Forums Menu

User: 
Pass:  

Curling Scores

M: USA Curling Junior National Championships
Eau Claire, WI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: M5 -- Wed, Mar 27 -- 7:00pm CT
Fitzgerald Final
Guentzel (10) Watch Live Curling!
Cenzalli Final
Rose (10) Watch Live Curling!
Church Final
Lannoye (10) Watch Live Curling!
Hebert Final
Brenden (9) Watch Live Curling!
W: New Holland Canadian Junior Championships
Fort McMurray, AB
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 10 -- Wed, Mar 27 -- 2:00pm MT
ON (Acres) Final
MB (Hayward) (10)
NO (Dubinsky) Final
NS (MacNutt) (9)
QC (Fortin) Final
MB (Terrick) (8)
PEI (Lenentine) Final
SK (Pomedli) (10)
NO (Toner) Final
NB (Forsythe) (10)
NT (Skauge) Final
AB (Deschiffart) (8)
ON (Markle) Final
AB (Beaudry) (10)
NL (Locke) Final
NS (Blades) (10)
W: USA Curling Junior National Championships
Eau Claire, WI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: W4 -- Wed, Mar 27 -- 2:00pm CT
Scheel Final
Berg (9) Watch Live Curling!
Pekowitz Final
Berg (9) Watch Live Curling!
Schapman Final
Johnson (10) Watch Live Curling!
Giroux 12  Final
Viau (9) Watch Live Curling!
M: Canadian Mixed Doubles Curling Championship
Fredericton, NB
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF -- Fri, Mar 22 -- 1:00pm AT
Lott/Lott Final
Walk/Muyr (8) Watch Live Curling!
M: Swiss Junior Championships
Thun, SUI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF2 -- Sun, Mar 24 -- 3:00am ET
Caccivio Final
Brauchli 12  (EE)
Dryburgh Final
Ringgenberg (9)
W: Swiss Junior Championships
Thun, SUI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF2 -- Sun, Mar 24 -- 9:00am CET
Schwaller Final
Oberson (9)
Blackham Final
von Arx (9)
W: NWTCA Curling Club Championships
Fort Smith, NT
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 3 -- Sat, Mar 23 -- 11:00am MT
Stroeder Final
Delorey (7)
M: NWTCA Curling Club Championships
Fort Smith, NT
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 3 -- Sat, Mar 23 -- 1:00pm ET
Delorey Final
Lockhart (EE)
Full Scoreboard  |  Play Fantasy Pick'em!  
Disclaimer: CurlingZone does not represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any Content posted on any Forums area and you acknowledge that any reliance upon such Content shall be at your sole risk. Any Content placed on any Forums area by users and anonymous posters are the views of the user posting the statement, and do not represent the views of CurlingZone or our partners, advertisers or sponsors. By posting anonymously, you are allowing your IP address to be displayed for identification purposes. CurlingZone reserves the right to remove any post at its discretion without warning or explanation.
Page 1 of 6 -- Go to: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | »»   Last Thread   Next Thread
Author
Thread Post New Thread   Post A Reply
02-22-15 02:13PM
tuck is offline Click Here to See the Profile for tuck Click here to Send tuck a Private Message Find more posts by tuck Add tuck to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
tuck
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Dec 2005
Location: St. Thomas, North Dakota
Posts: 2613

High Performance Program

Just starting a thread to discussion changes (not elimination...that would be just silly...we're going to have a HPP in some form).

There seems to lots of venom in the USA curling community against the HPP. No need for it to seep into every single thread. (remember the old days when FORMAT seeped into every discussion? TKO or RR all seem so small now...like that was our key to World medals...at the time, we were so passionate)

So let 'er buck, people. KINDLY remember that your plans and proposals should be able to attract funding from the USOC...which is always the problem with my populist plans.

Those about to suggest that more money go towards COACHING, beware. It wasn't a great year for coaching. I didn't see much impact on the Craig Brown, Aileen Sormunen or Nina Roth teams. I didn't see any positive impact on the Heater McCormick rink. Perhaps curlers that had significant HPP coaching will weigh in on this. (apologies to Dave Jensen, Wayne Anderson and others who believe the best path to a successful future centers upon paid professional coaches) Having a HPP budget that has equal funds for coaching salaries/expenses and team entry fees (as our current budget) seems totally insane to me.

I don't have much interest in joining the conversation...just lurking. Mostly I don't want every thread end up being about the HPP.

Ben Tucker

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-22-15 02:34PM
Flat Hat is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Flat Hat Click here to Send Flat Hat a Private Message Find more posts by Flat Hat Add Flat Hat to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Flat Hat
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Mar 2014
Location:
Posts: 86

Great idea, Tuck.

1) HPP should commit to a yearly report on successes, failures and significant learnings by the HPP, along with their plans to address any issues or changes that they see as necessary. This report and comments/discussion by the USCA / USOC about it should be made public. (I'm not passionate about having the actual discussion be public, but woe on to them if they doctor the report to look good)
2) HPP should be clear and document the acceptance and performance criteria for being chosen and maintained on the program.
3) HPP should fund and otherwise financially support the US team that medals at worlds the next season. (this does not mean cherry picking players to add to the program but dropping the team)
4) every HPP team member not a medalist should have to compete for their spot and new members should be added from those not selected already.


that's a start. anyone else?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-22-15 02:42PM
Jimbobogie is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Jimbobogie Click here to Send Jimbobogie a Private Message Find more posts by Jimbobogie Add Jimbobogie to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Jimbobogie
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Feb 2014
Location:
Posts: 538

My bad-my reply is in the "Save the Website" thread.

__________________
Jim

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-22-15 03:11PM
dbsdbs is offline Click Here to See the Profile for dbsdbs Click here to Send dbsdbs a Private Message Find more posts by dbsdbs Add dbsdbs to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
dbsdbs
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

Getting USA to the podium at Worlds or Olympics is not going to happen overnight. While it is still obviously early in the HPP program, I don't know that we have seen any evidence that HPP is speeding our progress. It seems to me we need to recognize that this is a long-term project and, rather than devoting resources to a few men/women/junior teams, we should focus those resources on a larger pool of junior curlers.

Regardless of how he performs at Worlds this year, Shuster's rink demonstrated that HPP support is not a prerequisite for winning Nationals and/or geting to Worlds. And HPP has not demonstrated that their plan will produce a stronger USA presence at World-level curling.

But the monkey in the room is that, unfortunately, USOC is not looking for long-term success. Instead, they want results now. Some will argue that the current HPP program will provide those results, but HPP dollars this year produced non-HPP national champions and no evidence that this is going to be any different going forward. So focus on the juniors -- get more young curlers into the tent now and better, stronger teams will emerge in the future.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-22-15 04:59PM
mr. lucky is offline Click Here to See the Profile for mr. lucky Find more posts by mr. lucky Add mr. lucky to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
mr. lucky
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: Nov 2007
Location:
Posts: 142

Of course the answer lies in coaching Ben. To think otherwise is just foolish.

If the reason our teams havent shown improvement this year does not rest with coaching, then one must conclude is rests with the athletes. Sorry, we have very good athletes. Its our teams that need improvement, and teams cant run from one spiel to another fixing themselves. They need good coaching.

There are many ways to craft a HP program centered on coaching and the USOC has backed coaching programs in the past.

Sorry, broken record.scratch..scratch..scratch

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-22-15 06:49PM
AlanMacNeill is offline Click Here to See the Profile for AlanMacNeill Click here to Send AlanMacNeill a Private Message Find more posts by AlanMacNeill Add AlanMacNeill to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
AlanMacNeill
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2011
Location:
Posts: 1064

Coaching is a part of the equation.

However, there is a significant difference between:

Hey, guys, y'all are our national champions, so I've been tasked with working with your existing coaches and seeing if we can't get y'all just that much better between now and (Olympics/Worlds/whatever)....let's get to work...

And

I know Coach X got you here, but I"m your coach now. Oh, by the way, your fifth has been kicked off the team in favor of this guy who I've hand picked to be the replacement Skip as soon as I feel y'all have done poorly enough that I won't get lambasted for making the switch.

One is coaching...the other is the current HPP.

Fix *that*,and you fix a lot of the current problem.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-22-15 06:57PM
Grat is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Grat Click here to Send Grat a Private Message Find more posts by Grat Add Grat to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Grat
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: Mar 2014
Location:
Posts: 107

A whole topic on the HPP program - where to start???

By using points as the measure for choosing our world championship team, they've shown the path to success is more often playing against a higher level of competition.

The obvious next step is to reward teams that perform with funding to play in tour events. The top three non-HPP teams get funded to travel to a couple of events. This provides an extra incentive to teams to make the initial commitment. What is the current incentive to the third best player on a non-HPP team who wants to represent the USA? If I'm the third best player, I can pay my way this year and if we do well I'll be looking for a new team when the HPP program cherry picks from my team next year.

I don't think the current system is set up properly. If so much of the budget is going towards staff and coaching, and that coaching is effective, then the chosen teams shouldn't need to the advantage of also having so many more points opportunities than the other teams to win their way to worlds.

Want to make it easier for non-HPP teams to fund themselves? Invite one or two to the next made for TV event. That gives exposure to teams who aren't already funded and provides a greater opportunity for meaningful sponsorship - macrosponsors instead of microsponsors Plus it shows the TV world that there's more to American curling than just the "national" team.

On a semi-related note - I think they HPP teams should have to earn their team USA kit. Our National Champions are Brown and Shuster, they can wear the USA jersey with Sormunen, our non-champion world championship rep, who earned that spot even if we don't all agree on the criteria.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-22-15 07:52PM
Flat Hat is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Flat Hat Click here to Send Flat Hat a Private Message Find more posts by Flat Hat Add Flat Hat to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Flat Hat
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Mar 2014
Location:
Posts: 86

Doh! Honeypot

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-22-15 08:43PM
brund is offline Click Here to See the Profile for brund Click here to Send brund a Private Message Find more posts by brund Add brund to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
brund
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Apr 2014
Location:
Posts: 17

The key to all this is the skip, and yes it takes four good players but I have felt for a long time that we have the players capable of winning on the world stage. WE are missing that special skip the leader, shot caller, shot maker, and on and on. Find and develop that guy or gal who comes along once in a life time and the rest will fall in place. So to me more of resources need to go for that spot. Great skips will win gold and have won gold with many different players, Too many to list.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-22-15 09:12PM
Flat Hat is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Flat Hat Click here to Send Flat Hat a Private Message Find more posts by Flat Hat Add Flat Hat to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Flat Hat
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Mar 2014
Location:
Posts: 86

quote:
Originally posted by brund
The key to all this is the skip, and yes it takes four good players but I have felt for a long time that we have the players capable of winning on the world stage. WE are missing that special skip the leader, shot caller, shot maker, and on and on. Find and develop that guy or gal who comes along once in a life time and the rest will fall in place. So to me more of resources need to go for that spot. Great skips will win gold and have won gold with many different players, Too many to list.


Totally agree, great spin on this - we need a skip development program (but oh the egos that would be bruised by that selection process)!

That's why the best team will likely be some skip who doesn't play into the HPP, but just figures out how to hold a team together while playing god with granite, ice and the minds of men.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-23-15 10:58AM
VAcurler is offline Click Here to See the Profile for VAcurler Click here to Send VAcurler a Private Message Find more posts by VAcurler Add VAcurler to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
VAcurler
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: Jan 2012
Location:
Posts: 136

I like the idea of an HP Program and if I were 10 (15?) years younger I would given almost anything to have been part of it.

Therefore I propose the following which are mostly tweaks to the existing program.

1. A player combine in September open to anyone nominated by their club president. We need more competitive curlers not fewer. Maybe focus on people who just aged out of juniors. Minimal additional cost

2. Form 4 - four player teams from the combine. Team A and Team B like before but also a Teams C and Team D for growth. Teams C and D are coach formed teams and have access to the HP coaches but are otherwise financially on their own and expected to hit up the "junior" tour events. The concept is that 4 curlers who wouldn't otherwise curl together to be introduced and put together based on potential and personality. Additional cost would be time for the weekly virtual coaching sessions offered to teams C and D.

3. Anyone not being selected to one of the four teams be given specific reasons why and what they could do to improve to make the cut to teams C or D next year. Additional cost is the will to be open and honest why someone didn't make the cut and understanding from the participant that it might be a brutal assessment of why they aren't good enough.

4. More National related than HP related: Challenge round is open to all and becomes a TKO to get ONE entry. Remaining spots (up to 9) go to the teams that have at least 6 OOM points. If you don't have 6 points you have to go to the challenge round and fight for one spot. If that means only 5 teams at nationals so be it. Nationals is a round robin with a page playoff and WINNER GOES TO WORLDS

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-24-15 01:12PM
rbi is offline Click Here to See the Profile for rbi Click here to Send rbi a Private Message Find more posts by rbi Add rbi to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
rbi
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: May 2014
Location:
Posts: 143

on the recent ATH podcast Gerry Geurts pointed out that the points-based USA curling system for determining world rep was designed in part to encourage the top teams to play more in Canada during the tour season.

Does anybody know whether this is actually happening? Are USA teams (men and women) playing more tour events and more events in Canada compared to previous years?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-24-15 03:07PM
ChiefIceMinion is offline Click Here to See the Profile for ChiefIceMinion Click here to Send ChiefIceMinion a Private Message Find more posts by ChiefIceMinion Add ChiefIceMinion to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
ChiefIceMinion
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Nov 2012
Location: In the crawlspace
Posts: 83

quote:
Originally posted by rbi
on the recent ATH podcast Gerry Geurts pointed out that the points-based USA curling system for determining world rep was designed in part to encourage the top teams to play more in Canada during the tour season.

Does anybody know whether this is actually happening? Are USA teams (men and women) playing more tour events and more events in Canada compared to previous years?



A few of the upper echelon non-HPP teams (Shuster, Clark) did play in events, but that was probably more to get the OOM points to attempt to avoid what happened on the ladies' side in terms of Nationals champ vs. Worlds rep.

The crux of the situation, though, is that all the encouragement in the world won't get the teams to go to Canada that aren't financially or otherwise able to do so.

Chief Ice Minion

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-24-15 04:51PM
dbsdbs is offline Click Here to See the Profile for dbsdbs Click here to Send dbsdbs a Private Message Find more posts by dbsdbs Add dbsdbs to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
dbsdbs
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

Is 1 or 2 trips to Canada really going to make a team better? It seems that the events the USA teams went to, there were a few really good Canadian teams but more just good teams. Kind of like sending teams to play on outdoor ice in Russia? If teams cannot get a steady diet of strong competition, then how do they get better? And does coaching make much of a difference with these teams?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-24-15 05:05PM
IMWright is offline Click Here to See the Profile for IMWright Click here to Send IMWright a Private Message Find more posts by IMWright Add IMWright to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
IMWright
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Dec 2014
Location:
Posts: 206

quote:
Originally posted by rbi
on the recent ATH podcast Gerry Geurts pointed out that the points-based USA curling system for determining world rep was designed in part to encourage the top teams to play more in Canada during the tour season.

Does anybody know whether this is actually happening? Are USA teams (men and women) playing more tour events and more events in Canada compared to previous years?



So is the HPP going to try to take credit for Shuster's win by saying because of the system they had in place, that made Shuster go out to other events to get OOM points, get better, then win nationals to go to Worlds? A, he probably would have gone to some events regardless, and B, he put his team together and had no coaching help from the HPP (to my knowledge).

Also, with whta happened on the women's side. Yes, the team with the most OOM points is going on, but I don't think that's indicative of a team who has had a strong yearlong performance. It's of a team who did good at a spiel and got some points, and they did good enough at Nationals, and now goes to worlds. And now you have the US National team who essentially rolled their way to victory sitting out.

I don't think that the HPP has really pushed the top non-funded teams to going to more events. I think they were already going to them, and now still are. The HPP has pushed the HPP teams to going to more events. However we see how that turned out in terms of their National's performance.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-25-15 03:03AM
peteski is offline Click Here to See the Profile for peteski Click here to Send peteski a Private Message Find more posts by peteski Add peteski to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
peteski
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Feb 2007
Location:
Posts: 631

The national championship should go back to deciding the world rep, preferably with a best 2 of 3 final. However, failing that, at the very least the winner of the national championship should become a funded team. Understandably, this would likely mean cutting a team from the HPP, which would be a bit awkward. However, I think it is important not to discourage players from trying to reach the highest level, which I fear the current system does.

There is some merit to the HPP. I think to compete at the highest level now, you have to have something bordering on professional players and the HPP can help in that way. I think it can help a lot in the development of younger players and while the junior program certainly had its issues, there appeared to be some good development there.

I think if you allowed players and teams a fair opportunity to earn their way into the program and maybe weren't quite so hands-on in deciding who is on which team (like splitting up Nina Roth's team) this could be a very useful program.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-25-15 05:16AM
rbi is offline Click Here to See the Profile for rbi Click here to Send rbi a Private Message Find more posts by rbi Add rbi to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
rbi
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: May 2014
Location:
Posts: 143

It seems that no matter how you design HPP it will be doomed by insufficient money to produce international medal winners. Today the way to win medals is to have professional, full-time curlers. To achieve that in the USA probably requires something like $500K per team per year, and that is probably far beyond the current HPP budget. Without full-time players, I don't see how USA can compete with Scotland, Sweden, Russia, China, and other countries that employ full-time, professional players.

Player selection, team selection, coaching, fitness, world team selection, and everything else is secondary.

Probably the same is true for skiing, snowboarding, bobsled and skeleton (all sports in which USA medaled at the 2014 Sochi Olympics). These sports attract many more corporate sponsors than USA curling, and I wonder whether corporate sponsorship is the key to attracting enough money to fund professional, full-time USA curlers.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-25-15 10:45AM
My three sons is offline Click Here to See the Profile for My three sons Find more posts by My three sons Add My three sons to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
My three sons
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: May 2013
Location:
Posts: 32

Fundamentally, the USA needs the HPP.
Your men's division is weak at best on an international scale. Countries such as CAN, SWE, SCO, SWI, CHN, NOR,are head and shoulders above and countries such as RUS, CZE, GER,DEN and USA are all competing for the last spot in Korea. KOR will get the host country spot.

WCF WORLD RANKINGS - MEN
2014-2015 WCF Member Association Points 2013-2014
1 Canada 986 1
2 Sweden 846 2
3 Scotland/Great Britain 766 3
4 Norway 731 4
5 China 560 6
6 Switzerland 554 5
7 Denmark 455 7
8 USA 397 8
9 Germany 368 9
10 Russia 333 10
11 Czech Republic 239 11
12 Japan 199 13


On the Ladies side, I am not sure if the HPP is required as much. It cannot hurt. Not sure it will have any impact for 2018 but should aid significantly by 2022.

WCF WORLD RANKINGS - WOMEN
2014-2015 WCF Member Association Points 2013-2014
1 Canada 950 1
2 Sweden 864 2
3 Switzerland 760 3
4 Scotland/GBR 678 4
5 China 508 5
6 Russia 503 7
7 Denmark 487 6
8 USA 470 8
9 Korea 422 9
10 Japan 387 10
11 Germany 317 11

The larger issue for the USCA is the current process to determine your World Representative. Using OOM points to determine this is obscene. On your ladies side, you have someone going to Worlds who has won NOTHING. The very reason the USCA put the points piece in was so a weak team did not get hot and win Nationals on a fluke. Well if they haven't demeaned the value of your National Championship. This piece needs reevaluation because your rep is going to get embarrassed in Japan.
On your mens side at least Shuster was both the points champion and the National Champion.
All for now.

Last edited by My three sons on 02-25-15 at 11:03AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-25-15 10:58AM
AlanMacNeill is offline Click Here to See the Profile for AlanMacNeill Click here to Send AlanMacNeill a Private Message Find more posts by AlanMacNeill Add AlanMacNeill to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
AlanMacNeill
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2011
Location:
Posts: 1064

Sure, the US needs *A* HPP. Some mechanism to make our best curlers better is not a bad thing at all, and no one disagrees with that.

The current argument in the US is whether we need *THIS* HPP...which puts all of the eggs in a very small number of what are perceived as politically selected baskets, and then, further, attempts to rig the national selection process to ensure that there is no way that an egg which isn't inside that basket can ever get laid.

Furthermore, it appears from the outside that the current HPP is more concerned with administrivia, power base building, and tracking than it is actual athlete improvement.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-25-15 12:02PM
dbsdbs is offline Click Here to See the Profile for dbsdbs Click here to Send dbsdbs a Private Message Find more posts by dbsdbs Add dbsdbs to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
dbsdbs
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

In response to interesting comments above

1. Cannot have a 'best of 3' to determine national champ. If USA curling is ever going to get tv coverage, there has to be a single game to determine champ.

2. Insufficient money is certainly part of the problem and sponsorship would be a great answer. We can argue that more success at world level is needed to attract more sponsor $$ but bobsled and skeleton have not been consistent medal sports either, in spite of recent wins. So how does USA curling get some real sponsor commitments? Why is USCA not able to turn curling's tv ratings in Olympics into meaningful sponsorships?

3. Using OOM points may be good for determining who can compete at nationals but it does not seem like a good benchmark for determining who goes to worlds. If indeed OOM points were chosen as the benchmark in order to avoid having a weaker team get hot and win nationals on a fluke, it seems using points has just transferred the timing of that fluke from nationals to a couple of spiels. I probably do not follow this closely enough but commenters have said team Sormunnen garnered its OOM points in November and thus is our world rep. If this is so, why is it better for USA world rep to be a team that get hot for a few weeks early in the season than for USA rep to be a team that got hot at the end of the season and won Nationals? USA needs more teams playing OOM events to make this a reasonable benchmark for determining world rep. And a final championship game on the ice will always be a better way to determine USA rep than will accumulated points that make the nationals nothing more than an exhibition.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-25-15 12:28PM
AlanMacNeill is offline Click Here to See the Profile for AlanMacNeill Click here to Send AlanMacNeill a Private Message Find more posts by AlanMacNeill Add AlanMacNeill to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
AlanMacNeill
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2011
Location:
Posts: 1064

1. Hmm...the NHL, NBA, MLB, NLL, and other leagues that have televised coverage of their finals series would disagree with you...the only leagues where there are single elim finals are Football and Soccer...all others get on tv with "IF necessary" games...

2. A few reasons...one is that the USOC hoards "The Olympics" unto itself...they have their own sponsors for all of the good categories, and the USCA can't engage competitors...Timmy Horton's couldn't sponsor the USCA Nationals even if they wanted to (and, honestly, I could see them thinking about it if they push this Burger King merger...), because McDonalds is the Fast Food for The Olympics, and since the USCA sold it's soul to the USOC for Olympic Access...well...we're screwed...

3. Concur. OOM to get into the field (so long as there are also opportunities for qualifying) is not a bad thing. OOM to determine who wins nationals (at least in terms of going to Worlds) is a bad thing. That right there ruins our televisability of the finals more than anything else.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-25-15 12:42PM
Asatru is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Asatru Click here to Send Asatru a Private Message Find more posts by Asatru Add Asatru to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Asatru
Knee-Slider

 

Registered: Feb 2015
Location:
Posts: 6

Stop giving Juniors a free ride into Big Boys/Girls Nationals. Handing Freebies to Developmental teams would limit other good teams from competing in OOM tournaments year round if they thought they'd lose their spot to a couple of JUNIOR teams.... that's embarrassing on so many levels

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-25-15 12:55PM
My three sons is offline Click Here to See the Profile for My three sons Find more posts by My three sons Add My three sons to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
My three sons
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: May 2013
Location:
Posts: 32

quote:
Stop giving Juniors a free ride into Big Boys/Girls Nationals. Handing Freebies to Developmental teams would limit other good teams from competing in OOM tournaments year round if they thought they'd lose their spot to a couple of JUNIOR teams.... that's embarrassing on so many levels


You are correct. If you have confidence that your HPP is working then lengthen the OOM spots into your National Championships. Last year on the ladies side you had 9 other teams sign up and had everyone travel to Bismark to qualify 6 spots. Can you water-down your field anymore? Limit it to 4 spots from OOM and 4 spots from Challenge, and your Nationals to 8 teams rather than 10. Oh but then your National Championship doesn't get the same point value as Canada's. Mmmm...could be a bit of a conspiracy.

I am not totally against the Jr. teams getting in because it does help leap frog them into the next level. Only issue is burning them out for Jr. Worlds. But your coaching staff is fully aware of that.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-25-15 01:08PM
CuriousCuz is offline Click Here to See the Profile for CuriousCuz Click here to Send CuriousCuz a Private Message Find more posts by CuriousCuz Add CuriousCuz to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
CuriousCuz
Knee-Slider

 

Registered: Feb 2015
Location: United States
Posts: 6

Slightly off topic, but it relates to sponsorship and money....

There has been essentially no reporting what so ever on nationals in the press. Star Tribune - Nothing! Did multiple searches and only thing I could find on the results was in the Hibbing Trib and Duluth News Trib.

USA Curling simply issuing a press release occasionally will not bring in fans or sponsors. They need to be rattling the sports reporters cages in every market that has a curling club. Daily calls, premade articles (reporters are lazy nowadays) photo upon photo. Throw enough of it against the wall and some will stick. When people know about it, they tend to want to continue to know about it.

Video clips daily in multiple formats submitted to all national press and web press. YouTube and Vimeo videos galore that lazy website publishers can link to and generate easy clicks.

What I see is either no effort or just plain old ignorance on how to deal with the media in todays age.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

02-25-15 01:46PM
dbsdbs is offline Click Here to See the Profile for dbsdbs Click here to Send dbsdbs a Private Message Find more posts by dbsdbs Add dbsdbs to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
dbsdbs
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

quote:
Originally posted by AlanMacNeill
1. Hmm...the NHL, NBA, MLB, NLL, and other leagues that have televised coverage of their finals series would disagree with you...the only leagues where there are single elim finals are Football and Soccer...all others get on tv with "IF necessary" games...

2. A few reasons...one is that the USOC hoards "The Olympics" unto itself...they have their own sponsors for all of the good categories, and the USCA can't engage competitors...Timmy Horton's couldn't sponsor the USCA Nationals even if they wanted to (and, honestly, I could see them thinking about it if they push this Burger King merger...), because McDonalds is the Fast Food for The Olympics, and since the USCA sold it's soul to the USOC for Olympic Access...well...we're screwed...

3. Concur. OOM to get into the field (so long as there are also opportunities for qualifying) is not a bad thing. OOM to determine who wins nationals (at least in terms of going to Worlds) is a bad thing. That right there ruins our televisability of the finals more than anything else.



1. Comparing curling to those sports is best example of apples vs oranges that I have ever seen.

2. Perhaps you are right but why are other sports able to get sponsorship deals while curling is not?

3. Yep, why would tv ever want to cover a meaningless final game?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

All times are GMT. The time now is . Post New Thread   Post A Reply
Page 1 of 6 -- Go to: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | »»   Last Thread   Next Thread
Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to thisThread

Forum Jump:
Rate This Thread:

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
 

Curling Scores

M: USA Curling Junior National Championships
Eau Claire, WI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: M5 -- Wed, Mar 27 -- 7:00pm CT
Fitzgerald Final
Guentzel (10) Watch Live Curling!
Cenzalli Final
Rose (10) Watch Live Curling!
Church Final
Lannoye (10) Watch Live Curling!
Hebert Final
Brenden (9) Watch Live Curling!
W: USA Curling Junior National Championships
Eau Claire, WI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: W4 -- Wed, Mar 27 -- 2:00pm CT
Scheel Final
Berg (9) Watch Live Curling!
Pekowitz Final
Berg (9) Watch Live Curling!
Schapman Final
Johnson (10) Watch Live Curling!
Giroux 12  Final
Viau (9) Watch Live Curling!
M: Canadian Mixed Doubles Curling Championship
Fredericton, NB
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF -- Fri, Mar 22 -- 1:00pm AT
Lott/Lott Final
Walk/Muyr (8) Watch Live Curling!
M: Swiss Junior Championships
Thun, SUI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF2 -- Sun, Mar 24 -- 3:00am ET
Caccivio Final
Brauchli 12  (EE)
Dryburgh Final
Ringgenberg (9)
W: Swiss Junior Championships
Thun, SUI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF2 -- Sun, Mar 24 -- 9:00am CET
Schwaller Final
Oberson (9)
Blackham Final
von Arx (9)
W: NWTCA Curling Club Championships
Fort Smith, NT
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 3 -- Sat, Mar 23 -- 11:00am MT
Stroeder Final
Delorey (7)
M: NWTCA Curling Club Championships
Fort Smith, NT
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 3 -- Sat, Mar 23 -- 1:00pm ET
Delorey Final
Lockhart (EE)
Full Scoreboard  |  Play Fantasy Pick'em!  

Recent News

Recent
Homan Brings Home Gold

Homan Brings Home Gold

Sydney, Canada - In front of a full house with over 4,000 spectators, Canada (photo: Stephen Fisher, World Curling) beat Switzerland by 7-5 to take gold at the BKT Tires World Women's Curling Championship 2024.

Curling Photos

Recent

Curling Blogs

Facebook Feed

Twitter Feed

To top ↑