This past weekend I drove up to Washington D.C. to the YHB Invitational – a youth tournament with 20 youth teams from the region. My goal – to see what the coaches, parents, and players thought about the UPA. Ideas, suggestions, and things they thought we could do better were just some of the things we talked about.
I first want to thank the folks at HB Woodlawn, the host school, for setting everything up for me – it was a first class event with first class treatment.
The experience I had talking with people last weekend was one of the best “ultimate” experiences I have ever had, and the best experience I’ve had since joining the board in January.
I’m glad I went because I don’t know if I would have heard some of the things I did if it wasn’t a person-to-person dialogue. At one point after talking to a group of 20 boys for 40 minutes, I had to tell them that I had to go talk to another team before they left. First off, I never thought that I would be able to hold the attention of 20 boys in the middle of an ultimate tournament for 40 minutes, but more so, I never knew that kids would want to talk about the UPA for 40 minutes!
I talked with a lot of the youth players about the new competition structure. While many of them were not thrilled with the idea of getting rid of Easterns and Westerns, by the end of our conversation they were really positive about the idea. Even though the new youth competition structure wasn’t going to affect them, it was awesome to see youth players still concerned and active about what was going to happen to youth ultimate.
I had a few conversations about what was happening with college ultimate as well. I talked with many coaches that were thrilled with the UPA Coaching Clinics, and most of them wanted to have more in their respective areas.
I can’t even put into words how happy and willing to talk the coaches, parents, and players were to a UPA board member, and because of that I think it’s something that we as a board should try to do as much as possible. There are tournaments all over the place every weekend. Whether it’s a club event, a college event, or a youth event, we can always benefit from hearing from players and coaches. The UPA wouldn’t be anything without its members, so it’s important that we as board members make ourselves as accessible as possible.
I had just one regret after I left the tournament – that I didn’t get to talk to everyone that was there. I enjoyed talking to everyone I talked to, and I would have loved to hear what everyone else thought as well, but time got the best of me.
Thanks,
John Terry
You can post a message to the entire board by commenting here (comments will not be publicly viewable, but will be read by the board), or feel free to send me an email about this or anything else at john.terry@upa.org.
Monday, March 23, 2009
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Board member resignation and replacement
Earlier this month, Robin Davies (at-large member) resigned from the Board for personal reasons. As Board president, I would like to thank Robin for his service to the UPA, and wish him well in all future endeavors.
Upon learning of the resignation, the Board had to decide how to deal with the ensuing vacancy. There were three options afforded to us by the UPA bylaws: a) hold a special election immediately, b) leave the seat vacant until the fall and hold a special election for a one year term during our normal election period, or c) appoint someone immediately to fill the vacancy. The first choice wasn’t ideal because it would require a lot of extra work for the staff (and board), and furthermore, turnout for special elections have historically been especially low. The second choice also wasn’t a great option, because given how early in the year it is, this would leave the Board down one member for almost an entire year. That left us with the third option, which was to appoint someone to fill Robin’s vacated seat, which is what we decided to do (in fact in my tenure on the board this option has been exercised twice before in similar situations).
Next came the question of whom to appoint. At our January Board meeting, the Board Development and Nominating Committees had identified several areas of expertise that they recommended we attempt to bolster on the Board, including legal and non-profit management expertise. We all agreed that our effectiveness as a Board would be increased if we could fill these gaps in our experience. This, therefore, was a great opportunity to seek out someone with those qualifications.
The Board quickly settled on asking Mandy Eckhoff to fill the vacancy. As an attorney with experience on other non-profit boards, we felt that Mandy would fill an important need at a time when the UPA is launching a series of organization-changing initiatives specified by the recently-released Strategic Plan. Moreover, Mandy was a candidate in our recent at-large Board election, and though she did not win a seat via election, finished in the running and stated a desire to stay as involved as possible, so we knew that she would probably be interested (you can check out her candidate statement here).
We are very excited to welcome Mandy to the Board!
Upon learning of the resignation, the Board had to decide how to deal with the ensuing vacancy. There were three options afforded to us by the UPA bylaws: a) hold a special election immediately, b) leave the seat vacant until the fall and hold a special election for a one year term during our normal election period, or c) appoint someone immediately to fill the vacancy. The first choice wasn’t ideal because it would require a lot of extra work for the staff (and board), and furthermore, turnout for special elections have historically been especially low. The second choice also wasn’t a great option, because given how early in the year it is, this would leave the Board down one member for almost an entire year. That left us with the third option, which was to appoint someone to fill Robin’s vacated seat, which is what we decided to do (in fact in my tenure on the board this option has been exercised twice before in similar situations).
Next came the question of whom to appoint. At our January Board meeting, the Board Development and Nominating Committees had identified several areas of expertise that they recommended we attempt to bolster on the Board, including legal and non-profit management expertise. We all agreed that our effectiveness as a Board would be increased if we could fill these gaps in our experience. This, therefore, was a great opportunity to seek out someone with those qualifications.
The Board quickly settled on asking Mandy Eckhoff to fill the vacancy. As an attorney with experience on other non-profit boards, we felt that Mandy would fill an important need at a time when the UPA is launching a series of organization-changing initiatives specified by the recently-released Strategic Plan. Moreover, Mandy was a candidate in our recent at-large Board election, and though she did not win a seat via election, finished in the running and stated a desire to stay as involved as possible, so we knew that she would probably be interested (you can check out her candidate statement here).
We are very excited to welcome Mandy to the Board!
Sunday, March 15, 2009
New high school structure will help growth of ultimate
I think it would be easy to rush to conclusions about the new youth competition structure that was approved at the January board meeting.
For those of you who don’t know the exact details, the UPA is switching the competition structure to focus more on state level. Ever since the split of UPA high school Nationals in 2005 to Easterns and Westerns, it has been the plan to focus more on state level growth.
It’s important to know that we’re not trying to make the shift overnight, and we know that it will take time.
Starting in the spring of 2012, the UPA will divide the High School Eastern and Western Championships into four new regional championships (Western, Central, Southern, Northeastern).
The State Championships will continue to serve as a qualifying event for the regional championships similarly to the current setup where teams must attend states the previous year to attend the Eastern and Western Championships. Ideally, the goal of the plan is to eliminate regional championships in 2016, and move to state championships serving as the main championship event.
Once the regional championships have been worked in, the UPA will reevaluate the regional boundaries to assure that they continue to be fair and that the youth structure is on target to go to a state only model in 2016.
If the number of state championships isn’t conducive to the elimination of the regional championship events in 2016, we will re-evaluate the plan and possibly push back the state-championship model if there hasn’t been the growth we had expected. In order to push for more growth, there are four new Regional Youth Directors that will be working with the Director of Youth Development on outreach projects in their regions.
This is a very large change to the youth ultimate structure, and I think it’s important to see the big picture to this plan.
Initially, I was against the idea of eliminating the national play, but after thinking about ways to improve youth play in the United States I realized it was a good idea.
One of the biggest arguments against this plan was that it would eliminate a national championship event for high school’s around the country, but it won’t. While there won’t be a national UPA Championship event for high schools, there will still be national tournaments for high schools. Tournaments such as the Paideia Cup, Amherst Invitational, Born to Dive, Hopkins Hustle, Spring Reign, and the many more will continue to give youth teams the opportunity to play on a national stage, while at the same time helping grow youth ultimate at a local level.
The UPA continues to hold the Youth Club Championships, a national level event for high school aged players.
I always hate to compare ultimate to other sports, but I think that this is a pretty good time to do so. There aren’t many (if any at all…) high school sports that focus on a national level. The crown glory of a champion is found at the state level in most sports, but at the same time the schools that want to compete on the national level are given the opportunity to participate in tournaments around the country.
We are doing no different in this new structure - The growth will be focused on the local level, but teams that want to compete on a national stage will still be given the opportunity to.
In addition, many schools do not have the permission or financial backing to be able to travel to a national tournament. Focusing on more local levels will allow more teams to compete and make high school ultimate more accessible.
It’s easy to rush to conclusions about the new youth structure, but this will actually continue to precipitate the grow youth ultimate the way the split from HS Nationals to HS Easterns and Westerns has done since 2004. You can find the UPA’s Public Statement about this here.
Thanks,
John Terry
You can post a message to the entire board by commenting here (comments will not be publicly viewable, but will be read by the board), or feel free to send me an email about this or anything else at john.terry@upa.org.
For those of you who don’t know the exact details, the UPA is switching the competition structure to focus more on state level. Ever since the split of UPA high school Nationals in 2005 to Easterns and Westerns, it has been the plan to focus more on state level growth.
It’s important to know that we’re not trying to make the shift overnight, and we know that it will take time.
Starting in the spring of 2012, the UPA will divide the High School Eastern and Western Championships into four new regional championships (Western, Central, Southern, Northeastern).
The State Championships will continue to serve as a qualifying event for the regional championships similarly to the current setup where teams must attend states the previous year to attend the Eastern and Western Championships. Ideally, the goal of the plan is to eliminate regional championships in 2016, and move to state championships serving as the main championship event.
Once the regional championships have been worked in, the UPA will reevaluate the regional boundaries to assure that they continue to be fair and that the youth structure is on target to go to a state only model in 2016.
If the number of state championships isn’t conducive to the elimination of the regional championship events in 2016, we will re-evaluate the plan and possibly push back the state-championship model if there hasn’t been the growth we had expected. In order to push for more growth, there are four new Regional Youth Directors that will be working with the Director of Youth Development on outreach projects in their regions.
This is a very large change to the youth ultimate structure, and I think it’s important to see the big picture to this plan.
Initially, I was against the idea of eliminating the national play, but after thinking about ways to improve youth play in the United States I realized it was a good idea.
One of the biggest arguments against this plan was that it would eliminate a national championship event for high school’s around the country, but it won’t. While there won’t be a national UPA Championship event for high schools, there will still be national tournaments for high schools. Tournaments such as the Paideia Cup, Amherst Invitational, Born to Dive, Hopkins Hustle, Spring Reign, and the many more will continue to give youth teams the opportunity to play on a national stage, while at the same time helping grow youth ultimate at a local level.
The UPA continues to hold the Youth Club Championships, a national level event for high school aged players.
I always hate to compare ultimate to other sports, but I think that this is a pretty good time to do so. There aren’t many (if any at all…) high school sports that focus on a national level. The crown glory of a champion is found at the state level in most sports, but at the same time the schools that want to compete on the national level are given the opportunity to participate in tournaments around the country.
We are doing no different in this new structure - The growth will be focused on the local level, but teams that want to compete on a national stage will still be given the opportunity to.
In addition, many schools do not have the permission or financial backing to be able to travel to a national tournament. Focusing on more local levels will allow more teams to compete and make high school ultimate more accessible.
It’s easy to rush to conclusions about the new youth structure, but this will actually continue to precipitate the grow youth ultimate the way the split from HS Nationals to HS Easterns and Westerns has done since 2004. You can find the UPA’s Public Statement about this here.
Thanks,
John Terry
You can post a message to the entire board by commenting here (comments will not be publicly viewable, but will be read by the board), or feel free to send me an email about this or anything else at john.terry@upa.org.
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Board Proposals: a rookie's perspective
Peri already published a great summary of the board meeting this past January in this blog's first post, but now that the minutes have come out from the meeting, I wanted to go into a little more depth about how discussions of proposals work. As a first year Board member, I learned a lot about how the proposal process functions at the January meeting--information which I'd like to share with interested members. Hopefully this will also help those of you who plan on submitting proposals to the UPA in the future.
To start, the UPA website already has a pretty detailed outline of what needs to go into proposals. Of all the proposals that get submitted to the UPA, those that purely concern logistics (called operational proposals) never make it to the Board and are dealt with by the UPA administration. The proposals the Board does review and vote on are policy proposals that pertain to setting the priorities and policy that then guide implementation by Staff.
This year, the Board reviewed 18 different proposals, of which 4 were submitted by UPA members not affiliated with the Board, Staff, or various volunteer Task Forces. Three more proposals submitted by more non-Board/Staff members were discussed and voted on during the February Executive Committee conference call. It's great to have so many "regular" members submitting proposals!
To take you through what happens when a proposal is discussed and voted on, I'll use the first proposal on the agenda as an example (page 2 of the minutes). Will Deaver had submitted a proposal titled, "Assistance Provided to 2009 DIII College Nationals." Beforehand, all the meeting attendees (which includes Board members, UPA Staff, and all the National Directors) had a chance to read the proposal, which included extensive background, laid out the pros and cons, and had the estimated financial impact of the proposal. With the proposal on the table, people were able to ask questions about specific points in the background, pros/cons, or financial impact and discuss the wording of the proposal itself. The Staff and National Directors were active participants in this (and other) discussions and often provided extremely valuable "on the ground" insights.
The wording of the proposal is very important to whether or not a proposal will be passed. In this case, the use of the term "offer" rather than more directive terms was an important element as no one wanted the UPA to be overstepping its welcome among the organizers still responsible for running the DIII College Nationals event. In general, if any proposal wording is too specific or narrow, it could be a stumbling block for the chances of that proposal passing. Or at the very least, be cause for an amendment of the wording.
In the case of the DIII Nationals proposal, the Board realized that the clause about the "promotion of the event" was actually not quite specific enough as there was no explicit mention of helping to promote the expansion of the event to include a women's division (DIII Nationals had yet to field a women's division in previous years). Given the gender equity policy that was passed in the summer of 2008, using UPA assistance to help the event attract enough teams for a women's division seemed like a necessary goal. As such, new language was proposed to amend the proposal and the Board voted on the proposal with the new wording included.
Also important is how a proposal fits in with the bigger picture of the direction the UPA is headed. This proposal dovetailed quite nicely with the future plans for restructuring the College Division that Will Deaver had just presented to the Board (and which are now public and open for feedback), which included the addition of UPA Championship events for different tiers of play.
After the questions and answers, discussion, and language amendment, the proposal was put to a vote. All 12 Board members voted in favor of the proposal and it passed. The UPA is now listed as a sponsor on the tournament website and I believe that an important partnership was formed.
A similar process was repeated for the other proposals put to the Board. I was impressed with the level of critical thinking during the discussion period for each proposal. People asked the tough questions and often challenged each other's assumptions, albeit respectfully and constructively. Through these discussions, the meeting attendees were able to work through a number of very complex proposals, and the Board was able to come to a general sense of consensus on most proposals. The process seemed well suited for getting at the heart of the issues and I believe that everyone left the meeting with optimism and positive thoughts about the future of ultimate and the UPA.
Gwen
-----
You can post a message to the entire Board by commenting here (comments will not be publicly viewable, but will be read by the Board), or feel free to send me an email about this or anything else at gwen.ambler@upa.org.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
HS Girls Ultimate - Where can the UPA help?
I love the start of the Spring Ultimate season. The practices in blustery cold weather are only made bearable by the faint knowledge that in only a few short weeks it will be sunny and warm and the best time of year for Ultimate. I'm four weeks into my second season as the head coach of the Paideia Girls Ultimate team. The team has a handful of newcomers with different athletic backgrounds to add to an established and experienced core group of athletes. I'm lucky to be coaching at a school like Paideia where Ultimate has been accepted as a varsity sport for 10 years now. The level of support that the team receives in terms of money, field space, and parent involvement is unparalleled in the southeast for high school teams and the result is that we can constantly draw recruits who join the team looking to take the sport seriously and many even have prior experience in camps, PE and on the playground.
Today after practice as I was driving a few of the freshman back to campus to be picked up I was asked about whether or not we had any "home" games. In the Atlanta area there are now over 20 HS boys teams and so a full match-play schedule is available to those that want it. But the growth in girls HS play in Atlanta, the Southeast and around the country has not kept up with the boys side. As of 2008 there were still fewer than 16 HS girls teams competing at UPA HS Easterns and Westerns and only 5 teams in the girls division of the YCC. HS girls Ultimate is currently about 10 years behind HS boys Ultimate and falling further behind each year as boys Ultimate continues to explode. For the Paideia girls our spring competition consists of a couple of local club and college tournaments and two high school events - one locally that teams fly from around the country for and one that we have to fly to (to play many of those same teams).
So, what does it matter that girls Ultimate is so far behind? To me it goes back to the three C's of the UPA's mission: Character, Community and Competition. One of the draws of Ultimate is the inclusive and vibrant community. That community is made stronger by having both men and women players, teams, and organizers. The culture of the sport would change dramatically if more events became either men's or women's only events. While I agree that the events that focus more on competition don't necessarily need to have opportunities for both genders to compete near each other, other events like Potlatch, Poultry Days, Clambake, or the dozens of summer leagues around the country would and do suffer when the gender balance is off. In Boulder's summer league they work to keep the co-ed league 4/3 and so some men do not have a co-ed opportunity if there are not enough women. HS girls Ultimate is the future of our adult tournaments and leagues.
As far as competition goes, right now there are teams of HS girls that are hungry to compete but have little opportunity to do so because there are so few other teams. One of our six tournaments scheduled for this Spring was cancelled because there were not enough women's teams and two more of our events will likely have six or fewer teams - which makes them barely feasible as tournaments.
Finally, Ultimate, like all sports is character building. I plan to have kids soon. If one or more of my kids happen to be girls I want them to have the opportunity to participate on an Ultimate team in high school or earlier. No, I won't force them into playing the sport :) but it's important to me that the opportunity is there.
I would be remiss if I didn't mention the opportunities to gain legitimacy through increased women's play. Due to Title IX, there is a far greater likelihood of the sport gaining HS Varsity and NCAA recognition for women's play than for men's. Promoting girls Ultimate may provide us with an opportunity to promote the sport to a much broader audience and gain resources and recognition that we have not had previously.
So, what can the UPA do to jumpstart HS Girls Ultimate? Already the UPA has put the same structure and resources into the HS Girls division as it has to the boys. In addition, the UPA has been providing rebates to the UPA's coaching clinic for women coaches or coaches of women's teams. Where else can the UPA strategically invest resources that will help the division grow faster?
I believe strongly that there is a tipping point that allows Ultimate to take off - if you can get 6 stable teams in a division in an area, starting additional teams is significantly easier. With six teams, there are enough teams to provide consistent competitive variety. What will it take for our major Ultimate centers to all have six HS girls Ultimate teams?
Today after practice as I was driving a few of the freshman back to campus to be picked up I was asked about whether or not we had any "home" games. In the Atlanta area there are now over 20 HS boys teams and so a full match-play schedule is available to those that want it. But the growth in girls HS play in Atlanta, the Southeast and around the country has not kept up with the boys side. As of 2008 there were still fewer than 16 HS girls teams competing at UPA HS Easterns and Westerns and only 5 teams in the girls division of the YCC. HS girls Ultimate is currently about 10 years behind HS boys Ultimate and falling further behind each year as boys Ultimate continues to explode. For the Paideia girls our spring competition consists of a couple of local club and college tournaments and two high school events - one locally that teams fly from around the country for and one that we have to fly to (to play many of those same teams).
So, what does it matter that girls Ultimate is so far behind? To me it goes back to the three C's of the UPA's mission: Character, Community and Competition. One of the draws of Ultimate is the inclusive and vibrant community. That community is made stronger by having both men and women players, teams, and organizers. The culture of the sport would change dramatically if more events became either men's or women's only events. While I agree that the events that focus more on competition don't necessarily need to have opportunities for both genders to compete near each other, other events like Potlatch, Poultry Days, Clambake, or the dozens of summer leagues around the country would and do suffer when the gender balance is off. In Boulder's summer league they work to keep the co-ed league 4/3 and so some men do not have a co-ed opportunity if there are not enough women. HS girls Ultimate is the future of our adult tournaments and leagues.
As far as competition goes, right now there are teams of HS girls that are hungry to compete but have little opportunity to do so because there are so few other teams. One of our six tournaments scheduled for this Spring was cancelled because there were not enough women's teams and two more of our events will likely have six or fewer teams - which makes them barely feasible as tournaments.
Finally, Ultimate, like all sports is character building. I plan to have kids soon. If one or more of my kids happen to be girls I want them to have the opportunity to participate on an Ultimate team in high school or earlier. No, I won't force them into playing the sport :) but it's important to me that the opportunity is there.
I would be remiss if I didn't mention the opportunities to gain legitimacy through increased women's play. Due to Title IX, there is a far greater likelihood of the sport gaining HS Varsity and NCAA recognition for women's play than for men's. Promoting girls Ultimate may provide us with an opportunity to promote the sport to a much broader audience and gain resources and recognition that we have not had previously.
So, what can the UPA do to jumpstart HS Girls Ultimate? Already the UPA has put the same structure and resources into the HS Girls division as it has to the boys. In addition, the UPA has been providing rebates to the UPA's coaching clinic for women coaches or coaches of women's teams. Where else can the UPA strategically invest resources that will help the division grow faster?
I believe strongly that there is a tipping point that allows Ultimate to take off - if you can get 6 stable teams in a division in an area, starting additional teams is significantly easier. With six teams, there are enough teams to provide consistent competitive variety. What will it take for our major Ultimate centers to all have six HS girls Ultimate teams?
----------
You can post a message to the entire Board by commenting here (comments will not be publicly viewable, but will be read by the Board), or feel free to send me an email about this or anything else at kyle.weisbrod@upa.org.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
