First, for the sake of examples, I'm going to say what team I play for. I'll write more about this in my next post, but for now I'll let you know I play(ed...that's weird to write) for Grinnell College. Discerning readers probably already figured this out, but, yeah, I tried to keep that hidden on this blog until now to write more objectively about stuff, but I'm done with college now and feel like it's important to talk about my experiences a little more personally in the next two posts.
Anyways. I wrote in 2008 about what I called the "quality divide in college ultimate," and I explained some reasons why I thought it existed. I'm going to go through those reasons and discuss them in the context of the current state of ultimate in 2010, because with D-IIIs and my own experiences in the past two years, some things have changed, or maybe my perspective has become more informed.
1. Size-- we're never going to be able to change that; Grinnell will always be a school of 1,500 students. The creation of D-III Nationals addresses this divide nicely, though, and gives small schools a more level playing field. I was really impressed with D-IIIs this year-- playing observed games and having official merchandise and the director of the UPA (it was the last UPA tournament, by the way) there were all nice gestures/signs that this was a legitimate national championship. I do see room for improvement in two areas regarding D-IIIs. First, not all the teams who were invited to nationals accepted their invitation. We were the only women's team from the Central, for example. We were behind Carleton and Luther in terms of bid allocation, but Carleton went to D-Is and Luther declined their bid. This happened in other regions, too. It was commencement weekend for a lot of smaller schools (it was our commencement weekend, too, and therefore I was the only senior to attend...), but I think some teams who were invited from distant regions and who would have had to pay for airfare to compete were not prepared to do so. As the tournament becomes more established, though, and teams start making D-IIIs their goal, I think more and more teams will accept, and the general quality of teams will get better. Elite teams are well-practiced, I would imagine, in the costs of travleing to distant tournaments, and D-III teams will also have to begin to think about how to fundraise and save for travel to the big show. Again, I think this is a matter of time and establishing D-IIIs as a legitimate national championship that teams can and should work for.
The second, and more important issue, I think, is the ranking system used to determine who gets bids. The regular season is the only thing that determines bids. There is no regional tournament with a championship game and a game-to-go for D-IIIs. I don't think a D-III series or anything like that will happen anytime soon because there aren't enough D-III teams in some places to warrant it, and it also isn't fair to really good D-III teams like Carleton and teams on the cusp like Middlebury to have to decide early on whether to compete in a D-III series or not...the current system lets Carleton and Middlebury play for D-I qualification but still allows them to go to D-IIIs if they don't make it (and both of them made it this year, congrats). So, the ranking system is likely to remain in place, and it is not perfect. There were definitely some teams in the Central that should have/could have gone to D-IIIs but didn't because they did not make the 10 sanctioned games requirement. Again, this is something that will take time...teams are going to realize that they need these games and will get them in if they are serious about D-IIIs. Tournaments also have to keep their end of the bargain (Vegas this year...) and teams need to get their accurate, completed rosters in (we had to attend an extra tournament this season because some games we though were sanctioned ended up not being so because our opponents messed their rosters up).
Also, one thing I have come to realize, through Michelle Ng's incredible work this past season, is that as ultimate players we have the power to create positive change in our own regions. We were beat by two D-III teams at Regionals that did not go to D-III nationals, and given those results, it could be argued that they deserved to go there in our stead (Neither of them had the ten sanctioned games, and results from Regionals didn't count towards the qualification rankings, either). This was sort of a monkey on my back as we went into D-IIIs. I'd like to think tying for third sent the message that we deserved to be there, but this discrepancy in results and in rankings could be avoided earlier in the season if D-III teams have the opportunity to play each other before a late tournament like Regionals (this was the first time we'd played these particular teams all season). The ranking system will only become more accurate if D-III teams get more chances to play other D-III teams, and this also means more chances for sanctioned games. And as D-III players, we can make that happen by hosting D-III tournaments. A tournament doesn't have to be 40 teams on polo fields-- you can easily host an 8-team tournament on four or even three fields on campus or at the local park. Eight teams would be a good portion of the D-III women's teams in the Central region, so a huge number of teams for a D-III tournament, in most regions, isn't necessary. Make it cheap, make it sanctioned, give people water and bagels, report scores, communicate with captains, and maybe host a mixer on Saturday night. Opportunities to play regional competition will help improve the D-III rankings, and will also build bonds between D-III teams in the region. Having run a tournament before, it's not thaaat hard to do if you keep the number of teams manageable and ask for help, plus you end up making money for your team in the process.
2. Experience-- I wrote about player experience through club and high school/middle school ultimate and coaching experience in my previous post. I think this is the most important aspect that sets some teams apart from others. You can have the tallest, fastest athletes on the field, but I still think, generally, they will lose against a team with an experienced coach and some players who have been on the club circuit for a season or more. The major difference I saw between women's teams at D-III nationals and D-I nationals, besides roster size (generally a product of point number one), was the absence of coaches at the former and their large presence at the latter. I highly recommend reading Lou Burruss' blog for an inside look at what the Oregon women did at D-I nationals this year, and look at how many decisions he carefully considers and makes in his coaching, from everything to in-game strategy to how to avoid getting heat exhaustion during and after games. Over the course of a four day tournament, it seems almost impossible to do well without a coach. And being a player and a captain/coach at the same time is really, really hard, as anyone who has tried to fill that role well will know. I've never played for an ultimate team with a coach (except for one happy weekend in March), but I watched a lot of good coaching at D-I nationals, and it really made me realize what a big difference a good coach can be.
And then there's player experience. By and large, the best players in the women's game play women's club, or elite mixed club. My thoughts on this really haven't changed since 2008...the more you play at higher levels, the better you will be on your college team and, presumably, the better that will make your teammates. D-III schools don't have a disadvantage with this, it seems, except maybe that all the really good ultimate kids who want a small-school college experience will try to get into Carleton and not Grinnell. My experience has been limited to Iowa, which doesn't have a really developed club scene (at least for those of us not good enough to play for CLX), but I'm assuming students at smaller colleges have generally the same opportunities to be on club teams, assuming those club teams exist...which has more to do with...
...3. Location My thoughts on this haven't changed too much since my post on it in 2008. The Northwest and Southwest continue to dominate women's ultimate (Santa Barbara every year, Oregon this year, Washington last year, Colorado this year, Stanford almost every year, etc.). A Northwest team won D-III nationals on the women's side this year, too (Pacific Lutheran)...and last year at the unofficial version of D-III nationals (Whitman). Better weather, better local competition, better high school ultimate, better (and more) women's club teams? All play a factor, I think. Still, Wisconsin proves every year that going to school in the snowbound north, away from elite women's club (though Georgia still played with Fury), doesn't stop a team from being elite. It remains to be seen what happens with D-III teams. My only thought is D-III teams (at least liberal arts schools) tend to enroll students from all across the country, so maybe that will level the playing field in some ways when it comes to getting experienced high school players. Still, if you go to school in rural Iowa, you have to drive longer to play teams and look harder to find club teams. Insert your state/location of choice-- there are lots of other examples (Texas comes to mind).
Anyways, to wrap up, I was really pleased with D-IIIs this year, and despite some first-year kinks, I think the system will work out well for small schools in years to come. And, addressing concerns I voiced earlier on this blog, the system doesn't stop a small team from competing with bigger schools, if they want that type of competition. My thoughts on experience and location haven't changed so much since 2008. Much of what I observed then continues to be true...get your players club experience, try to get a good coach, and move your school to California or Washington state.
I'm off to New Hampshire to hike for a week, but I'll try to get my second D-III post up sometime this month.
3 comments:
Sorry for the delay in responding to this-- catching up on my blog reading post-Worlds. :)
First off, thank you very much for your kind words. They mean a lot to me. Teams like Grinnell are exactly the kind of team I want to make a difference for. Your team has been an absolute inspiration to me and I feel very lucky to have had the opportunity to watch y'all play this year. You guys made the most out of every opportunity you were given-- and what's more, you created those opportunities for yourselves. You should be very proud of your season and your accomplishments.
I absolutely agree with the points you brought up in your post. There are so many factors that we can't change, but I fully believe that with some hard work, we can begin to close the gap between the West Coast and the other Regions. I don't think the playing field will ever be fully level, but I do think there is still more that can be done.
While Texas has not achieved the same level of recent success as Wisconsin, I think it is in a much more isolated location. I think Wisconsin still benefits from having schools like Wisconsin E-C, Carleton, Iowa State, etc SOMEWHAT close by. And Bella has representation on both Nemesis and Pop. Texas has none of that (yet!). Women's ultimate in Texas would not be what it is without players like Cara Crouch, Nathalie Guimard, Amanda Berens, Tina Woodings and many others. These women were directly responsible for the development of Melee... and are also for the development of Showdown. Showdown's leadership feels very strongly that our success is tied to the success of Melee and the other college programs-- and vice versa.
I will be the first to tell you that Showdown does not have the same caliber of player across the board as the other teams who were in the Quarterfinals last year. But whatever we lacked in skill, we made up for with the hours upon hours that we spent practicing (and commuting to practice). I feel pretty confident saying that the number of TEAM hours we logged at practices was unmatched by most, if not all, other club women's teams. In the (very) near future, Showdown will be an Austin-based team (right now, we draw from 4 cities), and all of the factors you mentioned will be our biggest battles as we make that transition. Our in-region competition is all a plane flight away, more than half of our players will have less than a year of elite club experience, and we don't have a big market of players to choose from. But this season, two new women's teams have formed (one in Austin and one in Houston), and I hope that this means good things for the future.
It's frustrating and disheartening, especially for those who have spent years building up the team (I'm frustrated and this is only my second year on the team and my first in a leadership role). To prepare for the retirements / moves to coed that we know are looming, we've made significant investments in college players this season-- captains of Rice, Texas A&M, and Texas are all playing with us. In the fall and spring, we will lead a series of skills clinics for college teams in Texas and in the greater South Region in hopes of continuing to develop the quality and quantity of ultimate being played here.
Anyway, I guess this is all to say: don't give up. Keep doing what you're doing and know that it's making a difference.
Hope to see you on the field this club season!
Michelle
Weird - I composed a response comment to this two weeks ago, and thought I posted it, but apparently not. Oh well... thanks so much for this entry, I really enjoyed it and would love to read the other DIII blog post that you name that deals more specifically with our team's experience.
When I read your thoughts on the factors that create a quality divide in college ultimate (and I think you've identified them pretty comprehensively and categorized them in a way that makes sense), my thoughts always turn to the best way to mitigate these factors for Grinnell while still retaining team character. For example, friendly competition within a team is a mechanism that elevates the overall level of play and fitness in every sport I've ever played. When there is a "starting line" or "varsity squad" or what-have-you, individual players are motivated to personal improvement in order to earn the greater playing time and recognition. This often results in more frequent self-directed workouts and skill development because the known rankings within the team create incentives. The precedent at Grinnell of equal playing time, coupled with the limitations you discuss such as lack of a coach (to make and enforce the distinctions) and size (if we only have 8 players, playing time isn't really based on merit or practice attendance), basically render our team exempt from this common phenomenon, which in turn makes it harder for Grinnell to maintain a competitive team mentality. Of course many individual players and certain lines play with intensity, but how can we incorporate that into our baseline team dynamic without changing the character of the team?
It's something I've talked about a lot this summer with girls I've played club with. At the smaller schools (Brandeis, Pomona), the team stuggles with this a lot, whereas as soon as you introduce a coach into the equation who can mandate the expected committment (Upenn) you see a vastly different team mentality - not less fun, just different. But, we wouldn't really want to change the expected committment, right? Because at Grinnell, people will always skip tournaments for schoolwork or even certain Harris Parties, and to punish that in playing time would contradict tradition. I don't know.
Anyways, I don't mean to grumble, it's just something I think about all the time and then when I read blog posts like this I just start rambling. I'll stop myself now but also, can I just say in this semi-impersonal weirdly public forum, I am so so grateful for the contributions you made to Grinnell ultimate and the directions you took our team in your two years as captain. First of all, learning about this blog in a silly social context, like in the D hall one day, precipitated my discovery of The Huddle and the larger ultimate frisbee blog world. But more importantly, I feel really honored to have learned how to handle and play spirited ultimate from you and am excited to see what you do next with frisbee.
Just found this blog. You definitely have to post a few words about the new DIII restructuring. I can't wait to hear what you have to say about DIII nationals as well. I went (with RPI) and had an amazing time. Somehow I managed to meet almost no one though which was sad. Was there any sort of social event that i completely missed? I need to utilize my national ultimate experiences like nationals and high tide better and see what ultimate means to people from across the country.
Post a Comment