What Makes an Ultimate Hall of Famer
in the Player Category?

Player Category Eligibility Criteria:  Former players with a distinguished record of competitive achievement at the highest national and/or international levels, with additional consideration given to integrity, longevity, sportsmanship, and character.  To be eligible, players must be the minimum age based on the age limit for the UPA Masters Division.  In order to ensure that players from the early years of Ultimate get fair consideration, the age limit began at Masters age plus 15 years in 2005 (48 years old for males by December 31, 2005, and 45 for females) and decreases by one year each year (45/42 in 2008 and 44/41 in 2009) until it reaches Masters age plus 10 years in 2010 at 43/40, assuming no changes in Masters age.  For purposes of age calculation, the candidate must reach the required minimum age by December 31 for the year under consideration. Deceased candidates are eligible in the year that they would have reached the eligibility age.

Context:  Candidates in the Player category will be reviewed at the same time as candidates in the Contributor category.  The Vetting Subcommittee and the Ultimate Hall of Fame voters will need to make a subjective tradeoff between candidates in the two categories each year.  In the early years, when there are up to eight candidates considered and five selected, it might be expected for there to be 4-6 Player candidates considered out of the eight and 2-4 actually elected out of the five.

Questions to Consider:  Here are some questions (with no “right” answers) to ponder in considering whether the Player candidate merits Ultimate Hall of Fame recognition:

• Was the Player ever regarded as the best player in Ultimate?
  
• Was the Player the best player on his/her team?
  
• Was the Player the best player at his/her position?
  
• Was the Player the best at a particular skill (e.g., skying, popping, hucking)?
  
• Did the Player have an impact on a number of Nationals?
  
• Did the Player display the Spirit of the Game by unholding the standards of sportmanship and character contained therein?
  
• Was the Player a good enough player that he/she could continue to play regularly after passing his/her prime?
  
• Is there any evidence to suggest that the Player was significantly better or worse than is suggested by his/her statistics or popular perception?
  
• If the Player were the best player on his/her team, would it be likely that the team could make/win Nationals?
  
• What players of the candidate's era and of the current era are most comparable?  How is this player better or worse than those comps?  Are those comps in the Hall (or worthy of being in the Hall)?
  
• Was the Player a team leader or strategist whose teams seemed to outperform their abilities?
  
• Was the Player held in high regard by teammates and opponents alike?
  
• Can the history of Ultimate be written without including this Player?
  
• Typical characteristics of an “inner-circle” Hall of Famer:
  
• Can start on O at any position or on D against any opponent for any team
• Is among the best in the game in several specific skills (throwing deep, handling in the zone, skying)
• Is good at just about every specific skill
• Causes other teams to adapt their styles because of him/her
• Can stand out on a windy day, in a swillfest, and on a fast day
• Will still be a stud if one aspect of his/her game is taken away
  
• Typical characteristics of a borderline Hall of Famer:
  
• Can start on O at his position or on D against a certain type of offensive player
• Is among the best in the game at at least one specific skill, and pretty damn good at some more
• Is good at most skills, and no worse than average Regionals player on others
• Makes other teams take notice of him/her
• Thrives in almost all conditions
• Might have an occasional bad game

What Makes an Ultimate Hall of Famer
in the Contributor Category?

Contributors:  Individuals who have made exceptional contributions that have furthered the growth, reputation and character of the sport, in categories such as development, administration, media, and coaching.

Context:  Candidates in the Contributor category will be reviewed at the same time as candidates in the Player category.  The Vetting Subcommittee and the Ultimate Hall of Fame voters will need to make a subjective tradeoff between candidates in the two categories each year.  In the early years, when there are up to eight candidates considered and five selected, it might be expected for there to be 1-3 contributor candidates considered out of the eight and 0-2 actually elected out of the five.

Types of Contributor Candidates:  As a broad category, there can be many different types of contributions considered.  Candidates may have made contributors in one or more of these categories.  The following outlines several broad categories, although it is not necessarily all-inclusive.

• Founders and Developers:  These candidates would have played a pivotal role in developing the rules of the game and how it is played.
  

• Administrators:  These candidates would have made their impact on the administration of the sport.  This could include the provision of watershed strategic leadership, the fostering of new divisions of play, extended and material contributions in the day-to-day administration, etc.
  
  
• Organizers:  This includes individuals who have made their mark in organizing significant play related activities.  This could include establishing and fostering the growth of significant summer leagues and clubs, organizing tournaments that defined the sport in their time, and generally promoting the growth of the sport by making something special happen.
  
  
• Promoters:  This subcategory could include everything from contributions to the stock of quality media, the authoring of seminal print materials, doing effective groundbreaking public relations work for Ultimate, or having a significant role in commercial products related to Ultimate.
  
  
• Coaches:  In the first couple decades of the sport, player-captains served the role of coach, in defining new play strategy and putting together championship teams.  As time goes on it appears there may be more true coaches whose role may be appropriately recognized in the Ultimate Hall of Fame.
   

• Can the history of Ultimate be written without including this candidate?
  
• Was the way the game was played significantly impacted by changes introduced by the candidate?
  
• Was the way the sport was administered or organized significantly impacted by changes introduced by the candidate or by their contributions?
  
• Did the candidate make his/her impact over an extended period of time?  Is that impact still being felt today
  
• Were the candidate’s accomplishments widely recognized at the time and/or did they become apparent only after the passage of time?
  
• Did the candidate have a significant playing career which, while perhaps not sufficiently outstanding to qualify for an Ultimate Hall of Fame spot solely on playing merits, nonetheless strengthens the overall candidacy?
  

Who or What is Deserving of Ultimate Hall of Fame
Special Merit?

Special Merit:  This category will accommodate all other potential candidates not included in the first two categories, whether teams, equipment, groups, individuals, or whatever, that defined the nature of the sport or its competitive spirit, or contributed to make Ultimate special, in the context of their day.  Because of the nature of the category, no more than one Special Merit inductee would be permitted in any year, with no requirement for a Special Merit inductee in every year.

Context:  Candidates for Special Merit would be reviewed separately from candidates in the Player or Contributor categories.  The Vetting Subcommittee would have the ability to recommend a Special Merit candidate if they so chose which would be approved only if they received no fewer than 90% of all the Ultimate Hall of Fame votes.  A Special Merit inductee does not count against the maximum five Player and Contributor inductees permitted in a given year, and further does not include subsequent voting rights for the Ultimate Hall of Fame.

Types of Contributor Candidates:  This is a catch-all category and the high supermajority voting requirement should ensure that a very high standard of “specialness” is met.  As defined above, the initial Organizing Committee felt that this category might include teams (such as Columbia High School, or teams with incredibly successful runs such as New York, DoG, Godiva), equipment (the 80 mold, Discraft Ultrastar, the Master Frisbee disc), groups or individuals (such as the defining Glassboro zone defense of the late ‘70s).  The idea is that there are stories that need to be told to fully describe Ultimate and its history that don’t get captured in an individual award.

Questions to Consider:  Here are some questions (with no “right” answers) to ponder in considering whether a candidate merits Ultimate Hall of Fame Special Merit:

• Can the history of Ultimate be written without including this candidate?
  
• Was the Special Merit candidate recognized in his/her day as being “special?”
  
• Can the story about Special Merit candidate be documented (in words and pictures) in a way that future generations can understand its significance?