official plan announced from usa-u

[Dan Naylor]

http://www.usaultimate.org/news/usa-ultimate-announces-the-t
riple-crown-tour/

Details on the tour events are vague, but this is in fact
what was expected, and there aren't enough details to change
my opinion from 3 weeks ago. Hard to say too much that
wasn't said a few weeks ago, because we dont know how much
the team that finishes 11th at nationals or whatever will
have to travel.

Congrats to all nationals teams that don't have to go to
sectionals next year.

For what it's worth, the prize money is, I think, terrible
albeit well intentioned.


Either it will bring out the worst in terms of
sportsmanship/spirit in people if the prize fund is
significant (not to mention that the vast majority of those
that weren't pre-drawn into these events now are subsidizing
them), or it will be such a laughably insufficient sum that
it will fail to cover the travel expenses of a team in any
meaningful way, and will be a burden on top teams.

The big winners here I maintain are still airlines and
rental car companies. And Tom Crawford. I wonder if this
extra revenue triggers a bigger bonus for him or something.




--
Posted from http://www.rsdnospam.com

[Alex Peters]

A "Pro" flight? Really USAU? Really? Really?

[Charlie Eisenhood]

Here's Ultiworld's write-up, along with an infographic that
helps make sense of how it all works:
http://ultiworld.com/2012/10/22/usa-ultimate-announces-major-club-restructure-an-explanation-of-the-triple-crown-tour/

[Mark -Mortakai- Moran]

I'm looking forward to seeing how this is executed.

.. also, Haters Gotta Hate. My prediction: haters outnumber
other 2.5 : 1

[homrbush]

Alex Peters wrote on Mon, 22 October 2012 20:03

> A "Pro" flight? Really USAU? Really? Really?

'Pro' is better than 'elite'.

#insecure

[Knappy]

A pro flight would be 4 ounces each of Stone, southern tier,
rogue & founders.

[dmmp]

On Monday, October 22, 2012 9:40:04 PM UTC-4, Knappy wrote:
> A pro flight would be 4 ounces each of Stone, southern tier,
>
> rogue & founders.
>

that is a wonderful selection of brews.

[Michael Francis]

College season until the end of May. AUDL starts picking teams in Feb/Mar, season goes through July. MLU probably follows somewhat of a similar pattern. World Games team starts getting chosen in Jan/Feb/Mar. Club teams start tryouts Mar/Apr. A lot going on in 2013.

So many questions...

What happens if the top teams opt out of the triple crown? They have to play sectionals? Are there any other consequences? Can teams play two out of three events?

If Revolver and Ironside put three each on world games team, do the club teams go on or opt out without those players? Does USAU choose the world team differently to avoid this?

Do world games teams get invited to US Open in Mixed?

If a nationals team has 50% turnover from this year to next, do they still get to be part of the elite/pro flights?

Do AUDL/MLU teams keep players from club teams until the end of their own pro leagues? What does this do to the Select Flight?

Out of these five, College, AUDL, MLU, World Games or Triple Crown, which would you want to win most?

[Matt W]

Based on the infographic form Ultiworld, new teams are
streamlined straight into sectionals. Does that mean a new
team cannot compete in a 'classic' flight tournament until
they have competed in a sectionals event?

And if that is the case, doesn't that completely defeat the
purpose of promoting the sport?

[Krishna]

Looks like it really sucks to be a team that just missed out
on Nationals this year. Sorry Southpaw, Condors, Madcow,
etc.

This year you probably could have gotten into a few
tournament with Nationals level teams (Colorado Cup,
Chesapeake Invite, Boston Invite, etc.). Next year looks
like you only have one shot at playing those teams before
Regionals, and only the bottom half of them

Lets imagne this plan had been implemented last year. Well
this year Sockeye would not have had any opportunity to play
against anyone that finished in the top half of Nationals.
Revolver, Ironside, Chain, Doublewide, Ring, etc. Same with
Rhino and PoNY. Those are some great games we would have
missed out on.

What seems worse is that this completely discourages the
formation of new teams. The last two years the mixed
division has been won by a new team. Next year, new teams no
matter how pedigreed they are, will have a hard time playing
any reasonable teams till Regionals. Who wants to spend a
whole season doing that?

[J Mac]

Knappy wrote on Mon, 22 October 2012 21:38

> A pro flight would be 4 ounces each of Stone, southern
> tier, rogue & founders.

Rogue sucks balls. Substitute Russian River.

[Swag King]

Slip83 wrote on Mon, 22 October 2012 19:55

> Based on the infographic form Ultiworld, new teams are
> streamlined straight into sectionals. Does that mean a
> new team cannot compete in a 'classic' flight tournament
> until they have competed in a sectionals event?
>
> And if that is the case, doesn't that completely defeat
> the purpose of promoting the sport?

No, it's not defeating the purpose of promoting the sport,
it's giving teams incentive to do well. Teams are going to
want to compete in the classic tier and higher tiers but
wont be able to until they participate in sectionals. It's
going to separate the casual teams that want to have fun
(there is nothing wrong with those teams) and the teams that
want to compete competitively.

I'm 100% down to see this take off because who really wants
to see the end of tournaments in ultimate?

[Matt W]

Swagking wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 00:48

But that doesn't answer my question. Assuming an official
'classic' flight tournament is a USAU sanctioned event, are
you allowed to compete if your team has never participated
in a sectionals event?

[homrbush]

Slip83 wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 01:46

I read it as Tier 4 is for any team that does not qualify
for the top 3 tiers.

[Krishna]

homrbush wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 02:04

> I read it as Tier 4 is for any team that does not
> qualify for the top 3 tiers.

That doesn't seem to be what this graphic suggests:
http://ultiworld.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/USA-Ultimate-Triple-Crown-Tour-Infographic.png

You have to have played the previous season to qualify for
Tier 4. New teams can't do anything within this structure
till sectionals.

[DB]

Yes you allowed to compete in tournaments during the regular
season.

From the Triple Crown Tour page:

Quote:
> Classic Flight
>
> TEAMS: Unlimited
>
> QUALIFICATION: Any USA Ultimate registered team eligible
> to compete in the Regular Season or the Post Season
> Championship Series


If anything, having sectionals only containing Select and
Classic teams will make sectionals more competitive by
giving more teams the mentality of "we can totally win
sectionals," thus promoting more teams participating in the
future.

[homrbush]

Krishna wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 02:45

Wow. That's incredibly short-sighted. Even for an
organization notorious for not thoroughly troubleshooting
their ideas.

[homrbush]

Now that I'm home (the infographic doesn't work so well on
my phone), it looks like the Ultiworld thing is incomplete.

From the USA Ultimate website:

Classic Flight

TEAMS: Unlimited

QUALIFICATION: Any USA Ultimate registered team eligible to
compete in the Regular Season or the Post Season
Championship Series

If you are a brand new team, you will start at the bottom
(good luck attracting any top level players for that!), but
as long you are registered for the regular season, you can
play prior to Sectionals.

[Brian]

homrbush wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 01:33

USA Ultimate has a different info-graphic, which I assume is
the official one, which says any team can form and play in
the Classic tier:
http://www.usaultimate.org/triplecrowntour/

[Dan Naylor]

I think USA-U wanted to reduce the turnover in teams, and
the constant blowing up and whatnot, and they got their
wish.

It's also convenient that they bury this news at a time when
in three days no one will be thinking of it, and instead
thinking of.. well... nationals.


It's a shame that they did this by lumping in say... the 6th
or 7th best team from the less loaded regions (which in many
cases are still RRI 2300, and could give nationals caliber
teams a pretty good game and occasionally even steal a win
here and there), the same treatment as teams a the bottom of
the section, with an rri of 1500. (i refuse to use the new
rating system because it doesnt include results from the
series, which are, you know, the most important games of the
season).

Anyway, we will see what this does to the touranment scene,
and specifically to some of the better touranments
throughout the country. It will be really interesting to see
what happens to southpaw and maybe sockeye and termites (who
each had or will potentially have big cores of their team
missing for the first part of all of this)

Does the new MLU schedule have a week off for whatver pro or
elite flight event is that weekend in july?

Where is the september event that "concludes" the regular
season for the tier 1 teams being held?

Who is hosting the july event for teams 5-12 from nationals
(not the US Open?)

Do tournaments in May and early June take on really huge
importance all of the sudden for teams outside of one of
these flights (or even in the third flight, as in normal
circumstances a team like Cash Crop would love to lock horns
with say... Chain, but now will find that very hard to do if
Chain makes quarters or better).

What happens in the women's division? (6 of the 8 teams make
it in to one of these structured flights, and for what it's
worth, the 5th best team in the mid-atlantic almost
assuredly was a one-off type deal). And FWIW, the 6th best
team (also in the Select Flight!) had an RRI of 1786, and a
record of 6-26, which is... not the best, and well below an
"average" women's team.

For those not familiar with RRI, 2000 represents being
perfectly average. Being 600 points worse than a team
typically means you wouldn't be expected to score more than
6 against a team in a game to 15.

This team is 200 points worse than an average team, meaning
they'd be expected to lose 15-9 to an average club women's
team, and lose by lots more to a good team.

Anyway, this is the system, i guess it's now on the vast
majority of teams that aren't in one of these tiers to
adapt.


For the teams in the top two tiers, you should really look
into hertz gold, marriott rewards, and some sort of frequent
flyer program.

Cheers,
~Dan

[Buck]

Jughandle10 wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 06:54

> It's a shame that they did this by lumping in say... the
> 6th or 7th best team from the less loaded regions (which
> in many cases are still RRI 2300, and could give nationals
> caliber teams a pretty good game and occasionally even
> steal a win here and there)

Not anymore they can't!

This seems like a big problem with the new system, the
extremely controlled access to your opponents. You might
not even see a regional rival at all until regionals? Say
you're Voodoo for example. How many regular season looks do
you get at Rhino, Furious, Sockeye under this plan?

[Knappy]

"Rogue sucks balls. Substitute Russian River."

Hey, we're trying to make this an affordable pro flight.
These are ultimate players we're talking about.

[Dan Naylor]

for what it's worth, voodoo will be in the third tier, so
should get some opportunity to play teams that dont finish
in the otp 8. In fact, all 7 teams at NW oPEN regionals
automatically make that tier, even though im guessing at
least 1-2 teams turn down the offer, not to mention a bunch
of other logistical issues.

[anakin gerics]

> It's also convenient that they bury this news at a time when
> in three days no one will be thinking of it, and instead
> thinking of.. well... nationals.

~~~~~~

---JUST club championships...not nationals.

[Drew]

While USAU states that this new structure is being
undertaken as part of the 6 year strategic plan and after
consulting with members, I'm willing to bet that they have
not done any analysis on the risks associated with the
re-structuring. Does anyone think that they've thought about
all of the possible scenarios? What happens if teams do not
want to travel to all of the events? Will the new structure
lead to more pickup teams in mixed like the Wolverines,
Blackbird etc? What's the incentive for these teams to
travel to these events when they might be able to just win
out at regionals? What happens when they schedule and plan
these elite pro flight tournaments and only 3 "pro" teams
agree to come? What impact will the re-structuring have on
attendance at tournaments? Are they really just assuming
they will get 100% compliance? How many elite teams want to
keep playing round robin tournaments amongst themselves all
summer? There's already many instances of top players taking
seasons off or having to step back from the demands of elite
open; how will this re-structuring affect rostering
decisions?

I just cannot believe that an organization that does not
have an incredible track record for success in implementing
changes thinks that dramatically revising its competition
structure in back to back season is a good idea. USA U does
not even know fully know the ramifications of this past
season's changes and yet the enormous complexity of a whole
new structure will be based on its results. I know that they
are trying hard to make alot of people happy to advance the
sport of ultimate but the hubris involved here seems to be
immense.

[Torre]

What if teams said," no thanks, we don't wanna travel that
much"? Can they just relegate themselves to the classic
flight?

Also, what if inclement weather knocks some of these top
tier tournaments off? Kinda screws up stuff, right?
(Sextions & regionals have rainout dates, will the select v
elite tourny?)

[Mark -Mortakai- Moran]

druse77 wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 08:10

> I'm willing to bet that they have not done any analysis
> on the risks associated with the re-structuring.

I'll take some of that action. I'll even give you huge odds.
How about 100:1? I'm in for $10,000... Are you willing to
back your words up with a c-note?

[Bulb]

Doobs wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 02:08

> If anything, having sectionals only containing Select
> and Classic teams will make sectionals more competitive by
> giving more teams the mentality of "we can totally win
> sectionals," thus promoting more teams participating in
> the future.

Great point... but this seems like a minor victory in the
scheme of things.

Krishna wrote on Mon, 22 October 2012 23:11

> Looks like it really sucks to be a team that just missed
> out on Nationals this year. Sorry Southpaw, Condors,
> Madcow, etc.
>
> This year you probably could have gotten into a few
> tournament with Nationals level teams (Colorado Cup,
> Chesapeake Invite, Boston Invite, etc.). Next year looks
> like you only have one shot at playing those teams before

> Regionals, and only the bottom half of them.

Yeah, pretty big ouch for them. Not only will they not be
able to play as much top competition, but...

homrbush wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 06:48

> If you are a brand new team, you will start at the
> bottom (good luck attracting any top level players for
> that!), but as long you are registered for the regular
> season, you can play prior to Sectionals.

The flip side of this is that teams in the pro tier will
have even more recruiting power than before. E.g. someone
in south Jersey who might've played Southpaw will now have a
much higher incentive to try out for Pony. (That is, if
they want to play against the top tier teams.)

[Mike Gentile]

I kinda wish that chart flowed into 2014, because I can't
wrap my head around:

TEAMS: Top 8 teams in North America
QUALIFICATION: Regular Season Pro Flight Champion, plus the
next seven teams based on results from the previous season's
National Championships*

Soooo, hypothetically, the 2013 Regular Season Champs could
flame out at Regionals, not qualify for Nationals and still
be Pro Flight in 2014. Then the 'next seven teams' at
Nationals (which in my scenario are 1-7 at 2013 Nationals).
The bottom 8 (#9-#16) goto to Elite Flight. What happens to
Team #8??

[Tofu]

Quote:

> The flip side of this is that teams in the pro tier will
> have even more recruiting power than before. E.g. someone
> in south Jersey who might've played Southpaw will now have
> a much higher incentive to try out for Pony. (That is, if
> they want to play against the top tier teams.)

THIS. Really, I just see this being helpful for pre-existing
ultimate hotbeds, while taking the best players from the in
between areas and leaving them dry. CT is a great example,
especially after District 5 didn't happen this year thanks
to the AUDL conflicts. Basically, now the best players in CT
have to choose between the already-established and "pro" or
Elite teams in Boston or NY.

Oh well, least we still have a "pro" team of our own! And
ours has a super creepy mascot to boot. Where's YOUR mascot,
Ironside?

Side note: if you play for the top teams, will you now be
able to refer to yourself as a "professional athlete"?

[Mozaic]

Have seen a few mentions about teams not having access to
regional / local teams that are stronger than them.

Did i miss a rule that says those teams are NOT allowed to
play other tournaments / scrimmages outside the prearranged
triple cron tournaments?

If you are actually a solid team who would give a top team
(pro/elite) a challenge, what is stopping you from forming
your own local tournament to use as a training scrimmage for
the local teams. Or even scarier, having the captains talk
to each other and arrange informal scrimmages?

I agree with one of the posters above re sectionals
participation. By having the top 2 flights of teams
automatically qualify to regionals, it will take away the
blowouts that finish in 30-45 minutes and make more games
competitive. It will either lead to more teams willing to
head to sectionals with a shot at doing well, or if no extra
teams attend, then more games / longer game time on existing
schedules.

And although a legitimate complaint for the top teams will
be the required travel to the triple crown tournaments, long
term, this should be good for Ultimate and its exposure to
the non-ultimate public. Having standard, regular high level
tournaments that can be broadcast (and perhaps eventually
selling broadcast rights - yes, it could be pie in sky dream
but there has to be a plan to get there).

But if the biggest argument is the mid level teams not
getting access to high level teams, then can someone show
examples where this already regularly happens now that
cannot be done under the triple crown system simply by
creating your own tournament? Chesapeake had the Open vs
Invite so no Nationals teams were at the open.

[Torre]

So will this end Chain's sectional winning streak?

[smcc...@fmail.co.uk]

In response to Mozaic:

The new structure, unequivocally, will substantially limit the ability for teams that are just "sub elite" to move upward. The rich get richer in ultimate, as they get the best playing opportunities to play against the best opponents and continue to get better.

Under the new format, what you said is of course still possible. It is POSSIBLE that sub-elite teams can set up scrimmages with nationals teams. It was also possible prior to the new structure. The thing is that it, in many cases, isn't probable. It is not in the interests of nationals teams to scrimmage sub-elite teams, if for no other reason than they want to keep their "wealth." Why would my nationals team scrimmage a team that is pretty good, but won't currently beat us, and help them get better so that they have a greater likelihood of beating us in the future? My team has little to gain.

This aspect of the argument is not even to mention geographical difficulties associated with scrimmages. Not every sub-elite team is situated like, say, Climax is, where they have Sub Zero and Madison Club easily accessible within a couple hours of driving.

It's quite possible that 2013 won't be that bad, as it is unlikely for the tournament landscape to change drastically. A lot of the established tournaments will probably still be run around the same dates, with a lot of the same teams attending. If this is the case, sub-elite teams can still battle all weekend to get one or two reps at whomever might be the best at the event. Over time, however, the tournament circuit will change and disparities between teams will become greater and greater.

Regardless of any of this, it remains crucial to note that the new structure, again, without doubt, discourages "class advancement" (to continue the analogy about wealth and status). As absurd as it may sound to say, it's simply un-American for "USA Ultimate" to construct a competitive edifice that impedes, as a matter of its structural composition, teams from rising in the ranks. "Pulling yourself up by your bootstraps" is what the USA is all about, and this structure expressly discourages it. For everybody that bought Al Gore's "wealthiest 1%" rhetoric or Obama's current line, Tom Crawford is the new Mitt Romney.

If we're going to make a structure that's un-American, we might as well hearken back to Steve Loomis and grant his wish too: "If we're now USAUltimate, my vote is that Canada can get fucked."

Mc

[anakin gerics]

What happens if teams do not
> want to travel to all of the events?

--the UOA will travel TO THEM!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What happens when they schedule and plan
> these elite pro flight tournaments and only 3 "pro" teams
> agree to come?

---the rest can attend a UOA event.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

How many elite teams want to
> keep playing round robin tournaments amongst themselves all
> summer?

---they can attend a UOA event, play 7 different teams round robin and
then play a final placement game!

[mgd.mitch]

padagentile wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 12:46

> Soooo, hypothetically, the 2013 Regular Season Champs
> could flame out at Regionals, not qualify for Nationals
> and still be Pro Flight in 2014. Then the 'next seven
> teams' at Nationals (which in my scenario are 1-7 at 2013
> Nationals). The bottom 8 (#9-#16) goto to Elite Flight.
> What happens to Team #8??

From the usau info page:


Top 8* qualify for the next season's Pro Flight
*If the Pro Flight Regular Season Champion does not
make
the top 8 at Nationals, then only the top 7
finishers
will qualify for the Pro Flight
Next 8* qualify for the next season's Elite Flight
*If the Pro Flight Regular Season Champion does not
make
Nationals, then the teams finishing 8-15 at
Nationals
will qualify for the Elite Flight

[Ryan]

I liked the idea of the Triple Crown when it included the
"Wildcard 16" event. I'm upset they ditched it.

[Mark -Mortakai- Moran]

padagentile wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 09:46

If the regular season champ isn't top 8 at nationals, pro is
them plus 1-7 and elite is 8-15, not 9-16.

[Mozaic]

Hey Mc1,

Thanks for the response. At present, how many tournaments
are there that sub elite teams attend as well as the elite
teams?

Thats the point I was trying to get to in a very round about
way.

My thoughts are there are very few tournaments at present
where the top 8-16 teams attend where teams outside the top
32 also attend and have a crack at the top teams.

I can think of Chesepeake Invite from memory where some Top
16 teams were playing as well as some from just outside top
16. Perhaps there are more that I have forgotten

If people are upset that the lower teams stop getting a fair
chance to play and improve against the top teams in the new
system, my question is, how many chances do they really get
under the current tournaments in place?

How much are they really missing out on?

[Knappy]

I'd like to see the USAU powers-that-be do a public Q & A on
the new restructuring. Something interactive, not one of
their one-way podcasts. A Reddit AMA would be an interesting
read.

I'm sure little is going to happen this week, since they
have Sarasota to focus upon. Maybe that was part of the
plan? They haven't even responded to questions on their own
forum in past month.

http://boards.usaultimate.org/showthread.php?1034-2013-Club-Restructuring-Options

[jsus...@gmail.com]

This happens fairly frequently in the mixed and womens division, but it is apparent that this plan is devised for the open/mens division and not in consideration of the other 2.

It's far time that the USAU started treating each division separately, as they each have their own wants and needs and qualities.

ml,
jsuss

[Torre]

They should do a reddit AMA!

[Krishna]

Mozaic wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 17:00

> Thanks for the response. At present, how many
> tournaments are there that sub elite teams attend as well
> as the elite teams?

Depends a little on you you define sub elite. It doesn't
seem like you are using the USAU flights. But Cazenovia,
Boston Invite, Chesapeake Invite, Heavyweights, Colorado Cup
and Terminus seems like examples of tournaments with sub
elite and elite teams.

For me, this new system seems toughest on teams who came
just short of making nationals, think of Truck Stop vs
Southpaw and Oakland. Next year Truck can play a season
pretty similar to this years (with a little more flying if
they make Pro). However, Oakland and Southpaw are only
Select and one of them might not get a chance to play any
teams that went to nationals last year till Regionals. And
most likely neither is going to get to play any teams that
finished above 8 at Nationals last year.

That makes staying at a high level as a team much harder.

[smcc...@fmail.co.uk]

Yeah, Krishna pretty much got it, and there are several more, particularly in the "pre season" (June/July) that are smaller but of note.

Sub-elite would be teams that don't suck and can actually give nationals teams games, probably even beat them given sufficient chance (i.e., maybe win 1 out of 5 games against them). This basically includes the top 4 or 5 teams in every region, which is to say, the "Select" class.

And that is also a good point about the women's and mixed division. Sub-elite teams play elite teams all the fooken time in those divisions.

[Not Ultimate]

Julie Sussman wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 14:43

I totally agree. I can't see how USAU could ever devise a
plan that would work well for all divisions.

[Kyle Weisbrod]

It's interesting reading RSD for critiques of the USAU. You
end up with all sorts of opinions(and I'm paraphrasing):

- "This is too risky for the USAU to do. It's going to hurt
a lot of teams"
- "USAU doesn't take any chances, they are too slow moving"
- "USAU asks too much of it's top teams/players"
- "USAU only cares about the top teams and players"
- "USAU should only showcase open Ultimate"
- "USAU doesn't take women in to account"
- "USAU isn't structuring the schedule enough to allow it to
be showcased"
- "USAU is structuring too much and so some teams don't get
adequate opportunities to play other teams."
- "USAU should shelve SOTG"
- "USAU isn't doing enough to promote SOTG."

And when you take a step back and look at it all in
aggregate, you realize that the USAU's responsibility to the
sport is significant and so is the variety of opinions out
there about what they should be doing and the values of
people playing the sport.

So the USAU spends time to dig in to these opinions and
values, understand what their constituents want and develop
a strategic plan that captures these values that they can
use to guide them as they make these decisions and the
overwhelming response is "These aren't specific enough" and
"USAU isn't about getting things done, just about meetings
and committees"

And they follow up shortly thereafter with a specific plan
for the club restructure that is in line with that strategic
plans values and we hear "not enough risk assessment" and
"they didn't think about group xxxx"

Is USAU doing everything I want them to do how I would want
them to do it? Of course not.

But it amazes me that USAU can release a plan like this that
does little more than add structure and formalize what, for
the most part, already exists and everyone's first reaction
is to lash out at the organization. Yes, it limits
opportunity for some teams and stratifies the competition
structure but it also provides clear opportunities for
showcasing and following the sport. That's the essential
trade-off being made here. And I'm pretty sure that they've
done their due diligence in determining that this is the
general will of their constituents (and they've surely done
more than what Jughandle or anyone else has done to
determine that). And while it stratifies the structure
some, any team can still show up on the first day of
sectionals and win the championship.

And my favorite critique out here is "I bet they are
releasing this now so no one will notice." Really? Isn't
this the week that everyone is focused on Ultimate? Now,
when teams are playing games at Nationals we can talk about
what it means for next season. I've always loved the
pre-quarters games but now the game is not just for quarters
but for what their next year looks like. I'm not sure when
they could have released this so it would get more attention
and notice.

My personal opinion is that USAU shouldn't be in the
business of "Pro leagues" but, despite what they call it,
this doesn't look like a pro-league to me - it just looks
like a more formal structure for pre-series play that will
allow us to follow and promote the sport better. It's a
positive step. It's not dramatic or risky but moves us
forward to some of the goals that people want for the sport
while not putting the whole structure at risk.

AUDL and MLU can continue to take chances and we can get
behind them knowing that it's not our fundamental
competition structure (or our money) at risk if they don't
work out. It's really a win-win.

Kyle

[jtj]

Kyle Weisbrod wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 16:29

> And while it stratifies the structure some, any team can
> still show up on the first day of sectionals and win the
> championship.

True, but only 4 teams have the opportunity to win the
Triple Crown, which USAU seems to be focusing on.

[Bulb]

Krishna wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 17:47

> For me, this new system seems toughest on teams who came
> just short of making nationals, think of Truck Stop vs
> Southpaw and Oakland. Next year Truck can play a season
> pretty similar to this years (with a little more flying if
> they make Pro). However, Oakland and Southpaw are only
> Select and one of them might not get a chance to play any
> teams that went to nationals last year till Regionals. And
> most likely neither is going to get to play any teams that
> finished above 8 at Nationals last year.
>
> That makes staying at a high level as a team much
> harder.

Except for the highest levels, right? Meaning, the teams in
the Pro and Elite divisions will have a much easier time
(time and money aside) to maintain their spot in those
divisions, as compared to the Select teams.

jtj22 wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 19:45

> Kyle Weisbrod wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 16:29
> > And while it stratifies the structure some, any team
> > can still show up on the first day of sectionals and win
> > the championship.
>
>
> True, but only 4 teams have the opportunity to win the
> Triple Crown, which USAU seems to be focusing on.

Only for that year... any team created in 2013 can win the
2014 Triple Crown!

[Mike Gentile]

Quote:

> Top 8* qualify for the next season's Pro Flight
> *If the Pro Flight Regular Season Champion does
> not make
> the top 8 at Nationals, then only the top 7
> finishers
> will qualify for the Pro Flight
> Next 8* qualify for the next season's Elite Flight
> *If the Pro Flight Regular Season Champion does
> not make
> Nationals, then the teams finishing 8-15 at
> Nationals
> will qualify for the Elite Flight

Quote:

> If the regular season champ isn't top 8 at nationals,
> pro is them plus 1-7 and elite is 8-15, not 9-16.

S'okay. That's not wonky at all. :roll: A 7 team team Pro
division. and #16 at nationals is sent to...where exactly?
This will be fascinating to watch unfold.

Personally, I think the Open division will work closest to
the plan. Women's and Mixed is a huge question mark.

[Krishna]

Kyle Weisbrod wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 19:29

> But it amazes me that USAU can release a plan like this
> that does little more than add structure and formalize
> what, for the most part, already exists and everyone's
> first reaction is to lash out at the organization. Yes, it
> limits opportunity for some teams and stratifies the
> competition structure but it also provides clear
> opportunities for showcasing and following the sport.

It seems like there are two things going one. One is USAU
taking what already exists (an elite club circuit) and
running part of it. The second is USAU modifying that
circuit to limit opportunity but better showcase the sport.


On the second, it shouldn't be that surprising that a number
of people would rather have USAU maintain opportunity, while
still working to promote the sport rather than trade one off
for another.

On the first, it seems like USAU has a habit of over
reaching then failing to deliver. Missing deadlines for
announcing this restructuring by months (so teams would have
a clear idea of what they might be qualifying for) is an
example. Taking over the Huddle seems like another. The
inability to write a reasonable algorithm for ranking teams
despite proposals explaining how to do it seems like a
third.

It seems like lots of people are already working hard on
promoting Ultimate (Next Gen Tour, AUDL/MLU, etc). And doing
a better job than USAU. I would prefer that the USAU focus
on core issues, rather than say expand into the tournament
running business.

I guess in short, I am surprised you are amazed.

[jtj]

Bulb wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 17:00

> jtj22 wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 19:45
> > Kyle Weisbrod wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012
> > 16:29
> > > And while it stratifies the structure some, any
> > > team can still show up on the first day of sectionals
> > > and win the championship.
> >
> >
> > True, but only 4 teams have the opportunity to win
> > the Triple Crown, which USAU seems to be focusing on.
>
> Only for that year... any team created in 2013 can win
> the 2014 Triple Crown!

Sorry, let me reword. Only 4 teams in a given season have
an opportunity to win the Triple Crown for that given
season, with the previous season's series serving as a
qualification tournament.

Interesting that all 'Pro' teams are not treated equally,
basically a Pro-1 and Pro-2 structure.

[Ariel Jackson]

jtj22 wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 20:20

> Sorry, let me reword. Only 4 teams in a given season
> have an opportunity to win the Triple Crown for that given
> season, with the previous season's series serving as a
> qualification tournament.
>
> Interesting that all 'Pro' teams are not treated
> equally, basically a Pro-1 and Pro-2 structure.

That's how promotion/relegation works, right? Only 20 teams
can win the EPL in a given year, but a much larger group can
win in 2 years, and even more in 3...

I, for one, think the triple crown system looks really good
(at least for the men's division, thankfully we are finally
calling it that instead of open). It has 2 main issues that
I see, but neither are insurmountable.

1. Travel costs for the upper teams. Playing competitive
ultimate is expensive. Maybe some of this can be offset in
the future with sponsorships, but in general, players at the
highest levels will have to find a way to make this work. In
most (but certainly not all) cases, this probably means
sacrificing other leisure spending to play competitive
ultimate. Elite club players will have to make a choice, is
playing elite ultimate worth it? Most club players are no
longer in college where there is limited access to income,
other than parents and summer jobs.

2. Nationals is not structured to accurately differentiate
the 4/5 and 8/9 best teams, which determines where they get
placed (Pro1/Pro2 and Pro2/Elite). This can probably be
improved, but at the same time, I don't think this is that
big a deal (as compared to determining strength bids for
nationals for example). Most sports have unfair systems, and
while we should strive to make it better, I don't think this
is a showstopper.

[Vincent McCrink]

"[in response to questions about the other Pro leagues]
Crawford didn't seem worried. 'We've been working on this
for two and a half years,' he said. 'This preceded all of
that stuff. Major League Ultimate, we haven't got the
slightest idea what that is. We've heard that there's
something, but what is it? As of now it doesn't exist.'"
[from Ultiworld]

This might be the stupidest thing USAU has said this week.
Does he seriously believe that AUDL and MLU won't affect
USAU (or that perhaps MLU doesn't even exist)? He's not
worried about them because it took USAU 2.5 years to "fix"
its league (I use quotes because only time will tell)? What
does that have to do with the strength of AUDL or MLU? He
did, however, follow it up with the funniest thing USAU has
said this week:

"And the AUDL? Thank God we weren't affiliated or associated
with THAT. Or we'd be in the middle of a bunch of lawsuits
right now."


V

[jtj]

Jackson wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 17:46

> jtj22 wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 20:20
> > Sorry, let me reword. Only 4 teams in a given
> > season have an opportunity to win the Triple Crown for
> > that given season, with the previous season's series
> > serving as a qualification tournament.
> >
> > Interesting that all 'Pro' teams are not treated
> > equally, basically a Pro-1 and Pro-2 structure.
>
>
> That's how promotion/relegation works, right? Only 20
> teams can win the EPL in a given year, but a much larger
> group can win in 2 years, and even more in 3...

Yes, that's how pro/reg works. Every team in the Premiership
theoretically has an opportunity to win the Premiership, FA
Cup, etc, in that season. And the new USAU structure has
pro/reg between the Pro, Elite, Select, and Classic flights.


What I was getting at though is the Pro flight is further
divided, with the top 4 teams able to compete in the US Open
and Triple Crown and the bottom 4 teams unable to so,
basically a Pro-1 and Pro-2 structure. That is where it
differs from the EPL pro/reg model, unless of course you
want to view the USAU's US Open as the equivalent to the
Champions League.

[Knappy]

"But it amazes me that USAU can release a plan like this
that does little more than add structure and formalize what,
for the most part, already exists and everyone's first
reaction is to lash out at the organization."

Kyle: I, too, am amazed at your amazement. Although RSD is
prone to flame throwing & hyperbole, I think many folks have
brought up some excellent points. I don't think you serve
your argument well by attacking folks for having an opinion
(i.e., your potshot at Jughandle) or by understating the
significance of this change.

This is some pretty significant cheese moving. To Julie's
(Jsuss) excellent point, one solution does not fit all 3
divisions. Women's division is still developing; mixed
division is in constant flux with the past 2 champions being
first year squads.

Krishna & Jughandle (Dan) & others make plenty of solid
points, too.

In my experience, the USAU does a poor job of communicating
with the community, and that belief has consistently been
reinforced by my fellow ultimate players on RSD & in private
conversations. when they unveiled the Triple Crown & other
option(s) to the community, many suggested some of the flaws
in the plans. Serious question: was there a public response
to those concerns? USAU refers to having engaged the
community: I want them to explain how they did that. I don't
think that's unreasonable.

I am a retired but still addicted player. I don't have a
huge personal stake in the battle. I'm not even sure if this
is the right plan or not. However, let's not stifle debate.
Let's also not let the USAU off the hook if they haven't
done a good enough job of communicating their action plan to
the players.

[Knappy]

[mgd.mitch]

padagentile wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 20:09

> S'okay. That's not wonky at all. :roll: A 7 team team
> Pro division. and #16 at nationals is sent to...where
> exactly? This will be fascinating to watch unfold.

I would suggest going back and reading the structure. It's
fairly straight forward that a 7 team pro division is not
one of the results.

At least make a cursory attempt to understand before you
criticize.

[Kyle Weisbrod]

Knappy wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 21:27

> "But it amazes me that USAU can release a plan like this
> that does little more than add structure and formalize
> what, for the most part, already exists and everyone's
> first reaction is to lash out at the organization."
>
> Kyle: I, too, am amazed at your amazement.

Ok, I'll concede that "Amazed" was definitely the wrong term
to use. It would have certainly been more amazing had the
response been the other way here on RSD.

My point wasn't to take a shot at Jughandle, just that
he(?), or you, or myself talk to a very small segment of the
Ultimate population compared who USAU and this committee
talked to and gathered information from. It is very easy
when something like this comes out to find points that don't
seem ideal in our eyes and think that the issue must not
have been considered.

Having been closely involved with the last strategic plan as
well as the college restructuring, I know how much effort
goes in to gathering information from the community and
different stakeholders and how much each facet of
implementation is considered. Often what look like flaws in
a plan have been weighed against other potential issues. By
identifying the most important goals and values of the
organization and the specific tactic itself within the
strategic plan, the details of the plan are developed that
aren't perfect but best meets those goals and values.

I also understand how easy it is to feel like the USAU is
missing obvious things either due to negligence, ignorance,
or incompetence. There are a number of things that the USAU
does that I disagree with (some brought up on this thread).
But, from my experience, it is most likely that the issue
was considered and there are valid reasons why the issue
exists in the plan.

I can't speak to specific concerns that folks have since I
had no part in developing this beyond answering some of the
surveys they sent out. I agree that it would be helpful for
USAU to be available to address concerns and explain the
decision making process - particularly where hard decisions
had to be made and why the decision was made.

As far as one solution fitting all 3 divisions, it appears
that the plan is rather scalable - if there are not many
teams, or teams choose not to participate, then it's
essentially like it's always been with sectionals, regionals
and nationals (and a few teams get invited to a couple extra
events).

That's perhaps my biggest confusion with the complaints -
this plan seems almost to be entirely additive to what
exists now. If teams choose not to participate they get
what they got every other year (except they don't get to
play the top teams at Sectionals). Yes, there are some
teams on the borderline who will get less opportunity over
the summer to play those top teams but the benefit is better
opportunities to showcase the sport which will, at worst,
make following the sport easier and at best add a great deal
of ability to market the sport and for those teams to market
themselves.

[Bulb]

mgd.mitch wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 22:34

Go easy on him, he's hit his head against a lot of bricks in
the last 30 years.

[anakin gerics]

> I, for one, think the triple crown system looks really good
> (at least for the men's division, thankfully we are finally
> calling it that instead of open)

~~~~~~~~~


---???Finally???
ANOTHER thing...that i've been saying for years....that folks are just
starting to catch on to, huh?
ya'll oughtta get on board with everything i've been saying.

[Knappy]

"I agree that it would be helpful for USAU to be available
to address concerns and explain the decision making process
- particularly where hard decisions had to be made and why
the decision was made."

Exactly. I think they owe this to the community. I don't see
anywhere that this did this -- not in their announcements,
not on USAU forum, not on RSD, Skyd, Ultiworld, Reddit.

It will be interesting to hear if they get any feedback in
Sarasota about the plan. Are any public forums planned for
after games or on off days? I am assuming that Masters
players won't be shy with their opinions.

[shock]

This is going to make it tough for teams to earn strength
bids for their region if they're stuck in the Select or
Class Flight.

[Slade]

T H wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 11:18
> What if teams said," no thanks, we don't wanna travel
> that much"? Can they just relegate themselves to the
> classic flight?


Yes. Teams can decline to participate in one of the more
structured flights if it fits their goals and agenda for the
season. Nobody is forced to travel.

Many teams have requested a more meaningful regular season
(which requires additional structure) and tiered play (which
means identifying which tournaments are when, and who they
are intended for).

However, they won't be able to pick and choose perks and
structures across different tiers. If teams decline an
invitation to the highest level of competition they qualify
for, it may affect how strength bids are awarded (e.g. if a
team declines to participate in the pro tier, another region
may get a 'pro strength bid' instead of them), and may
affect how much prize money they can win.

[Slade]

mortakai wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 11:29
> druse77 wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012 08:10
> > I'm willing to bet that they have not done any
> > analysis on the risks associated with the
> > re-structuring.
>
>
> I'll take some of that action. I'll even give you huge
> odds. How about 100:1? I'm in for $10,000... Are you
> willing to back your words up with a c-note?


Mortakai would be correct.

[Slade]

Knappy wrote on Wed, 24 October 2012 09:22

> It will be interesting to hear if they get any feedback
> in Sarasota about the plan. Are any public forums planned
> for after games or on off days? I am assuming that Masters
> players won't be shy with their opinions.

Yes, USAU will be speaking with players and teams about the
Triple Crown.

[Knappy]

Hey Ben Slade, USAU BOD member here on RSD. Thanks for
filling in some details. I sincerely appreciate that.

Do you agree that the USAU needs to do a better job of
formally answering questions from the membership about the
recently released plans?

[Slade]

Knappy wrote on Wed, 24 October 2012 11:10

> Hey Ben Slade, USAU BOD member here on RSD. Thanks for
> filling in some details. I sincerely appreciate that.
>
> Do you agree that the USAU needs to do a better job of
> formally answering questions from the membership about the
> recently released plans?

Happy to do my best to fill in some details, and glad that
we can finally unveil the plan to the membership!

To the best of my knowledge, most or all of the staff are in
Sarasota organizing the highest-quality competitive event in
ultimate, so I'd expect they are a bit busy. If you are at
the event, ask them questions in person!

I also think everyone should send their questions to
mailto:triplec...@usaultimate.org so that USAU can
formally answer questions about the recently released plans
on the website FAQ.

[Dan Naylor]

[quote title=Kyle Weisbrod wrote on Tue, 23 October 2012
20:10That's perhaps my biggest confusion with the complaints

- this plan seems almost to be entirely additive to what
exists now. If teams choose not to participate they get
what they got every other year (except they don't get to
play the top teams at Sectionals). Yes, there are some
teams on the borderline who will get less opportunity over
the summer to play those top teams but the benefit is better
opportunities to showcase the sport which will, at worst,
make following the sport easier and at best add a great deal
of ability to market the sport and for those teams to market
themselves.

[/quote]
And this is where i disagree strongly.

It's not additive.

It's certainly, if anything, stepping on the toes of
tournament directors of great events such as Terminus,
Philly Invite, Winston-Cup Charlotte, and other events,
where there are a mix of nationals teams, just outside of
nationals teams, and a few teams that are mid-level
regionals teams in most years.

This steps on the toes of teams in the top who now either
have to go grab a flight and collectively spend ~=10k as a
team (assuming a $350 round trip flight or so), or go play
in a tournament where there might be no other nationals
level teams instead of the two or three htey are used to
(and it hasn't been determined if a pro flight team can
choose to play a level down, or if they don't play pro do
they get lumped in with the unwashed masses).

And for promotion, streaming is great, DVD's are great.
Live, sunday afternoon ultimate, 10 yards from the action
with a front row seat is even better. You're losing
something by consistently pulling these teams out to Boulder
a couple of times a year to play eachother, and away from
that local tournament where a YCC team was happening to
compete and is sticking around to watch a big semis matchup
after getting knocked out in the quarters.

I don't doubt that there was thought put into the plan. I
also don't doubt that the USA-U is trying to do what they
think is right. The disconnect that myself, and some mutual
friends of ours have, is with how the USA-U is setting out
to reach it's goal of growth. I think there will be growth
in the game over the next 10 years regardless. The USA-U has
done a good job on the high school and youth side of
things.

It's also convenient that much of the growth has NOTHING to
do with the USA-U, and that some combination of Brodie,
NexGen, and some other passionate people (skyd, Jeff Snader
etc) outside the framework of USA-U have done much more to
grow the game and get it exposure than the USA-U has at the
club level

It is even more convenient that Ultimate is an easy story
to tell, and the game sells itself. Many of us know that if
you get an athletic friend out once, they will drop their
pre-conceived notions of the game, and there's a great
chance they will come back for more.

There have been a number of mishaps along the way to this
point, and the game keeps growing for a reason.

This particular change won't stop that progress, as the
story of ultimate is too compelling. But to say that these
changes will help the growth would be... wrong.

[Mozaic]

Jughandle10 wrote on Wed, 24 October 2012 12:05

> And for promotion, streaming is great, DVD's are great.
> Live, sunday afternoon ultimate, 10 yards from the action
> with a front row seat is even better. You're losing
> something by consistently pulling these teams out to
> Boulder a couple of times a year to play eachother, and
> away from that local tournament where a YCC team was
> happening to compete and is sticking around to watch a big
> semis matchup after getting knocked out in the quarters.

Once again, did I miss something that said all these top
events are being held in Colarado?

I thought the crown was the US Open (not sure this has been
permanently designated a home in Colorado, but I could be
wrong), the Regular Season and Nationals.

Nowhere did I read that the regular season events are all in
Colorado. There is nothing to stop the TD's of ECC or Labor
Day or Chesapeake Invite and so on to apply for their
tournament to be Designated part of the Pro Flight or a
cross flight challenge event.

As I said, I may have missed it, or people are making
assumptions, but it sounds like there is definitely an
opportunity for the TD's of existing established high level
tournaments to work with USAU as part of the Regular
season.


As for the big teams at a tournament with the YCC team, I am
not really aware of a tournament outside of sectionals where
such a divergent nature of teams would be present. I asked
earlier, and there was a response that outlined some
tournaments where there was a mix of top 16 and top 32
teams, but tournaments that are attracting top 16 teams
would have bids from sufficient top 30 (hell even top 50
would be semi competitive) that the wide eyed kids from a
YCC team would never get a shot.

[mgd.mitch]

Jughandle10 wrote on Wed, 24 October 2012 12:05

> But to say that these changes will help the growth would
> be... wrong.

It's not wrong, it's unknown. We will see what happens.

[Dan Naylor]

MGD you are right, its technically unprovable one way or
another.

Mozaic, great, the kids of boulder, (and sarasota) will get
to see more games. My more than a guess is that the US OPen
will continue to be in boulder, because when a mammoth event
happens, flying most of the USA-U staff is a major expense
of the tournament, plus they want to do all of their other
things associated with the event that they charged $99 a
head for last year.

The other two events may or may not be boulder, but it tends
to be their fallback historically.

As for the other point, I can think for sure that BUDA goes
to 1-2 tournaments a year in the summer. They surely are
getting to play some high level (at least select teams), at
those tournaments, and probably most years watch teams a
level above that. Nunez i think used to take DEVYL to some
higher level tournaments too.

And then there are tournaments such as Terminus, where you
have Chain and Truckstop in the finals (two clear nationals
levels teams), but a bunch of teams well below that level
who may well be sticking around to watch the finals. There
are of course more counterexamples than that. (heavyweights
surely?)

I'll try to put some numbers behind one of the more nuanced
points late tonight if i can format a spreadsheet nicely for
RSD>

[mgd.mitch]

Jughandle10 wrote on Wed, 24 October 2012 13:39

> MGD you are right, its technically unprovable one way or
> another.
>
> Mozaic, great, the kids of boulder, (and sarasota) will
> get to see more games. My more than a guess is that the US
> OPen will continue to be in boulder, because when a
> mammoth event happens, flying most of the USA-U staff is a
> major expense of the tournament, plus they want to do all
> of their other things associated with the event that they
> charged $99 a head for last year.
>
> The other two events may or may not be boulder, but it
> tends to be their fallback historically.

Jug, sorry, you are killing yourself here.

1) The US open was not in Boulder. It was in Colorado
Springs (not a suburb of denver). Remember that big fire
that forced them away from the Air Force Academy? Yeah, not
in Boulder. Colorado, yes. Boulder, no. Boulder has been
a fallback for college nationals, in large part because
people aren't submitting many bids to have it elsewhere. I
also heard that due to the two years in a row of high winds,
college nationals won't be returning because it doesn't fit
in their plan of marketing the elite levels. Frisbee in
high wind isn't marketable to Ultimate die hards, much less
everyone else. And South Central Regionals wasn't even in
Boulder.

2) Sarasota will likely not continue to be the venue for
club nationals as it isn't a good place for drawing crowds
as there isn't an extensive ultimate community there. Part
of the reason (my understanding, i wasn't involved in the
decision in any way) of removing masters was to shrink the
pool of teams, thus lowering the field requirements, thus
opening up more venues all over the country. Referencing
point #1, they did not shrink it enough to get it into the
sports complex in Boulder they use for college nationals.

3) It's actually blatantly obvious that USAU is not
envisioning having all the major regular season tournies in
Boulder. They are looking to leverage existing, well
established tournaments.

[Buck]

Mozaic wrote on Wed, 24 October 2012 09:51

> As for the big teams at a tournament with the YCC team,
> I am not really aware of a tournament outside of
> sectionals where such a divergent nature of teams would be
> present. I asked earlier, and there was a response that
> outlined some tournaments where there was a mix of top 16
> and top 32 teams, but tournaments that are attracting top
> 16 teams would have bids from sufficient top 30 (hell even
> top 50 would be semi competitive) that the wide eyed kids
> from a YCC team would never get a shot.

Terminus and Heavyweights for open, Mixed Easterns, most
Women's tournaments. Not sure also why you are hand-waving
away sectionals, especially since that's the one place that
we know for sure that games against higher caliber opponents
are going to disappear.

It seems people are simultaneously arguing whether access to
Pro teams for Select/Classic teams exists under the old
structure (it clearly does), and whether the amount in which
it currently exists is worth trading for the things that
USAU is hoping the new structure will offier.

[Jed]

Quick side-bar: how are Canadian teams regarded? I assume they are still eligible for the Triple Crown, but do they also count as international teams for the purposes of the US Open? Assuming so, if one of them finishes top 4, does the #5 team get slotted into the Pro tier for the US open? Or does a second Canadian team get a shot at an international slot?

[DMBr...@yahoo.com]

I've seen a few mentions of how the tiered system hurts "growth", which is a stated part of USAU's mission/plan. Too many rising/just below "Elite" tier teams not getting those games, etc. I guess I see this as two different issues.

Growth: USAU will be growing the sport from the bottom by creating a more welcoming environment for local league players to participate in a more competitive manor. How many players participate in PADA, BUDA, WAFC, etc leagues that don't play club, but may choose to if they had an option that was more appropriate for their competitive level? I've personally had conversations with WAFC B & C league players that want a more competitive outlet for the Ultimate fix. They can't convince their league teams to sign up for the series to get stomped by Truck Stop/Scandal/Ambiguously Grey and get very few competitive games (the whole reason they play B or C league, not A). I like that the tiered system will allow for more access to competition for players that are new to the sport and less experienced, as well as those that are less competitive/skilled. I'm sure USAU will like the added revenue generated from the membership dollars they weren't receiving in the past.

The growth at the top comes from increase in exposure which draws in better athletes, and encourages players to seek more competitive venues for participation. It's likely this means that, at least in the short term, some of the top players from mid-tier teams may push even harder to make top teams. However it works out, the influx of new talent (which we already see from the juniors levels on up) makes each level more athletic and competitive.

For the mid-tier teams that would fall in the third tier, yes, you lose some games against those top teams. If AMP finishes top 8 (good luck, rep the MA!) DBJ, Renegade, 7 Express, Termite's etc wouldn't get a shot at them during the regular season. That stinks, but DBJ played them once all season? I think that events will spring up that bring together the best tier III teams from an area (in Mixed: D5, 7 Express from NE, DBJ, Renegade, AG & Termite's from MA & Cahoots, Southern Revival, Sabre Corp & wHagonweel from SE) for smaller tournaments with good competition level, which provides a good pecking order going forward. Looks a lot like the bottom half of the Chesapeake Invite Mixed field there without the 7-8 Nationals teams, so still good competition. Perhaps this even just becomes a division inside of an existing tournament like Philly, Chesapeake, etc. Either way, I think that the third tier teams aren't losing as much as the sport is gaining.

Last thing - it will definitely be interesting to see what happens to the tournaments that everyone is used to attending. I'm sure some will bid to host USAU marquee events, but many will have to upgrade their facilities to include more fan friendly venues. Stadiums. Filming/streaming capabilities. Should be fun!

[D Rich]

It's all about the money. USA-U has to be able to package
this sport to large sponsors and you can't do that by
including a bunch of hippie teams getting destroyed by the
Top teams. Sure, you have great Tournaments like Labor Day.
But you can't "guarantee" that the Top teams will go to
this every year. For USA-U to pull in big sponsors for
multi-year agreements, you have to be able to "guarantee" a
high quality experience.

This is a tough change for a sport that was founded by a
bunch of hippies that hate "the man." I bet if you looked
at the typical Ultimate player's buying habits and social
habits, you wouldn't want to put your company in line with
the sport. We are cheapskates that crash on couches and
rely on the bagels that are provided from the tournament as
our breakfast, lunch and dinner.

USA-U is not selling sponsorships with the purpose to sell
to Ultimate players anymore. They are selling sponsorships
to the large viewing audience that the "Pro" division will
have. It will be interesting to see who they can get on
board next year.

I would really like to see USA-U provide some marketing
tools for the "Pro" teams to use when trying to get their
own sponsors. Obviously getting VC or Five Ultimate to
donate jerseys isn't going to offset the cost of flying to 4
tournaments. Teams need to find big sponsors that can put up
big money to help teams out. I wouldn't be surprised if
jerseys look like the jumpsuits from NASCAR.

Teams are going to have to be savvy when it comes to
Marketing too. What are you giving back to the Sponsors?
What does the Sponsorship Package look like (Social Media,
Branded Tent, Instructional Video, etc). Welcome to
Corporate America ultimate frisbee!!

[Pete]

Here is a rough look at the three flights in Open for next
year, assuming each region sends its top four teams, and
seeds were to hold at Nationals (naturally they will not,
and it will be different)

Pro Flight
Ironside
Furious George
Revolver
Machine
Sockeye
Chain Lightning
Doublewide
Johnny Bravo

Elite Flight
Rhino
Boost Mobile
Ring of Fire
Madison Club
Sub Zero
GOAT
Truck Stop
PONY

Select Flight
Madcow
Natives
Beachfront Property
Lake Effect
Southpaw
Oakland
Heva Havas
Medicine Men
Prairie Fire
Climax
H1N1
Castle
Voodoo
Dark Star
The Ghosts (the other one)
The Killjoys
Plex
Inception
Space City Ignite
HIP
Cash Crop
Florida United
Omen
Six Pack
Dark or Light
Phoenix
Garuda
Starfox or The Night's Watch (tied for 4th spot)
Condors
LA Renegade
Streetgang
Sprawl

The variety of section sizes makes the Select Flight odd.
Winners: NW Non-Nationals Open Teams (Made Regionals?
Welcome to Select Flight.)
Losers: Talented teams in low bid regions. (Remember when
Madcow, Streetgang, Condors, Southpaw and Oakland made it.
Well, they have a rough road this time. Have fun at
sectionals.)

The tournament based on the Ultiworld graphic that seems
interesting is the Elite/Select Challenge. Let's assume
seeds hold again. Here is the field for the Elite/Select
Challenge...

Rhino
Boost Mobile
Ring of Fire
Madison Club
Sub Zero
GOAT
Truck Stop
PONY
Madcow
Southpaw
Prairie Fire
Voodoo
Plex
Cash Crop
Dark or Light
Condors

Interesting tournament for a 2nd/3rd tier field.

There is also the Pro-Elite Challenge after the US Open, so
the only teams that would dodge everyone except the Pro
League until Regionals would be (if seeds hold) Ironside,
Revolver, Sockeye, and Doublewide. The field for Pro-Elite
looks pretty familiar.

There are certainly questions (mostly how will strength bids
and rankings be affected by the exclusive nature of some of
these tournaments based on the bids allocated this year, and
how will Classic Flight be evaluated when all they do is
play each other) but I felt it helpful to assign names to
the grid, if only as a thought exercise.

[homrbush]

Pretty impressive to make the Select Flight without winning
a single game all season (Killjoys).

Perhaps we need to revisit how we allocate the tiers.

[Drew]

"And I'm pretty sure that they've done their due diligence
in determining that this is the general will of their
constituents (and they've surely done more than what
Jughandle or anyone else has done to determine that)."

I call bullshit. Unless by general will of their
constituents, you mean they talked to some captains from
elite open teams. I would bet that they cannot provide data
to back this up. They said they relied on focus groups.
Really? From where? Consisting of who? I would also bet that
they have absolutely no data or analysis on what effect this
system would have on different divisions.

The agenda is clearly "showcase the sport" and everything
else is shoved to the side in the haste to get more people
to pay attention to us?. I would bet that they have not
actually done their due diligence, and part of the problem
is illustrated very well by the scheduling of the US Open
and its conflict with Potlatch. Ultimate and its culture is
unique from other sports and you can bemoan the fact that
the sport doesn't get enough respect or you can appreciate
the amazing vibrant special community that surrounds it.
Good luck with the Triple Crown but how many players in the
Pro, Elite and whatever flights will basically have to skip
Potlatch, Poultry days, Sandblast, Wildwood, etc? Sounds
silly but it makes a difference. How many elite teams do not
schedule anything in July so as to keep their team fresh,
both mentally and physically? Good luck with that under the
new "additive" system.

[Torre]

@ Pete

Thanks for filling out potential tiers. It helps get a
better grasp of what it could look like.
I linked it to a few friends that were asking me what the
tiers were all about.

direct link to Pete's post:
http://www.rsdnospam.com/index.php?t=msg&th=39436&goto=122450&#msg_122450

Torre

[Mozaic]

druse77 wrote on Thu, 25 October 2012 10:12

So your evidence that they didn't do due diligence is that
they scheduled the US Open on July 4 long weekend? A
tournament aimed at the top teams in the country and
international competition) and your concern is that it might
conflict with Potlatch?

As to how many teams do not schedule anything in July...
Well, a simple look at Score Reporter for this season will
answer that question. I just grabbed the teams I know and
high level teams that would prob fall into the Select group
as well


US Open (not part of triple crown this year ie not
compulsory)
- Johnny Bravo / Chain / Truck / Ring / DW / Goat / Kie /
Inception

Ow My Knee
- Heva Havas

DC Champs
- Med Men / Lake Effect

SoCal Slammer
- Boost Mobile / LA Renegade / Condors / Streetgang /
Sprawl

Club Terminus
- Cash Crop / Chain / Florida United / Truck / Tanasi

Colorado Cup
- Brawl / Johnny Bravo / LA Renegade / Madison Club /
Prarie Fire / Sprawl / Streetgang

Motown Throwndown
- Madcow / Natives

No Borders
- Phoenix


Seems like plenty of teams that would be in the select or
higher flight play tournaments during July and don't rest.

(as a side note, this exercise help answer one of my own
questions from before about how many times are there
tournaments where top 8/16 teams play against teams outside
the top 32/50.)