The Huddle | A Press Release from Cultimate
Bearseth
by Cultimate, explaining the reasons behind their positions. Take a
gander:
http://www.the-huddle.org/features/conference-1/a-press-release/
Stay tuned as we will continue to follow this story as it develops.
-- Ben & Andy
The Huddle
http://www.the-huddle.org/
Frankie
structure need massive overhaul. Patchwork fixes phased in over the course
of several years leaves generations of college players in an impossible
position."
So why is it Andy and Ben that when I proposed in my video interview on your
election cover page a massive overhaul of the collegiate system, you guys
didn't even bother touching it?
And in doing so, are you not part of the same exact problem that frustrated
Skip into going this route in the first place?
My whole platform is based on reform and overhaul.
Vote for Frank
"Bearseth" <andy.l...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b7814683-d0a9-4807...@a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
Frankie
And about journalistic integrity, you guys are about as fair and impartial
as Fox News is.
"Bearseth" <andy.l...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b7814683-d0a9-4807...@a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
Mark -Mortakai- Moran
wrote:
> So why is it Andy and Ben that when I proposed in my video interview on your
> election cover page a massive overhaul of the collegiate system, you guys
> didn't even bother touching it?
Do you seriously think that your rambling about ... er, I mean
discussing... overhaul of the college system is anywhere comparable to
someone actually developing and attempting to put one into place?
A platform based on reform and overhaul is nowhere near the same thing
as someone actually setting it up and making a go of it.
Although I think them using the byline, "Play in Conference 1, It's
Fun" would highlight some similarities.
Frankie
"Mark -Mortakai- Moran" <just_m...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d5ca3fd4-b9b8-42bd...@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 16, 4:44 pm, "Frankie" <billy_berrou(no_spam)@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
> So why is it Andy and Ben that when I proposed in my video interview on
> your
> election cover page a massive overhaul of the collegiate system, you guys
> didn't even bother touching it?
--Do you seriously think that your rambling about ... er, I mean
discussing... overhaul of the college system is anywhere comparable to
someone actually developing and attempting to put one into place?
Wait, 25 teams doesn't count for putting one in place. My proposal was
comprehensive and I put it up for a vote for all the membership to decide,
not a few people in a backroom.
Furthermore, The Huddle didn't even cover it.
--A platform based on reform and overhaul is nowhere near the same thing
as someone actually setting it up and making a go of it.
No, but I'm working within the system. I put it up to you, the UPA
membership to decide.
Skip is right, the game needs a major overhaul and for those who agree with
him, vote for Frank
ben sprung
In the press release, Cultimate seemed to me to make two main
arguments against the current system:
1. The season ends (too early) at sectionals for half the teams.
Furthermore, the difficulty of advancing to regionals varies greatly
from section to section.
2. Sometimes, really good teams don't get to go to nationals because
of the way regional bids fall out.
I think both of these are reasonable arguments for some
reorganization, but I don't see how poaching a group of 25 top teams
away from the college series really helps solve either problem. If
they are problems at all. I don't know, but I imagine for teams that
don't advance at sectionals, the season continues just as before,
going to local tournaments. As to the second point, this comes up
every couple of years. Probably regional strength bids should be
allocated based on the current year's results or there should be a
selection committee. Consistent high-level tournaments forming a
regular-season "series" of sorts would be necessary for either--so it
would seem to me there's plenty of room for Cultimate to run their
tourneys without trying to hijack the entire series, as they are doing
now.
By the way, the reason some people find the current strength bid
system (last year's nationals results) frustrating is because regional
strength -- team strength -- changes so quickly from year to year.
Moving to a preselected 'elite' group would be a step backwards in
this regard.
Jay Schulkin
BARRING C1 TEAMS FROM COMPETING IN THE UPA SERIES fit in with their
stated goals?
hint: it doesn't. which leads me to believe that this press release
is not entirely truthful and is instead intended to calm down all
those pissed off about the hostile takeover attempt.
a.ada...@gmail.com
a.ada...@gmail.com
with their actions is because I think they aren't ready to put
emphasis on their biggest motive, which is to introduce referees. The
UPA has proven that it is unable to introduce referees, a development
that must and will occur for ultimate to take the next step. The UPA
is simply too bureaucratic, too concerned with the status quo and is
constantly trying to please too many people.
Although they may not admit it in their press release, Cultimate is
clearly interested in overtaking some/all of UPA authority. Why else
would they have left them in the dark about the announcement of a
competing and exclusive championship event for the best teams that
would basically render useless the UPA's control over the entirety of
college open ultimate? Cultimate is being secretive and slightly
dishonest about their goals. However, they are finally creating an
environment, with referees and highly competitive play, which caters
to the top college players, a development I am very excited about. I
don't think it will succeed this year, mostly because nobody actually
trusts Cyle and the details of their proposal are half-baked. The
proposal needs to focus on the big picture and compromise a little bit
and then it can really become something great,
-Alex Adarichev
Wash U Alum
Frankie
<a.ada...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:aeb8b93d-291b-4e96...@k37g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Jeff
happen (think about the expense of having 8 or 9 sets of referees for
the Conference1 side of the tournament). To the degree that they are
present it is doubtful that they will have a common skill set that
translates across games to actually have a equitable application of
'refereeing' between games. Has Cultimate begun secret training of
referees in a hollowed out mountain out west?
The writing is on the wall for an organization like Cultimate. They
had to make a big play before the UPA began to implement their
Division 1 and Division 2. Since they do not have the resources to
make it work they have to charge non-Conference1 members to pay for
the supposedly top 25. I think the most appropriate response is to
develop an in-house tournament staff (or coopt some of the leagues to
do so) that would run pre-series tournaments that would provide a high
level of competition, an opportunity for teams to prove themselves and
a women's side. Have paid regional based staff that would do that on
both the college and club side. If they did that, Cultimate would
have a much lesser role.
There have been a lot of people who have sacraficed a heck of a lot to
get the growth in college Ultimate. People like Kathy Pufahl created
collegiate women's Ultimate through personal perserverance.
Maybe Joe Seidler could provide a link that would help people put
where the sport is in context and understand that there clamoring is
just building on the blood, sweat and tears of a couple thousand
people to get the game to were it is.
On Oct 16, 9:29�pm, "Frankie" <billy_berrou(no_spam)@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
> C'mon. �Their biggest motive is money.
>
> <a.adaric...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > Wash U Alum- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Bearseth
a joint statement they will be making with the UPA, which is
forthcoming shortly. We will have that statement for our readers on
The Huddle as soon as it is available.
Jay Schulkin
Wait so they "released" a press "release" and now they want to make it
unrelease it? And you are allowing this? What reason is there for not
simply publishing the joint statement in addition to the release?
Bearseth
We didn't press the matter. It seemed like a gesture in the spirit of
cooperation with the UPA and their upcoming joint statement.
Jay Schulkin
Fair enough.
True Dog.
pfkmerl
If an organization makes a press release, the content should be
applicable before, during, and after a separate statement made by the
organization. Cultimate's request to have their press release
"unpublished" - which shouldn't even be a word because it defies logic
and basic principles of journalism - exhibits the hastiness and
immaturity of Cultimate as an organization.
With all due respect to The Huddle, who generally publish a fantastic
piece of work, this is a joke. Report facts. Stick to your guns. Don't
pander.
Baer
screenshot before it was removed? What did they say?
I think that if they released it, it is fair game for analysis, even
if they wanted it removed...
Frankie
You call that journalistic integrity?
"pfkmerl" <pfk...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:72630354-b9e0-4447...@q9g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Torre
anyone have it saved ?
Is it posted somewhere?
Thanks,
Torre
rufio
exactly what we are doing and then change what we say about exactly
what we are doing" worrying anyone else about Cultimate's ability to
run the entire college game this year? Their tournaments usually go
smoothly, but are we supposed to believe that they will work
everything out to the point where it is better than the UPA in 6
months? I imagine that the whole eligibility deal would be pretty
hard to enforce, and they can't even seem to make up their mind about
the format of their own series.
Some of the changes for the top 25 would be good, but I am just having
trouble seeing this go smoothly this year if it happens.
in...@the-huddle.org
> With all due respect to The Huddle, who generally publish a fantastic
> piece of work, this is a joke. Report facts. Stick to your guns. Don't
> pander.
Our goal: To give readers as much credible information as possible. We
hope we have helped limit wild speculation, and we hope we have been
able to put facts and informed opinion into the hands of people that
want them.
(Maybe we were wrong. Maybe we should have left the entire contentious
issue alone. The ramifications for us (being confused with Cultimate,
being accused of being a stooge for Cultimate, being accused of having
no journalistic integrity) may outweigh the benefit of keeping
information circulating. We may have to reconsider our policy that
'more public information is better'. )
After discussing with Cultimate/UPA, we thought that keeping a hastily
written press-release on our site would confuse the issue, and would
lead to less general understanding, not more. We think that, right
now, the focus should be on the joint UPA/Cultimate statement which is
supposedly coming out today.
As long-time Board member Henry Thorne said, the Board can act very
quickly when they need to. We hope to see an informative discussion in
today's UPA statement, or at least an understanding of when such a
discussion might be publicized. We, and you, should wait for that
memo.
rufio
> In the press release, Cultimate seemed to me to make two main
> arguments against the current system:
> 1. The season ends (too early) at sectionals for half the teams.
> Furthermore, the difficulty of advancing to regionals varies greatly
> from section to section.
Didn't the season just end for those same teams, before it even
started? I mean, if my team couldn't make it out of the section I am
not having high hopes that we will be selected to play another team in
the "play in game" for nationals. Or do you/they consider the "end"
of the season when you stop playing any games at all (not games that
would lead you to a potential championship)? Do things like DIII
nationals not provide a solution to that already?
2. Sometimes, really good teams don't get to go to nationals because
of the way regional bids fall out.
I am sure this has been talked about over and over and over on RSD,
but at what point do you draw the line on "good" teams that make it in
to the final tournament? College Football has 2 teams there, and
there seem to be at least some angry people every year about the
selection process. March Madness has 65, and there seem to be at
least some angry people every year because of the selection process.
At least right now we don't have college football's system and the
field of teams competing for the title seems big enough. Does anyone
actually dispute Wisconsin as national champs last year? 16 is big
enough, bid distribution is another story. C1 still doesn't fix the
problem because bottom teams that were in the chosen 25 will think
they are better than the play-in team and that they should have made
it, teams that lose the play-in will think that they had a harder road
than the "wild cards" from the chosen 25 and that they should have
made it. Change ≠ solution.
pfkmerl
The underlying principle is that the organization that claims it will
be hosting Nationals and bringing collegiate ultimate into the
mainstream can't even write a decent press release. I see this as a
major problem. Imagine that the UPA had done the same thing. RSD would
be on fire about it. "I'm sorry... we're not really sure that we meant
that." Are we supposed to believe that these Cultimate/UPA discussions
will end in Kumbaya and hand-holding? No. There will obviously be
compromises made by one or both parties. If Cultimate had a well-
thought out stance on the issues in their press release, they could
have left their press release online, went through discussions, issued
a joint statement and, if necessary, issued another press release
stating that some statements in the initial press release have changed
in accordance to their joint resolution with the UPA. This is
uncomplicated and standard fare. For an entity that wants to bring
ultimate to the mainstream, they should deal with these issues as if
they are interacting with mainstream media outlets.
While The Huddle's de-publication of the press release disappoints me,
the issue reflects more strongly on the inadequacies of Cultimate to
handle this situation.
Baer
>
> The underlying principle is that the organization that claims it will
> be hosting Nationals and bringing collegiate ultimate into the
> mainstream can't even write a decent press release. I see this as a
> major problem. Imagine that the UPA had done the same thing. RSD would
> be on fire about it. "I'm sorry... we're not really sure that we meant
> that." Are we supposed to believe that these Cultimate/UPA discussions
> will end in Kumbaya and hand-holding? No. There will obviously be
> compromises made by one or both parties. If Cultimate had a well-
> thought out stance on the issues in their press release, they could
> have left their press release online, went through discussions, issued
> a joint statement and, if necessary, issued another press release
> stating that some statements in the initial press release have changed
> in accordance to their joint resolution with the UPA. This is
> uncomplicated and standard fare. For an entity that wants to bring
> ultimate to the mainstream, they should deal with these issues as if
> they are interacting with mainstream media outlets.
>
> While The Huddle's de-publication of the press release disappoints me,
> the issue reflects more strongly on the inadequacies of Cultimate to
>
I fully agree with this, pfkmerl. I would probably be one of these to
point out such a questionable move if it was the UPA, and it would be
hypocritical of me and other critics not to have the same reaction
when Cultimate does it. While I salute their bold thinking and action,
the way this is all going down so far (while we admittedly know very
few actual details) seems very haphazard and unprofessional.
The UPA has been put in an awkward position here, but they are
apparently handling it as well as they can. Meanwhile, Cultimate is
guilty of the same thing that the UPA has been grilled on recently:
poor communication and transparency, and that is why RSD and the blogs
have exploded in such a negative fashion. I don't know any of the guys
in Cultimate, but I do know good business when I see it, and if they
want to be taken seriously as a professional organization, they need
to get their "poop in a group" (as a former boss used to say), and
fast.
I fully support progress, legitimization, referees, and capitalism,
but the more I read and think, the more I think that this will not go
well for Cultimate, and I hope that the UPA does all the right things
in this situation.