College programs like Florida (just lost in Finals of Men's Centex) make no sense to me. Perhaps a conversation with Jason is on the horizon, but I have two main questions.
1. How do they go through entire tournaments playing 10-12 people?
2. Why the hell do players not included in that 10-12 stick around?
Florida is known for this, and has been as long as I've known about frisbee (8 years). We encountered another team that did this: they ran 9-12 deep max against us on Saturday morning. I watched another game of theirs during our bye and the story was the same. Mind-boggling to me.
So first off, how do these players play so many points and not just drop off the deep end in terms of effectiveness? Do they condition that much harder than us?
Kyle played the most points for us this weekend, and I would consider him very well conditioned, but he played maybe half as much as the guys on Texas State and Florida.
Secondly, why the hell do players pay for flights to go to these tournaments to play single digit amounts of points over a whole weekend? How do these programs convince players to stay around and committed?
Our mentality for a long time now has been to create a culture of positivity, inclusion, and investment. We invest in our entire roster to build depth for the current year as well as skill for the future. Is this simply not needed? Could we have even better results if we just let 2 to 3 players do everything every point, and when they leave another player will just pop into being to take the torch?
Brodie -> Bobby Ley -> Billy O'Brien (I think that's his name).
Chicago is similar in that sense too. Dean, Eugene -> Josh, Pardo -> Pardo, Percy -> Wets, Jeff, Judah
The prevailing thought is that our team culture would suffer with this plan, but I'm sure the people on Florida are all good friends just like the players on NUT. So what are we gaining?
It's also very possible that these teams are the exception, and most teams that try this fail. But then I guess I want to know why Florida succeeds in this way that very few other teams even attempt.
A few misc. thoughts on this:
ReplyDelete- Florida does this because of how Cyle coaches. He does a good job identifying players with potential, building relationships with them, and giving them a high sense of responsibility for the outcome of the team.
- If your best player is good enough, and he (or she) is touching the disc a lot, it gives you a chance to win every game, even early season. A ton of smaller, less organized teams naturally develop this kind of system. But typically their best player is less good and therefore the team is less good.
- This approach is risky for two reasons:
1. What if your best player isn't that good?
When Florida's best player was Kurt or Brodie, they won titles with this approach. When Florida's best player has been Bobby Ley or Billy O'Brien, they have not qualified for nationals. Your team can only be as good as that best guy.
2. What if your best player gets injured or sick or has a bad game at regionals?
You're basically screwed, because no one else is going to be able to fill the void.
Florida hasn't been to nationals since 2014. It is impossible to know what Florida 2018 would be like if a different development approach was taken. My belief is that the best way to build a program is to develop talent across the roster, not just at the very top.
I don't think Chicago and Florida are quite in the same boat.
ReplyDeleteFirst, while we are top heavy - you don't to mention all the great role players that have made big plays and had a huge impact across the years. I'm sure you wouldn't see NUTs success as simply as having Ruttledgem Spielman, Champe, Yiding etc... carrying the team around. But Chicago does tend to push its top talent a lot and runs lower on depth than NUT or Illinois. But certainly not for the same reason Florida does. We have 25-35 kids in the whole program each year with widely varying levels of commitment. Each year Chicagos Ateam takes several players who would highly benefit from a year or two on a bteam, but we take them on the Ateam for two reasons. First, we can't roll with a squad of 14-18 (we've tried) because injuries and commitments means we won't have 14 at practices and tourneys. Secondly, because the widely varying commitment of players on Bteam and lack of resources, we tend to take players we think will grow quickly on the Ateam when they get to practice more often and against better players in the winter.
Unfortunately, this undermines the Bteam, but its simply the numbers game here - which I assume Florida does not deal with. Chicago adds between 0-2 Bteamers to the Ateam each year - it's probably quite a bit higher on NUT and Illinois. This also ends up meaning that some of those Ateamers, who probably needed another year on the Bteam, are still working on the absolute basics of defense, throwing, and catching, even by the end of the season. Come series time, we let them know where they stand and it can still be frustrating, but they only get a few points a day a regionals. Its worth noting that Eugene, Josh, Percy, Jeff, and Judah were all these types of players - they did not make much impact or play much their first years on the Ateam. We throw them in the deep end pretty quickly in their second year though.
Does this post get a reactionary update now that the results are in from regionals?
ReplyDeleteThe biggest reaction is that there should not be a format where you can lose 3 games to go in a row imo. If you make the finals in a region with 3 bids, you should go to nationals, period.
ReplyDelete