NUFL

[Guest]

The ultimate forum for talking about Ultimate Frisbee. Aimed at bringing new life to the world of Ultimate Frisbee discussions, UltiTalk.Com (UT) combines both regional and international topics in one friendly place. So say hello to UT: The International Ultimate Frisbee forum.

Sorry Guest, you are banned from posting or sending personal messages on this forum.

We have had numerous SPAM infiltrations from your IP Address range. If you are an UltiTalk member and/or feel this error is incorrect, please contact us at banned [at] ultitalk [dot] com and we will look into the situation ASAP.

[Staples]

Lets start a new thread to talk NUFL. Those who want to discuss Ultitalk vs. aus.sport.frisbee etc should also start a new thread.
Worthwhile getting everyone together on this issue somewhere...

My last post on NUFL was:

NUFL allocations still being worked out? Doesn't it come straight from Nats?
WA should get a bid given they beat all QLD, ACT and SA teams this year.

[Drag]

well i think that should play a part, but a better reason for having one in the western states is because they are so far away, and it is unreasonable to expect them to travel east 3 times, it just evens it out.
And you cant say i am bias as i am in VIC.

D

[Staples]

Jangles mentions in the Nats thread that QLD will be stronger at NUFL.

I'm sure many teams can say that, we only had 6 of 12 men from Sublime WUCC team make the trip to Melb and JD was out injured.
My question is, what is the process for qualifying for NUFL? It must be written somewhere?

[littletom]

There effectively is no "process" or policy pre-defined about qualifying for NUFL.

In part, this has been because every NUFL in the past 3 years has been modified to fit the world clubs agenda.

Without this unifying theme this year, there has been lots of talk about the upcoming NUFL and how it is to be run and under what rational. Most of this discussion has taken place on the AFDA-HP yahoogroups list

A lot of the suggestions put forward there have been mentioned here already. There is a selection of things that I *do* know and a selection of stuff I can make probable comments about but a lot of it is speculation until the board and Pottsy make their policy release this week.

Okay to begin:
-NUFL teams have not previously been based on state allocations or state teams. They have been club teams, largely in line with the Men's and Women's club teams that went to World Clubs. Discussions about state teams have taken place but there has not been a strong show of support for any proposal for figuring out teams for NUFL as yet.

-NUFL allocations will probably not be based on results from nationals. This was a suggestion made to the HP list, as a simple way of figuring who should play but again "there has not been a strong show of support for any proposal for figuring out teams for NUFL as yet." However, because this policy was not in place before nationals, it will be unlikely to come about, as teams may have pursued their nationals campaigns differently if the policy was in effect. Nevertheless, still a very viable option for deciding future NUFLs.

-NUFL locations have *not* been decided. The Canberra one mentioned was organised by me at the start of 2006, so its old news. The locations mentioned on the NUFL website are old.

-NUFL is seen by some of its chief organisers as a venue for conducting initial selections and training for the 2008 National squad going to Vancouver. This has been a hotly debated issue. While there has been some opposition to this idea, no alternative for selections/training has been proposed and so NUFL will probably be linked to the selection process

-There is a limited amount of NUFL fatigue in the Eastern state. Basically, people are whinging about money/time etc. The usual. Of course, they'll ultimately put up and play anyway...

-The format is likely to be five or six teams with 12-14 regular players and 3-4 free agents each. The only four teams that are certainities for the comp are Fak, Chilly, Barefoot and the yet to be named QLD team. (Which might play as firestorm? Jangles?) If required the comp might even be limited to five teams but no more then six are considered. Newcastle and Canberra don't have enough interest for their own teams, Deathstar will not happen and Heads of State have indicated some interest in playing.

Well thats about all I know.

Feel free to question me further if somethings unclear.

-Tom

[Staples]

Thanks Tom,
Yeah, I realize there is talk on the HP group but that just raises the question about where we should be discussing all these issues. I guess it will be the HP list so will try and get myself added to that group.
Anyhow, that aside, you answer is about what I expected.

As for not using Nats for NUFL qualification or "there has not been a strong show of support for any... blah blah blah", I find this a bit strange. What's the point of nationals if we don't rank teams using it? As for teams who would have structured their lists differently, yes good point, but I have no understanding of going to Nats with a team other than one structured to get the highest placing possible. You guys chose a different path and that was your option.

Why would QLD/Firestorm get a team and not WA?

[Chris]

[simmo]

Why would QLD/Firestorm get a team and not WA?

Cost sharing. Having a WA team would make fees go up a bit. WA players can still get drafted by other teams though.

NUFL was started as a way to develop teams for World Clubs last year, but for this year it's probably going to be the first stage of selections for Worlds 08. The discussion that's going on at a board level at the moment is whether not attending NUFL will mean you get looked over for Worlds selection. There hasn't been a definitive decision made, but there'll be some announcement via email (and Pottsy's beloved aus.sport.frisbee) this week as Piers is chomping at the bit to get things underway.

[Jangles]

Well I have had a positive email from Mr Neild and assuming most of the Nats boys come we will be called Firestorm. As for a WA club coming i say you talk to your members and see how many people will commit themselves to 3 weekends. I do admit you guys had a good team at Nats but would the team get stronger for NUFL.

[Staples]

Don't know if we would get a better team to NUFL due to cost but our best player JD was on the sideline at Nats and 6 of 12 men from the Sublime team from WUCC didn't go to Melb.

[littletom]

Again, I do know for fact that Newwie do not have the player support to play NUFL. They have six players trying out (Tatts, Tim L, Hobbit, Dave Jarrot, Chris boy (Lavis) and some chump called johnno holmes) for the National team and the rest are more focused on a break or mixed.

Again, both Firestorm and FU (Canberra) may have approached nationals differently or do so in the future if NUFL team qualification becomes a factor but no policy will be applied retroactively to a past tournament. Nevertheless, Canberra is not interested in having a team.

I think the debate about having a WA team will be less based on whether or not there is space for the team, (There is no 6th team at the moment) but instead whether or not including that team will come up positive in a cost-benefit analysis (ie, is it worth paying for the cross-country airfares to bring Sublime over instead of 5-6 players as free agents) I'm not endorsing that view, I'm just saying thats what it will probably come down too.

Nevertheless, as a possible free agent, I'm keen to see how things will pan out.

Crap, must run to class!

[Dens]

Being a West Australian player I'll add into this debate. 

I think nationals needs to count for something here, if NUFL is going to be a teams based event.  While I except teams had a different approach and considered development (although I'm still perplexed as to why? ... it is the national tournament), this expectation that we can sit out Nationals and wait for NUFL is unrealistic and unfair for other teams and maintains a "stagnant" status quo.  The arguement over what full strength squads could and couldn't acheive is all well and good but numerous teams are in this bracket

Additionally if we did go down that path of picking up unless you are an out and out star who would pick you up?

[ulty_arnie]

First off, debating the recent Nationals results and how these can be used to decide team allocations for NUFL is far from useful.  This criteria was not set up beforehand and therefore teams did not plan for it.  I know personally, our team was made as a rebuilding year and was happy with its 8th place finish, with little effort put into building the most competitive team possible for our region. 

With this, if we want to go on the debate each team's potential growth and possible future achievements, then we are wasting each others time.  You can try and justify this and that, saying someone is your best player and was injured and 6 of 12 whoevers didn't come, but then going back to even earlier results, in a completely different division mind you, Sublime lost to Bootius, the Brisbane team, in every tournament they met during the lead up to worlds and also placed lower at Worlds!  This isn't to brag or whatnot, but to show this is a pointless debate to ensue.  Lets focus on what is known and controllable.  Queensland definitely has enough interest for a highly competitive team for NUFL.  We can afford it and make it to each event.  Now, the next step would be to see who else has full teams of interest and can afford to go.  If WA, and Sydney, and Newcastle, and Melbourne, and so on and so forth, then we have our list of possible teams and work our way down to 6 teams from there, if six is the number.  But just debating why QLD might get a team and WA might not, is numbing.  Lets try and work together to make sure NUFL gets the most competitive teams into the event as possible, and stop fighting like schoolies about which team is better or whatnot.  The truth is, whether QLD or WA gets a team or not, people from both regions will get to play if they want to as free agents anyway. 

Do we know that Fakulti, Chilly, and Barefoot are in for NUFL for sure?  I would assume so and personally believe they should all get to go. 

Anyways, try and be more objective and cooperative, and we can reach a end result beneficial for all parties.

[Chris]

[littletom]

Chilly and Fak have said they will field teams whatever way NUFL is run

On last account (pre-nats) Barefoot have said they would prefer a NUFL that includes a bunch of free agents because they don't have the numbers to go it alone.

HoS is a possiblity and they are doing the sums to see if they have the player support, maybe with some SA support.

I am certain that Qld will be allowed to and can raise a team.

There is a good chance that every team will have to take a certain amount of free agents, from Canberra, Newwie, WA, one from the gong, maybe SA and Mike Baker.

Thats five. Newwie and Canberra are out, WA would be the next appropriate team but if individual players have to bare the cost-sharing burden of their travel, interest in NUFL will die out as the cost increases over $200-250. However, if AFDA use some of its cash (It has a lot due to World Clubs) it could cover the gap between a melb-sydney and a perth-sydney airfare and then no one would be concerned over WA playing any more then they bitch about melbourne or brisbane playing. (So there would still be some bitching...just not any that people listen too)

One way or another, the *mens* NUFL is going to be rammed through. The *womens* NUFL on the other hand....may not happen at all

-Tom

[Joe - Barefoot]

Speaking to the other Barefoot guys, we're eager to field a NUFL team.

We would probably need to pick-up a couple of free agents though.
At the moment I reckon we could field a definite team of around 15, without free agents. 
Although I haven't spoken to every single player from Nats though.