Fireside Chats with Jewann: Nationals '08

Welcome to the first installment of Fireside Chats with Jewann (Sorry, I feel awkward when referring to myself using my given name), but without the Great Depression and polio, instead replaced with ultimate! And if you're looking for my trademark vulgarity and general tomfoolery/outlandishness/ridiculousness, this isn't the entry for it. Shocking, right?

Anyway, as I'm sure most of you know by now, the UBC Thunderbirds won the UPA College Championships, and while this college season is over and done with, there's always next season to look forward to and work towards. There are fifteen teams that missed out on the big prize, and even more that missed out on a chance at Natties. Which of these fifteen teams will be back next year, and which relative unknown will be breaking onto the scene? Which ballers can we expect to make big plays, and which new names are we going to need to have on our radar?

With the end of this 2008 season still fresh in mind, I thought I'd have a chat with Neva Cherniavsky, a player and blogger with ICUltimate who made the trip out to Boulder last month, who was super cool and took some time to answer some of my questions. I asked her about her impressions of Natties 2008, and what to look forward to in the 2009 season.


Of all the teams that you were able to see in Boulder, which teams stood out to you the most?

I worry that I am West coast biased, but the teams that stood out to me were the semis teams -- UCLA, UCSB, British Columbia, and UW. The quarters teams were a tier below, and I would include Texas on that tier. UCLA, UCSB, and UW are young and are going to be GOOD in the next few years. Consistent coaching really helps. I am less clear on British Columbia -- Kira Frew turned in such a dominating performance that I don't know how they will deal with her loss.


I know it's extremely premature, but which teams do you see back at Nationals next year?

Definitely UCSB and UCLA, and probably Colorado since there's the third bid. I think UW will make it out of the Northwest and I would be surprised if Stanford didn't make it again. Not sure if there are 3 spots for the NW, but if so, it will be a battle for the third spot again. Oregon will definitely contend -- their core is also really young, and their coach is really good. Georgia Bosscher has a few more years so Wisconsin will be back, as will Ottawa (Anne Mercier). Michigan seemed to have great team chemistry. I would have to do more investigating to know who will be back, though.


Which teams not present at Nationals this year do you predict will be there next year? Or, which teams that were there do you see making a deeper run in the tournament the next time around (Oregon, Ottawa, etc.)?

Well, definitely those two. Stanford will almost certainly be back. I think New England remains up for grabs -- no dominance from the two teams there, so any of Tufts, Dartmouth, or Brown could take it next year. The AC and ME both also have a lot of parity (the ME for that second spot).


At the risk of being blunt, last year's final game was sort of boring. But this year, I'd have to say I was a lot more engaged. Both teams were not afraid to pick it up and huck it, and we also saw both teams throwing some interesting zone (by interesting, I mean different from the traditional 3-man cup that I'm used to). UCSB had that 3-3-1, and UBC used a 4-1-2, with Kira running in the middle. What do you think the deciding factor in that game was, defense or offense?

Definitely defense. UBC's defense won the game -- it had to, considering that it was a comeback. Moreover, essentially UBC forced UCSB out of their comfort zone on offense by forcing them to make a lot of passes. It was totally different from the semi, which was much more offensively oriented.


Speaking of Kira Frew, will UBC be able to duplicate their success without her?

Great question. They have a lot of people on that team that are young and play well (Tory Hislop, Robyn Fashler). But she is really, really good, and her calmness as well as her athleticism led to a lot of their success. I don't know what happens next year. They are well-coached, but there are a lot of well-coached teams with good players in the NW region.


I think it's safe to say that the Northwest has to be one of the most difficult regions to make it out of in women's ultimate. The Northwest has also had a pretty strong hold on the championship for the past few years now, with UC-Davis winning in '04, Stanford winning in '03 and from '05-'07, and UBC winning this year. Do you think this NW dominance will be a continuing trend, or will some other team challenge it?

Continuing trend. The growth in this part of the country is just phenomenal. The best high school teams are from here, too, and in Seattle we even have a very competitive middle school league. Those players tend to stay in the Pacific NW, or at least on the west coast (well, except for the ones that go to Carleton). There's a cost factor too -- it's much cheaper to go to school in state. My impression is that other parts of the country don't have the same kind of youth infrastructure we have here. Plus, practices start outside in January. It's a big advantage.


Speaking more generally, the West Coast has had more success at Nationals than any other geographic region. All the teams playing in the semifinals this year were West Coast teams. Do you think this is a result of their "weather advantage", or is it due to a different style of play?

I think the weather advantage helps a lot. A smaller advantage is the number of very good coaches from the very good club teams. Back when I played, only a few teams had coaches, and they did quite well (Stanford, Carleton, UNCW). In NE, all the teams were coached, and all were very good, making quarters consistently. But that difference has worn away -- now almost every team has a coach, and now perhaps we're seeing a distinction in the quality of the coaching.


As mentioned, up until this year, Stanford had won four times in a five year period. Do you see another dynasty arising, or will women's ultimate see more parity?

I would expect to see more parity, at least among those West coast teams. It was surprising to me that Stanford won all those years in a row. They dominated when I played -- but I mean DOMINATED. They won 100 games in a row in the late nineties. The current winning streak hasn't been this undefeated streak over three years, the way it was then. So even now, there's more parity, and I think we'll continue to see that.


On to more player-oriented questions. Which players stood out the most to you at Nationals?

Kira Frew. Anne Mercier. Andrea Romano. Taz. Georgia Bosscher. Lucia Derks. Michelle Ng.


Which younger players caught your eye in this tournament, and which do you see making a splash next year?

Anne Mercier will continue to absolutely dominate. She'll be the story for the next two years. Emelie McKain on Wisconsin is very good, as is Kaela Jorgenson on UCSB.


There are a few younger players, like Shannon O'Malley and Emelie McKain, who played ultimate not only in high school but also for the US Junior Worlds team. Then again, there are players like Janel Venzant and Becky Malinowski who are making equally impressive contributions to their teams, and have never played ultimate before college. Do you see a trend of more experienced players coming into college ultimate, or more athletic, motivated players coming into the sport?

These days, it seems like all the top players played in high school at the very least. That experience definitely helps a lot (though it burns some players out, which is sad, because college ultimate is the best thing ever).


At the risk of asking something "controversial", what did you think of the Callahan results, both open and women's? Personally, I feel that Kira Frew is an absolutely ridiculous player, and if this were the NBA draft, she would without a doubt be anyone's #1 pick. But I'd also go out on a limb and say that she'd rather have the championship trophy than the Callahan trophy, as big of an honor as that is. The Callahan award comes down to voting, and obviously the winners got the most votes. So what's the big deal?

One of my favorite moments of college Nationals was seeing Kira Frew lifted up by her UBC teammates with this enormous beautiful grin on her face. She will never ever forget leading her team to victory at college Nationals. Yes, of course she'd prefer to be the National champion. It's a no-brainer.

On the other hand ... we as players need to decide how much we want the Callahan to be a popularity contest. The Wisconsin women wanted to honor the contribution and commitment of their captain, by making her their nominee and doing their best to be sure she stood with four others center stage at Nationals. I think any team would do the same for a beloved captain and teammate. But for her to win, when she's not the best player on her team and when the second place finisher so clearly deserved the title, felt unfair. Frankie from USC noted that some of it might have been anti-Canadian bias, and that's something I completely don't get. There are not many years when a player so clearly and unequivocally deserves the Callahan. She brought her team to Nationals, she dominated play the entire tournament, and she had a fantastic game in the finals to bring home the championship. The Callahan would have been icing on the cake -- but, no doubt, she deserved that honor.


Finally, what are you expecting for the 2008-2009 season, and what/who do you think our readers should be looking out for?

I think you can expect to see a lot more of Anne Mercier. She's only 19 years old and I thought she was the second-best player at the tournament. She made Team Canada and will be playing at Worlds in August (in Canada, the Worlds team must take players from other regions, unlike in the US). On the field, she looks incredibly polished and mature; she reminds me of Julie Baker, who carried Davis to the championship a few years ago.

I think both UCLA and UCSB will be back, and their rivalry will continue. UCSB will have Steve Dugan as a full-time coach, most of their players are young, and Andrea Romano is coming back for a fifth year. The loss of Barry will hurt, but the others in the handler core will be back and better. UW is also returning nearly everyone, losing only Lisa Niemann. The other five club players will be back. Plus, some of their younger players will be getting additional club experience. Look for Georgia Bosscher to continue to improve, and to step up in her captain role on Wisconsin. UCLA is also almost entirely young players, and they are so well-coached; expect them back in the top four. The Callahan race next year will be crazy!

_____________________________________________________

So that's my first stab at non-Illinois, non-personal writing (even though I actually did very little of the writing), and I hope it was entertaining enough. I want to give a big thanks to Neva for her insight and time, and I hope I can keep doing Fireside Chats with knowledgeable people about interesting things like this for the rest of the summer, because Lord knows ya'll don't want to hear about my summer ultimate exploits ...