Who is this "The USFA?"

[Peach]

Based on a couple of conversations I had this weekend, and on a recurring phrase in the forum messages, I was curious to find out what other people thought.

So often, we confidently say, "The USFA wants," or "The USFA says," but as far as I can tell the organization is a loose and non-monolithic network of committees, a collection of board members from different constituencies who often disagree with one another, a rather small and overworked office in Colorado Springs, and, I expect, some people who have been around for a long time and whose opinions other people listen to, as well as a number of written policies. But I don't know anyone (and I'm slightly acquainted with many people who work in/for/around the organization) or any group who fits the label. So if you're talking about "The USFA," who is it exactly you mean? Or is it a "what" instead of a "who?", like a rule book or the bylaws? Is there a list of people we could insert when we make assertions about what the USFA wants or says?

[Grasshopper]

I am the beginning. The end. The one who is many. I am the Borg.

[Inquartata]

It's YOU, Peach. YOU are the USFA!

But seriously, to me it's roughly synomymous with the national office and those who give the folks at the national office their marching orders.

[Bonehead]

The USFA is in each and every one of us.

Or at least it feels that way sometimes.

[Allen Evans]

Peach. This is a very good post, and the question itself may be indicative of the problems the USFA is currently having.

Well...whoever "they" are.

[tbryan]

I am the beginning. The end. The one who is many. I am the Borg.

I am the USFA (And So Can You!)

[hello?]

This:

But seriously, to me it's roughly synomymous with the national office and those who give the folks at the national office their marching orders.

I think of "The USFA" as the people who actually get to decide the things that the membership has to live with. A combination of the Board, the people with votes, and the National office. Of course they often disagree. Of course they do not all think alike. That's to be expected. But I think "the USFA" is much more cohesive than simply a "loose and non-monolithic network of committees, a collection of board members from different constituencies who often disagree with one another, a rather small and overworked office in Colorado Springs, and...some people who have been around for a long time and whose opinions other people listen to, as well as a number of written policies." (If you are correct and that's all "The USFA" is, then we are paying much too much in membership fees and have a much bigger problem than I thought.)

I am a "member" of "the USFA" (or "USA Fencing," I guess). I get to talk on and on on this forum about whether I think it was right or wrong to hold Zonals at the same time as Summer Nationals, whether I think it was right or wrong to move the Div 1, whether I think Stay and Play was a horrible idea, whether I think ROCs make sense or not, or doing away with Vet NACs makes sense or not, or the schedule at Summer Nationals makes sense or not...I get to write emails to "the USFA" expressing my opinions, or express my opinions to "them" in person (since I am also acquainted with some of the people who work in/for/around the organization).

But I don't get to decide anything. "They" do. They are "the USFA."

As a Division officer, for example, I am part of "The Division." When a Division policy is called into question, I consider myself a part of that decision whether or not I agreed with it. I, after all, have "a vote." (This past weekend, I fenced at an event that our Division chose not to sanction and had to explain to several people why "we" chose not to. I could not very well say "they" in those conversations. Conversely, I can very well say "they" when the idea of holding a NAC the week before Christmas comes up.)

[Tomas N]

In earlier threads about Summer Nationals and the new logo (I think...I looked for them, but couldn't locate the exact ones) several hypotheses were presented about who had power in the USFA. The board, the ED, eight mysterious behind the scenes operators, the national coaches, the USOC, Darth Vader. Vague references have been made to "the old guard" vs. "the new guard," whoever they are. There are certainly some people who have power over some aspects of the USFA, but saying that "USA Fencing" wants something is akin to saying "the federal government" wants something. Neither exist as individual decision makers.

I consider myself to be fairly active member of the fencing community. I advise a college club, I run local events, I go to some NACs, I support fencing regionally as best as I can. Very little of what the USFA does affects me, except when it really screws up. I suspect most fencers in the U.S. feel similarly. For most fencers, the strength of fencing in the U.S. isn't in the USFA, but in the thousands of people who work at promoting the sport independent of any national organization.

[hello?]

...I advise a college club, I run local events, I go to some NACs, I support fencing regionally as best as I can. Very little of what the USFA does affects me, except when it really screws up. I suspect most fencers in the U.S. feel similarly. For most fencers, the strength of fencing in the U.S. isn't in the USFA, but in the thousands of people who work at promoting the sport independent of any national organization.

True. If you stay mostly local, or even regional, chances are that what The USFA does or does not do will not affect you. (And they certainly have nothing to do with college fencing.) It only comes into play when you or your fencers (if you are a coach or have a club) go to more than just a few random NACs -- if your focus is on national (or even international) events.

[neevel]

Whatever anyone says, it's only what They fnord want you to think.

[dberke]

If there's one thing we all should know by now, it's that the USFA is run by Ro Sobalvarro.

Dan

[fencerX]

I am the beginning. The end. The one who is many. I am the Borg.

Nice to meet you! I'm Spartacus!

[PretAllez]

the people who organize NACs ... and give comfort to the enemy* (i.e. US Fencing, or is it USA Fencing, or USFA .... nevermind )
*jk*

(actually, to date, all my dealings with USA Fencing have been very prompt and helpful )

[mattacox]

Based on a couple of conversations I had this weekend, and on a recurring phrase in the forum messages, I was curious to find out what other people thought.

So often, we confidently say, "The USFA wants," or "The USFA says," but as far as I can tell the organization is a loose and non-monolithic network of committees, a collection of board members from different constituencies who often disagree with one another, a rather small and overworked office in Colorado Springs, and, I expect, some people who have been around for a long time and whose opinions other people listen to, as well as a number of written policies. But I don't know anyone (and I'm slightly acquainted with many people who work in/for/around the organization) or any group who fits the label. So if you're talking about "The USFA," who is it exactly you mean? Or is it a "what" instead of a "who?", like a rule book or the bylaws? Is there a list of people we could insert when we make assertions about what the USFA wants or says?

Overall, I think this is a pretty accurate read, except I'm not sure that the concept of the National Office as "a rather small and overworked office in Colorado Springs" is that accurate. The office is reasonably-sized, with upwards of 15 employees, and it's own real estate holdings off the OTC campus (not sure if it's USFA-owned or leased). How do you define "small and overworked?"

[Peach]

Overall, I think this is a pretty accurate read, except I'm not sure that the concept of the National Office as "a rather small and overworked office in Colorado Springs" is that accurate. The office is reasonably-sized, with upwards of 15 employees, and it's own real estate holdings off the OTC campus (not sure if it's USFA-owned or leased). How do you define "small and overworked?"

My own organization has around 150 employees. To me, that's a moderately-sized organization. 15 people for a national organization is rinky-dink, though not as rinky-dink as it was 15 years ago. And ownership of real estate was easier at the time the building was acquired, and required less in the way of capital (to the detriment of the economy.)

[TBean]

Overall, I think this is a pretty accurate read, except I'm not sure that the concept of the National Office as "a rather small and overworked office in Colorado Springs" is that accurate. The office is reasonably-sized, with upwards of 15 employees, and it's own real estate holdings off the OTC campus (not sure if it's USFA-owned or leased). How do you define "small and overworked?"

I think the national office is rather small and overworked. Are there 15 people on-site at the National Office, or are National Coaches included in your headcount. While they qualify as employees, they are not exactly helping to administer the organization, nor are they raising money, answering the phones, updating the database or the hundreds of other tasks it takes to run an office. The USA Fencing is understaffed they lack appropriate adminstrative support and some key leadership positions to make the office function reasonably well. Peach is right, 15 people is rinky-dink for an national organization.

[hello?]

Was the question "Is the USFA rinky-dink and overworked for a national organization?" Or "Who do you mean when you say 'the USFA?'"

[Peach]

I'm impressed that the thread hasn't drifted MORE than that. In fact, it sort of makes me nervous when a thread doesn't diverge immediately.

[hello?]

Haha. I know. Kind of like he dog in the movie "UP." "Squirrel!!!!"

By the way, I, for one, don't think of the overworked receptionist in Colorado as "The USFA." Unless, of course, Greg and Christine are answering the phones. : )

[wyoming]

Who is "the USFA?" Now there are probably a few good PHD's waiting for some bright, enterprising young scholars who want to tackle that one... I would think a question like that could embrace philosophy, epistomology, sociology, primate anthropology, business administration, quantum mathematics, material engineering, and maybe even particle physics. Oh, and string theory. Must not forget string theory.

As for me, I shall adopt a more pragmatic description based purely on personal observation:

The USFA is the entity that charges me X number of dollars to publish a membership card, which they used to print for me, but now have me print myself. This card heralds the arrival of a much larger publication, which is supposed to arrive periodically, but instead arrives infrequently or not at all.

This larger document is primarily focused on supporting, promoting, and historisizing a particular ethos of fencer (competitive and/or nationally rated.) The artwork featured therein is perpetually displays a style of bombastic footwork I try disparately to eradicate from my lowly students. One can go on the USFA website (an internet publication) and download additional publications, such as a rule book. To their credit, the USFA does not require a membership fee if one chooses to follow their rules voluntarily, but if if one ever hopes to get recognized in the periodical, you have to pony up.

I am told that my membership card allows me to get into places where other fencers are fencing. Well, that and a registration fee.