Site Links

Home
News
Events
Teams
Rankings
Polls
Players
Alumni
Hall of Fame
Archive

Who's Online
0 registered and 32 anonymous users online.
Top Posters
620
Karl Nickolai
432
westernalum
327
DMAC
326
uffleshuffle
267
rymac300
Page 6 of 7 « First<34567>
Topic Options
#7812 - 02/02/10 09:36 AM Re: Rule Changes - teams and eligible student-athletes [Re: houdini84]
footpba Offline
forum member


Registered: 04/04/07
Posts: 94
Loc: missouri
Karl, at this point I think we can agree to disagree.

There is only a very few NAIA schools that this rule would impact, and even I would say the effect would negligible. Not many schools can field more than 3 teams.

The rule has been voted on, best for all to move onů
_________________________
Coach Lightfoot
LU Bowling

Top
#7813 - 02/02/10 04:01 PM Re: Rule Changes - teams and eligible student-athletes [Re: footpba]
Greg Offline
forum member


Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 227
Loc: Ann Arbor, MI
Hooray for cooperation, but Karl's post really drove home to me the fact that this decision was made by everybody except valid college bowler input. It seems to me that surveying players themselves should have been an important part of the equation. Oh well.



Edited by Greg (02/02/10 04:01 PM)
_________________________
Greg Nicholson
The University of Michigan
]V[ Go Blue!

Top
#7814 - 02/02/10 04:37 PM Re: Rule Changes - teams and eligible student-athletes [Re: Greg]
uffleshuffle Offline
forum member


Registered: 12/19/06
Posts: 326
Loc: Iowa
I really do feel that the feedback that was shared on this forum WAS helpful and influential in this decision. For the most part, the points made on these posts were valid and respectful. I am sure the information was strongly considered by those charged with making the final call.
But it is also fair to say that for the most part, comments by the bowlers need to be taken with a grain of salt. Insightful as they may be, I know that I didn't gain a full appreciation for the inner workings of our organization until I was out of the player's shoes and in a coaching and managerial role. It is harder to look long term and see what is good for the sport and organization as a whole when you are so entrenched in the day to day affairs.
I know that the final ruling was a tough one for many to make, and I have the utmost faith that adequate time was taken in forming the best plan for our college sport.

Christopher Uffman
Clarke College
_________________________
Christopher P. Uffman
Assistant Coach
Midland University
Fremont, NE

Top
#7815 - 02/02/10 07:35 PM Re: Rule Changes - teams and eligible student-athletes [Re: uffleshuffle]
Karl Nickolai Administrator Offline
Administrator
forum member


Registered: 12/08/06
Posts: 620

Greg:

Chris is absolutely correct when he points out the players had a direct method of being heard on these proposals by posting in this forum (#5 on my list of the ways this was considered before a decision was reached). In fact, the topic on these proposals was one of the most activity with 121 replies and over 10,000 views.

Moreover, Gary Brown, Director of USBC Collegiate, was an intercollegiate bowler for Indiana just a few years ago (well, 11 years does not seem like that long ago to me). He was a very vocal proponent of athlete's being heard then, and remains very much so today. He regularly reads these forums, and did actively review the thread on these proposals on daily basis.

With that said, you also have to recognize that in most cases, the coaches do act as "official" representatives of their respective schools. Those institutions employ the coaches (whether paid a salary or not) to manage their bowling programs, as well as be their advocate on matters such as this.

Karl


Top
#7816 - 02/02/10 08:13 PM Re: Rule Changes - teams and eligible student-athletes [Re: Karl Nickolai]
Greg Offline
forum member


Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 227
Loc: Ann Arbor, MI
Karl, I do not question the legitimacy of the decision. I appreciate the role that program coaches are charged with. I do not believe anyone can argue that the posts of a handful of members on a forum is both representative and entirely inclusive of all voices of active players in college bowling. Something tells me this motion was not thoroughly discussed at college bowling practices across America, and as a player that is disappointing. Personally, I first heard about this in January. I am sure you can understand how that would make you feel if you were in a player's shoes.

Ultimately, I believe this was a decision that had to be made; I just simply think the timing was wrong. As I have mentioned above, and on that initial thread you mentioned, I believe the current fight for legitimacy of our sport needs to be fought on the micro-level within school athletic departments. Additionally, I think it is important to work for increased participation, which leads to my conclusion that it is too early to pass legislation that can directly reduce participation levels.

Perhaps it is bias, but as I illustrated in my example of college football, I do not believe the sport will gain the respect that we all strive for until the larger schools perform better.

I am thoroughly impressed with what programs such as Wichita, Saginaw Valley, Lindenwood, Calumet, RIT, Newman, etc have accomplished; However if you look at the history of college football you will find it was the nationally respected IVY league schools that legitimized the sport, not schools that most people in my region of the country haven't even heard of.

I'll conclude my post reiterating my appreciation for what you do for this sport; Someone would have to be blind to not recognize your dedication for the growth of college bowling.


Edited by Greg (02/02/10 08:13 PM)
_________________________
Greg Nicholson
The University of Michigan
]V[ Go Blue!

Top
#7817 - 02/02/10 09:35 PM Re: Rule Changes - teams and eligible student-athletes [Re: Greg]
CJ Kaltenbach Offline
forum member


Registered: 10/03/08
Posts: 41
 Originally Posted By: Greg
Karl, I do not question the legitimacy of the decision. I appreciate the role that program coaches are charged with. I do not believe anyone can argue that the posts of a handful of members on a forum is both representative and entirely inclusive of all voices of active players in college bowling. Something tells me this motion was not thoroughly discussed at college bowling practices across America, and as a player that is disappointing. Personally, I first heard about this in January. I am sure you can understand how that would make you feel if you were in a player's shoes.

Ultimately, I believe this was a decision that had to be made; I just simply think the timing was wrong. As I have mentioned above, and on that initial thread you mentioned, I believe the current fight for legitimacy of our sport needs to be fought on the micro-level within school athletic departments. Additionally, I think it is important to work for increased participation, which leads to my conclusion that it is too early to pass legislation that can directly reduce participation levels.

Perhaps it is bias, but as I illustrated in my example of college football, I do not believe the sport will gain the respect that we all strive for until the larger schools perform better.

I am thoroughly impressed with what programs such as Wichita, Saginaw Valley, Lindenwood, Calumet, RIT, Newman, etc have accomplished; However if you look at the history of college football you will find it was the nationally respected IVY league schools that legitimized the sport, not schools that most people in my region of the country haven't even heard of.

I'll conclude my post reiterating my appreciation for what you do for this sport; Someone would have to be blind to not recognize your dedication for the growth of college bowling.


Being some one from New England (Mass to be exact) and had never picked up a bowling ball til sophomore year in college, I had never heard of the bowling powerhouses and unfortunately until the big schools do well and put money into the sport it will be hard to grow it to the next level (This is a similar problem that lacrosse is having right now, except that it can't get anyone off the east coast to like it)
_________________________
CJ Kaltenbach
Notre Dame Bowling

Top
#7824 - 02/03/10 02:50 PM Re: Rule Changes - teams and eligible student-athl [Re: bowling fan]
bowling fan Offline
forum member


Registered: 01/29/10
Posts: 2
 Originally Posted By: bowling fan
I can understand that limiting the roster size may help other schools get bowlers and some schools that do not have bowling programs may be able to (big assumption but I understand). I wish someone would explain how limiting the teams to tournaments would be a positive thing for college bowling because from a marketing standpoint it's a terrible decision. Having a limit of 28 bowlers, a school could still have 5 teams and still have some subs for the top teams. Besides the benefits already mentioned on filling spots for tournaments is the fact the more teams you have, the more spectators you will have and that will mean more people talking about college bowling. This does happen because someone is always asking me what I did over the weekend and I tell them about the tournament. A lot of people (even league bowlers) don't know there is college bowling. Word of mouth has always been and always will be a great promotional tool. In my opinion this rule is a step backwards if promoting the sport of college bowling is the goal.
With the limit of 4 teams next year and 3 teams the following years and 8 players maximum per team your looking at 32 student athletes the first year and 24 the following years who are able to go to tier 2 tournaments. That doesn't come close to the 45 35 and 25 eligible bowlers. I think it would have been more fair to the freshman and sophmores of the larger programs to "slowly" implemented the number of teams to tournaments as you did the eligible players. I'm not sure how the schools are going to handle it but some bowlers are not going to be able to bowl much if at all in college bowling tournaments. What it might do is cause some students to transfer to the schools with smaller programs or first year programs so they get to bowl in more tournaments. In my opinion that would not be a good thing, but distribution of talent would be quicker and maybe that was the intention.

Top
#7827 - 02/04/10 06:12 AM Re: Rule Changes - teams and eligible student-athl [Re: bowling fan]
timtimv3 Offline
forum member


Registered: 01/26/10
Posts: 8
Are you guys done acting like a bunch of children? yeesh...
_________________________
Mobap
Closing my eyes and throwing it right since 82

Top
#7832 - 02/04/10 01:19 PM Re: Rule Changes - teams and eligible student-athl [Re: timtimv3]
Deano2810 Offline
forum member


Registered: 09/26/07
Posts: 165
I know Randy said we shouldn't respond anymore to this but I think he just meant that I should stop acting immature. i wanted to say that our E team finished 2nd to Mckendree A at the Lions classic over the weekend, lol. I am not quite sure what that says about our A team but that is impressive.

I believe in bowling that the people in charge of the most important decisions are not usually bowlers themselves. I am not saying that the people in charge don't have our best interest in mind but that they don't understand what we want to see. I think college bowling could use a student council of some sort to add an opinion. I don;t think the ruling would have changed in this case but I feel as though there are other issues such as the redundant lane pattern problem that JR brought up.



Edited by Deano2810 (02/04/10 01:23 PM)
_________________________
Dean Richards
Lindenwood University
http://www.seismicbowling.com

Top
#7834 - 02/04/10 01:44 PM Re: Rule Changes - teams and eligible student-athl [Re: Deano2810]
CoachK Offline
forum member


Registered: 05/06/08
Posts: 60
Loc: NorthWest Indiana
I think being lost in all of this is that everyone is trying to create more structure for the SPORT of Bowling. And that participating in the Sport of College Bowling is something that should be earned as it is in all other College Sports. I do sympathise with all of the student athletes that may be affected during the transition period, but also would like to point out that the college experience of collegiate bowling will resonate even more satisfying when earned.
_________________________
Mike Kubacki
Coach Mens Bowling
Calumet College of St Joseph
mkubacki@ccsj.edu
Minutes from Chicago

Top
Page 6 of 7 « First<34567>


Hop to:
Shout Box

September
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Generated in 0.125 seconds in which 0.089 seconds were spent on a total of 14 queries. Zlib compression disabled.