Spirit in regards to Divs

73 posts / 0 new
Last post
#1

Not sure if this is the right place to post this, but here it goes.

I am a Div 8 Co-Captain.

Yesterday at Winona 4 of my players were just playing around, basic drills and throws. A small group came and asked if they wanted to have a scrim. My members quickly stated they were Div 8, the other team stated they were Div 2.

Up until last night our team has had quite a few good experiences with other teams.

This Div 2 team did not want to mix the teams up as they wanted to work "as a team before next week" then of course they won easy.

Yes my members could have said no, however once made aware of the difference in skill level the challenge never should have been made.

Am I right to think this?

I'd say no.

Once the disparity in skill was apparent, I'm surprised the other team remained interested, but it
does seem that they were interested not simply in playing, but as you say in practising as a
team. It doesn't seem that it was really a challenge so much as an opportunity to practise
against opposition, which is sometimes more useful than drills. Your teammates were not obliged
to take part, and should not have felt so if they didn't want to.

No worries,

Thanks for you view on it. I did say they didn't have to play. I totally get what you say about practice against an opposition.

I guess I look at the game different, If I were that much better than another I wouldn't kill them in a practice, a game sure, not a practice.

Every other team we have run into in a higher div has been great. Mixing teams up, and giving a general sense of 'fun' for the game.

Just wanted some other views on it to clarify.

You were used. That may not feel great.

Though the other team asked if they could use you as a 'practice dummy', and you said yes, so I
don't see there being anything 'unspirited' on their part.

I wouldn't discuss this occurrence in the context of spirit of the game as defined in the rules; I'd say it falls outside its province. After all, if a div2 team challenges a div8 team to a friendly match, it may not be viewed as especially "sporting" but it's not certainly not "unsportsmanlike" by itself. This is more about negotiation and showing a little extra consideration for someone else's fun.

I can respect the innocence of wanting to practice as a team; I can also empathize with the sting of a solid routing. Perhaps you (read: one of the players) should have negotiated for a short game with mixed teams at the end as part of the bargain?

As long as they were upfront about their skill level, I don't see anything wrong with them challenging a weaker opponent to a scrim.

It's a little unrealistic to think that everybody in the league is interested in helping out new players.

i see it kinda the opposite way. i think everyone in the league should do their best to help out new players.

depends, if they helped out the div 8 team and gave you guys pointers and stuff sure. but if they just played and tried to perfect their team plays, etc, without giving you as a team any benefit.. then i duno, kinda strange..

remember, div 8 is absolute beginners.

Thanks for you views guys.

I knew this wasn't really a spirit question, didn't know what else to call it.

Bottom line, I think Temple put it right, we were used. My members should have either walked or ensured a mixed team.

(mrdmbond)The team didn't give pointers, one of them actually laughed at the fact my members were Div.8 I think that's where I got upset upon hearing it. lesson learned though.

I think when I posted my first reply yesterday it wasn't complete really. I have no problem killing off a team in a game situation. However I would be playing spirit points to ensure we are all having fun. Last year being my first season, I have seen spirit points played quite a bit =)

What's a spirit point? How does it ensure that everyone is having fun?

We're in here talking about practice. Listen, we're talking about practice. Not a game. Not a game. Not a game. We're talking about practice. Not the game I go out there and die for. We're talking about practice. How silly is that? We're talking about practice.

We're talking about SOTG.

Specifically the flawed idea of SOTG that is "Something happened which I didn't like, I think
that's bad SOTG." I'm not saying that this is what was said, but it is my guess that this idea
is at the heart of the original intent of the post. (That and a passive-aggressive calling out of
the other team.)

Whatever the value of the original post, I think it's been an opportunity to discuss the larger
issue, which does affect actual games, as opposed to practice.

This is only this year's first post on SOTG. There will be at least one or two more, one of
which will get to 64 replies. Here's a preview of what we'll be discussing in those posts:

The 'joy of the game' case for SOTG rationale is so misused. Quite often it is a useless way
to determine spiritedness.

When two people have a different idea of whether something is 'fun', then you can no longer
use fun in your argument for or against an action being 'spirited'. The argument becomes
'what is fun for A and not fun for B is spirited because it is fun for A'. That's a silly argument
because both teams can use it equally and both teams are simultaneously A and B.

Often what one person decries as "unspirited because I didn't like it" is right in line with the
other party's 'joy of the game'.

How do you resolve such inconsistencies? Well, fortunately SOTG is not defined by 'what is
fun for me' alone. There is an underlying protocol of play which is part of the Spirit
agreement. When the 'fun factor' is balanced on both sides, generally the rest of what makes
up SOTG is clear.

LOL @ Squiggsy...damm right...practice. I mean, practice.

.

Why is someone who had never played before playing on a div 4 team?

I play in div. 4, and if we ever recognize there is a weaker player, we always try to take advantage...whether to poach off them, or force them to handle etc.

If after a while we began running up the score, we may change it up a bit, but I think palying in div.4 is competitive enough that they will want to do whatever it takes to win.

An opposing team should help whenever possible, and be understanding of her maybe not knowing all the rules/causing picks etc....but they shouldn't be expected to let up on her just cause she is new to the game. Thats what div.8 is for.

I can't believe people can act so entitled under the banner of SOTG.

Because you have a new player, you expect your opponents to not play Ultimate that night?
They came out with the intention of playing good ultimate. What could possibly make you
think that SOTG suggests they shouldn't play good ultimate, but rather that they should play
at reduced capacity?

I'm a decent player, but I'm really slow. Is it unspirited if people put a speedy person on me
and I get burned all night? Absolutely not. There are no such things as the right to even skills,
or the right to win games, especially not under the name of SOTG.

SOTG is about respecting your *opponent* by playing "highly competitively", legally, and
safely.

While "basic joy of play" is part of spirit, that is *not* "everybody must be happy".

Any argument which is based on "basic joy of play" where both teams will disagree on what is
fun immediately makes that criteria moot. If you say playing good ultimate is not fun for
you, but I say playing good ultimate is fun for me, then the 'fun factor' is a wash. You have
to go back to the rest of the criteria: competition, following the rules, safety, respect.

Trying to use "basic joy of play" as a big stick to force somebody to play with their "basic joy
of play" reduced is unfortunately all too common. It's incredibly hypocritical, and it's also not
grounded on any SOTG that Ultimate recognizes.

"but I think palying in div.4 is competitive enough that they will want to do whatever it takes to win."

This is me inserting rolly eyes and laughing my ass off.

Our regulars were injured and we needed a player. I guess you and I have different views of what div 4 is about. haha.

Anyway, the point is we specifically told them she was new and to go easy and they did the complete opposite. Just stinks of shitty spirit. But hey, I guess if winning a game in div 4 in the vul is worth 'doing whatever it takes to win', so be it. ;)

kermit: "Anyway, the point is we specifically told them she was new and to go easy and they
did the complete opposite. Just stinks of shitty spirit. But hey, I guess if winning a game in
div 4 in the vul is worth 'doing whatever it takes to win', so be it. ;)"

Something stinks of shitty spirit alright.

Playing the game well, and playing safely and fairly, is the very nature of Ultimate.

Your argument is so shockingly self-centred. You're all but asking: "hey, new girl's check, I
know you're really good, and I know you like to poach off your check and get D's. I know
that's really good ultimate, and you like that, but please don't play really good ultimate
tonight. Please just go through the motions so that you're not a lot better than your check."

That's a terrible thing to ask of any player, of any team.

Let me understand your philosophy, can I cry spirit-foul when a tall person makes a D off of
a shorter person?

I didn't say they shouldn't play ultimate that night. Again, stop making stuff up. I simply said it was poor form of them, once we specifically told them she was new (and they acknowledged that and said ok we understand), to exploit that to their advantage. At the very least they should treat her with an iota of respect. But maybe that's just my bleeding heart talking. Like I said, it's not illegal or technically 'wrong', but come on.

Like I said, what happened to this league? It used to be about helping each other out, teaching new people, having fun, etc... Now it's 'win at any cost' in div 4??

kermit: "I didn't say they shouldn't play ultimate that night. Again, stop making stuff up. "

Right, you said they shouldn't play good ultimate that night. You said SOTG said that they
should play reduced capacity ultimate.

kermit: "Like I said, what happened to this league? It used to be about helping each other out,
teaching new people, having fun, etc... Now it's 'win at any cost' in div 4??"

If you think playing your best defense and your best offense is "winning at any cost", then that's
sad.

Yes, how self-centered of me to want our players to be respected and be a part of the game. How horrible of me.

I'm asking their team to recognize we have a new player, and perhaps take it upon themselves, this one game, in div 4, to help her out. But apparently this is life or death out there for some of you. haha. I know I sit back after a game in div 4 and think to myself 'yeah, we sure screwed that noob tonight!' and feel really good.

But clearly, I'm in the minority here. So be it.

"If you think playing your best defense and your best offense is "winning at any cost", then that's sad. "

I don't even know what to say to this. You sure like to ignore my point though.

kermit: "Yes, how self-centered of me to want our players to be respected and be a part of
the game. How horrible of me."

You need to understand what respecting your opponent is. You are showing an extreme lack of
respect for your opponent. You should also look up some of the following terms:

Spirit of sportsmanship
Respect among *competitors*
Highly competitive play is encouraged
Opponent
Joy of play (as opposed to joy of playing at half-capacity)

Respecting your opponent is *trying your best to beat them* while playing fairly, safely, and
non-aggressively.

Suggesting your opponent play at half-capacity so that you have a chance to win is incredibly
self-centred and shows a terrible lack of respect.

I'm not suggesting my opponent play at half capacity so that we can win. Why do you continually make up things?

I (and I appear to be in the strong minority) don't really care if we win or lose a game in late may in div 4 in the vul. I care about having fun, playing with my friends, and playing hard.

If, like happened in the first game, we come across new players, we back off a little (note I'm not saying stop playing or play at 'half capacity') and give them a chance at success. Sure, we could get right in their face, and ensure they screw up. But who feels good about that? Like I added above, I wonder if they sat around after the game and said to each other 'yeah, we sure screwed that noob tonight!'.

Jeez, guys. Mountains and molehills.

First, I'd like to say that the VUL aspires to be a welcoming venue for new recreational players at all times, whether that's at pick-up, div.8, or div.1. If someone who was being encouraged to join our ranks was turned off by the game, that's too bad and it's our general loss.

The next question: why was she turned off? What have we done wrong? I'm not going to accuse anyone of acting unspiritedly. I don't think this is really about SotG at all. I mean, a little poaching shouldn't turn someone off the game, and the other team probably didn't think so, either. But clearly, as a community, we can do better.

Some of you may know Vonn. He's an older gentleman, mentally challenged and, I believe, has a prosthetic leg that is a real hindrance to his mobility. He is also very enthusiastic about ultimate and appeared at pick-up many times this winter.

And every once in awhile, Vonn was rotated onto the field for a turn to play. Everyone acknowledged it was Vonn's chance to learn when he took the field. He was even in the company of some hyper-competitive elite players, but everyone gave him a generous chance and no one took advantage of his mistakes or difficulties. When Vonn stepped off the field, no holds were barred.

As I see it, we can foreseeably debate about the appropriate division to introduce to a "new," or "almost-new," or otherwise handicapped player until the cows come home. But I'd like to think that, at any level of play, we can come to an agreement to let a disadvantaged player see how great a game this is. The "best way" to do this will never look the same way twice -- the teams just have to communicate with each other.

Before this gets too crazy, I wanted to offer one perspective.

There are at least four factors involved in situations like this:
- The rules of the game
- The official position of the VUL executive (board & staff). A league may have goals or policies to supplement the rules of the sport, for the benefit of the organization or its members.
- The culture of VUL community (which can vary between divisions, too). All communities develop their own conventions and cultural norms over time, independent of official rules.
- The preferences of the two teams.

And each of those factors may lead to a different assessment of what's appropriate in this situation. The rules may be interpreted as "it's not spirited to be asked to let up on a new opponent", but that was definitely part of accepted culture in the past, and it supported the growth of the league. The executive does not have an official policy on matters like this, but it seems we may need to create one.

atanarjuat: "The next question: why was she turned off?"

I think this is a key question. Kermit, perhaps you can answer. What specifically was it that
reduced your fun in the game?

It sounds like what made the game not fun was that they capitalized on a hole in your
offense. How? You said that they poached off her and used what was like a two-person cup.

Let's examine that.

You're complaining that they *left her open*? You're upset that they *didn't* play super hard
defense on your new girl? You're complaining that they played harder on all your
*experienced* people, leaving your new girl wide open to get the disc?

Somethings seriously wrong with your complaint here. I think the whole issue of there being a
new player which instigated this defensive style might be a red herring.

Was it just that your team couldn't beat this two-person poachy cup? I've been seen this
defense thrown up against my team and I've been on teams that used this defense.
Sometimes it worked because the Offense couldn't adapt, sometimes it didn't work. It was
never unspirited for them to throw up this type of zone-ish D.

What exactly was it that you disliked about the game or thought was unfair?

It sounds like they played harder D on the rest of your team, and your team as a whole failed
to beat that D. It sounds like your new player had *extra* opportunity to get the disc, so if
anything, she should have been able to participate better than had the other team not
poached off her.

From your complaint that they left your new girl open, I seriously suspect that if the new
girl's check had stuck to her, and quietly played person-defense, and your new girl never
touched the disc once, but the rest of your team was able to play regular O against a regular
Man-D and score some points, that you wouldn't have thought there was any 'unspirited'
behaviour. If true, that would really suck on your behalf.

haha. I can't even comprehend the number of assumptions and leaps in logic in this post. I'll just leave it as we agree to disagree.

kermit: "haha. I can't even comprehend the number of assumptions and leaps in logic in this
post. I'll just leave it as we agree to disagree."

Are you saying that the heart of your complaint *isn't* that they left the new girl open, and
played harder on the rest of your team?

First of all, I think it's perfectly fine for new players to start playing in any division. The higher the division, the more they will struggle, but the more they will learn.

In my experience, div 4 teams want to win just as much, and often more, than div 1 teams. The level of play in div 1-2 is higher, but the players are often more experienced, and more relaxed. Many of the harder fought VUL games I have played in have been in divs 3-5.

For some people, div 4 VUL will be the most competitive sport experience they undertake. Short of cheating, or dangerous play, I will never fault a team for playing hard, or playing to win.

That being said, I don't tend to take advantage of weaker players. In fact... every time my check touches the disc, it's because I let them.

Re: post 25 (Temple's).

Yup, pretty much. Not trying to jump on Kermit, but someone being poached, especially over the length of a game (13 plus points) provides an excellent opportunity for education for new players. Having someone on the sideline giving them ideas on where to cut and when is one of the best ways to learn. Enthusiastic positive reinforcement, high fives, etc. will greatly increase the enjoyment of that person, and make them far more likely to return to the league.

I've played against teams that have two strong handlers. We stick a man on their strongest handler and throw on a zone. You can bet the rest of the team gets more touches than they would normally. "Taking advantage" of a team's weaknesses gives them opportunities to strengthen themselves.

"That being said, I don't tend to take advantage of weaker players. In fact... every time my check touches the disc, it's because I let them. "

hahahahahahaha

awesome.

Wow! I was playing for the team that poached the new girl. A few points:

We didn’t poach her from the first point. I think (might be wrong by a point) we started poaching her when the score was 4-2 for your team. Final score in the game was 6-4 for us so we poached her for about 4 points: not really “all night.”

The reason we poached her wasn’t because she was new it was because your team was only using 1 of your girls. You weren’t throwing to the other 2 (maybe this is a reason you have a hard time getting girls out?), so we decided if you weren’t throwing to them anyway, why not poach.

This left the new girl open all the time, but she still rarely saw the disc. If you aren’t going to use her, why should we cover her? If she would have started getting the disc, we probably would have stopped poaching.

I don’t think we’re to blame for her having a shitty night.

dangnammit!

I thought my secret [women zone / men man D] defense was a secret; but it appears to be more widespread than I thought :)

Poaching off women, when their teams aren't using them, is a great lesson for the team on offense to stop looking off their women, IMO.

So is "hey, use your women!" or asking if they're bored.

Also? Offering to take the women onto your team if they want to play ultimate instead of running around on a field. A bit passive aggressive, but it gets back to the team.

kermit: "At the very least they should treat her with an iota of respect."

kermit: "I guess you and I have different views of what div 4 is about. haha."

Ha ha indeed.

edit: never mind. I'll pass on this thread for now.

kermit: "yikes. This degraded while I was gone haha. Now the consensus is my team doesn't
throw to women. Interesting. More assumptions please!!

And to the one who was actually was there--thanks for the little jab, says a lot ;) Our
woman, who in your mind should have so obviously just gotten open when you poached off
her, didn't know/understand because it's her first night, ever. We tried to explain, but it's a
slow process to understand this game as I'm sure we can all agree."

I'll ask the question again...

What was it that was unspirited by the other team?

Is leaving the new person *completely open* and playing hard against your veterans
unspirited?

--

kermit: "edit: never mind. I'll pass on this thread for now."

Edit: I see you deleted your above post.

In case you're wondering, now would be the perfect time to say "You know what, I was
wrong. The other team did nothing that was unspirited. I was frustrated at losing the last four
points in a row and thus the game, and I confused 'playing better than us' with 'poor spirit'.
Sorry for the vent."

"In case you're wondering, now would be the perfect time to say "You know what, I was wrong. The other team did nothing that was unspirited. I was frustrated at losing the last four points in a row and thus the game, and I confused 'playing better than us' with 'poor spirit'. Sorry for the vent." "

Would that make you feel better about something you have nothing to do with?

Sure. I'm wrong. You're right.

All better?

edit--thanks for publishing what I chose to not publish. You are a stand up guy!

Everyone have a great weekend. I'm done with this. I forgot the vul troll would just destroy the discussion. Foolish of me!

kermit: "Would that make you feel better about something you have nothing to do with?"

First, it was you that brought this issue to the very public forum. You cannot cry 'MYOB' now.
If there was one person 'trolling' for attention, it was you. It appears the attention you got
was not the type you were looking for.

Second, every member of the league is affected by the behaviour you've now recognized (I'm
assuming you were sincere above).

It is not poor spirit to win.

You're not the first, nor will you be the last to think the team playing better than you is
playing with poor spirit. You're one of the very few to admit to that. Whether you want it or
not, you have my respect for that.

arggh i can't help myself with you. You're like that irritating itch you know will get worse if you scratch it but you still can't stop.

First off, I'm old, what is MYOB.

Second, I've already said, and I'll say it again, I didn't/don't care if we win in div 4 in the vul. I'm out to play with friends and have a good time.

Third, I don't think playing better is poor spirit. I've been on teams that have lost 13-0 and teams that have won 13-0 and the spirit of the team winning was just fine.

Looking back I don't know why I brought this up here. I just felt bad for our woman who most likely won't come back. But that's my issue. I apologize to all for having to read this chain of stupidity. Go about your day.

MYOB = Mind Your Own Business

You made it public business, so there's no complaining that others are commenting on
something that they weren't involved in.

You say you don't think playing better is poor spirit, yet you can't answer why you felt the
other team was showing poor spirit.

What was it that was poor spirit about playing hard against your veterans and leaving the new
girl open?

Probably nothing. They adapted, they played better the last four points, and they beat you.
You didn't like that, you felt they were unspirited. I think (?) you've now recognized that
perhaps this wasn't the case.

If anything, I imagine this thread will result in the new girl having a much different
experience the next time she comes out. Potentially, others can read this and it can have an
effect on their encouragement of participation for their new players. I don't think this thread
was pointless at all.

I feel it was a poor move to, after we specifically told them she was new, to exploit that. Yes, she was open, but like I said, she didn't know where to go/what to do etc...because she's new. Now I know it's not the responsibility of the other team to teach her or show her or anything and I said as much in my first post. I also know it's our responsibility to teach her and show her, but like I said, we had no subs.

I guess I just know when we play against new players we try to help out and I expected the same in kind. That's all. Nothing more. I don't want to raise a big stink, it's not a huge deal.

I repeat. I don't care that we lost. That seems to be hard for you to understand.

Maybe I spoke too soon. I think this conversation is getting more productive at least.

kermit: "Now I know it's not the responsibility of the other team to teach her or show her or
anything and I said as much in my first post."

Ok, now how is leaving a player wide-open (new or not) unspirited for the other team? I just
don't see how you can call that unspirited.

If Team 1 is not ever throwing to Player A, then why should Team 2 guard Player A?

Would you have felt it be more spirited if the other team had guarded your new girl? I hope
we can agree that, since she got no discs when she was unguarded, being more guarded
would have definitely not resulted in her getting any discs.

The other team gave your new girl the *highest* chance to get the disc as possible. So the
fact that she was new really shouldn't enter into your complaint. Any other behaviour that you
wanted from the other team would have made it less likely that she could get the disc.

The way it's sounding to me is that all you wanted out of that game was for the new girl's
check to not affect your other 6 players from playing and scoring points, even though that
would have definitely meant your new girl wouldn't have touched the disc.

MYOB = mind your own business.

Worth noting that this issue is a problem in all sports at any level. Winning teams are regularly chastised by opponents and fans for running up the score.

Link goes to example of vastly superior team agreeing to only crush their opponent slightly.

"Would you have felt it be more spirited if the other team had guarded your new girl? I hope we can agree that, since she got no discs when she was unguarded, being more guarded would have definitely not resulted in her getting any discs. "

Like I said, I've been on teams where I've stayed with my new opponent and helped them out, told them where to go/when to cut--tried to get them involved. THis goes back to my earlier point about what the vul used to be like.

I guess I'm just old and it ain't like it used to be!

"we had no subs."

yet another example why minimum roster sizes would be a benefit to everyone in the VUL.

kermit: "Like I said, I've been on teams where I've stayed with my new opponent and helped
them out, told them where to go/when to cut--tried to get them involved. THis goes back to
my earlier point about what the vul used to be like."

Kermit, you can't simply pawn off all responsibility of teaching your new teammate to the
other team, and then call it unspirited when they don't!

You asked them to "go easy on her" and they did! You didn't ask that they teach her (I bet if
you had, they may have been receptive). You got what you asked for.

Also, even with no subs, why couldn't one of your players stand with her and give her that
advice? That's something my teams have always done with new players.

Sure, doing that may make your O less effective. Athough if she's poached and getting good
advice, she's going to get open a lot. Also, if the on-field coach gets poached then they can
bust long for the point, so I don't think that on-field coaching necessarily hurts your O. But
even if it did, what's wrong with that? Why would you expect the D to play less effective D in
order to teach your new player, when you're not willing to play less effective O to teach her?

"The other team gave your new girl the *highest* chance to get the disc as possible. So the fact that she was new really shouldn't enter into your complaint. Any other behaviour that you wanted from the other team would have made it less likely that she could get the disc."

I don't think that's a completely fair assessment, Temple. As you've said yourself, the offense has to adapt to an intelligent poach. That's not altogether straightforward if the offense wasn't great to start with, and if the poached cutter doesn't know what to do about it.

This is not to condemn the poaching as an unspirited act, mind you. I'm just saying that the act of poaching isn't quite the same as playing light defense on someone.

kermit...so according to lofft, from the team that was 'poaching', the final score was 6-4...so it was a close game. And from what he said, I would think you are probably more upset that their team scored 4 straight points on you and your team wasn't able to over come the poach. of course, this is assuming lofft's statement about the scores is correct...

as for Div.4 and winning at all costs...i am not implying anything about cheating or dangerous plays, i am just implying about playing hard and playing smart. Yes, i like to win, and i will try to do whatever it takes, within the rules, for my team to win. Almost ever game i play in div. 4 has been competitive, but that doesnt mean they still arent tonnes of fun.

If the other team had run up the score on you, and beat your team by a large margin, maybe you could have a point....but a final score of 6-4, and your still complaining? Sound like your just bitter that you lost.

So first you said:

Kermit: “Our woman, who in your mind should have so obviously just gotten open when you poached off her, didn't know/understand because it's her first night, ever. We tried to explain, but it's a slow process to understand this game as I'm sure we can all agree."

Then you said:

Kermit: “Yes, she was open, but like I said, she didn't know where to go/what to do etc...because she's new.”

You are contradicting yourself. So was she not open because she didn’t know how to get open or was she open?

From my point of view you either told her how to get open and she understood (not that hard to explain or a slow process) or she just just instinctively knew how to get open. But she was open: constantly.

“I feel it was a poor move to, after we specifically told them she was new, to exploit that.”

Like I said above (but maybe you didn’t catch) was that we weren’t exploiting the fact you had a new girl, we were exploiting the fact you weren’t throwing to her when she was constantly wide open.

"Like I said, I've been on teams where I've stayed with my new opponent and helped them out, told them where to go/when to cut--tried to get them involved. THis goes back to my earlier point about what the vul used to be like.

I guess I'm just old and it ain't like it used to be!"

I have the same sentiment at times, although I'm not sure if it's true or just my perception. I think there was a brief period of time when the league saw a big influx of people who hadn't spent a lot of time in traditional team sports and during that era there was a different atmosphere at work. Whether it was good, bad, spirited or not I'm not sure, but I do feel some of camaraderie has declined as the league grew. I think it was an unavoidable byproduct of the league's growth.

Pages