|
Post by schlager7 on Aug 3, 2011 8:46:16 GMT -6
If you follow FNet you already know this. If you do not coach you may have no interest in this.
This last weekend Greg Dillworth, Executive Director of the USFA (or USA Fencing) attended the annual meeting of the United States Fencing Coaches Association.
Allen Evans on Fencing Net posted a brief capsule of points discussed:
1. The insurance for the USFA is concerned that many members of fencing clubs are NOT USFA members and the possible liability that entails. How this will impact future coverage by the insurance company is being discussed. The USFA may have to respond to changes in our insurance coverage for coaches and clubs in the 2012-2013 season after negotiations with the insurance company are concluded.
2. Greg discussed the USFA Professional Membership, and its possible benefits to professional coaches, focusing on the background check that is part of the membership package. This is not news to USFA members, but might have been to some USFCA members, who don't see value in holding membership in both organizations.
3. The USFA is committed to coaching education, and cooperating with the USFCA to further coaching development in the US. The USOC continues to be difficult to work with, and the USFA will be looking to replicate Coaches College (or something similar) at another location next summer. Last year, the USOC again left the USFA hanging until the last minute and then denied the USFA space. Future coaching training will probably no longer occur at the OTC.
|
|
|
Post by monitorlizerd on Aug 3, 2011 9:38:55 GMT -6
You know, I'd be very interested in finding out if any of the other individual sport organizations are holding their coaching seminars, etc. at the OTC...or is everyone being denied???
|
|
|
Post by seguin on Aug 3, 2011 10:57:58 GMT -6
Actually, I'd be curious to learn HOW the other sports NGBs handle their coaching development.
And, yeah, what monitorlizerd said. I'm curious how the USOC handles their relationship with the other sports NGBs.
|
|
|
Post by joevisconti on Aug 3, 2011 11:24:48 GMT -6
Frankly, I was most intrigued by point 3. I could easily see the USFA abdicating the responsibility of coaching deverlopment to another organization (like the USFCA).
At the elite level they rarely use coaches developed in this country but rely on Europeans.
|
|
|
Post by katyblades on Aug 7, 2011 18:20:52 GMT -6
It looks like economics may force the change in the USFA that other factors have not. To increase the USFA participation, there needs to be benefits. Current benefits.
1. USFA magazine. 2. USFA tournaments.
As I have discussed before, the current scenario of USFA tournaments in the Gulf Coast Division are not a proper stimulation to force USFA membership. I have no incentive to become a USFA club, or become a USFA coach. The coaches nationally that matter know who I am, and the others are usually "wanna bes" anyway. Without proper stimulation, many local club members never join the USFA.
There are many ways to increase membership participation, and one would be by having USFA tournaments as part of every new class session or on a periodic basis. This would have the undesired effect of removing the exclusionary procedure that is currently part of the norm for tournament hosting, but all things must suffer for the greater economic good.
You can't force people to join the USFA without motivation. As a coach, you can't bring enough equipment for 10 people in my Beamer. I definitely could not make all my club members go to a local tournament. I can't outfit them and don't have motivation to. They will have to make that decision based upon the USFA enticing them.
The marketing of the USFA has been to see how we can "force" people to a policy. Good policy will encourage participation. There will always be growth pains, but a multiplication of opportunity increases membership anyway. Ultimately, the customer's desires have to be considered as part of any growth management.
I remember the Grapevine Nationals SSCC meeting, when Jerry Benson left because we could not force our members to attend his SSCC event. As fencers, we have to be careful that nationally there is not a movement to force local participation in some event that benefits the leaders and does not benefit the customers.
|
|