The problem with USAU Nationals

so my last post described a problem that i saw with the tiered system for ultimate, especially as a team scratching to get into nationals.  i think the new nationals format also shows that the governing body of our sport is no longer a "players association".  i think many players were excited for the re-branding of the UPA, but i know i didn't see that re-branding as a loss of the focus on players' experience at their events.

this year's nationals will be the third nationals format i've played under.  my first few trips to nationals were just two pools of teams and the top two in each pool qualified for semifinals.  this format had its shortcomings, but it also had its strengths.  one of the big strengths was that everyone had games on thursday, friday and saturday.  you were guaranteed to play on three days, which for teams travelling across the country made the expenses and loss of work easy to justify, even for teams that maybe had no chance of making the semifinals.  one of the shortcomings was that seeding was pretty important and that the order of games mattered, because you could wind up playing a pool play game against a team after they were eliminated, and not get the same effort or subbing pattern from them as if you played them earlier in the tourney.

in 1999 they changed the format to what was used up until last year.  this new format removed a lot of the importance on seeding, which was great because while we could maybe identify some different classes of teams, we didn't know the shades of gray within those classes.  this format eliminated some teams by friday afternoon, but they got 5 pool games, and then they could still play out for placing on saturday (admittedly half-hearted for many in the lower-half).  seeding got pretty well sorted out through all the power pools, and the pre-quarters gave those with a bad first day an avenue to play back in.  semifinals and finals were still showcased, and all placings were fairly accurately played out.  and, from a players' perspective, you would get some games against teams much better/weaker than you on day 1, but then most games were against teams that were roughly your level, but that you probably didn't get to see or play against much during the regular season.  it was a good format, and an improvement over the two pools format.

now, we look at the format set up for 2013.  it is clearly no longer a players' event.  pool play format on thursday.  can't complain about that...same as before.  but then it goes straight to the round of 16.  this is ridiculous.  it puts a ton of emphasis on the original seeding, especially when the USAU seems to think that there is a big difference between the 8th and 9th best teams (one being a pro-flight and one being an elite-flight...and therefore access to different tourneys and competition).  i think some of the problems with this have been discussed in other forums.

the emphasis on seeding is a big problem, even for determining the champion.  now, the thing that is a smaller issue, but highlights the mindset of USAU, is how consolation games are treated.  i'll agree that nationals isn't meant to figure out who the 12th best team in the country is, but they have decided that it is important to differentiate 8th from 9th, and this format doesn't do that.  for instance, let's say you're the 8th best team in the country and are vying for that spot in the pro flight, but you under-performed at the one tour event you went to, because your whole team couldn't travel or because you had a few injuries at that point in the season (see: furious or condors).  so you get the 15th seed in the tourney, finish third in your pool, losing to the 3rd and 6th best teams.  in the round of 16 you lose to the 7th best team at the tourney on universe point.  now, let's just assume that you're the best of the eliminated teams, and just better than one team that won their round of 16 game.  however, because of your tour performance, and commensurate low regular-season ranking, the best you can play for is 13th.  that's right, you have no chance of playing for the pro flight.  that sucks.  similar things could be said for the quarterfinals losers, and their lock on 5th/6th or having to play for that 7th/8th spot.

furthermore, let's say one of those underseeded teams (say, furious) has the day of their life on thursday and wins their pool, going 3-0, while the 1-seed in that same pool loses all their games.  in the round of 16 both those teams lose.  despite that 4-seed (in the pool) winning their pool, and the head-to-head with the 1-seed, the 4th seed is still stuck playing for 13th at best (with a 3-1 record), while the 1-seed can still scrap for 7th, and a spot in that pro flight (despite being 0-4).  to me, this reliance on the regular season ranking, that not all teams have access to, is a real flaw with this process.

finally, a few smaller complaints, from a player's perspective.  half the teams are eliminated on friday morning, and 10 are done by friday night.  this sucks.  players are missing work and paying a lot of money to travel to and stay at this event, and the majority won't need to bring their cleats to the fields on saturday.  half of the round of 16 losers have a 5+ hour bye after being eliminated.  i think there's a good chance of those teams playing out their games if they get to them right away, but i wouldn't be surprised if more than a few take the downtime to get a beer after the conclusion of their season while watching a quarterfinal, but ahead of their placement games.  finally, the tourney fee...$65/person.  this is more than $1500 for most teams.  more than five times what i would consider a standard tourney fee.  granted, this isn't a standard tourney.  this is a lot of money for two days of ultimate, which is what most teams get for their money.  it seems like the price/person has risen, but we're getting a smaller venue (fewer fields) and fewer games than previous years.  hopefully the quality of the fields is the same as sarasota, because it seems like they are far worse in terms of providing enough fields.

clearly this event is no longer about the players.  the old format wasn't necessarily about the players, but the players got a lot out of the format.  that is no longer the case.  the focus of this event is to crown a champion (also the priority for the old event), but i would say this is being done at the expense of the non-champions, or non-quarterfinalists at least.  how many years will those teams put up with being second-class citizens, or not getting their money's worth, before they decide that nationals just isn't worth it.

Getting reacquainted with tiered ultimate

my last foray into the open division was in 2008 with JAM, and on that sunday late in october on the sarasota polo fields, the trophy in our team's hands, i was pretty sure i was done with the open division.  three UPA championships and three more finals losses over 12 nationals was enough of a career for me, and the commitment to the grind of the fall season couldn't be justified any more.  but, we fast forward five years and i was getting a little bug, and i talked to the condors and we worked something out and i got to wear the proud condor jersey once again.  and now i'm going to nationals wearing the same jersey that i wore my first time there in 1997.  

a lot has changed, and maybe at some point i'll put some thoughts together about the game itself, and those changes, but the thing that has been striking me most is the way USA ultimate has organized the season.  to me it is clearly not a "players" association any more, as they ask more of players, and in my mind, provide them less.  there's a few things that brought this home for me, but this post describes what i see as the shortcomings of this tiered/flight approach to ultimate

the condors went to three tournaments this year.  two of them were not part of the triple crown tour, and at these two events there was only one team at cal states, and none at the san diego tourney, that were nationals-level teams the year before (the second to last finisher at nationals in 2012).  incidentally, the condors won both events.  the one triple crown event the condors went to, we underperformed, but still only played one team that went to nationals in 2012 (and they were the last place finisher).  how is a team that is on the outside of nationals, supposed to get games against nationals caliber teams?  how can we learn what is needed to get into that top tier without a chance to see what it looks like up close?  

this year's version of the condors is relatively young (myself excluded), and we probably have a half-dozen guys who have never been to nationals.  we're not all familiar with the game at the top tier - the speed, skill and tactics that we might see on the nationals fields.  so, yes, we go to regionals, where we get the chance to play revolver in the finals.  despite traveling to three tournaments, including one that required plane tickets, this is the first time we've played against a team that played an elimination game at nationals last year.  we didn't play particularly well, and probably were a bit starstruck, especially after a particularly amazing catch on revolver's first O point of the game.  we took our lesson like men, and hopefully improve as a result.

now, i'm not trying to say that it was so great in the old days.  being on the dominant team that would go to a tourney and be surprised to have a team get half our score in pool play wasn't always fun, and probably didn't make us better.  but those tourneys (like cal states, or the now defunct labor day), would draw some top talent, but also have some local up-and-comers at the event.  the not-quite-nationals level teams would get to play a game or two against the nationals team before both groups segregated and played amongst themselves.  

it would have been great for the condors to play revolver at cal states, and suffer the 15-8 loss we were dealt at regionals.  then, maybe even play them or seattle or rhino again later in the summer, and hopefully have a 15-10 or 15-12 result, but learn even more.  and by the time we get to regionals, we wouldn't be starstruck anymore, we'd be ready to give revolver a game.  

the tiered approach is certainly bad for the "select flight" teams, as their access to the nationals teams is very limited.  from talking to some teams in the pro and elite flight, it didn't sound like they enjoyed it much either (far from a comprehensive survey, to be sure).  it sounded like a lot of money to spend on travel, with hyper-expensive entry fees (i heard $800 for an event in philly), and little payoff.  

so, it seems like this format has showcased a few games/events at the expense of the development of the middle tier (regionals-level teams) across the country.  teams outside of nationals have very limited chances to see nationals teams and figure out how to improve to give those teams more of a challenge.  it seems a bit unfortunate to me.