Without a tournament of our own this weekend, I was avidly following all four divisions' results on Score Reporter, starting on Thursday morning. There were some things that almost nobody predicted, like Furious tanking, Rival beating Shazam, or Barrio's wins. Some things most of us saw coming: Sockeye making the finals (and winning), a Fury-Riot womens finals, and Shazam taking Mixed. I was not surprised with GOAT making semis - as soon as I saw that Chain took Pool D, I knew that would be the quarterfinal matchup, and GOAT had been lights out against east coast competition all year, with the exception of NE Regionals. I was surprised that AMP made semis in Mixed, but once again, when Rival got the #1 seed for bracket play, I knew AMP would win their quarterfinal matchup.
A lot of interesting things happened in Masters, which nobody is talking about yet. Four teams from the A pool made semis, something that probably would have been different if Miami hadn't beaten OaitW (resting their studs?) and forced OLDSAG down to the #4 seed out of the B pool. DoG had their hardest matchup in the quarters, and I would have loved to see that all-east coast final. But now DoG returns to Worlds and their strongest competition may be Tombstone, a team that combined with GLUM for NE Regionals and DoG knocked out of Nationals.
I'm happiest with the play of Truck Stop, representing for the Mid-Atlantic as Ring of Fire tanks at Nationals for the third year in a row. Condors joined Ring in disappointing, as they couldn't maintain the momentum they had from the SW Regionals final and ended up crashing into the "ninals" bracket after their play-in loss to Truck Stop. After beating Boston 15-13 at the Chesapeake Open, Ring lost 9-15 in the play-in game. Accusations that they just can't play as a team surface yet again, as their strategy of being angry and athletic falls short at Nationals once more. Another storyline: the NW loses a strength bid. That leaves five elite teams fighting for three bids to Nationals next year. Can Furious reload and shake off their Day 1 failures? Will Revolver be able to return to the show? Will Jam's age hurt them?
On the womens side, Lady Godiva had the most startling tournament, proving that their win over Capitals at Regionals was no fluke. Is this a last hurrah for these Boston dames? Or is there a resurgence and reaction to Brute Squad? Either way, the Northeast managed to grab a strength bid with Capitals taking 5th. Maybe Ambush will get to come back next year with a full roster. The Northwest is still limited to three bids, meaning that the fight to finish third behind Fury and Riot will be just as tough next year. Brute Squad seems to be the most capable of breaking into the finals, as their close semifinal against Riot shows. They're picking up a lot of young talent that is making an immediate impact on the club scene, and they will only continue to get better. Riot is doing the same, and only Fury's roster seems bereft of former high school and young college stars. Will it hurt them in the long run? Only time will tell.
In Mixed, Shazam didn't get to avenge their loss to Rival but still won Nationals and will be making the short trip to Vancouver for Worlds next summer. Rival managed to beat BOTH finalists, something that may not have ever happened in ANY division. Haven't bothered checking the results, but it seems pretty unlikely. And yet they still couldn't make the semis, running into a determined AMP team that had already handled them 13-3 earlier in the season and was not afraid. Barrio and Tandem proved the strength of the B-pool, with Barrio finishing 6th and Tandem one point away from a berth in the semifinals.
As an aside, I just spent a while analyzing spirit scores (my favorite!) from Nationals, in all divisions. My number-crunching shows that the Open division is the most-spirited while Womens is the least-spirited, the SW and CN regions send the most-spirited teams, and the South and Mid-Atlantic have the least-spirited elite teams.
Santa Clara tournament this weekend, Stanford is going split-squad. Games start at 12:30 on Saturday and finish under the lights - it should be exciting and we'll get a chance to see what the potential rookies are like when they have to play against people they've never seen before. And vets will get their chance to lead a team whose success will depend on a lot on how they manage the pressure and perform with a cast of rookies around them.
Monday, October 29, 2007
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Ambush, NC State, and the UPA's quest for legitimacy
The latest controversy regarding Series eligibility and the UPA's new rostering rules surrounds Ambush, the NYC-based womens team that took the fourth bid to Nationals out of the Northeast Region. One player was inadvertently left off of the roster for Sectionals and included on the additional roster filled out for the Nationals program. The UPA acknowledged that it was a "clerical error" on behalf of one of Ambush's captains, and they declared that both the ineligible player and the captain in charge of rostering would not be allowed to play at Nationals.
The Championship Committee's decision spurred a furious email campaign and RSD discussion about whether or not the UPA's decision was "fair." Having seen Ambush practice at Prospect Park this summer and having watched some of their games at Boston Invite, I felt some pride when they qualified for Nationals over RRI-favored Storm. I recognize the difficulty of having a competitive team based in NYC and the lengths that a lot of the players went to in order to play this season and qualify for Nationals. I even got an invitation to their Girl Scouts Gone Wild fundraising party.
Last spring, NC State was one day late with its college rosters, due to the slow processing of the university registrar's office. My co-captain from high school and longtime teammate was on that team. He and his teammates cursed Will Deaver to high heaven and also appealed to the masses. NC State did not get to compete in the Series at all, minus a captain or not. There were stories circulating around RSD that one coach flew his team's roster into UPA headquarters personally in order to guarantee that it was received in time.
In all likelihood, had Ambush been "found out" at Sectionals, Regionals, or shortly thereafter, they would have been completely disqualified from the Series. The precedent has been set in the past, especially in college - UCSB in 2004 comes to mind. But with Nationals on a few days away, there is no way that Storm could have assembled their players and bought plane tickets to Sarasota in time. At the UPA Club Championships, an awkward 15-team format would have ruined their showcase event, specially designed to sprawl out over four days with 16 teams, along with making 16 players eat their plane tickets and reservations had they chosen to stay home instead of watch.
Instead, the UPA decided to suspend the two people who were most directly "responsible" for the situation - the player who was not on the roster and the captain in charge of rostering. There was absolutely no way that the UPA could allow a player who was not on the Sectionals and Regionals roster play at Nationals without being extremely hypocritical and inconsistent. In effect, Ambush would benefit by breaking the rules. And in order to discourage this from happening in the future, the UPA could not just stop there. If the message were sent that teams could play with unrostered players until they were caught, with no further repercussions, the UPA could not be taken seriously as a legitimate governing body for the sport. So they also DQ'ed the player responsible for making sure that everyone was supposed to be on the roster - not an unreasonable decision in my opinion, especially considering there was a precedent set for complete disqualification from Nationals.
As the UPA tries to set firmer roster guidelines and legitimize ultimate, it starts to move towards the realm of other amateur sport governing bodies, such as the NCAA. In 2006, after a former Ohio State assistant basketball coach accepted a head coaching job at Wright State, the NCAA declared that he would be prohibited from recruiting for 18 months because his former coach gave $6000 to an eventually ineligible foreign recruit. USADA is notorious for imposing suspensions on athletes despite their claims of not knowing anything about the seemingly innocent supplements or vitamins they've taken.
The important thing is that all of these rules are laid out in advance. There are deadlines in place for rostering, and if a team submits no roster or an incomplete roster, then the team cannot play or must play shorthanded. It is the responsibility of the captains and/or coaches to make sure that every player is accounted for, and if not, either petition the UPA for an exemption before play starts, or prohibit the excluded player(s) from participating in the Series in order to spare the entire team a disqualification. Yes, this sucks. Yes, I want Ambush to be full-strength at Nationals. But they screwed up, and now they have to play undermanned. I absolutely wanted Stephen and NC State to have a chance to qualify for Nationals and play against each other in Columbus. But if their late roster were accepted, then the UPA's legitimacy is tarnished. Hopefully every other team learns from this, and the situations will never come up again.
The Championship Committee's decision spurred a furious email campaign and RSD discussion about whether or not the UPA's decision was "fair." Having seen Ambush practice at Prospect Park this summer and having watched some of their games at Boston Invite, I felt some pride when they qualified for Nationals over RRI-favored Storm. I recognize the difficulty of having a competitive team based in NYC and the lengths that a lot of the players went to in order to play this season and qualify for Nationals. I even got an invitation to their Girl Scouts Gone Wild fundraising party.
Last spring, NC State was one day late with its college rosters, due to the slow processing of the university registrar's office. My co-captain from high school and longtime teammate was on that team. He and his teammates cursed Will Deaver to high heaven and also appealed to the masses. NC State did not get to compete in the Series at all, minus a captain or not. There were stories circulating around RSD that one coach flew his team's roster into UPA headquarters personally in order to guarantee that it was received in time.
In all likelihood, had Ambush been "found out" at Sectionals, Regionals, or shortly thereafter, they would have been completely disqualified from the Series. The precedent has been set in the past, especially in college - UCSB in 2004 comes to mind. But with Nationals on a few days away, there is no way that Storm could have assembled their players and bought plane tickets to Sarasota in time. At the UPA Club Championships, an awkward 15-team format would have ruined their showcase event, specially designed to sprawl out over four days with 16 teams, along with making 16 players eat their plane tickets and reservations had they chosen to stay home instead of watch.
Instead, the UPA decided to suspend the two people who were most directly "responsible" for the situation - the player who was not on the roster and the captain in charge of rostering. There was absolutely no way that the UPA could allow a player who was not on the Sectionals and Regionals roster play at Nationals without being extremely hypocritical and inconsistent. In effect, Ambush would benefit by breaking the rules. And in order to discourage this from happening in the future, the UPA could not just stop there. If the message were sent that teams could play with unrostered players until they were caught, with no further repercussions, the UPA could not be taken seriously as a legitimate governing body for the sport. So they also DQ'ed the player responsible for making sure that everyone was supposed to be on the roster - not an unreasonable decision in my opinion, especially considering there was a precedent set for complete disqualification from Nationals.
As the UPA tries to set firmer roster guidelines and legitimize ultimate, it starts to move towards the realm of other amateur sport governing bodies, such as the NCAA. In 2006, after a former Ohio State assistant basketball coach accepted a head coaching job at Wright State, the NCAA declared that he would be prohibited from recruiting for 18 months because his former coach gave $6000 to an eventually ineligible foreign recruit. USADA is notorious for imposing suspensions on athletes despite their claims of not knowing anything about the seemingly innocent supplements or vitamins they've taken.
The important thing is that all of these rules are laid out in advance. There are deadlines in place for rostering, and if a team submits no roster or an incomplete roster, then the team cannot play or must play shorthanded. It is the responsibility of the captains and/or coaches to make sure that every player is accounted for, and if not, either petition the UPA for an exemption before play starts, or prohibit the excluded player(s) from participating in the Series in order to spare the entire team a disqualification. Yes, this sucks. Yes, I want Ambush to be full-strength at Nationals. But they screwed up, and now they have to play undermanned. I absolutely wanted Stephen and NC State to have a chance to qualify for Nationals and play against each other in Columbus. But if their late roster were accepted, then the UPA's legitimacy is tarnished. Hopefully every other team learns from this, and the situations will never come up again.
Monday, October 22, 2007
CHUG Recap
Our total numbers for the weekend:
We brought a squad that wasn't used to playing together, but we could have two or three experienced handlers on each line to control the game and let the rookies cut. Our first game was against UCSC and their massive army of 47 players that they brought for the weekend.
The game started out sloppy and close, but our downfield defense really took it to Santa Cruz and we found ourselves up 7-2 at halftime. Danny Karlinsky played maybe three points, and both teams played a lot of rookies. They ran both a spread and a vert, and we had success against the spread when we held our marks and didn't let cutters get open deep. In the second half we got a little complacent and they started hucking a lot more, scoring a few goals in a row. Once we started taking those looks away again, we closed out the game 13-6. Our freshmen scored a lot in this game, and our marks got better as the game went on.
The next game was against Barley, the Chico B-team, which included George Van Pelt, former NW All-Region (2006) and UCSC player. They scored early but only once in the first half. The game ended 13-3, and we were coasting. But Barley was making it easy for us, dropping discs, macking D's right to us, etc. The game was pretty forgettable, although it was a confidence-booster for us. But our complacency followed us into our next game, against Oregon State. We saw them at Regionals last year and won 15-7 in pool play, but that was with a full team. This time they were virtually at full-strength, and we were overconfident following our stomping of Barley.
The game opened with a long O point for us that we eventually punched in. But things quickly got out of hand, as their deep pulls and tight downfield defense intimidated our inexperienced cutters and handlers started to get impatient and force throws. We also started tunneling in on our experienced downfield cutters in Tom and Steve, and we quickly found ourselves down 7-1 at halftime. OSU typically ran a ho-stack with three strong handlers back, all looking for the unmarked huck. They had two strong receivers in the middle of the field, and they looked deep a lot. We managed to slow them down a lot more by switching to a backhand force and stopping their break throws and dishy passes. The second half also had every lucky deflection and bounce go straight into an OSU player's arms, and we lost 6-5 for a final score of 13-6.
It was a little bit of a wakeup call for us, but we learned a lot of lessons in fighting back in the second half. The newer players also got their first taste of playing against a tight defense and teams that will do whatever it takes to get their gameplan going - hucking at all costs, in this case. The loss left us with a bye before our prequarters game against Redding, and we stopped by at the stadium field to watch Superfly give UC-Davis a thumping. We left to warmup at halftime, when the score was 7-0. Apparently it finished 13-1, and Superfly went 2-2 on the day.
The game against Redding was pretty fun to watch. They were a community team with some old guys, some young and inexperienced guys, and some mix. They had one baller who came down with two or three jump balls in the endzone, but for the most part we were able to get D's on them and work the field with relative ease. We took half 7-4 and I played one point in the second half, as we had a bunch of all-rookie lines out there that took care of business. We won 13-5, securing a berth in the quarters and first round bye for Sunday. On the next field over, UC-Davis was playing UN-Reno and called an "RSD line," where every player's first name began with R, S, or D. I appreciated it.
The tournament party was that night, and the theme was "boatracing" aka nautical aka pirates. We raided a local thrift store owned by a creepy old lady who us about dislocating her toe and asked us to help her over piles of clothes to the cash register side of the counter. We went to the party prepared and excited after watching Stanford pull off a last-minute win over Arizona. There were plenty of people, seven kegs of disgusting Butte Creek organic pale ale, and a bonfire. Our women's team was also encostumed, although only a few people were noticeably pirates. Some commotion was had when someone had to be convinced not to jump over the towering bonfire (although someone much taller did it later when it was much smaller). Eventually we lost a boatrace to Oregon by a few seconds (rookies need to pull their weight!) and the popo rolled up, sending us back to the house. We watched Knocked Up and ordered pizza. It was sweet (in an "aww" way, not an "awesome!" way).
Sunday morning saw us pack up and head to the stadium for our game against LPC. The last time we played LPC was at Sectionals, when we barely held on for a 16-14 win after leading 10-4. They had done a great job of jumping and poaching on our dump sets, as well as coming down with a lot of hucks to Robot and their other cutters. This game would be different, but not really by that much. The wind was extremely strong upwind/downwind, which made throwing really difficult for the rookies. We jumped out to an early 5-3 lead, capitalizing on some swilly crossfield throws and utilizing our patience to work the disc up the field and punch it in. Our grad student and Unabomber lookalike from UChicago made some great throws into the wind - so did Schlag. But then LPC started poaching on the dumpsets again, and we started killing ourselves with drops. We didn't throw into poaches or get stifled, but drops, decisions, and wind-related throwaways led to four quick goals for LPC and we were down 7-5 at halftime.
LPC did a great job of running their ho-stack with dishy passes. We shut down their handlers during their dump sets and hardly got broken, but we got killed on dishys to streaking handlers who would launch hucks to cutters who took advantage of their defender watching the disc instead of the man. It was really well-executed, and they took what we gave them. We'll absolutely have to work on stopping the dishys and ho-stack in practice, but it killed us in the second half. Robot had some great D's and goals, and we struggled a lot in the second half with the wind and decisions. We only got two (maybe three?) goals, one on Schlag's beautiful upwind huck. On the plus side, our rookies got a lot more experience cutting and cutting well on experienced, aggressive defenders, and our vets handled the poaching dump defense a lot better than we did at Sectionals. Marks were *much* improved. Loss, 13-7 (or 8).
The loss dropped us into a 5th-place game against Hops, aka Chico A. We were hungry after losing to LPC, and we jumped out to a quick lead against a Hops squad that was also looking huck-first (aside: are we the only team that doesn't live and die by the huck?). But we learned from our mistakes and defended the hucks a lot better in this game. We pressured them extremely well on defense and worked the disc really well on offense. After letting them back into the game with some costly turnovers, we ran off an 8-1 run to end the game 13-5. We played a lot more all-rookie or one-vet lines. Chico threw zone on a one-vet line, but we didn't miss a beat - we broke through the cup with a hammer from Colin, a sophomore from the B-team, and the freshmen worked it up to the endzone. Win, 13-5.
Overall, we came in a tie for 5th, and LPC won the tournament. Almost every team we played ran some form of the ho-stack, which was difficult to defend against when our players have only ever played with and against a vertical stack. Hopefully we'll work on this at practice before Santa Clara in two weeks, and we'll also be able to work on communicating switches and team defense, which can really shut down a ho-stack. I was definitely pleased with the progress the team made over the course of the weekend, especially with our marks and cutting.
- 5 returners
- 4 freshmen
- 5 sophomores (4 B team)
- 1 junior (B team)
- 3 seniors (B team)
- 3 grad students (1 B team)
We brought a squad that wasn't used to playing together, but we could have two or three experienced handlers on each line to control the game and let the rookies cut. Our first game was against UCSC and their massive army of 47 players that they brought for the weekend.
The game started out sloppy and close, but our downfield defense really took it to Santa Cruz and we found ourselves up 7-2 at halftime. Danny Karlinsky played maybe three points, and both teams played a lot of rookies. They ran both a spread and a vert, and we had success against the spread when we held our marks and didn't let cutters get open deep. In the second half we got a little complacent and they started hucking a lot more, scoring a few goals in a row. Once we started taking those looks away again, we closed out the game 13-6. Our freshmen scored a lot in this game, and our marks got better as the game went on.
The next game was against Barley, the Chico B-team, which included George Van Pelt, former NW All-Region (2006) and UCSC player. They scored early but only once in the first half. The game ended 13-3, and we were coasting. But Barley was making it easy for us, dropping discs, macking D's right to us, etc. The game was pretty forgettable, although it was a confidence-booster for us. But our complacency followed us into our next game, against Oregon State. We saw them at Regionals last year and won 15-7 in pool play, but that was with a full team. This time they were virtually at full-strength, and we were overconfident following our stomping of Barley.
The game opened with a long O point for us that we eventually punched in. But things quickly got out of hand, as their deep pulls and tight downfield defense intimidated our inexperienced cutters and handlers started to get impatient and force throws. We also started tunneling in on our experienced downfield cutters in Tom and Steve, and we quickly found ourselves down 7-1 at halftime. OSU typically ran a ho-stack with three strong handlers back, all looking for the unmarked huck. They had two strong receivers in the middle of the field, and they looked deep a lot. We managed to slow them down a lot more by switching to a backhand force and stopping their break throws and dishy passes. The second half also had every lucky deflection and bounce go straight into an OSU player's arms, and we lost 6-5 for a final score of 13-6.
It was a little bit of a wakeup call for us, but we learned a lot of lessons in fighting back in the second half. The newer players also got their first taste of playing against a tight defense and teams that will do whatever it takes to get their gameplan going - hucking at all costs, in this case. The loss left us with a bye before our prequarters game against Redding, and we stopped by at the stadium field to watch Superfly give UC-Davis a thumping. We left to warmup at halftime, when the score was 7-0. Apparently it finished 13-1, and Superfly went 2-2 on the day.
The game against Redding was pretty fun to watch. They were a community team with some old guys, some young and inexperienced guys, and some mix. They had one baller who came down with two or three jump balls in the endzone, but for the most part we were able to get D's on them and work the field with relative ease. We took half 7-4 and I played one point in the second half, as we had a bunch of all-rookie lines out there that took care of business. We won 13-5, securing a berth in the quarters and first round bye for Sunday. On the next field over, UC-Davis was playing UN-Reno and called an "RSD line," where every player's first name began with R, S, or D. I appreciated it.
The tournament party was that night, and the theme was "boatracing" aka nautical aka pirates. We raided a local thrift store owned by a creepy old lady who us about dislocating her toe and asked us to help her over piles of clothes to the cash register side of the counter. We went to the party prepared and excited after watching Stanford pull off a last-minute win over Arizona. There were plenty of people, seven kegs of disgusting Butte Creek organic pale ale, and a bonfire. Our women's team was also encostumed, although only a few people were noticeably pirates. Some commotion was had when someone had to be convinced not to jump over the towering bonfire (although someone much taller did it later when it was much smaller). Eventually we lost a boatrace to Oregon by a few seconds (rookies need to pull their weight!) and the popo rolled up, sending us back to the house. We watched Knocked Up and ordered pizza. It was sweet (in an "aww" way, not an "awesome!" way).
Sunday morning saw us pack up and head to the stadium for our game against LPC. The last time we played LPC was at Sectionals, when we barely held on for a 16-14 win after leading 10-4. They had done a great job of jumping and poaching on our dump sets, as well as coming down with a lot of hucks to Robot and their other cutters. This game would be different, but not really by that much. The wind was extremely strong upwind/downwind, which made throwing really difficult for the rookies. We jumped out to an early 5-3 lead, capitalizing on some swilly crossfield throws and utilizing our patience to work the disc up the field and punch it in. Our grad student and Unabomber lookalike from UChicago made some great throws into the wind - so did Schlag. But then LPC started poaching on the dumpsets again, and we started killing ourselves with drops. We didn't throw into poaches or get stifled, but drops, decisions, and wind-related throwaways led to four quick goals for LPC and we were down 7-5 at halftime.
LPC did a great job of running their ho-stack with dishy passes. We shut down their handlers during their dump sets and hardly got broken, but we got killed on dishys to streaking handlers who would launch hucks to cutters who took advantage of their defender watching the disc instead of the man. It was really well-executed, and they took what we gave them. We'll absolutely have to work on stopping the dishys and ho-stack in practice, but it killed us in the second half. Robot had some great D's and goals, and we struggled a lot in the second half with the wind and decisions. We only got two (maybe three?) goals, one on Schlag's beautiful upwind huck. On the plus side, our rookies got a lot more experience cutting and cutting well on experienced, aggressive defenders, and our vets handled the poaching dump defense a lot better than we did at Sectionals. Marks were *much* improved. Loss, 13-7 (or 8).
The loss dropped us into a 5th-place game against Hops, aka Chico A. We were hungry after losing to LPC, and we jumped out to a quick lead against a Hops squad that was also looking huck-first (aside: are we the only team that doesn't live and die by the huck?). But we learned from our mistakes and defended the hucks a lot better in this game. We pressured them extremely well on defense and worked the disc really well on offense. After letting them back into the game with some costly turnovers, we ran off an 8-1 run to end the game 13-5. We played a lot more all-rookie or one-vet lines. Chico threw zone on a one-vet line, but we didn't miss a beat - we broke through the cup with a hammer from Colin, a sophomore from the B-team, and the freshmen worked it up to the endzone. Win, 13-5.
Overall, we came in a tie for 5th, and LPC won the tournament. Almost every team we played ran some form of the ho-stack, which was difficult to defend against when our players have only ever played with and against a vertical stack. Hopefully we'll work on this at practice before Santa Clara in two weeks, and we'll also be able to work on communicating switches and team defense, which can really shut down a ho-stack. I was definitely pleased with the progress the team made over the course of the weekend, especially with our marks and cutting.
Friday, October 19, 2007
Chico this weekend
Stanford is sending a team up to Chico for CHUG this weekend. Five returners, thirteen "rookies," and an injured captain to man the clipboard. We should see our main sectional and regional competition with UCSC, Cal, and Oregon all sending teams. It will be good to see how the rookies respond to an actual tournament with "competitive" games.
Expect a full writeup sometime next week.
Expect a full writeup sometime next week.
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
A Useless Exercise (aka Nationals "Predictions")
Seeds for all divisions were posted yesterday, and running through all 60 teams it looks like there could be some fireworks.
Masters
Last year's champions Throwback didn't make it but the Double Happiness/Bay Area team Troubled Past took the #1 seed. I'd expect OLDSAG to definitely break seed and possibly take a berth in the semis. I can also see Boneyard moving into the quarters. My semifinalists: BIGS, DoG, OLDSAG, and OaITW. Masters is always contentious and there are almost always pool play tiebreakers that give some team a harder road.
Open
I can't see any opening-day pool play upsets except in Pool D, where Chain will try to avenge their Chesapeake loss to Truck Stop and regain their semifinal form against Furious and Sub Zero. Power pools look interesting, and I think GOAT's O will struggle against Bravo but they'll take the 3rd seed out of the power pool and avoid prequarters, where Condors will have to face a determined foe in the Pool H winner - almost certainly the 3rd placed team from Pool D. On the other half, Pool F looks like the Sockeye-Furious rematch again, and this time both teams know that it counts. It looks like Boston will be forced down into the play-in and unenviable game against a scrappy Doublewide team, only for the privilege of facing the Jam-Bravo winner.
Likely quarterfinal matchups pit Bravo against Boston, Sockeye against Condors, GOAT against Furious, and Jam against Sub Zero or Chain. Boston beat Bravo at ECC, but that looks like the only potential upset. Jam-Sockeye looks like a potentially blockbuster semi, and the NW looks super-strong with three teams in the semis. Again.
Women
Everyone's goal is to stop the juggernauts Fury and Riot from meeting in the finals once again, but do any teams really have what it takes? Safari thinks so, and Brute Squad and Capitals will be out to prove that east coast teams can hang with the big dogs. The bottom 9 teams are all capable of beating each other depending on how they deal with the Sarasota wind and big game pressure. The battle for 9th will be immensely entertaining, and possible more interesting than the upper bracket. I'm pulling for Loose Cannon - they're much stronger than a 15 seed.
Mixed
Shazam Returns (what a terrible name, by the way) beats out Fury for Most Dominant Team in Any Division. They've won every tournament they've entered, and since their loss to Brass Monkey - the sole blemish on their record - they've beaten them twice since then. But there is a large group of teams that can cause an upset, and the Flycoons have an intriguing pool play matchup against Slow White, one that is definitely winnable for them. Every single pool except Pool C looks like the 2-3 game will be incredibly close, and the difference between going into the upper pool 0-1 and the lower pool 1-0 is immense. And again, except for Pool C, all of the bottom-seeded teams are relatively unpredictable and could make a name for themselves with an upset that sends Day 1 into disarray. But in the end, the NW teams look the strongest, and only they look capable of taking home the title.
(Why, NW, why? At least you might not win Masters)
Masters
Last year's champions Throwback didn't make it but the Double Happiness/Bay Area team Troubled Past took the #1 seed. I'd expect OLDSAG to definitely break seed and possibly take a berth in the semis. I can also see Boneyard moving into the quarters. My semifinalists: BIGS, DoG, OLDSAG, and OaITW. Masters is always contentious and there are almost always pool play tiebreakers that give some team a harder road.
Open
I can't see any opening-day pool play upsets except in Pool D, where Chain will try to avenge their Chesapeake loss to Truck Stop and regain their semifinal form against Furious and Sub Zero. Power pools look interesting, and I think GOAT's O will struggle against Bravo but they'll take the 3rd seed out of the power pool and avoid prequarters, where Condors will have to face a determined foe in the Pool H winner - almost certainly the 3rd placed team from Pool D. On the other half, Pool F looks like the Sockeye-Furious rematch again, and this time both teams know that it counts. It looks like Boston will be forced down into the play-in and unenviable game against a scrappy Doublewide team, only for the privilege of facing the Jam-Bravo winner.
Likely quarterfinal matchups pit Bravo against Boston, Sockeye against Condors, GOAT against Furious, and Jam against Sub Zero or Chain. Boston beat Bravo at ECC, but that looks like the only potential upset. Jam-Sockeye looks like a potentially blockbuster semi, and the NW looks super-strong with three teams in the semis. Again.
Women
Everyone's goal is to stop the juggernauts Fury and Riot from meeting in the finals once again, but do any teams really have what it takes? Safari thinks so, and Brute Squad and Capitals will be out to prove that east coast teams can hang with the big dogs. The bottom 9 teams are all capable of beating each other depending on how they deal with the Sarasota wind and big game pressure. The battle for 9th will be immensely entertaining, and possible more interesting than the upper bracket. I'm pulling for Loose Cannon - they're much stronger than a 15 seed.
Mixed
Shazam Returns (what a terrible name, by the way) beats out Fury for Most Dominant Team in Any Division. They've won every tournament they've entered, and since their loss to Brass Monkey - the sole blemish on their record - they've beaten them twice since then. But there is a large group of teams that can cause an upset, and the Flycoons have an intriguing pool play matchup against Slow White, one that is definitely winnable for them. Every single pool except Pool C looks like the 2-3 game will be incredibly close, and the difference between going into the upper pool 0-1 and the lower pool 1-0 is immense. And again, except for Pool C, all of the bottom-seeded teams are relatively unpredictable and could make a name for themselves with an upset that sends Day 1 into disarray. But in the end, the NW teams look the strongest, and only they look capable of taking home the title.
(Why, NW, why? At least you might not win Masters)
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Recruiting (High School)
I was involved in recruitment for my high school ultimate team at Columbia every year except my freshman year. The goal was simple: recruit as many athletic-looking freshmen as possible. Our school, as I'm assuming most high schools do, had a Club Fair on the first or second day of school for freshmen. We, despite not being an official club, got a table and set up shop. We brought jerseys, posters, discs, and ultimate videos and DVDs. And the most important thing of all was our email signup sheet, so we could contact everyone later that night and tell them about practice, etc.
It was important for us to recruit people who were willing to treat the sport the same way we did - as if it were a varsity sport that traveled outside of the state. We practiced every day, like varsity sports. There were tournaments every two or three weekends. We emphasized that we were multiple-time state champions and nationally ranked. This will probably not work for programs that are smaller, that just need to recruit to stay alive. But remember that *everyone* is nationally ranked (thanks Score Reporter!), and usually there are not many teams in a state, so almost every team can say that their goal is to make it to state semifinals. For people who are not exposed to ultimate and used to traditional varsity sports, this is a big deal.
Also, never underestimate the effect of ultimate video footage. It serves three purposes. First, it attracts people to your booth/table. Second, it helps you explain what ultimate is, and show people that there are not, in fact, any dogs. And third, it's actually really, really cool. People love to watch big hucks, skies, and layouts. Spikes help too. If you can have three or four people around the table, scanning the crowd for potential teammates, and one or two people actually at the table to catch people who stop in of their own accord.
Approach everyone, including groups of friends. If an athletic kid's unathletic friends are interested in ultimate, he may be swayed and play when he wouldn't have otherwise. Also, DO NOT BE RUDE to anyone, no matter who they are or what they say. Just mention the running that you do, or the traveling to tournaments.
When you talk to someone, try to play up the legitimacy of the team. If you have a coach, mention that. If not, try to get one before the season starts - approach the local league, club team, alumni, etc. Coaches make a huge difference to players and parents and also the continuity of the team. Mention the fun that the team has, the games that you play, and how often you practice. If they're interested, get their email address or phone number. If they're still undecided, bring them over to the table and show them some video.
Columbia likes to start players out with practice after school the next day. Our girls team used to do informational meetings before the first practice, where people could come, learn about the sport, and ask any questions they had. I'd actually recommend the meeting for fledgling teams - not everyone is willing or able to jump into practice immediately. If you do have a meeting, try to get word out about it by flyering your school hallways, bulletin boards, and bathroom doors.
We generally get about 20 freshmen out for the beginning of the fall. To keep them, we do a lot of throwing instruction and scrimmages (stopping after/during every point to explain things) and build in the force, cutting technique, marking, and downfield defense in about that order so that people can get a hang of things. We let them watch A-team and returning B-team players scrimmage so that they can see how things are "supposed" to look. And we take them to a tournament ASAP so that they can actually play.
Don't be discouraged if not all of them come back for the spring. My freshman year, only two of the 20-some kids returned for the spring. A couple years later, about 18 came back. Try to buy jerseys in the fall, for A-team and B-team players (if you have a B-team). Having a physical tie to the team seems to increase people's willingness to come back. And remember - in order for a team to stay afloat, they need about four players each year to stay, play, and become experienced. Some years will be leaner than others - of the seven classes I played high school ultimate with, three of them were smaller than four - two, two, and three. But you try to recruit in numbers with the goal of having a fraction of them staying on to be future contributors. Our general ratio when I was doing recruiting:
50-60 signups
25-30 at first practice
15-25 at the end of the fall
12-18 at the end of the spring
8-15 at the start of the next fall
6-12 at the end of their sophomore spring
It was important for us to recruit people who were willing to treat the sport the same way we did - as if it were a varsity sport that traveled outside of the state. We practiced every day, like varsity sports. There were tournaments every two or three weekends. We emphasized that we were multiple-time state champions and nationally ranked. This will probably not work for programs that are smaller, that just need to recruit to stay alive. But remember that *everyone* is nationally ranked (thanks Score Reporter!), and usually there are not many teams in a state, so almost every team can say that their goal is to make it to state semifinals. For people who are not exposed to ultimate and used to traditional varsity sports, this is a big deal.
Also, never underestimate the effect of ultimate video footage. It serves three purposes. First, it attracts people to your booth/table. Second, it helps you explain what ultimate is, and show people that there are not, in fact, any dogs. And third, it's actually really, really cool. People love to watch big hucks, skies, and layouts. Spikes help too. If you can have three or four people around the table, scanning the crowd for potential teammates, and one or two people actually at the table to catch people who stop in of their own accord.
Approach everyone, including groups of friends. If an athletic kid's unathletic friends are interested in ultimate, he may be swayed and play when he wouldn't have otherwise. Also, DO NOT BE RUDE to anyone, no matter who they are or what they say. Just mention the running that you do, or the traveling to tournaments.
When you talk to someone, try to play up the legitimacy of the team. If you have a coach, mention that. If not, try to get one before the season starts - approach the local league, club team, alumni, etc. Coaches make a huge difference to players and parents and also the continuity of the team. Mention the fun that the team has, the games that you play, and how often you practice. If they're interested, get their email address or phone number. If they're still undecided, bring them over to the table and show them some video.
Columbia likes to start players out with practice after school the next day. Our girls team used to do informational meetings before the first practice, where people could come, learn about the sport, and ask any questions they had. I'd actually recommend the meeting for fledgling teams - not everyone is willing or able to jump into practice immediately. If you do have a meeting, try to get word out about it by flyering your school hallways, bulletin boards, and bathroom doors.
We generally get about 20 freshmen out for the beginning of the fall. To keep them, we do a lot of throwing instruction and scrimmages (stopping after/during every point to explain things) and build in the force, cutting technique, marking, and downfield defense in about that order so that people can get a hang of things. We let them watch A-team and returning B-team players scrimmage so that they can see how things are "supposed" to look. And we take them to a tournament ASAP so that they can actually play.
Don't be discouraged if not all of them come back for the spring. My freshman year, only two of the 20-some kids returned for the spring. A couple years later, about 18 came back. Try to buy jerseys in the fall, for A-team and B-team players (if you have a B-team). Having a physical tie to the team seems to increase people's willingness to come back. And remember - in order for a team to stay afloat, they need about four players each year to stay, play, and become experienced. Some years will be leaner than others - of the seven classes I played high school ultimate with, three of them were smaller than four - two, two, and three. But you try to recruit in numbers with the goal of having a fraction of them staying on to be future contributors. Our general ratio when I was doing recruiting:
50-60 signups
25-30 at first practice
15-25 at the end of the fall
12-18 at the end of the spring
8-15 at the start of the next fall
6-12 at the end of their sophomore spring
Friday, October 5, 2007
A New Season
The fall is always a very exciting time for an ultimate team. It has a vibe so unlike anything I've encountered in any other sport. The ultra-competitive spring season is the championship season - 20+ guys working together for the ultimate (no pun intended) goal. But the fall is interesting and gratifying for other reasons. When practices start, there is an incredible feeling of starting anew. Anything is possible at the beginning of the season. You have a mix of savvy vets, players who are no longer rookies and need to step up, B-team players trying to impress, and completely new players.
There is nothing quite like seeing a freshman at out at the Club Fair, bringing them out to that first practice, and watching them develop over the course of the fall. I love seeing players come up to you, excited about learning how to throw a forehand, or just after getting their first layout D. Everyone has the same chance to make the A-team at the start. And as time goes on, the air gets colder and the wind stronger, and the people who really want it began to rise above the rest.
I've been involved in the "teaching" aspect of fall recruitment and tryouts since my junior year of high school. Personally, I don't really have the patience or desire to teach people how to throw and catch. I have a lot of respect for the players and coaches who are good throwing instructors. I don't mind correcting someone's form or telling them about a hitch in their motion that keeps the disc turning over. But I do it best one-on-one, not in large groups. And, while throwing is extremely important, I think that the concepts of offense and defense are ultimately more valuable and indicative of who can "make it" as an ultimate player by the end of the fall.
I am a huge proponent of doing drills that isolate concepts within a game context. For instance, teaching players about beating their defender in a man-defense matchup shouldn't happen in a vacuum. I like a drill that has the entire stack set up appropriately on the field, with defense, and a thrower with a marker. Then the last person in the stack will cut against their defender until they get open or the thrower looks them off (after about three stall counts). Then they will cycle back into the front of the stack, or become the thrower, or go to a "waiting position" as the dump/dump defender, and the rotation through the positions/stack will continue.
In a drill like this, the player doesn't have all day to get open on their cut, or the entire field. They have to be aware of the two cutting lanes, avoid causing a pick by cutting too close to or through the stack, and realize when a thrower will think that they're open, which is often different than when a receiver thinks that they're open. And for the thrower, it works on their decision-making. A coach watching can chastise a thrower for not throwing to the open man or applaud a no-throw. And alternatively, if an ill-advised throw goes up, everyone will see and realize it.
The same drill can be a defensive drill, depending on the emphasis placed on defensive positioning vs. cutting, etc. Defenders can't be expected to shut down the players they're guarding for all 10 seconds of the stall count in all directions, like some drills seem to expect. It's not a failure if your man gets open deep on you at stall five after the thrower is no longer looking.
And then there is the part of practice that new players look forward to the most - the scrimmage. It's a chance for freshmen and tryouts to show off what they've learned at practice, for returners to assess which players actually "get it," and a way to see what the focus of the next practice should be. The role of the vets in the early scrimmages is to be the handlers and the dumps - bailouts for anyone who gets stuck, keeping the offense moving, and constantly watching to see what points to make on the sideline or before the next pull. I have mixed feelings about whether or not I actually enjoy this. I alternate being extremely frustrated with the level of play or just letting it all go and treating it like a meaningless summer league game or coed tournament.
One of the darker tradeoffs about fall ultimate is balancing the desire to separate the wheat from the chaff with making sure someone doesn't slip through the cracks. I don't know of any veteran or captain who hasn't thought about running everyone insanely hard at an early practice to see who quits and who is actually interested in working and making the team. Weeding out the jokers, hippies, and no-hopers early-on would dramatically raise the level of practice, but everyone is always worried that someone with potential would get swept out with the rest of them. I lean towards the hard early practices, because I'm not convinced that someone unwilling to work hard in the fall will be willing to work hard and commit in the spring when it counts. But looking back at some ex-teammates, I see players who probably would have quit if we'd run them into the ground early. Some of them turned out to be great players. But did we lose other players that we weren't serious or athletic enough for? You never know, but therein lies the dilemma.
There is nothing quite like seeing a freshman at out at the Club Fair, bringing them out to that first practice, and watching them develop over the course of the fall. I love seeing players come up to you, excited about learning how to throw a forehand, or just after getting their first layout D. Everyone has the same chance to make the A-team at the start. And as time goes on, the air gets colder and the wind stronger, and the people who really want it began to rise above the rest.
I've been involved in the "teaching" aspect of fall recruitment and tryouts since my junior year of high school. Personally, I don't really have the patience or desire to teach people how to throw and catch. I have a lot of respect for the players and coaches who are good throwing instructors. I don't mind correcting someone's form or telling them about a hitch in their motion that keeps the disc turning over. But I do it best one-on-one, not in large groups. And, while throwing is extremely important, I think that the concepts of offense and defense are ultimately more valuable and indicative of who can "make it" as an ultimate player by the end of the fall.
I am a huge proponent of doing drills that isolate concepts within a game context. For instance, teaching players about beating their defender in a man-defense matchup shouldn't happen in a vacuum. I like a drill that has the entire stack set up appropriately on the field, with defense, and a thrower with a marker. Then the last person in the stack will cut against their defender until they get open or the thrower looks them off (after about three stall counts). Then they will cycle back into the front of the stack, or become the thrower, or go to a "waiting position" as the dump/dump defender, and the rotation through the positions/stack will continue.
In a drill like this, the player doesn't have all day to get open on their cut, or the entire field. They have to be aware of the two cutting lanes, avoid causing a pick by cutting too close to or through the stack, and realize when a thrower will think that they're open, which is often different than when a receiver thinks that they're open. And for the thrower, it works on their decision-making. A coach watching can chastise a thrower for not throwing to the open man or applaud a no-throw. And alternatively, if an ill-advised throw goes up, everyone will see and realize it.
The same drill can be a defensive drill, depending on the emphasis placed on defensive positioning vs. cutting, etc. Defenders can't be expected to shut down the players they're guarding for all 10 seconds of the stall count in all directions, like some drills seem to expect. It's not a failure if your man gets open deep on you at stall five after the thrower is no longer looking.
And then there is the part of practice that new players look forward to the most - the scrimmage. It's a chance for freshmen and tryouts to show off what they've learned at practice, for returners to assess which players actually "get it," and a way to see what the focus of the next practice should be. The role of the vets in the early scrimmages is to be the handlers and the dumps - bailouts for anyone who gets stuck, keeping the offense moving, and constantly watching to see what points to make on the sideline or before the next pull. I have mixed feelings about whether or not I actually enjoy this. I alternate being extremely frustrated with the level of play or just letting it all go and treating it like a meaningless summer league game or coed tournament.
One of the darker tradeoffs about fall ultimate is balancing the desire to separate the wheat from the chaff with making sure someone doesn't slip through the cracks. I don't know of any veteran or captain who hasn't thought about running everyone insanely hard at an early practice to see who quits and who is actually interested in working and making the team. Weeding out the jokers, hippies, and no-hopers early-on would dramatically raise the level of practice, but everyone is always worried that someone with potential would get swept out with the rest of them. I lean towards the hard early practices, because I'm not convinced that someone unwilling to work hard in the fall will be willing to work hard and commit in the spring when it counts. But looking back at some ex-teammates, I see players who probably would have quit if we'd run them into the ground early. Some of them turned out to be great players. But did we lose other players that we weren't serious or athletic enough for? You never know, but therein lies the dilemma.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)