[JohnR]

Originally Posted by SeaWolf

john, again, this is not so much an sb.com issue as it is a tournament chairman issue. i will give sb.com credit as they have several members that keep involved and advise others here about issues. some even are on advisor panels, which is great. however, being that this and the fall mda club challenge are just that, club challenges. take sb.com out of the equation for a minute. you are the tourney chair or weighmaster at a shop. someone comes in w/ a fish to weigh in for a club. they ask the member, "who are you fishing for?" they say sb.com. great, now prove to me you are a member? one of the key parts that is hardly checked is that people are up to date/in good standing members of their particular club. it's easy when you are a familiar face at a shop you weigh in at, but what if you are not and are fishing this tournament? how do i know you are part of that club? you don't have membership cards. what's to keep the same person from later weighing in a different fish for a different club? how will i know? i personally am not involved with the rules for the risaa club challenge. that is risaa and bob mueller. i am giving my viewpoints from a tournament's chair position, which i am for other clubs.

Two things: First - a great solution was implemented at the last MDA, having a list of who would be fishing for what club - this took care of exactly what you mentioned plus it made certain that those that belong to multiple participating clubs - and there were many - could not chose depending on which way the wind was blowing or which club needed a little boost. Same with weighing for multiple fish. Now all fish weighed in really should have the tail cut in a specific way (without impacting length) to prevent multiple times being entered. Some tournaments do this and it is a good policy. Also, how many people carry their club membership cards with them? 50% maybe? When a fish is entered in a club tourney, it is easy to check membership standing - this completely fails at the intra-club level, short of the roster. So the rosters work on several levels. Based on the current system, I suppose I could weigh in a fish for RISAA even though I am not a member (I have not gotten around to join yet but the wife so no more fishing commitments )

ok, next issue. you invite sb.com into the tournament. what's to say website x cannot enter it? how about website w's ri forum if they want to enter it and their parent website is already entered into it? how about if i want a group of my friend's that all happen to fish rods i built for them want to enter. are all these still clubs? why can't they be? they paid the fees to enter. what if i want to fish for myself as a club. can i if i pay the entrance fee? do you see what and where this is going? originally, once a club signed up, all members of that club are eligibile to fish. there was no sign up. but, some are members of several clubs. how do you keep track of what club they fish for or if they enter fish for different clubs? so, they started to keep track of names of participants for that club so people couldn't fish for 2 or more clubs during the tournament.

You are now dividing one entity into several. Some Tourneys have fixed group size (Tri State) so a club splits teams into A, B, C, etc. This creates some competition within clubs too. As for a bunch of friends getting together? That's far more loosely based than say S-B, which is a defined entity, like a club. We're defined as in we have a place we meet - online, members are registered, rosters can be defined in advance... I have not given much thought about a manufacture putting a team together, say like Team VS.

now, as far as the majority of the participating clubs entered into the fall mda tournament not being true clubs, i argue that point. i'll give you a couple, one being sb. in more recent years this has been addressed.

I don't want to put gas on a flame but several of the MDA teams, even historically competing teams, are not "legal" clubs so that is a wash. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that a club needs legal status but I am saying that several of your tightly defined "clubs" do not pass legal muster. No more than SB would, no less.

ok, money. the entrace fee for the tournament and raffle prizes are all donated towards the charity. also, if people or clubs wish to give extra, they can make that donation as well. sure, it's all for a good cause, but it is also a club challenge.

- yep, all for a good cause

now, off the serious note. fear? this has nothing to do w/ fear of sb.com. my reasons were said above, but go back and do some searches and see how many people said the same things about fear as some are saying here. then, go check the people that actually weighed fish for sb during those year. yes, sb won it one year, but i believe only 3-5 people even weighed fish! it's easy to talk behind the keyboard, but few have been able to step up to the plate and back it up.

I don't think "fear" is a real reason either. Perhaps with some thinking we'd bring down 100 people, which is obviously has not been the case. We've typically had somewhere between 6 and a baker's dozen fish a tourney, not the 20-40+ members that teams like RIMS et al have entered in the past. Yeh, that year SB won it, 3-4 guys whacked the daylights out of the fish, Hab's, Tattoo, Krispy, and I (sadly) don't recall if there was one other, that put SB over the top. Then guys from WS or RIMS, forgot which but I think RIMS, got all bent out of shape that they lost because those fish were not entered for that team. How many guys did RIMS and Weekapaug have that year? Or the year after when RISAA had some huge number of anglers fishing the tourney?

now, onto the whole club issue. i'd be curious to see how many of the members here that want to fish for sb.com are actually members of another club. so, why would you not fish for that club? why sb.com? some clubs are in need of new blood and members, fresh with ideas and enthusiasm. why not get involved? when clubs start dying, as some have or are showing trends in that way, how are lobbyist going to use rec groups for their backing? does website x.com mean or hold any value to someone like asmfc? is sb.com affiliated with any other organizations? i said this last time john, and i'll say it again, sb.com could be a very important and vital voice in support of fisheries and other issues, but they way i see it right now, it's just a message forum. again, i stress, try and look at this as someone would who is outside of sb.com. then, ask the same questions.

I disagree that we are just a "message forum". Yes, that’s what we revolve around more or less, but we have become a community, and in many ways more so than some clubs. You mention the ones that have failed over the years, well, many have been brought down by squabbles, hands in the cookie jar, and lack of fresh blood, far too narrow of focus, or plain unwillingness to change with the times.



I think we do have some pull on fisheries issues. Not the pull of a MSBA or RISAA but some pull and some influence when muscles are flexed and calls made. I know we are not organized as efficiently as we could be on this. Or as political as we could be. I do all I can and do not have time to do more. Could SB move that way more in the future? Perhaps. But that would entail involvement from others stepping up to the plate to do this. I can't do anymore.



The sad fact is that most clubs generate so few people to attack a subject where it counts in fisheries meetings. RISAA and MSBA being probably the most vocal in RI & Mass, send the most people to hearings and public events but it is still painfully too few doing it and usually the same few (though RISAA impresses me by how broad their influence is on various committees and such). How many clubs don't send anyone? Or don't sit on any committees? Would more than half be a fair number?



Well, not to beat a dead horse , again but you and I are obviously still on opposite sides of the fence on this subject. I can see and even appreciate some of your points. But you seem to minimize what SB is in some areas and maximize what clubs are in other areas. The way I look at it, we define a lot of things of a "club"; camaraderie, education, responsibility, action, community, yet place it in an easy to access format with fewer limitations than some traditional clubs. We are perhaps an extension of the club philosophy in mission without some of the baggage that sometimes impedes regular clubs, at least those that fail. So I feel that in many cases we do define the "spirit" of a club better than many out there now do.



Are we the best club out there? No. Are we the best community (you say message board)? Maybe, maybe not. Some think so and others think not. But do we grab the spirit of a club that is pretty open to all walks? Yeh, I think we do....