Changes for 2015 NEDGC

[Matt DeAngelis]

Proposed changes for next season to be discussed:

Move date into September instead of October

Create select number of win and get in events (maybe 1-2 per region)

Allow for retroactive membership to include points from prior events

Remove min # events required for season standings payout

Clarify if eligible for multiple divisions, which can/must you play in; including both an AM & Pro if different days.

Redirect money away from AM payouts (maybe 50%) to other budgetary items (NEDGC general expenses perhaps?)

Award an NEDGC grant to help fund the event and cover expenses for the host club.

Include NEDGC in the final point totals for series standings

[Jeff Wiechowski]

Season Standings payouts - Pay the same depth percentage in all divisions.

[Trent Solomon]

Season Standings payouts - Pay the same depth percentage in all divisions.

follow PDGA payout calculator for 40% qualified (higher payouts)

[Matt DeAngelis]

The season ending payouts is different from a normal tournament, since there are so many people putting into the pot. We will likely stick with the process we have for those payouts. The way Rick calculates works out so that the last place cash in any division will end up getting enough money to get a renewal membership next season ($20). I think that works out well.

[Bill Bertera]

Clarify if eligible for multiple divisions, which can/must you play in; including both an AM & Pro if different days.

Redirect money away from AM payouts (maybe 50%) to other budgetary items (NEDGC general expenses perhaps?)

[Karl Molitoris]

Redirect money away from AM payouts (maybe 50%) to other budgetary items (NEDGC general expenses perhaps?)

Bill,

Do you think it's fair for AMs to defray expenses to any greater extent than the Pros have to? The only equitable way is ALWAYS to have AMs and Pros pay an equal "per person amount to cover expenses" and anything else go to THEIR "pool" - whether the pool contains nothing or something.

If you thought that AMs got TOO much "payout", well, that's probably another thread .

Karl

[Bill Bertera]

Karl, I've gone back and forth on this quite a bit in my own mind. I used to think it needed to be "fair" and that everything AMs put in, they should have to get out as equally as pros. But then I see the payouts AMs get and realize that its way too much for supposed amateurs to be getting. Between 2 tournament payouts and the points series payouts I got 12 discs and a hat on Saturday (between MS & PF), and I didn't even play Saturday.

AMs subsidize tournaments already with player packs assuming the TD smartly counts cost vs. value.

So, is it "fair"? probably not in the sense you ask. But I also don't think its "fair" that AM2 get paid out more than AM1s for shooting worse in a lower division, and that Pros get paid less than shooting better than both AM1 & AM2.

So, at least today, my mind is its better for tournaments & the series if AMs got paid less, and if the tournament had more budget to use to improve the experience for everyone.

[James Scanlon]

Karl, I've gone back and forth on this quite a bit in my own mind. I used to think it needed to be "fair" and that everything AMs put in, they should have to get out as equally as pros. But then I see the payouts AMs get and realize that its way too much for supposed amateurs to be getting. Between 2 tournament payouts and the points series payouts I got 12 discs and a hat on Saturday (between MS & PF), and I didn't even play Saturday.

AMs subsidize tournaments already with player packs assuming the TD smartly counts cost vs. value.

So, is it "fair"? probably not in the sense you ask. But I also don't think its "fair" that AM2 get paid out more than AM1s for shooting worse in a lower division, and that Pros get paid less than shooting better than both AM1 & AM2.

So, at least today, my mind is its better for tournaments & the series if AMs got paid less, and if the tournament had more budget to use to improve the experience for everyone.

I believe that payouts should be based on how many people are putting into it. We had an exceptionally large AM2 division this year, but that division had the most players in it in almost all the tournaments so they contributed more entry fees throughout the year. Just because someone believes that an amateur division is less important and they don't deserve the % that they get doesn't seem all that fair. I know that some tournament directors will push payouts up divisions and I believe that is in their right for that tournament if they chose but I do not believe that the NEDGC/Point Series should be formatted like that. With the top 10 AM2 guys all being right in the same skill level and most of us planning to move up, I believe that next year that AM1 will be the heavier division. So what is going to stop someone from saying that those payouts should be funneled into pro when the top am1 guy is going to win twice as much funny money as pro will cash?

So in my mind, selling out AM heavy tournaments all year long is better for the series. I am going to play tournaments no matter what, it is what I love doing but I can't speak for everyone else if they were to find out that their money is being given to people they don't compete against. Especially on the grounds that they shouldn't have it because they aren't "good enough" by other people's standards.

[Bill Bertera]

its not about being good enough, its about not competing against them. and I'm not saying push the payouts to PRO's, I'm saying take half of the AM points & finals payout and use it for the general budget (not pro payout). If money and payouts are so important to a player, they should be playing pro.

[Matt DeAngelis]

I agree with Jimmy and Karl. I don't see a reason to take money from AM's and move it to expenses for the event. Rather, I could see taking that $1 per AM player, splitting it up so half goes towards payout and the other half goes towards an AM specific expense. This money could be used for creating an over the top players pack with multiple discs, a decent shirt, towel, etc.

[James Scanlon]

its not about being good enough, its about not competing against them. and I'm not saying push the payouts to PRO's, I'm saying take half of the AM points & finals payout and use it for the general budget (not pro payout). If money and payouts are so important to a player, they should be playing pro.

I enjoy how the first 6 words completely contradict the last sentence. We are sorry that there are less people at your skill level and you don't have as much competition. While I am at it, I would also like to apologize for a sport that is growing exponentially each year being too amateur heavy, I wish I could play pro after only a year playing, but I can't.

[Josh Connell]

If the desire is to redirect some of the money being paid out for the series (standings or finals) back into NEFA's general coffers, the place to start that discussion is with the dollar for dollar match NEFA does with the dollar per player fees. Cut out that expenditure and suddenly the NEFA coffers grow by $1500 or whatever, and the issue of AM2s getting so much loot largely goes away.

Why does NEFA do a dollar for dollar match, essentially doubling the series funds? Couldn't that money be better spent on courses and education, or this mysterious new web site we keep hearing about but haven't seen?

[Matt DeAngelis]

If the desire is to redirect some of the money being paid out for the series (standings or finals) back into NEFA's general coffers, the place to start that discussion is with the dollar for dollar match NEFA does with the dollar per player fees. Cut out that expenditure and suddenly the NEFA coffers grow by $1500 or whatever, and the issue of AM2s getting so much loot largely goes away.

Why does NEFA do a dollar for dollar match, essentially doubling the series funds? Couldn't that money be better spent on courses and education, or this mysterious new web site we keep hearing about but haven't seen?

Now that's an idea. Just cut out the match for Am players. As for the mysterious website, I posted a link for people to take a look at what was being worked on...just don't remember where I posted that link.

[Bill Bertera]

its not about being good enough, its about not competing against them. and I'm not saying push the payouts to PRO's, I'm saying take half of the AM points & finals payout and use it for the general budget (not pro payout). If money and payouts are so important to a player, they should be playing pro.

I enjoy how the first 6 words completely contradict the last sentence. We are sorry that there are less people at your skill level and you don't have as much competition. While I am at it, I would also like to apologize for a sport that is growing exponentially each year being too amateur heavy, I wish I could play pro after only a year playing, but I can't.

James, you're making this about something other than what I'm proposing. It has nothing to do with getting more money for Pros, or not growing the sport, or forcing people to play in higher divisions. My idea is to lessen the amount of money paid to so-called amateurs. If that's done by cutting payouts by 50%, or just eliminating the match (not sure what the difference between the 2 ideas is, other than Matt gets credit for the latter . And if amateurs care so much about their payouts, they can play in divisions that offer more money. You said you'll play regardless because you love the sport and like to play for fun, sounds like we're in the same boat, as amateurs who like to play and don't need or want to play for large amounts of money (be it funny or serious).

[James Scanlon]

its not about being good enough, its about not competing against them. and I'm not saying push the payouts to PRO's, I'm saying take half of the AM points & finals payout and use it for the general budget (not pro payout). If money and payouts are so important to a player, they should be playing pro.

I enjoy how the first 6 words completely contradict the last sentence. We are sorry that there are less people at your skill level and you don't have as much competition. While I am at it, I would also like to apologize for a sport that is growing exponentially each year being too amateur heavy, I wish I could play pro after only a year playing, but I can't.

James, you're making this about something other than what I'm proposing. It has nothing to do with getting more money for Pros, or not growing the sport, or forcing people to play in higher divisions. My idea is to lessen the amount of money paid to so-called amateurs. If that's done by cutting payouts by 50%, or just eliminating the match (not sure what the difference between the 2 ideas is, other than Matt gets credit for the latter . And if amateurs care so much about their payouts, they can play in divisions that offer more money. You said you'll play regardless because you love the sport and like to play for fun, sounds like we're in the same boat, as amateurs who like to play and don't need or want to play for large amounts of money (be it funny or serious).

I feel like we are on the same page about most of this Bill but I can't wrap my head around the correlation between caring about payouts and being good enough to compete at the pro level.

I'd also like to add that these "large" payouts go directly to local disc golf shops like MST and Pure Flight and help grow the sport by growing the businesses.

[Bill Bertera]

I feel like we are on the same page about most of this Bill but I can't wrap my head around the correlation between caring about payouts and being good enough to compete at the pro level.

I'd also like to add that these "large" payouts go directly to local disc golf shops like MST and Pure Flight and help grow the sport by growing the businesses.

That part about the local shops is one reason I keep going back & forth on the issue. But this proposal wouldn't affect Tourny payouts, I believe in giving complete freedom to the TD to run each tournament as they see fit to their vision. I wouldn't propose something like "NEFA tournaments can have no AM payout." But as Josh pointed out, NEFA is putting $1 into AM payouts for every player per tournament. Could that money be better spent elsewhere, and also widen the gap between pro & am end of season/finals payouts? then I think its a good start.

[Karl Molitoris]

If the desire is to redirect some of the money being paid out for the series (standings or finals) back into NEFA's general coffers, the place to start that discussion is with the dollar for dollar match NEFA does with the dollar per player fees. Cut out that expenditure and suddenly the NEFA coffers grow by $1500 or whatever, and the issue of AM2s getting so much loot largely goes away.

Why does NEFA do a dollar for dollar match, essentially doubling the series funds? Couldn't that money be better spent on courses and education, or this mysterious new web site we keep hearing about but haven't seen?

Now that's an idea. Just cut out the match for Am players.

Let us think - and espouse - exactly what we mean to say! I'm doubting that Josh is advocating a NEFA-match-the-Pros-input and a NEFA-NOT-match-the-AM-input...as that would mean the SOME "extra" money (obtained from who-knows-where) that NEFA has would go to the Pros but the AMs wouldn't get any of this...and that wouldn't be fair. Any "match" has to be done on a X$/player basis, whether Pro or Am. What MIGHT be done - although the Pros might grump as it would cut into their individual-tournament-payouts - would be if the Pros would pay in MORE (each time) to then be distributed in the finals, etc. And maybe the AMs pay in less per time (and get out less in the end). Lots of possibilities / options / opinions. Any of which somebody would like but none that all would like. A quandary.

Karl

[Matt DeAngelis]

Is there anything wrong with NEFA taking $1 match to the Pros in cash and $1 match to Ams in some other non-cash method?

[Bill Bertera]

Is there anything wrong with NEFA taking $1 match to the Pros in cash and $1 match to Ams in some other non-cash method?

AMs paid in lap-dances? lets put it to a vote.

[Karl Molitoris]

Is there anything wrong with NEFA taking $1 match to the Pros in cash and $1 match to Ams in some other non-cash method?

Probably not, since it seems to be engrained into dg society for entities to make money on the retail / wholesale vig. But I say this with some amount of misgivings as I personally would like to see NEFA use its money (not the money that it's collected from the players - that should go back to them) for some other purpose(s).

Karl

[Bill Bertera]

the $1 per player is actually collected from ALL players in the tournament right, not just NEFA members? Harder to track, but there's some flexibility their too.

[Kenji Cline]

I like the idea of taking the $1 match from all as long as the funds taken stay in the division and keeping it fair. Now after that I also like the idea that it goes to pro payout so they can compete for larger prizes and it goes to all am as a bigger better players pack so that every am playing NEDGC gets the same benefit.

I also love the idea of the NEDGC bidding process with asking for submitted proposal. I think that an incentive for the host course/club to be awarded and used however that club/course see fit is a great way to get good proposals.

[Bill Bertera]

I just don't see the importance of making sure every dollar that is given from a player stays in that division for payout or other monetary value throughout the year, or in this case not even paid by the player - but matched by NEFA. I used to think it matters, but what is $6 or $8 or $10 over the course of the year from one player (or matched form one player), if pooled with all other AM players could total $1500 and be spent on a better tournament, player packs, or another grant? As long as the player is getting the value he thinks his entry fees and memberships are worth, then is he due every cent from his and his competition's entry fee (or matched entry fee)?

[Karl Molitoris]

I just don't see the importance of making sure every dollar that is given from a player stays in that division for payout or other monetary value throughout the year, or in this case not even paid by the player - but matched by NEFA. I used to think it matters, but what is $6 or $8 or $10 over the course of the year from one player (or matched form one player), if pooled with all other AM players could total $1500 and be spent on a better tournament, player packs, or another grant? As long as the player is getting the value he thinks his entry fees and memberships are worth, then is he due every cent from his and his competition's entry fee (or matched entry fee)?

Bill,

You're right - it might be a rather insignificant amount (your $6 or $8 or $10...) but anyone who plays in dg tournaments has to be at least a little competitive (mano a mano, against the course, themselves, etc.) and I'm guessing that this also would include anything involving their money. Thus said player(s) would NOT like to know that one of their buddies "made out" better than they did regarding the o'l dinero thing.
Yes, people are THAT competitive.
And thus the advocating of "keeping moneys within each division", etc.

Just a little guess at human nature; maybe I'm wrong....

Karl

[Mike Dussault]

Bill,

You're right - it might be a rather insignificant amount (your $6 or $8 or $10...) but anyone who plays in dg tournaments has to be at least a little competitive (mano a mano, against the course, themselves, etc.) and I'm guessing that this also would include anything involving their money. Thus said player(s) would NOT like to know that one of their buddies "made out" better than they did regarding the o'l dinero thing.
Yes, people are THAT competitive.
And thus the advocating of "keeping moneys within each division", etc.

Just a little guess at human nature; maybe I'm wrong....

Karl

Wrong again Karl.

[Karl Molitoris]

Bill,

You're right - it might be a rather insignificant amount (your $6 or $8 or $10...) but anyone who plays in dg tournaments has to be at least a little competitive (mano a mano, against the course, themselves, etc.) and I'm guessing that this also would include anything involving their money. Thus said player(s) would NOT like to know that one of their buddies "made out" better than they did regarding the o'l dinero thing.
Yes, people are THAT competitive.
And thus the advocating of "keeping moneys within each division", etc.

Just a little guess at human nature; maybe I'm wrong....

Karl

Wrong again Karl.

Maybe you don't think that way Mike, but more than one person has mentioned that exact facet (of competition) to me so I don't think I'm "wrong"...just maybe "wrong" when it comes to SOME people...but correct for others.

[Paul Sullivan]

Karl talking about payouts right now?????????????

Between Season ending payouts and last Sat/Sun $207 total for Pro Grandmaster and $182 for Amateur Grandmaster (insert golf clap)

Yeah, yeah I know. But just because it is not against the rules and you can do it, does not make it the right thing to do.


Sure it still bothers me, but the majority of the AdvGM's are even more frustrated then I am.

[Karl Molitoris]

1. Let's stay on-point (no thread drifts...if you want to lambast me, do so in another thread).
2. State your wanted changes (so the PTB can have ideas as how to make the NEFA year-end tournament better).
3. The more ideas / opinions the better (not many new ideas may equal not much of a change...).

Karl

[will plein]

[quote][/quote]I agree with Jimmy and Karl. I don't see a reason to take money from AM's and move it to expenses for the event. Rather, I could see taking that $1 per AM player, splitting it up so half goes towards payout and the other half goes towards an AM specific expense. This money could be used for creating an over the top players pack with multiple discs, a decent shirt, towel, etc.

I agree with this ^^^^

The final should be the biggest, best, and "badest".

The points should be included in the final match. There is no insentive if the points stop before the final.

There should be a reward, certificate, or trophy for an Ace. (even if they did not contribute to the pot)
As long as it is not a T-REX.

[Matt DeAngelis]

The points should be included in the final match. There is no insentive if the points stop before the final.

I like this a lot. Hopefully can get it pushed through for next year!