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.
02-25-15 02:37PM |
|
fanofcurling
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Mar 2009
Location:
Posts: 81 |
I've read remarks that say, "let's give this (the HPP) a chance, it's only two years into the program". Well, the HPP was established when they hired the Director in 2011 (I think!). It's only been the last two years that the HPP included OOM and only one year that the HPP staff picked it's own players to create it's own teams and essentially "called all the shots". IF they continue to tweak the program, I guess that's one way to justify continuing "it". But sometimes difficult decisions need to be made and say, "the path we are going down is wrong".
We can talk about all kinds of creative solutions and many are great ideas. I say, "Go ahead and keep your HPP staff and teams, but GIVE US BACK THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP HEADS UP ON THE ICE." Winner goes to Worlds.
IF their teams win, GREAT! I'm happy for them and the program.
BUT, maybe some other teams have other ideas of what it takes to win. If they are successful in "their program", then they should be rewarded.
With the most recent posting of how the Continental Cup selection will be handled, it's obvious the HPP want TOTAL control over everything, because you know they know best. Erica Brown and her team deserves to attend that event. They got screwed for Worlds, give them that event.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
02-25-15 02:44PM |
|
ChiefIceMinion
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Nov 2012
Location: In the crawlspace
Posts: 83 |
quote: Originally posted by dbsdbs
2. Perhaps you are right but why are other sports able to get sponsorship deals while curling is not?
CuriousCuz was spot on, I think, with a primary cause of the lack of sponsors. There's no media visibility, even on a regional level. Yes, you might need $$$ to get actual events on TV, but print and local TV coverage is something that you can usually generate at the expense of a few phone calls and no cash outlay.
Sponsors won't put out advertising dollars unless their brands are going to get media exposure.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
02-25-15 03:26PM |
|
dbsdbs
Drawmaster
Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812 |
quote: Originally posted by ChiefIceMinion
CuriousCuz was spot on, I think, with a primary cause of the lack of sponsors. There's no media visibility, even on a regional level. Yes, you might need $$$ to get actual events on TV, but print and local TV coverage is something that you can usually generate at the expense of a few phone calls and no cash outlay.
Sponsors won't put out advertising dollars unless their brands are going to get media exposure.
Agree. For many years, USA Curling was happy to get any mention in the media, be it a short clip on TV or a blurb on the back page of a newspaper sport section. Has that mentality changed yet? Clearly sending out press releases is not going to work by itself.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
02-25-15 04:03PM |
|
brund
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Apr 2014
Location:
Posts: 17 |
quote: Originally posted by AlanMacNeill
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.
Well said you hit the nail on the head.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
02-25-15 06:23PM |
|
tuck
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: St. Thomas, North Dakota
Posts: 2613 |
Dang, Brund...you're killing me. What did I forget? Did you dress Barcome up in drag and win a Mixed title?
Sorry to interrupt a good conversation. I'll behave now. It's just been killing me.
Ben Tucker
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
02-25-15 08:54PM |
|
mcgregorm89
Swing Artist
Registered: Apr 2014
Location: Kingston, ON
Posts: 210 |
quote: Originally posted by dbsdbs
1. Comparing curling to those sports is best example of apples vs oranges that I have ever seen.
How so, all of these sports didn't just become popular one day and curling and the Nll are probably on the same level media wise.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
02-25-15 08:55PM |
|
Gerry
CZ Founder
Registered: Sep 2002
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 4002 |
It's the carrot vs the stick. USA teams don't play enough high level competition and giving teams funding didn't do it.
In the past, teams were handed funding dollars after winning the USA Nationals. Instead of using it to ecpand their seasons, it was generally used to pay for a similar season the next year.
I know of one team who outright said they would be banking half the funding for the following season as they didn't know if they would be funded again the next year.
So the system changed to the stick. If teams want to be the Worlds rep, you better go out and earn it all year long. Maybe not ideal, but it's definitely pushing teams to play more in Canada.
__________________
CurlingZone
Everything...Curling!
Please click on our sponsors' banners periodically, as visiting their sites helps keep CurlingZone.com Free!
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
02-25-15 10:02PM |
|
SPMFromPCC
Swing Artist
Registered: Jun 2007
Location:
Posts: 440 |
Those that can afford it, anyways. All the rest just say "Screw that, it's out of my price range."
Just calling it like I see it.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
02-25-15 11:24PM |
|
tuck
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: St. Thomas, North Dakota
Posts: 2613 |
Gerry, that's only "mostly" true.
Funded teams before this particular HPProgram did often not increase their tour schedule. However, all funded teams had to have their plans approved. Many got approval for subpar schedules. So the carrot did have a stick back in those days...the stick was just shamefully ignored.
I do not want a part in this debate. I will, however, point out a compromise when I see the chance:
The goal should be to have more teams in the WCT Top 50. If we do well enough, there will be tons of Points available at our National Championships. That will return us to having our National Champs represent us at Worlds.
So there is the question. How do we get more teams into the Top 50?
If, as Gerry and others have alluded to, the current HPP was designed in part to ENCOURAGE teams to do more WCT events, then it is failing. Fewer teams are going north of the border. If it is failing, what can we do to reverse the trend?
Ben Tucker
more questions than answers
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
02-25-15 11:40PM |
|
IMWright
Swing Artist
Registered: Dec 2014
Location:
Posts: 206 |
Curious... Not a peep in the recent US Curling news about the new national champions...
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
02-25-15 11:50PM |
|
dbsdbs
Drawmaster
Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812 |
quote: Originally posted by IMWright
Curious... Not a peep in the recent US Curling news about the new national champions...
Probably went to press before Nationals -- it is both print and electronic.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
02-25-15 11:55PM |
|
Grat
Hitting Paint
Registered: Mar 2014
Location:
Posts: 107 |
quote: Originally posted by IMWright
Curious... Not a peep in the recent US Curling news about the new national champions...
Nothing to see here. To get in the mail this week it would have gone to print before the championships.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
02-26-15 07:53AM |
|
AlanMacNeill
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Sep 2011
Location:
Posts: 1064 |
There's a relatively easy fix....
Switch the polarity of the incentives...
Instead of "The HPP points leader goes to Worlds, if they place high enough at Nationals"...something like this (some modifications around the edges probably make sense)
At the conclusion of the United States National Championships, the United States National Team will be determined by the following Criteria (in this order):
1st: If the Winner of the USNC is ranked among the top 4 United States teams in the current Curling Order of Merit (including any points awarded on the OOM for the USNC) or is ranked in the top 15 teams in the World, they will be the USNT.
2nd: If not, then If the team that comes in 2nd in the USNC is ranked among the top 3 United States teams in the current Curling Order of Merit, or is ranked in the top 12 teams in the World, they will be the USNT.
3rd: If not, then If the team that comes in 3rd in the USNC is ranked among the top 2 United States teams in the current Curling Order of Merit, or is ranked in the top 10 teams in the world, they will be the USNT
4th: If not, then if the team that comes in 4th in the USNC is ranked as the top United States team in the current Curling Order of merit, or is ranked in the top 10 teams in the world, they will be the USNT
5th: If all of the above are not met, then the winner of the USNC becomes the USNT.
So now it's "The Winner of Nationals is the rep, if they have enough OOM points to qualify" rather than the other way around. Teams will fight for OOM points to make it so that they can be top 4 at Nationals and have a chance. We send our best team that has done well both at nationals and OOM combined, rather than effectively eliminating one as an issue because of the other.
It's also equivalent, roughly, to how sports like track and field do it...the USTFA sends the top placers in trials, if they have an adequate qualifying time (which, generally, if you're going to win nationals, you will). If the top placeers don't have qualifying times, they take the best who do have them. If no one has a qualifying time, they send the champ (and try like hell to get them a QT in the gap between team selection and Worlds)
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
02-26-15 11:44AM |
|
VAcurler
Hitting Paint
Registered: Jan 2012
Location:
Posts: 136 |
quote: Originally posted by AlanMacNeill
So now it's "The Winner of Nationals is the rep, if they have enough OOM points to qualify" rather than the other way around. Teams will fight for OOM points to make it so that they can be top 4 at Nationals and have a chance. We send our best team that has done well both at nationals and OOM combined, rather than effectively eliminating one as an issue because of the other.
If the Director of the HPP were to agree to this change, wouldn't it make sense to say Top 50 OOM or Top 4 US? If we have 5 teams in the top 50 (and I have no idea if that is possible) I think any of them should be eligible to be Team USA at Worlds
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
02-26-15 12:05PM |
|
tuck
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: St. Thomas, North Dakota
Posts: 2613 |
Interesting, but that changes format more than the program itself.
Harder to fit inside a budget is: How do we get a half dozen teams of each gender into the WCT Top 50? Remember that it also has to be acceptable to the USOC.
I do like the thinking behind "Top 50, win Nationals and you can go to Worlds" concept.
Ben Tucker
instigator, not participant
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
02-26-15 12:06PM |
|
AlanMacNeill
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Sep 2011
Location:
Posts: 1064 |
Like I said, some modifications around the edges would be legit and make sense...and I could see "Top 50 world" rahter than "top 5 US" or the like as legit...
My point is basically, we send our champion, so long as they've established a flag on the ratings list...if they havne't, we send the closest thing to our champion that has done so...
but the determinant isn't OOM > US Champs, it is, and should be US Champs < OOM
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
02-26-15 12:15PM |
|
AlanMacNeill
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Sep 2011
Location:
Posts: 1064 |
quote: Originally posted by tuck
Interesting, but that changes format more than the program itself.
Harder to fit inside a budget is: How do we get a half dozen teams of each gender into the WCT Top 50? Remember that it also has to be acceptable to the USOC.
So the HPP is (probably) never going to be able to support more curlers fully than they do now...and that's not really a negotiable thing.
Personally, I'd see value in debating the question:
Is it better to fund 6 teams at 100%, or 12 teams at 50%? (or even 24 teams at 25%?)
If you really want to incent teams to climb the OOM ladder (and really, that's what we're incenting...it's only "go to Canada" because that's where the OOM points are currently...if we could get to the top 50 staying in Hibbard, we would, I am sure)...put the cash on the line...
Take $200,000 of the HPP money...designate it to be awarded like this, with no strings attached:
Top US OOM Men's team at the end of the season: $50,000
Top US OOM Women's team at the end of the season: $50,000
2nd Men's team: $30,000
2nd Women's team: $30,000
3rd Men's team: $15,000
3rd Women's team: $15,000
4th Men's team: $5,000
4th Women's team: $5,000
Voila, you've just incented the hell out of the OOM
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
02-26-15 01:11PM |
|
Gerry
CZ Founder
Registered: Sep 2002
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 4002 |
quote: Originally posted by SPMFromPCC
Those that can afford it, anyways. All the rest just say "Screw that, it's out of my price range."
Just calling it like I see it.
1. Practice and train. Throw rocks every day, hit the gym and get into curling shape. John Morris did a book on it which is a great resource.
2. Go win the USA events, bank your winnings towards a bigger schedule.
3. Cut costs where you can as you expand your schedule. While it's a long drive, events in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Ontario are accessible.
4. Seek out sponsors to help you with travel costs as you build your profile. Just like practicing, put together a package and approach possible sponsors. Microsponsorships raised a significant amount of money for Team Gemmell in less than a month.
If you're doing that and not succeeding, then it's not meant to be. If you're not doing all that, you're not trying hard enough.
Part 4 is the only part that's harder to do in the USA than Canada. It's not impossible though. 5-10K goes a long way to help supplement a developmental season. Find sponsors who might front your season, and they get it all payed back when you win. With all the hype around curling, offer to do some learn to curl events for businesses as part of sponsorship.
Brad Jacobs did it and they're Olympic Champions. And they drove to EVERY event, more than 7 hours for each time they played. At least in midwest, you still have events within a reasonable drive to add to your schedule.
__________________
CurlingZone
Everything...Curling!
Please click on our sponsors' banners periodically, as visiting their sites helps keep CurlingZone.com Free!
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
02-26-15 03:10PM |
|
chubb
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 52 |
I am challenged to write or not to write.
1. Winner of the USA National Championships should ALWAYS represent the USA at Worlds. Period the end. Do not devalue what is established as the paramount event in the USA. If the USCA wants to stack the deck with their HPP teams. No problem as long as GI Jane and GI Joe have an equitable opportunity to win. Maybe the final should be best 2 out of 3. Then the opportunity of a fluke is greatly diminished. I would rather take the hot team than the team that couldn't get it done.
2. Guertsy I totally disagree with your point about teams taking funding and not spending it all. I have never ever seen Erika or her teams ever end up in the black even after funding. Its all been spent and then some.
3. USCA use of funds. IMO sending one team to Europe with coaches to the tune of $15K is not a good use of funds. Not only is it a bit of a boon doggle, the monies could be better spent on a USA event to attrack teams to the USA and now 8 - 10 USA teams benefit from the use of funds.
4. USA Teams and International Travel. - IMO whoever has made the decisions for USA teams pre-Olympic and pre-National international travel to events has done so without regard to how the body transitions and the recuperation time. My examples are Debbie in 2010, Erika in 2014 and Nina this past year for Nationals. As a person that has done alot of international travel, it takes the body weeks to months to recoup. You need your teams well rested and dying to get on the ice.
I wish the Juniors luck this upcoming week in Estonia cause I know they have played alot.
Cheers
Tet
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
02-26-15 03:51PM |
|
tuck
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: St. Thomas, North Dakota
Posts: 2613 |
Excellent post, Chubb. Almost good enough to have me to forgive you marrying a young Erika and spiriting her across the border...but not quite.
Alan, I have to strongly disagree with your budget and plan. Not that it lacks logic, but it's "been there tried that didn't work".
Alan states that we HAVE to send teams north because that's were the Point, the money and the good competition reside. I strongly disagree.
We can't afford to send dozens of teams to Canada the 5 or 6 times necessary. Also, we suck at picking out the correct teams to send...we've done poorly at it for 15 years now so the trend has become a certainty.
We could, however, bring the top competition, money and Points down here to the USA. The US Open was exactly what we need. Curl Mesabi did a great job in 2013. IF IF IF we could find budgetary help for these cash spiels, then all of our teams could do this appropriate training and garner Points.
IF we want 5 or 6 teams of each gender to make the WCT Top 50, I see no other way.
Then we can attach appropriate Coaching to these events to a far wider collection of teams.
Attracting Points south of the border is the best way to implement Gerry's steps. This is what would make it achievable to what talent we do have. This is what would broaden our base and fill out Nationals with World caliber teams.
Ben Tucker
sucked into another curling debate...dang you, Chubb
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
02-26-15 04:14PM |
|
brund
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Apr 2014
Location:
Posts: 17 |
Tuck I have been waiting for somebody to post that. Blain showed us that if you put up the cash they will come, but we already new that. The best part of that is the up and coming teams that cant go to Canada much can play some of the best here and that helps everybody and not just hp teams. Best bang for the buck.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
02-26-15 05:37PM |
|
runinrock
Harvey Hacksmasher
Registered: Jul 2013
Location: 216
Posts: 41 |
Tet,
Is there a like button on here? Spot on
__________________
-Mike Moore
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
02-27-15 08:44AM |
|
AlanMacNeill
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Sep 2011
Location:
Posts: 1064 |
Two quibbles with your statements, Tuck...
1. "We've tried that"...really? I don't recall any Open Cash on the Barrelhead for OOM rankings in the past...yeah, we've awarded money to teams and said "do what you will with it", but not based purely on performance, and really, not without strings.
2. "Alan says we have to go to Canada"...not quite...I said we *currently* have to, because that's where the points are *right now*. I've long thought that if someone would pony up the bucks for a decent paying spiel circuit around the US, teams would flock (it's a point of capitalism...talent goes where the money is...), and then we have the local advantages...but it hasn't happened yet (and I don't think the USCA is creative enough to make it happen).
A circuit of 8-10 Arena events, scheduled to avoid national playdowns and Grand Slams (although personally, I think withiin a couple of years the Grand Slams would be *part* of said circuit, now 12-14 events in length), with purses around $250,000 per event (very doable...game shows have bigger prize budgets for less airtime...), each event holding 32 teams, with 8-12 of those spots reserved for open qualifiers (held the week before at a local club), and then an additional purse for yearly champions...yeah, that would get some interest.
You could probably get that on ESPN too...
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
02-27-15 06:36PM |
|
tuck
Super Rockchucker
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: St. Thomas, North Dakota
Posts: 2613 |
Um...yeah...we tried that. I was in place when I was hitting the circuit. Ed Lukowich program to incentivize teams to head north. Not a bad program. Not the worst we've ever had. Know your history.
I'm glad you like the thought of bringing more Points to the USA, because we have a huge challenge in front of us: How do we sell this idea to the USOC? They don't fund competitions.
We need imaginative minds to formulate a HPP that builds the tour within reach of all of our teams, yet is acceptable to the USOC. Not an easy thing. I will be forever in debt to whomever can draw it up.
Derek Brown's initial thoughts when becoming the HP Director was along these lines. I don't know if he ever penciled out a true plan with a budget. The Fort Wayne Cash that had SUCH a good field for the Women's was his doing. We need more of that. A lot more of that.
Ben Tucker
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is . |
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|