Thoughts.

I played B-team last year, and while it was a great time and I did develop a bit, I feel like there was definitel more progress to be had as a player on the A-team (not that I didn’t enjoy the extra play time and limited stud status I had on the B-team).

Cuts have been made again this year, and I feel like the B-team players are again getting shortchanged. We’ve been focusing a lot on A-team development, with all the new players we have (by Socks’ count, something like 60%-ish of the team were not A-teamers last year), and as a result, haven’t been playing mixed with the B-team much, which is currently one of the best sources of development for our B+ players, the guys with dedication and ability that just didn’t make the cut (man, is it hard to make the cut). I’ve had several conversations with people already just expressing frustration or disappointment at being unable to improve at a rate they’d like to.

So how do we work around this?

Obviously you can just have more mixed practicing/scrimmaging…drilling together and the like. Particularly at this point of the season, when the A-team is effectively done playing as a collective until the spring (barring one winter tourney), it makes a lot of sense to get as much development for the B-team as possible. The winter’ll be here soon, and unless you’re really close to Leverone it takes a fair bit of commitment, of “buying in” to the ultimate crowd to see a good B-team turnout. This is particularly important for the freshmen–we need to make sure we get as many invested in playing ultimate and dedicating themselves to improvement now, before the winter comes and the chill winds and lack of consistent practice time leave freshmen vulnerable to other activities and interests taking root and pulling them away come spring.

That works to an extent; with A-quality handlers, cutting options improve tremendously, and the measuring stick for a man defender, mark, really all aspects of play, increase when matched up against an A-teamer. But simply relying on A-team players to be playmakers will only result in having B-teamers who are good at playing with people better than them. You also need to cultivate responsibility and talent in at least some of them for the team to be successful, and I think the best way to really generate that sort of situation would be with a B-team coach.
It makes a lot of sense. It could be as simple as having a couple A-teamers talk strategy and contribute wisdom from the sidelines, though I feel that having a “authority”-type figure would be much more powerful. Even if it’s only in a limited role, I think having somebody who’s in a position of power and really legitimized experience–even the captains could work in this aspect to an extent, though they’re busy with the A-team–looking at the B-team players, evaluating them, and really guiding their development to an extent–would make a big difference.

Perhaps that’s a bit too ambitious of me though. This sport’s really not up to that level of coaching and sophistication. More simply, we could do something akin to what the women are doing with throwing partners, where you have somebody who’s experienced relative to their partner(s) working with and teaching a B-team player, really investing in their personal improvement. Personally I really like being able to toss with somebody, or just be chatting with somebody about ultimate, and being able to point out, hey, if you focus on wrist position when you huck flick it’ll really help keep it from taking a trajectory you don’t want, but I’m not going to walk around instructing everyone I see–it’s just too much, you know? But in a limited role I think most people on the A-team could have a positive impact on the development of the Bness.

I guess that’s part of why I started blogging. It’s really helped me a ton reading stuff on RSD and in blogs about various aspects of play, really got me thinking, and I can only hope to be as helpful to somebody else who’s curious and has the desire to improve.

Related posts:

1. Freshmen
2. The Cells!