2007 Collegiates Review

The Collegiate Competition for 2007 hosted by the USPA was held at Skydive Arizona and was a success in many ways but also brought up many questions amongst the competitors. Everyone attending had a great time and competitors came from all over the Nation to partake in the event.

After making the trip to Skydive Arizona, everyone was well received by the dropzone staff and registered for the competition. A big bonus to arriving early and registering was that the boogie fee was included, so jumps were abundant and aircraft were flying frequently (with the Skydive Arizona fleet being one of the biggest in the nation!). The other thing that happened was that a good number of people saw the effect that our very own forum has had on the college side of the sport. Many students traveled from every corner of the U.S. to compete and then everyone started piecing together who was who from the website. It didn’t take long for the entire group’s true competition values to show through as competitors were sharing resources, advice, and equipment to make sure each and every student made the best showing they could. It was a refreshing experience to see old friends and to make new ones that you felt you already knew.

In addition to the ability to make numerous practice jumps the days before the competition, Skydive Arizona also gave the Collegiate Competition its own landing area away from the boogie side of things. By the way, this didn’t mean extra walking for the competitors; they also provided a trolley from the Collegiate area to the loading area. There was a concern amongst many competitors about trying to focus on scoring points on each skydive and then having the extra pressure of landing with boogie air traffic which made this pre-planned solution a welcome and appreciated one.

Throughout the event several generous happenings surprised the competitors and made the higher registration fee more understandable. First and foremost, the onsite SkyVenture tunnel was not only a location for some great experiences and coaching, 3 hours of time was then donated to the participating competitors. After the competition finished, students from different schools whom had never met were pitching in to have some fun flying with those who were rivals just the day before. Tunnel time proved to be a big learning and memorable experience for everyone.

Another more than helpful surprise and one that is hoped to continue from a competitor’s standpoint is the appearance of Skydive Arizona’s own Arizona Airspeed members Eliana Rodriguez and Craig Girard. These two very well decorated members of the skydiving community were on hand the evening before and during the competition to assist collegiate competitors with preparation and strategy for their upcoming jumps. There was more than a lot of talk around the bonfire about how helpful this was and how much each person learned in the process.

Skydive Arizona was the host location while the USPA was the host of the event. The USPA brought with them not only the game plan for running the show, but also the judges and know-how with them. For many college students, Collegiates is their first skydiving competition experience and an introduction to a more intense side of the sport. Having scores given by official competition judges and then receiving feedback about missed points gave those newer to the sport a greater insight into the inner workings of a more serious event.

For those of you who didn’t make it out to the event, there was a lot of discussion about the future of the competition and the ups and downs of everything from how the competition was run to the location and facilities available. In order to give everyone involved an outlet to voice their opinions, a Forum Topic has been created to gather input on the pluses, the minuses, and the suggestions for the years to come.

As for what was discussed amongst event coordinators and myself, I would like to share the general ideas and responses received. One item of concern brought up during these discussions was the lack of knowledge of how everything is put together and what is involved in staging this sort of event. We all know there is planning and we all know there is a great deal of work going into this, but what are the intricacies that make it extra difficult? I had a chance to talk with dropzone coordinators and with USPA Directors during the competition and I would like to share what I learned.

On the dropzone side of things, I initially had a concern as to whether or not it was alright to place the College Skydiving banner on the building facing the landing area for the event. I found out that there are fairly strict contractual agreements between the USPA and the hosting DZ and that abiding by all of them was more difficult than just asking for one person’s opinion. The bottom line is that our organization was misunderstood as to whether or not a profit was being made and not given back to the competitors, and there was also a lack of communication about whether or not we would be allowed to make a showing. In the end, everyone came to the same decision and had an appreciation for each others’ goals and moved to work towards them. The difficult part of the equation is how to achieve those goals.

The short story of the predicament is that the USPA is the skydiver’s legal association and can provide an airtight contract protecting monetary interests of the event, although it may not be needed for our particular competition. What I mean is that Collegiates is not a “money maker”, so why is there an abundance of concern and energy spent towards protecting monetary interests if they just aren’t there? On the flip side, a hosting dropzone is not likely to make money, or break even for that matter, when it comes to sponsoring the event, so why are we not looking towards making this a big enough event to entice more competition on the hosting side of things and to make it desirable for a dropzone to participate.

This causes two problems for the collegiate skydiver. The first problem is while this may be one’s first competition experience, they are expected to know and abide by all the rules and contractual agreements. The second, and most important, complication deals with a lack of publicity and knowledge in order to gain a larger number of skydivers needed to make the event more enticing to both dropzones and competitors.

Possible solutions to this predicament are acknowledging that this is a learning experience for most so getting competitors there and giving them a reason to come back should take precedent over everything else. By this I mean that allowing students to have access to information, whether it’s been officially recognized by all contractual terms or not, is incredibly helpful from a competitor’s standpoint. If a dropzone intends on hosting the event in a separate landing area, this could be the deciding factor for many competitors as to whether or not to make the trip, which makes this information directly relational to the number of competitors attending. On the USPA’s contractual side of things, maybe line items could be taken a little less seriously and students would have some more freedom to publicize their accomplishments and efforts.

Of course everything is always up for discussion, but this is the first time YOU, the college competitor, has had a voice in the situation. College Skydiving is gaining a lot of ground and support, which means that your participation and input is more readily received now than ever before.

I encourage all of you to participate in the Collegiate Forum Topic and to keep looking for ways to increase the number of competitors, which in turn increases the number of skydivers across the Nation.

A big congratulations and thank you to everyone involved, both competitors and organizers, and we all look forward to making the National Collegiate Competition a consistently bigger and better event.