20 pm, ryanthomp...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 22, 7:33 pm, "mdv...@aol.com" <mdv...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 22, 9:29 pm, joe.m.se...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 21, 10:58 pm, 3janemariefrancetessierashpool <q3j...@yahoo..com>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > Just beat them when you play them.
>
> > > > I thought the point of c1 was that nobody else got to play those
> > > > teams.  Makes it pretty hard to prove you're better than them.
>
> > > stop bitching about c1 stuff. no matter what happens, in either a 25
> > > team or 40 team set up, some teams are going to feel slighted by
> > > cultimate. you know what teams left out should do. train hard, win the
> > > d1 or whatever system they will have in place, and earn a chance to
> > > play in c1.
>
> > ...
>
> > Or win Sectionals/Regionals/Nationals.
>
> dude, most of us can only play for for years, i dont want to waste 1,
> 2, or 3 of them trying to get in to an "elite" division.  maybe my
> best chance to do well is this year.  why should we have to waste it
> in the lower division just cuz a few florida douches wanna make some
> money by "furthering the sport"?

I don't know what in my post you're responding to, but every team in
the country will be participating in Sectionals. The UPA Championship
is the undivided National championship. Every team has the same
opportunity to win Nationals.
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #8962 is a reply to message #8931] Tue, 23 December 2008 11:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Andrew Dickerson
Messages: 14
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Dec 23, 2:14 am, ryanthomp...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Dec 22, 9:22 pm, Andrew Dickerson <soccert...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 22, 11:20 pm, ryanthomp...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 22, 7:33 pm, "mdv...@aol.com" <mdv...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 22, 9:29 pm, joe.m.se...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > > On Dec 21, 10:58 pm, 3janemariefrancetessierashpool <q3j...@yahoo.com>
> > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > Just beat them when you play them.
>
> > > > > I thought the point of c1 was that nobody else got to play those
> > > > > teams.  Makes it pretty hard to prove you're better than them.
>
> > > > stop bitching about c1 stuff. no matter what happens, in either a 25
> > > > team or 40 team set up, some teams are going to feel slighted by
> > > > cultimate. you know what teams left out should do. train hard, win the
> > > > d1 or whatever system they will have in place, and earn a chance to
> > > > play in c1.
>
> > > ...
>
> > > Or win Sectionals/Regionals/Nationals.
>
> > dude, most of us can only play for for years, i dont want to waste 1,
> > 2, or 3 of them trying to get in to an "elite" division.  maybe my
> > best chance to do well is this year.  why should we have to waste it
> > in the lower division just cuz a few florida douches wanna make some
> > money by "furthering the sport"?
>
> I don't know what in my post you're responding to, but every team in
> the country will be participating in Sectionals. The UPA Championship
> is the undivided National championship. Every team has the same
> opportunity to win Nationals.

my bad i quoted one message too far down
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #8967 is a reply to message #8923] Tue, 23 December 2008 13:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
joe.m.segal
Messages: 185
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Dec 22, 10:33 pm, "mdv...@aol.com" <mdv...@aol.com> wrote:

> stop bitching about c1 stuff. no matter what happens, in either a 25
> team or 40 team set up, some teams are going to feel slighted by
> cultimate. you know what teams left out should do. train hard, win the
> d1 or whatever system they will have in place, and earn a chance to
> play in c1.

I could just as easily tell you to stop sucking cultimate's d*ck.
Surprisingly enough, people don't just have to accept whatever
cultimate says. It doesn't seem right to a lot of people that two
dudes should by themselves decide how college ultimate will be run.
Telling teams to just "win the d1 or whatever system they will have in
place" is a cop out. Nobody knows what their plan is because they
keep changing shit and they don't tell anybody what they're doing.
We're a week away from January and apparently cultimate is still
trying to take over this season and most people still have no idea
what their plans are and that sucks.
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #8973 is a reply to message #8967] Tue, 23 December 2008 16:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mdvdmn
Messages: 3
Registered: December 2008
Junior Member
> I could just as easily tell you to stop sucking cultimate's d*ck.
> Surprisingly enough, people don't just have to accept whatever
> cultimate says.  It doesn't seem right to a lot of people that two
> dudes should by themselves decide how college ultimate will be run.
> Telling teams to just "win the d1 or whatever system they will have in
> place" is a cop out.  Nobody knows what their plan is because they
> keep changing shit and they don't tell anybody what they're doing.
> We're a week away from January and apparently cultimate is still
> trying to take over this season and most people still have no idea
> what their plans are and that sucks.

a few things are wrong with what you said. first, from everything I
have heard from both cultimate people and UPA people, C1 is not
happening this year so really there is no need to complain right now.
its dead (tear). second, cultimate has released a lot of information,
just not to people that really dont impact the outcome of their view
of the series. most teams invited to C1 have a good understanding of
what exactly is going to happen and how things would be run. Also,
they have released less than all their information because as you
said, they are changing things. they released that initial webpage to
get the ball rolling, and now they are fine tuning it. and dont lump
in all of cultimate to Cyle. ya, he made a mistake, but he probably
has done more to make the sport larger and more marketable with
helping to lead cultimate sponsored tournaments (vegas, standford,
centex, huck finn for 09) then you ever will.
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #8975 is a reply to message #8967] Tue, 23 December 2008 16:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
joadntoad
Messages: 1411
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Dec 23, 4:27 pm, joe.m.se...@gmail.com wrote:

>.  It doesn't seem right to a lot of people that two
> dudes should by themselves decide how college ultimate will be run.


i'de rather see two progressive minded dudes doing it than 10 (the upa
BoD) dumbass, traditionalist, spirit zealot kooks doing it.
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #8983 is a reply to message #8975] Tue, 23 December 2008 18:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
soffer801
Messages: 17
Registered: December 2008
Junior Member
On Dec 23, 6:39 pm, joadnt...@ec.rr.com wrote:
> On Dec 23, 4:27 pm, joe.m.se...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >.  It doesn't seem right to a lot of people that two
> > dudes should by themselves decide how college ultimate will be run.
>
> i'de rather see two progressive minded dudes doing it than 10 (the upa
> BoD) dumbass, traditionalist, spirit zealot kooks doing it.

Spirit is important part of Ultimate, but I don't think Cultimate is
anti-spirit. The progressiveness isn't what I like about C1. It's that
it they will be promoting public awareness of the sport. I'd love to
be able to watch a game of Ultimate on a standard cable package. CSTV
just doesn't cut it for me. The UPA BoD doesn't seem to be doing
anything worthwhile in that direction.
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #8995 is a reply to message #8983] Wed, 24 December 2008 00:20 Go to previous messageGo to next message
joe.m.segal
Messages: 185
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Dec 23, 9:38 pm, soffer...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Dec 23, 6:39 pm, joadnt...@ec.rr.com wrote:
>
> > On Dec 23, 4:27 pm, joe.m.se...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > >.  It doesn't seem right to a lot of people that two
> > > dudes should by themselves decide how college ultimate will be run.
>
> > i'de rather see two progressive minded dudes doing it than 10 (the upa
> > BoD) dumbass, traditionalist, spirit zealot kooks doing it.
>
> Spirit is important part of Ultimate, but I don't think Cultimate is
> anti-spirit. The progressiveness isn't what I like about C1. It's that
> it they will be promoting public awareness of the sport. I'd love to
> be able to watch a game of Ultimate on a standard cable package. CSTV
> just doesn't cut it for me. The UPA BoD doesn't seem to be doing
> anything worthwhile in that direction.

How is c1 doing anything in that direction? It has taken a lot of
work by the UPA to get what they have gotten in the past with CSTV.
Why should you think the staff at cultimate would be more successful?
If the networks aren't interested in showing UPA Nationals why should
they be interested in showing regular season c1 games?
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #8997 is a reply to message #8975] Wed, 24 December 2008 05:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
agerics20
Messages: 8115
Registered: October 2008
Senior Member
> >.  It doesn't seem right to a lot of people that two
> > dudes should by themselves decide how college ultimate will be run.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


--only one dude decided how college ultimate would be run from 91
until about 2008......and if cultimate changes it now....i know that i
at least had a good run!
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #8999 is a reply to message #8995] Wed, 24 December 2008 06:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Jeff
Messages: 338
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
Iit was not about television, it was about money. It still is about
money.

On Dec 24, 3:20�am, joe.m.se...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Dec 23, 9:38�pm, soffer...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 23, 6:39�pm, joadnt...@ec.rr.com wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 23, 4:27�pm, joe.m.se...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > >. �It doesn't seem right to a lot of people that two
> > > > dudes should by themselves decide how college ultimate will be run.
>
> > > i'de rather see two progressive minded dudes doing it than 10 (the upa
> > > BoD) dumbass, traditionalist, spirit zealot kooks doing it.
>
> > Spirit is important part of Ultimate, but I don't think Cultimate is
> > anti-spirit. The progressiveness isn't what I like about C1. It's that
> > it they will be promoting public awareness of the sport. I'd love to
> > be able to watch a game of Ultimate on a standard cable package. CSTV
> > just doesn't cut it for me. The UPA BoD doesn't seem to be doing
> > anything worthwhile in that direction.
>
> How is c1 doing anything in that direction? �It has taken a lot of
> work by the UPA to get what they have gotten in the past with CSTV.
> Why should you think the staff at cultimate would be more successful?
> If the networks aren't interested in showing UPA Nationals why should
> they be interested in showing regular season c1 games?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #9003 is a reply to message #8983] Wed, 24 December 2008 09:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
joadntoad
Messages: 1411
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Dec 23, 9:38 pm, soffer...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Spirit is important part of Ultimate


which IS its major malfunction
-----------------------------------------------------------



, but I don't think Cultimate is
> anti-spirit.

I would think, to spirit zealots(who happen to be the ones running
this sport), if you are for the sport progressing to refs, you are
anti spirit. Would you say that other sports (such as football,
basketball, etc) are anti-spirit.......because they use refs? what
the fuck does it mean to be anti-spirit anyways?
------------------------------------------------------------ ---------


The progressiveness isn't what I like about C1. It's that
> it they will be promoting public awareness of the sport.

but if they do it through progressive means, which i'm pretty sure was
a big aspect of their strategy, that in fact would be what you like
about them, right?
------------------------------------------------------------ -----------




I'd love to
> be able to watch a game of Ultimate on a standard cable package.

well that aint gonna happen until you ditch all the spirit crud and
conform to the standards that have been set when it comes to sports
entertainment presentation and delivery.
------------------------------------------------------------ --------



CSTV
> just doesn't cut it for me. The UPA BoD doesn't seem to be doing
> anything worthwhile in that direction.


thats because they have hitched their cart to a game manegment
philosophy and rule enforcement system that is completely idiotic and
not condusive to whats accepted and expected as a viable form of
sports entertainment. cant you see this?
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #9004 is a reply to message #8995] Wed, 24 December 2008 09:17 Go to previous messageGo to next message
joadntoad
Messages: 1411
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Dec 24, 3:20 am, joe.m.se...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> How is c1 doing anything in that direction?  It has taken a lot of
> work by the UPA to get what they have gotten in the past with CSTV.
> Why should you think the staff at cultimate would be more successful?

because they would have a better product with higher standards.
---------------------------------------------
> If the networks aren't interested in showing UPA Nationals why should
> they be interested in showing regular season c1 games?


well they wouldnt right off the bat. a promoter like c1 would have to
dig ultimate out of the deep hole that the upa has put it in. but it
would be a turn in the right direction of mending ultimates sullied
reputation as a sport for idealistic romantics that seem to be on some
kind of dogmatic spirit quest and help to get ultimate to a "real
sport status" quicker than if they, otherwise, werent involved at all.
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #9005 is a reply to message #8999] Wed, 24 December 2008 09:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
joadntoad
Messages: 1411
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Dec 24, 9:31 am, Jeff <Jffr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Iit was not about television, it was about money.  It still is about
> money.
>
> On Dec 24, 3:20 am, joe.m.se...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 23, 9:38 pm, soffer...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 23, 6:39 pm, joadnt...@ec.rr.com wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 23, 4:27 pm, joe.m.se...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > >. It doesn't seem right to a lot of people that two
> > > > > dudes should by themselves decide how college ultimate will be run.
>
> > > > i'de rather see two progressive minded dudes doing it than 10 (the upa
> > > > BoD) dumbass, traditionalist, spirit zealot kooks doing it.
>
> > > Spirit is important part of Ultimate, but I don't think Cultimate is
> > > anti-spirit. The progressiveness isn't what I like about C1. It's that
> > > it they will be promoting public awareness of the sport. I'd love to
> > > be able to watch a game of Ultimate on a standard cable package. CSTV
> > > just doesn't cut it for me. The UPA BoD doesn't seem to be doing
> > > anything worthwhile in that direction.
>
> > How is c1 doing anything in that direction? It has taken a lot of
> > work by the UPA to get what they have gotten in the past with CSTV.
> > Why should you think the staff at cultimate would be more successful?
> > If the networks aren't interested in showing UPA Nationals why should
> > they be interested in showing regular season c1 games?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

whats wrong with ANYTHING, in this capitolistic society of ours, being
about money? You know most people that work for a living dont do it
for their health......they do it for a paycheck.
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #9013 is a reply to message #9004] Wed, 24 December 2008 13:04 Go to previous messageGo to next message
soffer801
Messages: 17
Registered: December 2008
Junior Member
On Dec 24, 11:17 am, joadnt...@ec.rr.com wrote:
> On Dec 24, 3:20 am, joe.m.se...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > How isc1doing anything in that direction?  It has taken a lot of
> > work by the UPA to get what they have gotten in the past with CSTV.
> > Why should you think the staff at cultimate would be more successful?
>
> because they would have a better product with higher standards.
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> > If the networks aren't interested in showing UPA Nationals why should
> > they be interested in showing regular seasonc1games?
>
> well they wouldnt right off the bat.  a promoter likec1would have to
> dig ultimate out of the deep hole that the upa has put it in.  but it
> would be a turn in the right direction of mending ultimates sullied
> reputation as a sport for idealistic romantics that seem to be on some
> kind of dogmatic spirit quest and help to get ultimate to a "real
> sport status" quicker than if they, otherwise, werent involved at all.

The idea behind C1 is that it is ridiculous for low end teams to be
playing high end teams. Neither team has anything. That's why we have
D1, 2, and 3 for NCAA sports. If the top teams are playing each other
over and over again, there will be a market to watch them. Watching
the national championship game once a year is no big deal for anyone.
First of all, its on CSTV, with shitty commentary. Second, it's once a
year. If I could watch Ultimate even once or twice a month over the
course of the spring season, I wouldn't miss it. In order to build a
following, you need reliably and routinely broadcast events. Without
C1, good teams don't play each other enough for this to happen.

As far as the spirit/anti-spirit debate goes, I think y'all are
confusing refereed games with anti-spirit. You can't quantify spirit
in some set of rules about how the play is governed. As I see it,
spirit is about not intentionally fouling or hurting other players.
Like what it says in the spirit clause of the rules. Games can be
refereed, though I don't think that this provides the optimal setup in
cases such as stalling, picks, etc. (but this is a separate debate).
There is something gentlemanly about the current state of Ultimate,
and I would like to keep it that way, but still get publicly accepted.
Hell, if people watch golf, a non-reffed sport I might add, then
they'll watch Ultimate.
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #9016 is a reply to message #8923] Wed, 24 December 2008 15:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
afam259
Messages: 6
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Dec 22, 10:33 pm, "mdv...@aol.com" <mdv...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Dec 22, 9:29 pm, joe.m.se...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > On Dec 21, 10:58 pm, 3janemariefrancetessierashpool <q3j...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > Just beat them when you play them.
>
> > I thought the point of c1 was that nobody else got to play those
> > teams.  Makes it pretty hard to prove you're better than them.
>
> stop bitching about c1 stuff. no matter what happens, in either a 25
> team or 40 team set up, some teams are going to feel slighted by
> cultimate. you know what teams left out should do. train hard, win the
> d1 or whatever system they will have in place, and earn a chance to
> play in c1.

so duke is now in C1? maryland? texas? I don't know much about Duke or
Maryland but didn't Texas finish second to last in their pool at CCC
(this is the fall season but still...)? Seems like the UPA is becoming
more elite while C1 is becoming more diluted. Perhaps this is the real
flip-flop
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #9017 is a reply to message #9013] Wed, 24 December 2008 15:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
joadntoad
Messages: 1411
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Dec 24, 4:04 pm, soffer...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> The idea behind C1 is that it is ridiculous for low end teams to be
> playing high end teams. Neither team has anything.

to gain???
----------------------------------------------------------


That's why we have
> D1, 2, and 3 for NCAA sports. If the top teams are playing each other
> over and over again, there will be a market to watch them.

only if the presentation is solid........which under the current game
management system, is anything but.
------------------------------------------------------------ ----------



Watching
> the national championship game once a year is no big deal for anyone.

it would be if it were modernized. Ncaa lax only really comes on once
a year and its the shit.
------------------------------------------------------------ ----
> First of all, its on CSTV, with shitty commentary.

cant argue that point
--------------------------------------------

Second, it's once a
> year.

i CAN argue that one.....in fact, i already did
------------------------------------------------



If I could watch Ultimate even once or twice a month over the
> course of the spring season, I wouldn't miss it.

even if it were on cstv with shitty commentary. i mean, where else do
you think you'll get it aired?
---------------------------------------------------



In order to build a
> following, you need reliably and routinely broadcast events.


you need a fuck of a lot more than just that! trust
-----------------------------------------------------------


Without
> C1, good teams don't play each other enough for this to happen.
>
> As far as the spirit/anti-spirit debate goes, I think y'all are
> confusing refereed games with anti-spirit.

still dont know what entails "anti-spirit"?
------------------------------------------------------------ ----------



You can't quantify spirit
> in some set of rules about how the play is governed. As I see it,
> spirit is about not intentionally fouling or hurting other players.


so when people stategically foul in basketball they are unspirited?
I've heard many many commentators refer to this as smart heads up
play......never unsportsmanlike. and thats probably because they
(both commentators and players) know there is a risk going in.
------------------------------------------------------------ --------
> Like what it says in the spirit clause of the rules.

but people intentionally foul in ultimate (at least on the mark) all
the time
--------------------------------------------------------


Games can be
> refereed, though I don't think that this provides the optimal setup in
> cases such as stalling, picks, etc.

and are you basing this on knowledge and experience or just pure
speculation
------------------------------------------------------------ ---


>(but this is a separate debate).

not any more it isnt. dont you know how shit works around here?
--------------------------------------------------------
> There is something gentlemanly about the current state of Ultimate,

dont ya mean "lady like".....after all, it was a woman that came up
with this silly sotg nonsense.
------------------------------------------------------------ -----
> and I would like to keep it that way, but still get publicly accepted.

HA......thats a good one.
------------------------------------------------------------ ---
> Hell, if people watch golf, a non-reffed sport I might add,

hello mcfly, any golf you see on tv has officials to make rulings one
each and every hole. and why you people insist on comparing a field
team sport to and individual stand still sport with no defense or
contact, i'll never get.
------------------------------------------------------------ -------


then
> they'll watch Ultimate

but since golf DOES have impartial active officials, are you implying
they wont (watch ultimate).......cause it dosent?????
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #9020 is a reply to message #9013] Wed, 24 December 2008 17:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Jeff
Messages: 338
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Dec 24, 4:04�pm, soffer...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Dec 24, 11:17�am, joadnt...@ec.rr.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 24, 3:20�am, joe.m.se...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > How isc1doing anything in that direction? �It has taken a lot of
> > > work by the UPA to get what they have gotten in the past with CSTV.
> > > Why should you think the staff at cultimate would be more successful?
>
> > because they would have a better product with higher standards.
> > ---------------------------------------------
>
> > > If the networks aren't interested in showing UPA Nationals why should
> > > they be interested in showing regular seasonc1games?
>
> > well they wouldnt right off the bat. �a promoter likec1would have to
> > dig ultimate out of the deep hole that the upa has put it in. �but it
> > would be a turn in the right direction of mending ultimates sullied
> > reputation as a sport for idealistic romantics that seem to be on some
> > kind of dogmatic spirit quest and help to get ultimate to a "real
> > sport status" quicker than if they, otherwise, werent involved at all.
>
> The idea behind C1 is that it is ridiculous for low end teams to be
> playing high end teams. Neither team has anything. That's why we have
> D1, 2, and 3 for NCAA sports. If the top teams are playing each other
> over and over again, there will be a market to watch them. Watching
> the national championship game once a year is no big deal for anyone.
> First of all, its on CSTV, with shitty commentary. Second, it's once a
> year. If I could watch Ultimate even once or twice a month over the
> course of the spring season, I wouldn't miss it. In order to build a
> following, you need reliably and routinely broadcast events. Without
> C1, good teams don't play each other enough for this to happen.
>
> As far as the spirit/anti-spirit debate goes, I think y'all are
> confusing refereed games with anti-spirit. You can't quantify spirit
> in some set of rules about how the play is governed. As I see it,
> spirit is about not intentionally fouling or hurting other players.
> Like what it says in the spirit clause of the rules. Games can be
> refereed, though I don't think that this provides the optimal setup in
> cases such as stalling, picks, etc. (but this is a separate debate).
> There is something gentlemanly about the current state of Ultimate,
> and I would like to keep it that way, but still get publicly accepted.
> Hell, if people watch golf, a non-reffed sport I might add, then
> they'll watch Ultimate.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #9034 is a reply to message #9017] Thu, 25 December 2008 10:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
soffer801
Messages: 17
Registered: December 2008
Junior Member
On Dec 24, 5:15 pm, joadnt...@ec.rr.com wrote:
> On Dec 24, 4:04 pm, soffer...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > The idea behind C1 is that it is ridiculous for low end teams to be
> > playing high end teams. Neither team has anything.
>
> to gain???
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>  That's why we have
>
> > D1, 2, and 3 for NCAA sports. If the top teams are playing each other
> > over and over again, there will be a market to watch them.
>
> only if the presentation is solid........which under the current game
> management system, is anything but.
> ------------------------------------------------------------ ----------
>
>  Watching
>
> > the national championship game once a year is no big deal for anyone.
>
> it would be if it were modernized.  Ncaa lax only really comes on once
> a year and its the shit.
> ------------------------------------------------------------ ----
>
> > First of all, its on CSTV, with shitty commentary.
>
> cant argue that point
> --------------------------------------------
>
>  Second, it's once a
>
> > year.
>
> i CAN argue that one.....in fact, i already did
> ------------------------------------------------
>
>  If I could watch Ultimate even once or twice a month over the
>
> > course of the spring season, I wouldn't miss it.
>
> even if it were on cstv with shitty commentary.  i mean, where else do
> you think you'll get it aired?
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
>  In order to build a
>
> > following, you need reliably and routinely broadcast events.
>
> you need a fuck of a lot more than just that! trust
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
>  Without
>
> > C1, good teams don't play each other enough for this to happen.
>
> > As far as the spirit/anti-spirit debate goes, I think y'all are
> > confusing refereed games with anti-spirit.
>
> still dont know what entails "anti-spirit"?
> ------------------------------------------------------------ ----------
>
>  You can't quantify spirit
>
> > in some set of rules about how the play is governed. As I see it,
> > spirit is about not intentionally fouling or hurting other players.
>
> so when people stategically foul in basketball they are unspirited?
> I've heard many many commentators refer to this as smart heads up
> play......never unsportsmanlike.  and thats probably because they
> (both commentators and players) know there is a risk going in.
> ------------------------------------------------------------ --------
>
> > Like what it says in the spirit clause of the rules.
>
> but people intentionally foul in ultimate (at least on the mark) all
> the time
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
>  Games can be
>
> > refereed, though I don't think that this provides the optimal setup in
> > cases such as stalling, picks, etc.
>
> and are you basing this on knowledge and experience or just pure
> speculation
> ------------------------------------------------------------ ---
>
>  >(but this is a separate debate).
>
> not any more it isnt.  dont you know how shit works around here?
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
> > There is something gentlemanly about the current state of Ultimate,
>
> dont ya mean "lady like".....after all, it was a woman that came up
> with this silly sotg nonsense.
> ------------------------------------------------------------ -----
>
> > and I would like to keep it that way, but still get publicly accepted.
>
> HA......thats a good one.
> ------------------------------------------------------------ ---
>
> > Hell, if people watch golf, a non-reffed sport I might add,
>
> hello mcfly, any golf you see on tv has officials to make rulings one
> each and every hole.  and why you people insist on comparing a field
> team sport to and individual stand still sport with no defense or
> contact, i'll never get.
> ------------------------------------------------------------ -------
>
>  then
>
> > they'll watch Ultimate
>
> but since golf DOES have impartial active officials, are you implying
> they wont (watch ultimate).......cause it dosent?????

Golf has a SOTG clause just like ultimate. Whether or not a game has
active officials, it is obvious that people will watch a sport, even
if spirit is part of the game. Actually, same goes for cricket.
Apparently SOTG is big in cricket too.

Isn't SOTG what makes golf gentlemanly? I've heard spirit been
referred to as "that pussy shit," which is a misrepresentation. There
is a big difference between a being a pussy and not being a dick. That
is to say, "lady like" is the wrong way to categorize spirit. It
actually wasn't invented by a woman. It started with the beginning of
ultimate 40 years ago. Maybe a woman gave it its official name now, i
don't know, but it started at the beginning.

I'm sort of answering your point is random order, but about strategic
fouling in basketball... yes, I think it is unspirited. Obviously it
is heads up play, but the way it stands now, the SOTG clause
specifically says that intentional fouling, even when your team stands
to benefit, is anti-spirit. I realize people foul while marking all
the time. I have little respect for those people as ultimate players.
It is not the way the game was intended to be played, and it adds
nothing to the game.

As far as refereed games go, I'm basing most of it on speculation, but
what I have seen of observed games makes me think it won't work. Also,
at Fallout 2008, UofI organized a refereed exhibition game. Refs
called fouls, picks and stalls. They were decent with fouls, but the
pick and stall calls just failed outright. More than half of the picks
went uncalled, and refs couldn't get stalling right. It was impossible
for them to tell when a mark was within stalling range. It is just
simpler for the mark to call stalls, and the thrower to call
violations if they exist.
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #9037 is a reply to message #9034] Thu, 25 December 2008 11:16 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mdvdmn
Messages: 3
Registered: December 2008
Junior Member
> Golf has a SOTG clause just like ultimate. Whether or not a game has
> active officials, it is obvious that people will watch a sport, even
> if spirit is part of the game. Actually, same goes for cricket.
> Apparently SOTG is big in cricket too.

where did you learn that spirit is big in cricket, cause thats just
not right. I have been to cricket matches and watched many an
international test match, and a good chunk of the time teams lie about
hitting certain things that if i described here would not make sense
unless you understood the game, but are on par with intentional fouls
or calling a disc up when it is not
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #9042 is a reply to message #9005] Thu, 25 December 2008 14:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
piikeman34
Messages: 16
Registered: December 2008
Junior Member
On Dec 24, 11:31 am, joadnt...@ec.rr.com wrote:
> On Dec 24, 9:31 am, Jeff <Jffr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Iit was not about television, it was about money.  It still is about
> > money.
>
> > On Dec 24, 3:20 am, joe.m.se...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 23, 9:38 pm, soffer...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 23, 6:39 pm, joadnt...@ec.rr.com wrote:
>
> > > > > On Dec 23, 4:27 pm, joe.m.se...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > > >. It doesn't seem right to a lot of people that two
> > > > > > dudes should by themselves decide how college ultimate will be run.
>
> > > > > i'de rather see two progressive minded dudes doing it than 10 (the upa
> > > > > BoD) dumbass, traditionalist, spirit zealot kooks doing it.
>
> > > > Spirit is important part of Ultimate, but I don't think Cultimate is
> > > > anti-spirit. The progressiveness isn't what I like about C1. It's that
> > > > it they will be promoting public awareness of the sport. I'd love to
> > > > be able to watch a game of Ultimate on a standard cable package. CSTV
> > > > just doesn't cut it for me. The UPA BoD doesn't seem to be doing
> > > > anything worthwhile in that direction.
>
> > > How is c1 doing anything in that direction? It has taken a lot of
> > > work by the UPA to get what they have gotten in the past with CSTV.
> > > Why should you think the staff at cultimate would be more successful?
> > > If the networks aren't interested in showing UPA Nationals why should
> > > they be interested in showing regular season c1 games?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> whats wrong with ANYTHING, in this capitolistic society of ours, being
> about money?  You know most people that work for a living dont do it
> for their health......they do it for a paycheck.

The fear is that they do it not for the betterment of the sport, but
only for the money

-_-
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #9057 is a reply to message #9042] Fri, 26 December 2008 07:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Jaws
Messages: 31
Registered: October 2008
Member
If you think the only thing standing between Ultimate and televised
games is refs and better commentators, you are delusional. If you
think that the best reason to buy into C1 is that they'll get games on
standard cable and Ultimate highlights on ESPN, then please get in
touch with me. I have a bridge to sell you.
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #9058 is a reply to message #9057] Fri, 26 December 2008 08:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Peterson
Messages: 82
Registered: September 2008
Member
On Dec 26, 10:32 am, Jaws <jdb...@mizzou.edu> wrote:
> If you think the only thing standing between Ultimate and televised
> games is refs and better commentators, you are delusional. If you
> think that the best reason to buy into C1 is that they'll get games on
> standard cable and Ultimate highlights on ESPN, then please get in
> touch with me. I have a bridge to sell you.

You seem to be inferring beyond what is being implied.

Ultimate needs baby steps to get there. Standardized fields sizes,
hand signals, a better rule enforcement plan (whatever your choice),
more organized tournaments, better and more savvy marketing and
promotion and about 100 other things.

Refs or more active observers accomplishes some of those goals. C1
seems to also wanting to accomplish some of those goals as well. I'm
not saying I would join C1 if I was at an eligible school, but I don't
think they will hurt college ultimate in the long run. And there is a
chance they will help.

Peterson
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #9060 is a reply to message #9034] Fri, 26 December 2008 08:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
joadntoad
Messages: 1411
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Dec 25, 1:30 pm, soffer...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Golf has a SOTG clause just like ultimate.

but the dynamics in making, and having to make, judgements(as well as
manage the overall game) are completely oppisite in those two sports,
no?.
------------------------------------------------------------ -



Whether or not a game has
> active officials, it is obvious that people will watch a sport, even
> if spirit is part of the game.

then explain why no one watches ultimate??? even x-players.
------------------------------------------------


Actually, same goes for cricket.
> Apparently SOTG is big in cricket too.

who watches that? and why not make a comparison to the sports that
ultimate, not only closest resembles the most......but was also born
out of.(football basketball and soccer)
-----------------------------------------------------
>
> Isn't SOTG what makes golf gentlemanly?

not for the ladies, but (all joking aside) i'd say it more of its slow
paced and stand still nature.
------------------------------------------------------------ --

I've heard spirit been
> referred to as "that pussy shit," which is a misrepresentation.

how so?
-------------------------------------------



There
> is a big difference between a being a pussy and not being a dick. That
> is to say, "lady like" is the wrong way to categorize spirit.

you must be a schavenist, because, besides gender, whats the
difference between "lady like" and "gentelmanly"? and how can women
be expected to do ANYTHING in a gentlemanly fashion?
------------------------------------------------------------ -----


It
> actually wasn't invented by a woman. It started with the beginning of
> ultimate 40 years ago.


see, this is where you people are delusional. you think self
officiation was invented by/thru ultimate. ALL sports are played at
least at some levels under an informal sotg philosophy. It was,
though, the verbage that made up the sotg clause that came directly
from the "new games" movement, which was spearheaded by a woman, that
was the source of ultimates sotg bullshit.
------------------------------------------------------------ --



Maybe a woman gave it its official name now, i
> don't know, but it started at the beginning.

if it started at the beggining the why did the original rules of
ultimate contain a section called "officials" that basically said tha
refs could be used in ultimate comp to make all calls which would be
final. and if there were no refs then players would have to enforce
rules and manage the calls themselves?
------------------------------------------------------------ -------
>
> I'm sort of answering your point is random order, but about strategic
> fouling in basketball... yes, I think it is unspirited.

how so? theres no rule against it......as there is with ultimate.
------------------------------------------------


Obviously it
> is heads up play, but the way it stands now, the SOTG clause
> specifically says that intentional fouling, even when your team stands
> to benefit, is anti-spirit.

anti-spirit??? is that like anti semitism, or anti christ??? in which
it implies the presence of the devil or evil? that seems like a total
relegious concept/propaganda to me. nt that you are saying it isnt but
many refut the notion of ultimates sotg bullshit as NOT being
relegilous.
------------------------------------------------------------ ----




I realize people foul while marking all
> the time.

and go offsides, and double team, and fast count and travel, and make
bogus calls, etc, etc
------------------------------------------------------------ ------

> I have little respect for those people as ultimate players.

so would you say that it makes those that violate it even MORE
"unspirited" (and therefore less respected by YOU)than people that
intentionally foul in other sports.......you know, since ultimate has
such pious expectations and ridgid spiritual standards reguarding that
dynamic. I mean, as you yourself said, "sotg is a big part of
ultimate"......while, obviously, in other sports it isnt.
----------------------------------------------------
> It is not the way the game was intended to be played, and it adds
> nothing to the game.

well, unfortunately, your disapproval is hardly a deterent and it
seems that the violations are just getting worse as time goes on. so
why not wise up and "add somthing to the game" that will tangibly deal
with this obvious problem? like refs? ya stupe
-----------------------------------------------------------


>
> As far as refereed games go, I'm basing most of it on speculation, but
> what I have seen of observed games makes me think it won't work.

why just "think/speculate" though? Your like my 6 year old daughter
that wont eat certian foods because she "thinks" she wont like them.
grow up!
----------------------------------------------------------



Also,
> at Fallout 2008, UofI organized a refereed exhibition game.

where and when was this......and organized by who again?
----------------------------------------------------------


Refs
> called fouls, picks and stalls. They were decent with fouls, but the
> pick and stall calls just failed outright.

picks are tough. why they couldnt get stalls to work is beyond me.
maybe those refs just needed a little more training. as for stalls,
in mlu comp, at potlatch the refs did a silent stall second 7 count
(which is probably as long as it takes most current player/refs to
count to 10) and it was a big success.
-----------------------------------------------------------



More than half of the picks
> went uncalled, and refs couldn't get stalling right. It was impossible
> for them to tell when a mark was within stalling range.

impossible???? hardley! if those refs couldnt accurately judge when
they were in a ten foot range (isnt that the same range with double
teaming that present day observers must offer referals on?) then they
probably had no right being out there anyways. and many people (in
fact the vast majority of current players) just arent cut out for
reffing......which only adds to the inconsistancy of a "player
controled" game in which ALL players are obligated to multi task and
be refs too.
------------------------------------------------------------ -



It is just
> simpler for the mark to call stalls, and the thrower to call
> violations if they exist.


no one said reffin wasnt hard, but with said simplicity also comes
inconsistancy, partiality and cheating. Its a double edged sword that
cuts ultimate to the bone at times........and makes it extreemly hard,
boring and often painful to watch.
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #9061 is a reply to message #9037] Fri, 26 December 2008 08:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
joadntoad
Messages: 1411
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Dec 25, 2:16 pm, "mdv...@aol.com" <mdv...@aol.com> wrote:
> > Golf has a SOTG clause just like ultimate. Whether or not a game has
> > active officials, it is obvious that people will watch a sport, even
> > if spirit is part of the game. Actually, same goes for cricket.
> > Apparently SOTG is big in cricket too.
>
> where did you learn that spirit is big in cricket, cause thats just
> not right. I have been to cricket matches and watched many an
> international test match, and a good chunk of the time teams lie about
> hitting certain things that if i described here would not make sense
> unless you understood the game, but are on par with intentional fouls
> or calling a disc up when it is not

uhm, i guess sotg aint workin to good with cricket either.
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #9062 is a reply to message #9042] Fri, 26 December 2008 08:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
joadntoad
Messages: 1411
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Dec 25, 5:11 pm, piikema...@gmail.com wrote:

>
> The fear is that they do it not for the betterment of the sport, but
> only for the money
>
poor parinoid ultimate players. did you by into all the bush/chainy
fear propaganda too?
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #9064 is a reply to message #9057] Fri, 26 December 2008 08:37 Go to previous messageGo to next message
joadntoad
Messages: 1411
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Dec 26, 10:32 am, Jaws <jdb...@mizzou.edu> wrote:
> If you think the only thing standing between Ultimate and televised
> games is refs and better commentators, you are delusional. If you
> think that the best reason to buy into C1 is that they'll get games on
> standard cable and Ultimate highlights on ESPN, then please get in
> touch with me. I have a bridge to sell you.

didnt i shut your ass up on another thread there jaws.
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #9068 is a reply to message #9058] Fri, 26 December 2008 09:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Jaws
Messages: 31
Registered: October 2008
Member
On Dec 26, 11:02 am, Peterson <pevesteter...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 26, 10:32 am, Jaws <jdb...@mizzou.edu> wrote:
>
> > If you think the only thing standing between Ultimate and televised
> > games is refs and better commentators, you are delusional. If you
> > think that the best reason to buy into C1 is that they'll get games on
> > standard cable and Ultimate highlights on ESPN, then please get in
> > touch with me. I have a bridge to sell you.
>
> You seem to be inferring beyond what is being implied.
>
> Ultimate needs baby steps to get there.  Standardized fields sizes,
> hand signals, a better rule enforcement plan (whatever your choice),
> more organized tournaments, better and more savvy marketing and
> promotion and about 100 other things.
>
> Refs or more active observers accomplishes some of those goals. C1
> seems to also wanting to accomplish some of those goals as well.  I'm
> not saying I would join C1 if I was at an eligible school, but I don't
> think they will hurt college ultimate in the long run.  And there is a
> chance they will help.
>
> Peterson

I agree completely, but I don't think I'm stretching the inference.
Look back over some of these discussions. I mean, right in this thread
is the insistance that "spirit" is equal to "pussy." Some of C1's most
vocal supporters have used the discussion to trash the UPA and SOTG.
They very clearly state their belief that America's mainstream sports
audience would take Ultimate seriously if, and only if, the spirit
rule were abolished. They elevate C1 into some sort of revolution that
will immediately transform the way mainstream sports "perceives"
Ultimate. I think there's some good ideas in C1, and I would love to
see Ultimate on TV. But I completely reject the idea that Ultimate
must reject the spirit rule in order to evolve. I would like to see
the discussion about C1 focus on common goals we all have for
ultimate, rather than a means to nurse grudges or advance ideologies
that impede progress rather than advance our common goals. My main
point is that Ultimate is too small to get locked in stupid infighting
that some people seem can't seem to let go of.
Re: calling out the new c1 teams [message #9070 is a reply to message #9068] Fri, 26 December 2008 11:30 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
soffer801
Messages: 17
Registered: December 2008
Junior Member
On Dec 26, 11:02 am, Jaws <jdb...@mizzou.edu> wrote:
> On Dec 26, 11:02 am, Peterson <pevesteter...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 26, 10:32 am, Jaws <jdb...@mizzou.edu> wrote:
>
> > > If you think the only thing standing between Ultimate and televised
> > > games is refs and better commentators, you are delusional. If you
> > > think that the best reason to buy into C1 is that they'll get games on
> > > standard cable and Ultimate highlights on ESPN, then please get in
> > > touch with me. I have a bridge to sell you.
>
> > You seem to be inferring beyond what is being implied.
>
> > Ultimate needs baby steps to get there.  Standardized fields sizes,
> > hand signals, a better rule enforcement plan (whatever your choice),
> > more organized tournaments, better and more savvy marketing and
> > promotion and about 100 other things.
>
> > Refs or more active observers accomplishes some of those goals. C1
> > seems to also wanting to accomplish some of those goals as well.  I'm
> > not saying I would join C1 if I was at an eligible school, but I don't
> > think they will hurt college ultimate in the long run.  And there is a
> > chance they will help.
>
> > Peterson
>
> I agree completely, but I don't think I'm stretching the inference.
> Look back over some of these discussions. I mean, right in this thread
> is the insistance that "spirit" is equal to "pussy." Some of C1's most
> vocal supporters have used the discussion to trash the UPA and SOTG.
> They very clearly state their belief that America's mainstream sports
> audience would take Ultimate seriously if, and only if, the spirit
> rule were abolished. They elevate C1 into some sort of revolution that
> will immediately transform the way mainstream sports "perceives"
> Ultimate. I think there's some good ideas in C1, and I would love to
> see Ultimate on TV. But I completely reject the idea that Ultimate
> must reject the spirit rule in order to evolve. I would like to see
> the discussion about C1 focus on common goals we all have for
> ultimate, rather than a means to nurse grudges or advance ideologies
> that impede progress rather than advance our common goals. My main
> point is that Ultimate is too small to get locked in stupid infighting
> that some people seem can't seem to let go of.

No Peterson's right. I was not implying that all we're waiting on is
referees for Ultimate to hit the big networks. But what C1 is
accomplishing is a huge step in the right direction. That is all I
meant.

Someone asked about cricket... Regardless of what actually happens (I
have no knowledge of that) in the actual rules, there is a spirit
clause, just like golf, and just like ultimate.

As for Toad, thanks for comparing me to your 6 year old. Like I said,
I have seen a refereed game, just never had the opportunity to play in
one. It didn't run terribly smoothly. I think it's a good idea, it
just failed. Fallout is a fall tournament run by the University of
Illinois.

Anyway, y'all are missing my point. The idea is that C1 is is helping
the ultimate community, and that there are games that are televised
that are based in spirit (golf being the example).
Previous Topic:-=UT=- C: Yes or No?
Next Topic:G-star Men's Down Jacket
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Thu Apr 9 09:32:03 PDT 2020
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

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