National Ultimate Media Panel Members voted for their Top 7 athletes in Mens or Womens Disisions, or both. 7 points were awarded to their #1 pick, 6 for #2, 5 for #3 etc.......
From these votes we determine the ALL COLLEGIATE TEAM(ACT) and the top vote getter in each Division will be named NUMP COLLEGE MVP.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ the NUMP's Most Valuable Player---- Kurt Gibson, Florida ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
NUMP's ALL COLLEGIATE 1st TEAM
Athlete/School Points 1 Kurt Gibson, Florida 77 2 Jolian Dahl, Colorado 65 3 Mark Sherwood, Stanford 39 4 Will Neff, Michigan 34 5 Brandon Malecek, Wisconsin 23 6 Stephan Pressley, Texas 21 7 Jim Foster, Wisconsin 17
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ NUMP's ALL COLLEGIATE 2nd Team
8 Joe Kershner, Arizona 16 9 Austin Gregerson, Arizona 10 10 Brodie Smith, Florida 9 11 Greg Swanson, Georgia 8 12 Kevin Schipper, Colorado 6 13 Martin Cochran, Colorado 6 14 Will Locke, Wisconsin 5
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Honorable Mentions: Matthew Rebholz, Wisconsin George Stubbs, Harvard Shane Hohenstein, Wisconsin
> National Ultimate Media Panel Members voted for their Top 7 athletes in Mens > or Womens Disisions, or both. 7 points were awarded to their #1 pick, 6 for > #2, 5 for #3 etc.......
> From these votes we determine the ALL COLLEGIATE TEAM(ACT) and the top vote > getter in each Division will be named NUMP COLLEGE MVP.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > the NUMP's Most Valuable Player---- > Kurt Gibson, Florida > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> NUMP's ALL COLLEGIATE 1st TEAM
> Athlete/School Points > 1 Kurt Gibson, Florida 77 > 2 Jolian Dahl, Colorado 65 > 3 Mark Sherwood, Stanford 39 > 4 Will Neff, Michigan 34 > 5 Brandon Malecek, Wisconsin 23 > 6 Stephan Pressley, Texas 21 > 7 Jim Foster, Wisconsin 17
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > NUMP's ALL COLLEGIATE 2nd Team
> imagine that.....the guy that WINS the calahan dosent even make the > all collegiate 1st team. Hmmmmmmm
I'd imagine if I'd polled my friends about who should have won the oscars, I'd get different results than the academy as well. I wouldn't take that to mean that the Academy screwed up and needs to be overhauled. This list is pretty skewed toward a few teams, which is misleading and doesn't really take into account how good players look when they're on phenomenal teams. But it's impossible to come up with a system that's fair and logical for everyone.
On May 21, 9:30 am, MilesMB <skidwomb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> How many members does the NUMP panel have?
are you questioning the validity of NUMP? Personally i dont know a whole lot about how nump or callahan voting takes place but it dosent take a brain surgen to see the huge inconsistacies in the winners of the two polls.
Usually, when there are different polls, the top contenders are separated by a very small margin. Kurt was 2 or 3 in calahan votes and 1 in nump......yet the guy that won calahan was EIGHTH IN THE NUMP VOTE. Somthing smells a little fishy here to me.
And you cant help but look at the fact that the calahan winner was from arizona (1st in spirit scores) and kurt, the nump all collegiate player of the year was from florida (last in spirit scores). So you just cant deny that the calahan award overemphisizes spirit.
> I'd imagine if I'd polled my friends about who should have won the > oscars, I'd get different results than the academy as well. I > wouldn't take that to mean that the Academy screwed up and needs to be > overhauled. This list is pretty skewed toward a few teams, which is > misleading and doesn't really take into account how good players look > when they're on phenomenal teams. But it's impossible to come up with > a system that's fair and logical for everyone.
which is why alot of sports related polls have more than one system to figure out whos the best.
All that needs to happen is that this nump "all collegiate player" award needs to be hyped up more. Soon it will become more coveted than the callahan.
And again, even with different systems you usually see a flip flop in the rankings or at most a one rank discrepency..........not an 8 rank discrepency.
>"...So you just cant deny that the calahan award overemphisizes spirit."
Yes I can. Why is OVERemphazing spirit? The college players voted and decided that this is what we valued. All night after the award I heard people come up to Joe and congratulate him and tell him that he truly was their Callahan. Joe was the candidate that we idolized, not Kurt.
After the Callahan award was announced, people immediately started whining on RSD. Although some people congratulated Kershner on being recognized by his peers, many people said that it should have been given to someone else and that the award is flawed. Stop trying to take this away from him. He won. That means that the college players that he has played against for years recognized him, and I hope that he chooses not to listen to what all of these washed up alumni have to say about him not deserving it. We believed that he deserved it, that's why we voted for him.
All of this complaining is meaningless. The factors that contribute to the Callahan selection are laid out, but they are guidelines and people usually vote based on what they value in the sport. This is how it should be, and this sport is defined by the players and the idea of "most valuable" should be defined by the players in this division. The true meaning of this award is the recognition by all of the current college ultimate players that have been watching the candidates play all year at tournaments around the country. It is a vote for who the college ultimate community believes to be the embodiment of this sport and a vote for the player that is most respected by his peers (respected for whatever reason they deem to be most important and valuable). The opinions of posters on RSD are not as important as the votes of all the actual college players. Let the college players continue to define what a Callahan award winner is.
Go ahead, washed up alumni, and make up some other MVP award. The truth is that no one will care. This sport is not about who goes first in a draft or who gets paid the most, so no one cares who the most skilled player is. Who cares about the NUMP team, it doesn't mean anything. None of us are in this for anything more than a love of the game, and so no one cares who a bunch of washed up alumni (who haven't seen much college ultimate this year) believe to be the best. By allowing all of the players to vote for the Callahan, the players get to choose each year what they want to value and recognize.
Congratulations to all of the Callahan nominees, but especially to the people's winner, Joe. Stop trying to rob this from the guy that we picked, and let him enjoy the undeniable fact that college players respect him and chose to give him the division's greatest honor. The Callahan means exponentially more than the opinions of RSD posters.
'a bunch of washed up alumni (who haven't seen much college ultimate this year)'
It's interesting that you think this describes the NUMP, when the (mens) panel includes at least three players at College Nationals, several more for teams who competed in the NCUS, several regional coordinators, an ex-UPA official, some all-region players, and some coaches of Regionals-level teams.
On May 21, 10:13 am, b_rainwater2...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Stubbs didn't even get all- region nor FOTY, but he was honorable > mentioned?.
All-region and FOTY are also, to a degree, popularity contests.
I'm fine with Kershner winning the Callahan (even though he was not my top choice) - you can't fake your way into getting the most votes. I also think this All Collegiate team is pretty cool. There are several ballers Mike G listed who, as already pointed out, didn't make all- region but deserve some props.
Thanks Mike G and all the NUMP panel members for all the NUMP polls over the years and for this All Collegiate team. I hope this continues.
On May 21, 9:13 am, b_rainwater2...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > Honorable Mentions: > > Matthew Rebholz, Wisconsin > > George Stubbs, Harvard > > Shane Hohenstein, Wisconsin
> Stubbs didn't even get all- region nor FOTY, but he was honorable > mentioned?.
He was injured for most of the season and didn't deserve FOTY based on his performance up to Regionals, but he was a huge part of Harvard's Quarters performance at Nationals.
> > Stubbs didn't even get all- region nor FOTY, but he was honorable > > mentioned?.
> brodie smith was the tenth highest vote getter, and he didn't make all > region in the AC
Ok obviously I got worse this year going from AC All-region last year and not making this year and Kurt stayed the same with placing 3rd in the Callahan race over the last two years.
That is easy to believe enough but what is difficult for me to believe is how we ended up with a spirit score of 1.8??? We played UNT first and they gave us a score of 5 and when we asked the guy taking the scores to change it to a 1 he said he couldn't do that. Ok next game was Deleware and they also gave us a 5 but we were able to get Deleware's captain to change it to a 1 after some hardcore "Suck it 17" comments. The last game of the day was against Illinois who for sure gave us a 1 without us having to do much.
So after day one we have a spirit total of 5+1+1=7
Day two Arizona gave us a 5 and we couldn't stop it and Carleton gave us a 1 after a battle...
so adding day 1 and day 2 together we have 7+5+1= 13
now if you just do 13/5 you get a spirt score of 2.6 so thats fine lest assume that Wisco gave us a 1 after finals even though no spirit scores were given we now have 14/6 which is 2.333 repeating of course. So even though I am impressed with our 1.8 spirit score beating out carleton by 1.7 points i am confused...
> Ok obviously I got worse this year going from AC All-region last year > and not making this year and Kurt stayed the same with placing 3rd in > the Callahan race over the last two years.
> That is easy to believe enough but what is difficult for me to believe > is how we ended up with a spirit score of 1.8??? We played UNT first > and they gave us a score of 5 and when we asked the guy taking the > scores to change it to a 1 he said he couldn't do that. Ok next game > was Deleware and they also gave us a 5 but we were able to get > Deleware's captain to change it to a 1 after some hardcore "Suck it > 17" comments. The last game of the day was against Illinois who for > sure gave us a 1 without us having to do much.
> So after day one we have a spirit total of 5+1+1=7
> Day two Arizona gave us a 5 and we couldn't stop it and Carleton gave > us a 1 after a battle...
> so adding day 1 and day 2 together we have 7+5+1= 13
> now if you just do 13/5 you get a spirt score of 2.6 so thats fine > lest assume that Wisco gave us a 1 after finals even though no spirit > scores were given we now have 14/6 which is 2.333 repeating of course. > So even though I am impressed with our 1.8 spirit score beating out > carleton by 1.7 points i am confused...
> any insight???
Clearly Arizona lied to you about the score they gave and should be stripped of their team Spirit award.
> >"...So you just cant deny that the calahan award overemphisizes spirit."
> Yes I can. Why is OVERemphazing spirit? The college players voted and > decided that this is what we valued. All night after the award I heard > people come up to Joe and congratulate him and tell him that he truly > was their Callahan. Joe was the candidate that we idolized, not Kurt.
> After the Callahan award was announced, people immediately started > whining on RSD. Although some people congratulated Kershner on being > recognized by his peers, many people said that it should have been > given to someone else and that the award is flawed. Stop trying to > take this away from him. He won. That means that the college players > that he has played against for years recognized him, and I hope that > he chooses not to listen to what all of these washed up alumni have to > say about him not deserving it. We believed that he deserved it, > that's why we voted for him.
> All of this complaining is meaningless. The factors that contribute to > the Callahan selection are laid out, but they are guidelines and > people usually vote based on what they value in the sport. This is how > it should be, and this sport is defined by the players and the idea of > "most valuable" should be defined by the players in this division. The > true meaning of this award is the recognition by all of the current > college ultimate players that have been watching the candidates play > all year at tournaments around the country. It is a vote for who the > college ultimate community believes to be the embodiment of this sport > and a vote for the player that is most respected by his peers > (respected for whatever reason they deem to be most important and > valuable). The opinions of posters on RSD are not as important as the > votes of all the actual college players. Let the college players > continue to define what a Callahan award winner is.
> Go ahead, washed up alumni, and make up some other MVP award. The > truth is that no one will care. This sport is not about who goes first > in a draft or who gets paid the most, so no one cares who the most > skilled player is. Who cares about the NUMP team, it doesn't mean > anything. None of us are in this for anything more than a love of the > game, and so no one cares who a bunch of washed up alumni (who haven't > seen much college ultimate this year) believe to be the best. By > allowing all of the players to vote for the Callahan, the players get > to choose each year what they want to value and recognize.
> Congratulations to all of the Callahan nominees, but especially to the > people's winner, Joe. Stop trying to rob this from the guy that we > picked, and let him enjoy the undeniable fact that college players > respect him and chose to give him the division's greatest honor. The > Callahan means exponentially more than the opinions of RSD posters.
To clairfy:
"washed up alumni" were 'schooling kids' when you were learning ABCs.
"washed up alumni" were studying teams when you were learning to read a disc.
"washed up alumni" realize there is a difference in skill and Spirit.
Joe is the player's winner. (Nice job Joe.)
NUMP ACT are the observer's* winner. (No comment necessary.)
> are you questioning the validity of NUMP? Personally i dont know a > whole lot about how nump or callahan voting takes place but it dosent > take a brain surgen to see the huge inconsistacies in the winners of > the two polls.
I care how the voting works. I'd rather see a poll of nationals college players rather than a self-selecting group of people with the narrow view that college ultimate should be analyzed with the same methods that college basketball and football are analyzed. Both college sports' ranking and selection systems are widely criticized every year, and I'm fine with not relying on that for ultimate as well.
> And you cant help but look at the fact that the calahan winner was > from arizona (1st in spirit scores) and kurt, the nump all collegiate > player of the year was from florida (last in spirit scores).
No, _you_ can't help but look at that. Not everyone is like you and is as obsessed with spirit scores as baptist ministers are with sexual deviance. You can't hold up the NUMP results as the true voice of reason just because you agree with it more (while you still admittedly haven't seen Kershner play). It's the first year it's ever been awarded. It's the result of a relatively tiny poll of like-minded players and fans.
> So you just cant deny that the calahan award overemphisizes spirit.
Yes I can. There's no evidence that the voters overemphasized spirit, they voted for the player they respected most as an ultimate player. And if you have such a problem with how these players voted, too bad, no one asked you who you wanted to be the Callahan.
On the other hand, in your world, spirit shouldn't exist in any form, so maybe everything overemphasizes spirit.
<richardaustinw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > are you questioning the validity of NUMP? Personally i dont know a > > whole lot about how nump or callahan voting takes place but it dosent > > take a brain surgen to see the huge inconsistacies in the winners of > > the two polls.
> I care how the voting works. I'd rather see a poll of nationals > college players rather than a self-selecting group of people with the > narrow view that college ultimate should be analyzed with the same > methods that college basketball and football are analyzed. Both > college sports' ranking and selection systems are widely criticized > every year, and I'm fine with not relying on that for ultimate as > well.
> > And you cant help but look at the fact that the calahan winner was > > from arizona (1st in spirit scores) and kurt, the nump all collegiate > > player of the year was from florida (last in spirit scores).
> No, _you_ can't help but look at that. Not everyone is like you and > is as obsessed with spirit scores as baptist ministers are with sexual > deviance. You can't hold up the NUMP results as the true voice of > reason just because you agree with it more (while you still admittedly > haven't seen Kershner play). It's the first year it's ever been > awarded. It's the result of a relatively tiny poll of like-minded > players and fans.
> > So you just cant deny that the calahan award overemphisizes spirit.
> Yes I can. There's no evidence that the voters overemphasized spirit, > they voted for the player they respected most as an ultimate player. > And if you have such a problem with how these players voted, too bad, > no one asked you who you wanted to be the Callahan.
> On the other hand, in your world, spirit shouldn't exist in any form, > so maybe everything overemphasizes spirit.
Seems like spirit was pretty heavily emphasized if it was enough to move Joe up 7 spots. Take all the other factors combined, and Joe's #8. Add spirit, and he rockets up to #1. Either this guy is the absolute Messiah of ultimate spirit, or those top 7 guys are the cheatin'est grouches we've you'll ever have the mistfortune to meet; or, spirit got too much emphasis in the Calahan voting.
That's now this Canadian, washed-up never-been sees it, anyway.
The thing everyone is over looking in all of this, is Joe is really really freaking good at playing ultimate. Dont forget that in all this discussion of spirit vrs skill and all that other nonsense.
> I care how the voting works. I'd rather see a poll of nationals > college players rather than a self-selecting group of people with the > narrow view that college ultimate should be analyzed with the same > methods that college basketball and football are analyzed. Both > college sports' ranking and selection systems are widely criticized > every year, and I'm fine with not relying on that for ultimate as > well.
Sounds like you're all set then. Good. You rely on what you want to rely on.
> No, _you_ can't help but look at that. Not everyone is like you and > is as obsessed with spirit scores as baptist ministers are with sexual > deviance. You can't hold up the NUMP results as the true voice of > reason just because you agree with it more (while you still admittedly > haven't seen Kershner play). It's the first year it's ever been > awarded. It's the result of a relatively tiny poll of like-minded > players and fans.
See your own first post. All of these things you are talking about are polls. By definition this just means a sampling of opinions.
> Yes I can. There's no evidence that the voters overemphasized spirit, > they voted for the player they respected most as an ultimate player. > And if you have such a problem with how these players voted, too bad, > no one asked you who you wanted to be the Callahan.
You are correct here in the first couple of sentences. However apparently no one asked you about to be on the NUMP panel so too bad. It sounds like your saying " you are free to say whatever you want as long as I say you are free to say it"
> On May 21, 2:39 pm, "richardaustinw...@gmail.com"
> <richardaustinw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > are you questioning the validity of NUMP? Personally i dont know a > > > whole lot about how nump or callahan voting takes place but it dosent > > > take a brain surgen to see the huge inconsistacies in the winners of > > > the two polls.
> > I care how the voting works. I'd rather see a poll of nationals > > college players rather than a self-selecting group of people with the > > narrow view that college ultimate should be analyzed with the same > > methods that college basketball and football are analyzed. Both > > college sports' ranking and selection systems are widely criticized > > every year, and I'm fine with not relying on that for ultimate as > > well.
> > > And you cant help but look at the fact that the calahan winner was > > > from arizona (1st in spirit scores) and kurt, the nump all collegiate > > > player of the year was from florida (last in spirit scores).
> > No, _you_ can't help but look at that. Not everyone is like you and > > is as obsessed with spirit scores as baptist ministers are with sexual > > deviance. You can't hold up the NUMP results as the true voice of > > reason just because you agree with it more (while you still admittedly > > haven't seen Kershner play). It's the first year it's ever been > > awarded. It's the result of a relatively tiny poll of like-minded > > players and fans.
> > > So you just cant deny that the calahan award overemphisizes spirit.
> > Yes I can. There's no evidence that the voters overemphasized spirit, > > they voted for the player they respected most as an ultimate player. > > And if you have such a problem with how these players voted, too bad, > > no one asked you who you wanted to be the Callahan.
> > On the other hand, in your world, spirit shouldn't exist in any form, > > so maybe everything overemphasizes spirit.
> Seems like spirit was pretty heavily emphasized if it was enough to > move Joe up 7 spots. Take all the other factors combined, and Joe's > #8. Add spirit, and he rockets up to #1. Either this guy is the > absolute Messiah of ultimate spirit, or those top 7 guys are the > cheatin'est grouches we've you'll ever have the mistfortune to meet; > or, spirit got too much emphasis in the Calahan voting.
> That's now this Canadian, washed-up never-been sees it, anyway.
Ah, but part of this is that he carried his team to such success from obscurity, which isn't spirit related and is hard to quantify against others skills. There's no denying that Kobe deserved the award before this year because of his dominant skills, but this was the year he was most important to his team so he won it. Just because Kershner wasn't the #1 most skilled player, he played with great intensity, great spirit and unbelievable skill while taking a previously unknown program to the top.
Usually, when there are different polls, the top contenders are separated by a very small margin. Kurt was 2 or 3 in calahan votes and 1 in nump......yet the guy that won calahan was EIGHTH IN THE NUMP VOTE. Somthing smells a little fishy here to me.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
---hopefully the fishy smell isn't from the NUMP????!!!!!
---i think that people saying that other people are COMPLAINING when they are simply expressing their opinion and offering viewpoints IS WHAT"S MEANINGLESS!
|
