College Varsity vs. College Club

[MyrddinsPrecint]

Originally Posted by Soberin

I fail to understand why a good fencer would get worse fencing for a varsity team. Could you expand a bit on your statement? Clubs hold no interest for me at all.

Depends on how good you are. If you're an E, you'll probably get better (Unless you go to CCNY or something.)

If you're just back from the Olympics, you will get worse regardless of where you go.

If you're somewhere in the middle, it will depend on what school you go to, who happens to be on your squad while you're there, and what kind of schedule you fence.

Even if you go to a school that's a good match for you, the same amount of time spent at a good private club would probably be a better (if more expensive, depending) investment.

[erooMynohtnA]

Originally Posted by Soberin

I fail to understand why a good fencer would get worse fencing for a varsity team. Could you expand a bit on your statement? Clubs hold no interest for me at all.

Be aware that his definition of good and yours might differ.

There are a couple really obvious reason top fencers atrophy in the NCAA.

1. You're in college, taking college course loads.
2. You're no longer training where you got good.

Everything else is pretty inconsequential compared to those two monolithic facts.

[LordShout]

Originally Posted by prototoast

Yeah, screw Yale...um... um...

but seriously, whether or not we sucked too is doesn't make clubs suck any more or less.

Suckage is a relative value, only meaningfully defined when it is in comparison to another team.

Do club schools absolutely categorically suck compared to PSU/OSU/ND and so on? Yes. Do club schools suck compared to the tier2 schools? Now we're talking about a valid comparison.

Think of college fencing as a tiered system. Tier 1 is the obvious NCAA title contender teams. Tier 2 are the teams that send a handful of fencers to nationals and might sometimes compete on a regional level. Tier 3 schools sometimes might compete locally. Tier 4 schools are those that sometimes in a blue moon send a squad or individual to nationals.

Club fencing has the exact same system, only (here's my interesting statement to whine/complain/moan about) when mapped to varsity you simply subtract 1 from tlevel and have an empty level at the top.

Would, as the center of this thread, Bruce's team compete on a regional level in NCAA competition? Questionable perhaps but not unreasonable. Are there other club teams (I.E. T1(c)->T2(v)) that would compete regionally if they were varsity?

This is not an opinion based question. We have data, from one conference at least, that can provide an answer. Someone, with the time, could pull the data from MFCC's and take the placing data and than use to approx. where those teams would place at regionals/nationals and than we would have an answer. I just looked at 3 years, 05 thru 07, and found that the two t1(c) teams in the midwest always placed 7th or higher out of a minimum of 14 competitors.

Someone want to run the full numbers?

Edit: I agree with eroo. Varsity fencers tend to have way harder degree programs than say football players. This, combined with his 2nd point, insures that they will probably not see the kind of improvement basketball or football players see in college. We can't all be Roger Bannister.

[rocky]

Originally Posted by prototoast

Yeah, screw Yale...um... um...

but seriously, whether or not we sucked too is doesn't make clubs suck any more or less.

what's that about?

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by rocky

what's that about?

I am trying to use misdirection to try to deflect somewhat justifiable criticism of myself and my former college team.

[MyrddinsPrecint]

Originally Posted by prototoast

I am trying to use misdirection to try to deflect somewhat justifiable criticism of myself and my former college team.

How'd that go for you?

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by MyrddinsPrecint

How'd that go for you?

I got at least one guy!

[Wetmelon]

? Man you got lucky... here's our thing:

CFF Varsity
-------
Good:
Field a couple of teams - not unlimited # of people, but easy enough to join
Decent coaches.
All travel arranged and paid for by the school
Opportunity to compete in OUA & CFF regionals/nationals
Scholarship money available

Bad:

Practice 4 days a week, in evenings (2 compulsory)
Buy your own fencing equipment
Must purchase shirts/shorts/socks/warmups/etc (Though it says "Varsity" on it)
Bring your own Misc money on travel
Schedule must fit around classes
Have to pay dues ($600)


Club
-----
Good:
No cap on members, no tryouts
Practice 2-3 times a week, at night
No worries about compliance
Free equipment


Bad:

Varsity members coach
No travel/competition
Have to pay dues ($80)

[K O'N]

Originally Posted by erooMynohtnA

Be aware that his definition of good and yours might differ.

There are a couple really obvious reason top fencers atrophy in the NCAA.

1. You're in college, taking college course loads.
2. You're no longer training where you got good.

Everything else is pretty inconsequential compared to those two monolithic facts.

My goodness, what a dull image of college life you have. Can you really not think of anything but schoolwork and a change in club scenery that might derail an 18 year old out from under the parental thumb for the first time?

K O'N

[LordShout]

No bedtime! Thats it for sure!

Also: I have a stone to grind on the v/c issue and no clue who your are irl

[mrbiggs]

Originally Posted by K O'N

My goodness, what a dull image of college life you have. Can you really not think of anything but schoolwork and a change in club scenery that might derail an 18 year old out from under the parental thumb for the first time?

K O'N

What?


First, moving to college is not a "change in club scenery" it's a "change in coach", which is often a "change in everything about how you train and sometimes fence." That's a big deal for someone who's trying to stay nationally competitive, and it's pretty major even for fencers who aren't.

Second, there are things other than schoolwork which can distract a top fencer, but if you're at the top you're probably used to prioritizing fencing over things like hanging out with friends or watching TV or whatever else you're implying exists but haven't mentioned. And again, even if you're not at the top it's really pretty easy to go "no, I can't do ____, I have fencing." Schoolwork is an obvious exception for equally obvious reasons.

No one's going to say that those are the only reasons it's difficult to improve as a fencer in college, but they're the important ones.

[Emfuser]

Although prototoast acts like a pretentious douchebag in making his points, most of them are valid. In the world of mixed collegiate fencing, there are roughly two different categories of fencer: varsity fencer or club fencer. Varsity fencers tend to refer to club fencers as "club scrubs". Sometimes it's being mean, but more often it's because varsity teams have a certain set of standards to meet to fence for them whereas clubs do not. It is only made more dichotomous when your club has a bunch of people hanging around at duals meets and such talking about their next SCA meet, with the varsity fencers who overhear this just laughing at such an idea.

There are club fencers who are good, and earn respect from the varsity guys. Typically these are people who didn't go to college primarily for fencing, but still want to fence. Yes, it is highly likely that those fencers are being made worse by their clubs.

Having acknowledged that, I think clubs are still fun. I first learned fencing at a club. I was a club scrub. We never had a coach, but we still trained and practiced as best we could. We improved here and there, and threw people out who stopped caring about fencing and only were showing up halfway through practice to socialize and get people to go out to the local brewpub. Would I have preferred I start fencing at 10 years old with a coach, and carried a fencing career up to the top levels? I sure would. I wouldn't mind NOT having all my bad habits that I'm whittling away with a coach now (at 30 years old). Even though I didn't get to do that, did I have a lot of fun, make friendships, and come away from club fencing with some great life memories? ABSOLUTELY

Do what you can with what you can get. There's some truth in this thread, but don't let the jerks and negative attitudes get to you.

[Dusie]

I have to put in my two cents about club teams:

I fenced on a great club team. We have a great coach, we've made some great fencers, and yeah, they're not going to compete with the Penn States of the fencing world, but they sure compete with the MITs, the Brandeises, the BCs...

Our dues are roughly $50 a semester, which covers EVERYTHING for the fencer; gear, weapons, coaching, private lessons, tournament entry fees, transportation... If you've ever fenced at a private club, I'm sure you understand what a fantastic deal that is. We do one big fundraiser a year, which covers most of our costs and transportation to Club Nationals each year. We do get some funding from Campus Rec as well.

The main difference between clubs and varsity, to me, is that clubs just have FUN. We want to do well, we really do want to win, but it's still a failure of a tournament if no one had fun. We don't have to abide by any silly coach/fencer interaction rules; we can see our coaches in the summer, we can start practicing whenever we want - we fence straight from September to May - we can put our school work ahead of fencing if need be.

I considered Varsity schools when I was applying to colleges, but I picked a competitive club instead, and as a result, I haven't burned out of fencing, and I'll likely continue fencing for a long long time. I've had a lot of fun on the team and I've come back to help coach.

There's certainly a big difference between some clubs and others, but all I'm saying is, don't discount us just because we're a club, alright? We still might kick your butt and have fun doing it.

[Wafath]

Originally Posted by prototoast

... your free time doing bake sales, a club ...

Yeah, because varsities never have to do fundraisers... .

W

[sah62]

Originally Posted by Wafath

Yeah, because varsities never have to do fundraisers... .

W

The fencers and other "small-team" athletes at Penn State have been raising funds by cleaning Beaver Stadium for years. We also sold souvenirs at the football games to make money for the team. Work like this was a fairly easy way to supplement the funding provided by the athletic department.

[seak]

Indeed, as do many other varsity teams, and many club teams. I think Wafath's point was that in this Varsity and Club teams are similar.

In my experience the best most competitive club teams, are even with the upper mid level varsity teams and most competitive club teams are at the very least competitive with and frequently stronger then the weakest level of varsity teams. As with all things though there is a huge variety in club fencing, from barely know how to come en guarde to national points level.

Also at most even semi-competitive no one's stadning around at the meet discussing SCA.

[K O'N]

Originally Posted by K O'N

My goodness, what a dull image of college life you have. Can you really not think of anything but schoolwork and a change in club scenery that might derail an 18 year old out from under the parental thumb for the first time?

Originally Posted by mrbiggs

What?

I said, "My goodness, what a dull image of college life you have. Can you really not think of anything but schoolwork and a change in club scenery that might derail an 18 year old out from under the parental thumb for the first time?"

First, moving to college is not a "change in club scenery" it's a "change in coach", which is often a "change in everything about how you train and sometimes fence."

No, it's more than that. It's a change in coach, club, training partners, competition, where you lift weights and where you run and what you eat and your fencing schedule and all that, it's much more than just a change in coach. It's a change in club scenery, as I said.

That's a big deal for someone who's trying to stay nationally competitive, and it's pretty major even for fencers who aren't.

Second, there are things other than schoolwork which can distract a top fencer, but if you're at the top you're probably used to prioritizing fencing over things like hanging out with friends or watching TV or whatever else you're implying exists but haven't mentioned.

Well, sex comes to mind as something you might run into your first year at college that's a bit more compelling than watching tv; hormones, adulthood, thousands of potential partners wandering about looking for new experiences, your parents are a thousand miles away and you have a door that locks.

I'm just saying, you know, there are classic reasons even very talented people have trouble adjusting to high workloads at college for a year or so, whatever those workloads are, and "social distractions", if you'd like the polite euphemism, are way up there.

And again, even if you're not at the top it's really pretty easy to go "no, I can't do ____, I have fencing." Schoolwork is an obvious exception for equally obvious reasons.

No one's going to say that those are the only reasons it's difficult to improve as a fencer in college, but they're the important ones.

If you say so.

K O'N

[eac]

Originally Posted by Soberin

I fail to understand why a good fencer would get worse fencing for a varsity team. Could you expand a bit on your statement? Clubs hold no interest for me at all.

Presumably, this is because if you have a good fencer, it's a good bet that the coach they were coming from was good. On the other hand, the coaches at high-powered fencing colleges rarely have any good fencers that they've made from scratch, which makes you doubt how good they fundamentally are as coaches, as opposed to as recruiters or physical trainers or whatever else. So if the college fencer starts listening too much to the college coach as opposed to the original coach, he may be led astray.

[Wafath]

Originally Posted by seak

I think Wafath's point was that in this Varsity and Club teams are similar.

My point was "There are exceptions to your assumptions. Do more research." [1]

W

[1] Actually, my real point is "ooh! I can say something that is short, relevant, true and snarky! Go me!" [2]

[2] Someone accused me of being a voice of reason here, so just to make sure no-one thinks that, YOUR MOM!

[Emfuser]

Originally Posted by seak

Also at most even semi-competitive no one's stadning around at the meet discussing SCA.

If I hadn't seen it with my own eyes, more than once, I would not have mentioned it.