First, I want to say congrats to the DoG crew, especially Marshall. I remember him saying after Nats in 04 that that was probably his best chance for a championship. Well, that isn't the case and I am glad that the team will have the chance to represent the country in Vancouver.
Second, this post isn't really about the seedings. It is about the simple fact that if teams play lots of games, especially inter-regional games...the data is better, the seedings are better, and the quality of Nats is better as the initial pools are better balanced.
So, again, thanks to the Mixed teams that put in the effort to travel during the season and organize events like Boston, ECC, and Labor Day. I think this season pretty clearly speaks that it is positive when teams play under one moniker and take the good with the bad. One of the primary reasons for the initiative to increase inter-regional games was to improve data for seeding Nats, so how did we do?
In subjecting the seedings to a predictive point of view, this was by far the most successful year since I became NXD in 03. 3 of 4 semifinalists were correct. 7 of 8 quarterfinalists were correct. 9 of the top 10. 3 of the bottom 5 were also correct.
Biggest changes:
Poodle Club +5(possible answer: pick-up team...everyone doesn't show up until Nats)
Bashing Pinatas +5
Barrio +4 (no data to seed)
ICE -3
Mischief -3
Bad Larry -5
This is much better when compares to years like 05, where we had the 12th seed in the finals, 11th seed in Semis, etc.
The seedings were, generally, as good as RRI in terms of predicting outcomes. The RRI, if I recall (I didn't save a copy of the matrix before the event), had Rival too high, Amp too low, etc, but was pretty good.
So, get out there, play the games, travel to tournaments, keep your name, and take the good with the bad. Your team will be better off and the sport will benefit from your efforts.
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Evaluating the Seedings
Monday, October 22, 2007
Qtrs Predictions?
Very busy getting ready for this show I am doing. I am pretty bummed I will not be making the trip down south this week........
So, let's discuss brackets.
Please feel free to post your predictions for qtrs/semis/finals of any/all divs.
Monday, October 15, 2007
More Deep Thoughts
-I received a call from one of my captains yesterday as I was headed back from NYC. I guess my girls won Purple Valley. I think this might be the first time the Whips have won a tournament. My understanding is that they lost to Williams on Sat, but beat Tufts in the final.
-With the light diminishing quickly in the afternoons, we are starting to have some practices in which we don't scrimmage. I do like that as it provides a reminder that actually playing is something not to be taken for granted.
-Finished seeding Nats. It was pretty consuming as there are some points with a glaring lack of data. The captains were great to work with and, thanks to Boston Invite, Labor Day, CHC, and ECC, we did have much better data than in previous years.
-Heady times for Boston sports...really a wicked pissah time to get provincial.
-We are getting great proposals in for the UCPC 08. Reminder that proposals are due by Nov 9. www.buda.org/ucpc
Tuesday, October 09, 2007
Deep Thoughts
-Interesting to drive directly from working the BC-Bowling Green game to Regionals. Obviously very different atmospheres. The BC game atmosphere was a bit mundane as the game was a blow out. Regionals, with everyone fighting to keep their seasons alive, was very exciting.
-One of my girls qualified for Mixed Nats with Bashing Pinatas. I think she might be the first Whiptail to do so while still a student.
-The end of the Open final has been written about in detail. Not much to say there other than it is rare to see someone very clearly take the game over and exert their will to that extent.
-It was nice to see the celebrations when teams earn their spot to Sarasota. For the established teams, earning a spot might be an afterthought, but I found it one of the most rewarding feelings.
-Brute really took it to Godiva in the Women's final. Pretty solid on both sides of the disc. They had 1 point scored on them on Sat...
-The Mixed Div does all that work to develop inter-Regional results and then we get three or 4 teams with little or no results plus no Moe, Deliverance, Puppet, Pleasuretown. I am especially curious about how Central Regionals played out as Moe was having a great season up until that point.
-Working on Zone D with the girls this week.
Wednesday, October 03, 2007
Announcing UCPC 08/Request for Presentation Proposals
All of the permits and budget stuff is settled, so Tiina and I are excited to announce that UCPC 08 will be held on January 26, 2008 at Newton South High School.
The updated website is;
www.buda.org/ucpc
This year's theme is "Preparation and Performance for the Sport of Ultimate". We are accepting proposals for presentations until November 9, 2007. Please go to the "Presenters" page to submit a proposal.
We will be releasing information about registration, logistics, and who is presenting over the next few week, so stay tuned.
Monday, October 01, 2007
Questions & Anecdotes
1) Will this be the first year that neither of Boston's #1 Open and Women's teams will be a #1 seed at NE Regionals?
2) In the club division, will this be the first time that teams from Canada will be both the #1 seeds in Open and Women's at Regionals? Maybe FG and Prime one year??
3) Wanting it both ways #1:
Complaining that the sport isn't on TV/legit/respected
AND
Whining about the numbers on shorts
Even leaving the pro sports out of it, ever read the NCAA uniform guidelines? Want to be legit? Get ready for someone to tell what color and brand your underwear has to be.
4) Another Hard Time Cap controversy out in the NW. This reminds me a bit of the situation with UBC and Berkeley a few years back.
There is a lot of work to be done in this area. First thing, the concept of an "end of round" time point in the schedule is not only meaningless, but it is dead and gone. Here is what we have:
The Start of the round: This is the first time listed on the SRT.
The Soft Time Cap: The second time listed on the SRT.
To be clear, the UPA suggests and has written into its SRT templates that 30 minutes is needed for the completion of the game after the Soft Time Cap. The 30 minutes listed is NOT a break.
The only other time device available is:
Hard Time Cap
The first thing is that we need to agree that 30 minutes is enough time to complete the game after the Soft Time Cap. If so, then the Hard Time Cap should be no less than 30 minutes after the Soft Time Cap. If the Hard Time Cap is scheduled for less than 30 minutes after the Soft Time Cap, then it should be due to day light, round scheduling, or other concerns.
If a break is needed to change fields AND there is enough time in the day, I will therefore offer my opinion of a "preferred" schedule:
Start of the round: 9AM
Soft Time Cap: 10:30AM
Hard Time Cap(if needed): 11AM
Start of the Next Round: 11:15AM
Notice that there is no "end of round" marker. That is because it is dead and gone.
5) Wanting it both ways #2:
A friend of mine told me about taking a high school team to UPA Open Sectionals a week or so ago. For quite of few of the high school players, this was their first time playing at Club Sectionals. Not unexpectedly, the team played several college teams and, not unexpectedly, the college teams, some who went to Nationals last year, behaved atrociously. Inappropriate sexual cheers within earshot of parents, trash talking on the field, intimidating my friends team during time outs by surrounding them and singing loudly, etc. Of course, "Its all good", right, dude?
After one game that was particularly horrendous, the college team captain approached my friend, who is a very successful Ultimate coach, and asked if my friend would be interested in coming during the fall and speaking to the team about what it would take to improve, etc. My friend reflected for a moment on the 2 hours of abuse that just occurred, took another look at the costume wearing college team and replied "I don't think so....."
Monday, September 24, 2007
Looking at Offense with questions
The girls and I began work on revamping the offense last week. For us, any work on the O begins with the acknowledgment that any specific work is predicated upon the assumption that we can throw and catch. Without specific focus on those skills and a practice regime that emphasizes their importance and development, we would be better off playing huck and play D and working on the defense. The good thing about working on throwing and catching is that everyone, both new players and vets, need the work and benefit from it.
One of the changes for me this year is that I am reducing my personal assumption that the girls can, without the benefit of defined structures or principles, properly read a situation and react. It is all well and good to say "take what you are given", but without context, it is pretty much meaningless. For example, a new cutter is fronted, so she cuts away. However, she makes her cut starting 25 yards away from the disc in the same third as the thrower, who only has a 20 yard flick, and the team is going upwind. This is a brief example only meant to say that there are many factors to consider in any given situation and it is probably unfair to expect "correct" reads, let alone basic improvisation, from players who are beginning their involvement in the sport.
So, I have been looking at structure, principles, and creating options in a manner that is manageable for my young, but very smart players. Obviously, the idea of breaking down a potentially complex series of interactions into familiar components (for example, dump pass when trapped) is not earth shaking in its originality. I do, though, appreciate the clarity offered by Phil Jackson in his book "More than a Game" when he says:
"Tex's way of teaching the formatting of the offense (which is the most critical consideration) is to break every possibility down to its constituent parts. For example, when Pippen makes the wing-entry pass to MJ, the way in which the defense chooses to pressure Pippen and Paxson will determine which one of them moves to the corner. The timing and rhythm between Pippen and Paxson must be established before the entire five-man offense can operate smoothly. So Tex will drill this particular two-man sequence until it becomes instinctive".
This systematic approach has an appealing potential, it seems to me, for developing confidence in players as the situations they experience will be somewhat familiar. An additional benefit is less real time thinking and "creativity" ("the cross field blade forehand to the break side seems like a good thing to do now"). The next steps are rather clear: identification and drilling.
When breaking things down into components, it is, however, pretty difficult to ignore what occurs several pages later than the paragraph I quoted above in "More than a Game": The Seven Principles of a Sound Offense. Unfortunately, it is hard these days, with a modicum of awareness of RSD, to read the Seven Principles without a smirk and the thought, "Here I go into Crazy Frank land". Research calls, though, and the Seven Principles is a resource. So, I guess my disclaimer, for what it is worth, is that I have been interested in the Seven Principles potential relevance to Ultimate long before CF publicly attached himself to it, and I do recall feeling a bit bummed that I would probably associate the "Swimmy Swim" with the Seven Principles for years to come. In any case, I do think that when one reads the Seven Principles that questions arise: "Could there be something similar for Ultimate?" and/or "How applicable are the Seven Principles to Ultimate?" are just a couple that come to mind. It is important to keep in mind that the Triangle is a "system" which, in the opinion of PJ and TW, makes the best use of the Seven Principles. So what follows is a point by point look at these hallowed concepts and their possible application in Ultimate:
"A sound offense...
1. Must penetrate the defense.
A. Create good % shots. Define what is a good shot for each player
B. Stress inside power game. Play for the 3-pt power play.
C. Break down all defenses from full court presses to double teams.
Before getting into the specifics, I think this is a an interesting example, potentially, of jargon. Several pages before this listing of principles, Jackson says, "The idea is not to go head to head with the defense. In fact, the offense players will always take the path of least resistance and move to open areas". To me, "breaking down" and "penetrating" sound pretty similar to "going head to head". Now, this is certainly nit picking, but I do have basic questions: what is the difference between "breaking down" and "not going to head to head"? and why is it important? I would say my interpretation is that the former tries to identify weakness and exploit it, while the later will try to impart an approach regardless of what the defense presents, but I don't think this interpretation is overwhelmingly clear based on the somewhat vague language.
I think, for Ultimate, that this principle could be simply "Break down all defenses". A possible addition could be specifics about what breaking down actually means. B seems irrelevant and A could possibly be adapted, if one was really limiting themselves.
2. Basketball is a full court game, end to end play. Skills must be learned at a fast-break pace. Know the optimum speed and work to increase it. Transition basketball begins on D. Look to run!
Clearly, #2 is a problem for most pro basketball teams. I do think that #2 is an odd inclusion. Rather than a principle, it seems more like a process for teaching.
3. Provides proper floor spacing 15'-18', creating an operating area and clearing area on the court. It keep the defense occupied on and off the ball.
Obviously, for Ultimate, the "15'-18'" needs to be removed. I think most Ultimate schemes have considered spacing as well as open and dead spots. My opinion is that the vertical stack does struggle to occupy defenders, specifically those guarding the 2nd and 3rd players from the front of the stack in a 5 person stack.
4. Provides player and ball movement with a purpose. There is only one ball and five players. All things being equal, a player is without the ball 80% of the time.
#4 is good stuff. Speaks to discipline and creating space for others.
5. Provides strong rebound position and good defensive balance on all shots.
Pretty much useless for Ultimate. I am not a basketball player, but I am assuming that "defensive balance" means that the team has a defensive option in the case of a defensive rebound/fast break.
6. Provides the player with the ball the ability to pass to any of his teammates. (The offense should also provide a counter to whatever action the defense may take).
Very interesting idea. Most Ultimate offenses have, it seems to me, created systematic opportunities for maybe 3 players at any given moment (primary cut, dump, perhaps a break side option). I am not sure that the goal should be for every player to have potential, but maybe 4-5 could be looked at.
7. Utilizes the abilities of the individual players. Must create high % shots for a team's beast shooters, rebound opportunities for bounders, etc., affords the opportunity to play out of a flexible format rather than be restricted to a definite set play"
While the first part of #7 is useful, especially for teams at a high level, I think the last sentence is where the power is and it brings us back to the idea of small components as building blocks to understanding possible options based on what is presented.
So, I am skeptical that the Seven Principles can be used, as written, as a template for Ultimate. I do think it is interesting to contemplate similarities between these concepts and we do now, or could do in the future. I think, for the time being, that, for my girls, increasing the sense of situational familiarity on the field based upon repeated component work is a positive way to begin thinking about offense.
