Peter pleads, Ziggy launches & JR lectures on the Brits

[Frank Delicious]

Why does this thread keep name changing?

 

[some call me...tim?]

What's so bad about the ratings system? It might not be perfect, but I haven't seen a better alternative.

 

[VictorB]

PDGA-sanctioned events are provided liability insurance by the PDGA, a (maybe the) non-trivial benefit of sanctioning, unless you are one of those deluded souls that believe that the mathematically-bankrupt ratings system is worth more than teats on a bull.

I doubt insurance provided by a group that isn't actually running the tournament - let alone have an ambassador/official/employee there - could possibly be held accountable in a court of law. The clubs run the tournaments (except in rare cases) and are the ones that would be held liable, especially here since the parks are reserved under the club organization's name.

The ratings system isn't that bad.

I still think someone should start the ADGA.

 

[Timko]

The PDGA provides insurance to every participant in a sanctioned event.

 

[krazybronco]

I can attest to the insurance thing a guy in my group a couple of years ago hit a car and left a pretty large dent in a minivan and i asked the TD later what happend and also Brian what happpened (my dad is does body work and i help alot) and they both said that the car was fixed and the owner was happy so there is one instance when having the insurance did help the TD and also the player (who was a rec player)

 

[JHBlader86]

As much as I'd like to see an ADGA, I think we first need to work our way from the ground up and form an Amateur Committee within the PDGA that focuses on Ams needs by helping to create either regional Amateur Tours, or helping to promote Amateur only events, and attracting sponsors for Am only events. It would be pretty sweet though to see different regions with an amateur tour to help promote the sport alongside the pros National Tour.

 

[Working Stiff]

Peter is sort of a quack, so it makes me sad that I can see what he is saying. The PDGA has always been a organization based more on funneling the money of bad players into the pockets of top players as opposed to promoting the sport, and the pieces are in place for the Open players to make a push for a bigger slice of the pie.

I'm not really worried about it. I think the Open players are overestimating the size of the pie, and many of the moves they might make would drive players away from the PDGA and make the pie even smaller.

That being said, the PDGA isn't driving anything. The local clubs are the organizations that are attracting new players, and a higher % of them simply won't join the PDGA. Local clubs will get stronger, the PDGA will get weaker. That really doesn't scare me. Back in the day around 50% of the St. Louis Club belonged to the PDGA. That number is more like 20% now even with hosting an A tier that forces you to be a member to participate in. To me as the sport grows the PDGA becomes less relevant. If the PDGA wants to do things to speed up a process that is already happening, more power to them.

 

[Timko]

That being said, the PDGA isn't driving anything. The local clubs are the organizations that are attracting new players, and a higher % of them simply won't join the PDGA. Local clubs will get stronger, the PDGA will get weaker. That really doesn't scare me. Back in the day around 50% of the St. Louis Club belonged to the PDGA. That number is more like 20% now even with hosting an A tier that forces you to be a member to participate in. To me as the sport grows the PDGA becomes less relevant. If the PDGA wants to do things to speed up a process that is already happening, more power to them.

Winner winner chicken dinner.

 

[JR]

As much as I'd like to see an ADGA, I think we first need to work our way from the ground up and form an Amateur Committee within the PDGA that focuses on Ams needs by helping to create either regional Amateur Tours, or helping to promote Amateur only events, and attracting sponsors for Am only events. It would be pretty sweet though to see different regions with an amateur tour to help promote the sport alongside the pros National Tour.

If a split is some day deemed to be necessary a committee may be a good step if it is made up of the people that will form/run the ADGA initially so that they get experience. I'm not sure if the PDGA wants them to gain contacts to prospective sponsors though.

 

[Cgkdisc]

The PDGA has had an Amateur Committee off and on (currenty off) for around 18 years. But it had little activity when it had members and no one to head it up for most of the time. Most of the functions are covered by the Competition Committee which spends more time on Amateur and overall competition issues than Pro specific. There's a small NT Committee strictly about pro tour issues. The Womens Committee has had similar problems over the years with no one to head it up. The Senior Committee is new and has Don Dillon as a real go-getter heading it up.

 

[JHBlader86]

As much as I'd like to see an ADGA, I think we first need to work our way from the ground up and form an Amateur Committee within the PDGA that focuses on Ams needs by helping to create either regional Amateur Tours, or helping to promote Amateur only events, and attracting sponsors for Am only events. It would be pretty sweet though to see different regions with an amateur tour to help promote the sport alongside the pros National Tour.

If a split is some day deemed to be necessary a committee may be a good step if it is made up of the people that will form/run the ADGA initially so that they get experience. I'm not sure if the PDGA wants them to gain contacts to prospective sponsors though.

The split shouldnt be one where the ADGA and the PDGA are trying to compete against one another. The two organizations should simply be about working to promote the sport for their respective targets. The best solution, although still not possible at the moment, would be if the PDGA were able to create branches throughout the country instead of just one centralized location. If we had a PDGA North, South, East, West then we wouldnt have near as many issues as we do now.

 

[keltik1]

the more I think about things the more I see it like this: with ball golf there is the PGA (which handles ALL professional stuff), the USGA which is an optional organization open for anyone and then there are the local [Country]Clubs which handle the lion's share of amateur competition and play. I think it would be best if the PDGA dropped all amateurs and left the rest to local clubs and homegrown organizations. NC is famous for its HGT and we have several clubs in each major region to accommodate amateur competition. I'm sure it's the same in most other states. If it's not then maybe the guys on that particular local scene should band together so to speak.

If the AM side is gonna lose too much money from a split with the PDGA then maybe we should look to the AAU. IMHO getting disc golf recognized by the AAU would be a tremendous step in the right direction. Maybe the PDGA should sell the AM segment to the AAU. or make a contract or something.

 

[JR]

As much as I'd like to see an ADGA, I think we first need to work our way from the ground up and form an Amateur Committee within the PDGA that focuses on Ams needs by helping to create either regional Amateur Tours, or helping to promote Amateur only events, and attracting sponsors for Am only events. It would be pretty sweet though to see different regions with an amateur tour to help promote the sport alongside the pros National Tour.

If a split is some day deemed to be necessary a committee may be a good step if it is made up of the people that will form/run the ADGA initially so that they get experience. I'm not sure if the PDGA wants them to gain contacts to prospective sponsors though.

The split shouldnt be one where the ADGA and the PDGA are trying to compete against one another. The two organizations should simply be about working to promote the sport for their respective targets. The best solution, although still not possible at the moment, would be if the PDGA were able to create branches throughout the country instead of just one centralized location. If we had a PDGA North, South, East, West then we wouldnt have near as many issues as we do now.

I'm just afraid that from a sponsor point of view we're gonna seem like two smaller groups that are separate and thus less interesting source of revenue. And I'm not so sure that the ADGA/PDGA operation would run so smoothly thanks to partially different and potentially conflicting needs. What would the reason of creating ADGA be if there wasn't a problem currently because the PDGA is spread too thin? My opinion. There remains a lot to do and the staff ain't large enough IMO to exploit every opportunity. I just think that a split would divert too much power and staff to different activities at a time when there's too much on the plate already. Could the PDGA do better with the current resources? Yes just like any organization. But IMO the PDGA should be closer to some other organizations but are there other more skilled people to be staffing the PDGA available? I have no clue about that.

Should the PDGA be doing something else or changing priorities? Quite possibly but I'm not an expert on that except sponsors outside of the sport would help. Media visibility has really really worked for Finland. Our growth rate in players is probably the highest among countries with established player base if not the highest overall growth rate has been increasing each year and now there are estimates of over 30000 players vs 15000 last year. Major newspapers have written a lot of articles so basically most if not each Finn has had an opportunity to read about the sport. Radio interviews and TV coverage? Check. Done. Maybe the Finnish Frisbee Association should be consulted. Maybe the president Sami Poimala has interesting things to say. They've made progress and had success why not learn from them?

 

[JHBlader86]

As much as I'd like to see an ADGA, I think we first need to work our way from the ground up and form an Amateur Committee within the PDGA that focuses on Ams needs by helping to create either regional Amateur Tours, or helping to promote Amateur only events, and attracting sponsors for Am only events. It would be pretty sweet though to see different regions with an amateur tour to help promote the sport alongside the pros National Tour.

If a split is some day deemed to be necessary a committee may be a good step if it is made up of the people that will form/run the ADGA initially so that they get experience. I'm not sure if the PDGA wants them to gain contacts to prospective sponsors though.

The split shouldnt be one where the ADGA and the PDGA are trying to compete against one another. The two organizations should simply be about working to promote the sport for their respective targets. The best solution, although still not possible at the moment, would be if the PDGA were able to create branches throughout the country instead of just one centralized location. If we had a PDGA North, South, East, West then we wouldnt have near as many issues as we do now.

I'm just afraid that from a sponsor point of view we're gonna seem like two smaller groups that are separate and thus less interesting source of revenue. And I'm not so sure that the ADGA/PDGA operation would run so smoothly thanks to partially different and potentially conflicting needs. What would the reason of creating ADGA be if there wasn't a problem currently because the PDGA is spread too thin? My opinion. There remains a lot to do and the staff ain't large enough IMO to exploit every opportunity. I just think that a split would divert too much power and staff to different activities at a time when there's too much on the plate already. Could the PDGA do better with the current resources? Yes just like any organization. But IMO the PDGA should be closer to some other organizations but are there other more skilled people to be staffing the PDGA available? I have no clue about that.

Should the PDGA be doing something else or changing priorities? Quite possibly but I'm not an expert on that except sponsors outside of the sport would help. Media visibility has really really worked for Finland. Our growth rate in players is probably the highest among countries with established player base if not the highest overall growth rate has been increasing each year and now there are estimates of over 30000 players vs 15000 last year. Major newspapers have written a lot of articles so basically most if not each Finn has had an opportunity to read about the sport. Radio interviews and TV coverage? Check. Done. Maybe the Finnish Frisbee Association should be consulted. Maybe the president Sami Poimala has interesting things to say. They've made progress and had success why not learn from them?

That's why we dont need a split yet, but we need a permanent committee within the PDGA to oversee amateur growth specifically through more cooperation with local clubs. I know what clubs dont like to see is the PDGA's name put on their tournaments when the PDGA staff themselves have nothing to do with the tournament other than sanctioning it. What the committee and eventual ADGA would do is to actually show real support for these local clubs through marketing and sponsorship help. The committee/ADGA would be on their phones and computers contacting businesses in the area trying to attract sponsors instead of having the local club do all the work. It takes part of the burden off the club, and it would be a true ADGA event because the ADGA personally helped grow and oversee the tournament.

 

[Vegan Ray]

Every opinion here seems to favor a more sprawling, decentralized org (or orgs) to run our sport, and I couldn't disagree more. Whatever issues you have with the man (and there are many to be had), the PDGA never functioned more efficiently & sanely than when it was run by two people out of Brian Hoeniger's basement. What the org needs is not more committees, subcommittees, paid consultants, or, FSM forbid, a second org with the bloated bureaucracy (including the inevitable resource-leeching consultants & executives) that comes with it, but a leader with the sack to choose a focused course & a scaling back toward a monarchical system to allow him to implement it without having to kowtow to every special-interest group that wants a bigger piece of the extremely tiny pie. The culture of trying to please everybody all of the time, as well as allowing representatives of these 'disenfranchised' groups to dictate the course of what should be a professional organization, need to go.

 

[JR]

As much as I'd like to see an ADGA, I think we first need to work our way from the ground up and form an Amateur Committee within the PDGA that focuses on Ams needs by helping to create either regional Amateur Tours, or helping to promote Amateur only events, and attracting sponsors for Am only events. It would be pretty sweet though to see different regions with an amateur tour to help promote the sport alongside the pros National Tour.

If a split is some day deemed to be necessary a committee may be a good step if it is made up of the people that will form/run the ADGA initially so that they get experience. I'm not sure if the PDGA wants them to gain contacts to prospective sponsors though.

The split shouldnt be one where the ADGA and the PDGA are trying to compete against one another. The two organizations should simply be about working to promote the sport for their respective targets. The best solution, although still not possible at the moment, would be if the PDGA were able to create branches throughout the country instead of just one centralized location. If we had a PDGA North, South, East, West then we wouldnt have near as many issues as we do now.

I'm just afraid that from a sponsor point of view we're gonna seem like two smaller groups that are separate and thus less interesting source of revenue. And I'm not so sure that the ADGA/PDGA operation would run so smoothly thanks to partially different and potentially conflicting needs. What would the reason of creating ADGA be if there wasn't a problem currently because the PDGA is spread too thin? My opinion. There remains a lot to do and the staff ain't large enough IMO to exploit every opportunity. I just think that a split would divert too much power and staff to different activities at a time when there's too much on the plate already. Could the PDGA do better with the current resources? Yes just like any organization. But IMO the PDGA should be closer to some other organizations but are there other more skilled people to be staffing the PDGA available? I have no clue about that.

Should the PDGA be doing something else or changing priorities? Quite possibly but I'm not an expert on that except sponsors outside of the sport would help. Media visibility has really really worked for Finland. Our growth rate in players is probably the highest among countries with established player base if not the highest overall growth rate has been increasing each year and now there are estimates of over 30000 players vs 15000 last year. Major newspapers have written a lot of articles so basically most if not each Finn has had an opportunity to read about the sport. Radio interviews and TV coverage? Check. Done. Maybe the Finnish Frisbee Association should be consulted. Maybe the president Sami Poimala has interesting things to say. They've made progress and had success why not learn from them?

That's why we dont need a split yet, but we need a permanent committee within the PDGA to oversee amateur growth specifically through more cooperation with local clubs. I know what clubs dont like to see is the PDGA's name put on their tournaments when the PDGA staff themselves have nothing to do with the tournament other than sanctioning it. What the committee and eventual ADGA would do is to actually show real support for these local clubs through marketing and sponsorship help. The committee/ADGA would be on their phones and computers contacting businesses in the area trying to attract sponsors instead of having the local club do all the work. It takes part of the burden off the club, and it would be a true ADGA event because the ADGA personally helped grow and oversee the tournament.

I tend to agree that a split may one day be necessary but lets wait until we can make this sport viable as a profession for the best you name the amount of players. That would mean that the name Professional in the DGA would be merited and if it means TV exposure in the US and better yet in many places around the world the better. I think that when the pro tour gains enough income to support themselves and they still act as ambassadors to the sport benefiting every player that would be a good time to look hard if a split is necessary. Unless somebody can provide good reasons as to why everyone would benefit from an earlier split.

 

[John Rock]

Modeling the org after the Finnish example may not work in the US. When I played in the US Open in 1992, I got partnered with a guy from Norway for DDC and Freestyle. He was really cool to hang around with, and even though we had a language barrier (he knew a little English, I know zero Norwegian), I learned some of how they operate there across the pond. He said the government helps with Frisbee sports, even providing an indoor place to play in the winter. Their clubs seemed to set up differently than they are in the US, much more fromal. Things may be different now, I don't know. That was almost 20 years ago, but those guys from Norway and that part of the world sure did have some mad Frisbee skills.

 

[JHern]

90% is diverted to Open Pros? Is that true? If so, this is a serious blow to the PDGA's image!

Damn, and I was just about to finally join the PDGA! Guess I'll shelve that idea until they come clean about all of this (and censoring Peter Shive is NOT a good way of dealing with it). I'm not going to be an Open Pro (and I'm already 37)...no use in diverting my money to an organization that won't be supporting programs that I'm interested in seeing funded, and that ignores the vast majority of those who pay for it all to begin with.

I personally think 90% of PDGA funds should be spent on new course development and growth of the sport at the grass roots. Seriously, let's continue to grow the sport, then the fame and fortune for open pros will follow later, when it is ready. This fruit isn't ripe, so don't pick it! These guys are way too impatient! The sport is not yet at the level where they can make as much money as they'd like. Instead, by sucking the blood out of other important efforts to feed their lust for fame and fortune, these guys will slow progress and might end up destroying the very organization they depend upon to better shepherd the sport into the future.

Don't get me wrong, I love to compete in tournaments now. But, for now there are a lot of fun tournaments I can play where I don't need a PDGA membership. And if these policies continue to head in the direction Peter thinks they are headed, then I can foresee a lot more tournaments in the future that go away from the PDGA. They don't own the sport, so they can't tell us not to do that. We still hold all the power in our hands.

 

[JHern]

In other words, what Peter describes is that the PDGA is becoming a Ponzi scheme. Those at the top extract funds from those coming in at the bottom, and this is unsustainable as well as disrespectful to the organization and the sport.

This is just like how corporate boards across the US have leached away all value from their institutions for their own personal gains, and left in ruins the once important roles they used to play in our society. This is the same corrosive US organizational culture that has destroyed almost every sector of our country, from education, to gov't, to finance and banking, to manufacturing, etc., etc..

 

[Jesse B 707]

Every opinion here seems to favor a more sprawling, decentralized org (or orgs) to run our sport, and I couldn't disagree more. Whatever issues you have with the man (and there are many to be had), the PDGA never functioned more efficiently & sanely than when it was run by two people out of Brian Hoeniger's basement. What the org needs is not more committees, subcommittees, paid consultants, or, FSM forbid, a second org with the bloated bureaucracy (including the inevitable resource-leeching consultants & executives) that comes with it, but a leader with the sack to choose a focused course & a scaling back toward a monarchical system to allow him to implement it without having to kowtow to every special-interest group that wants a bigger piece of the extremely tiny pie. The culture of trying to please everybody all of the time, as well as allowing representatives of these 'disenfranchised' groups to dictate the course of what should be a professional organization, need to go.

word