YGO issue: Pre-sponsored riders.......schould they.....or schouldn't they

MLB

MLB

Active member
Ok.....soo this is just an issue tread. So for next year's YGO, schould they let sponsored kids ride in the YGO.....or schould it be "Fresh" talent?

Just want to know how people feel.
 
THe whole point of the YGO is to give unsponsored skiers a chance. thats why its bullshit that matt walker won. and you spell schould 'should'.
 
i think if the already sponsored kid wants new sponsors, this could be a great, easy way for them to do it. i dont have a problem with it
 
Yeah they shouldbe allowed, because the kids that are sponsored and winning the comps are kids that really just need to catch a break... like, you can't expect every single kid that wants to make a name for themselves to do it by winning the us open, there needs to be more events that offer exposure, and the ygo series are one of them...
 
so... you're saying the kids that deserve to be pro skiers, are the ones that HAVEN'T worked their asses off winning other comps, filming shit, and trying their hardest to make connections??...
 
^ Your not understanding what we are saying. THere are PLENTY of other competitions that sponsored athletes can do, but the YGO is the only one that doesn't let sponsored athletes in so that the kids who AREN'T sponsored can show what they can do, without being behind the better sponsored skiers.
 
I think there needs to be a clearer definition between sponsored riders and kids that get flow from companies. Like, kids that get a single free pair of skis should still be considered "fresh talent", if no one's ever heard of them
 
i think it is pretty obvious that sponsored riders should not be competing in an event designed to showcase unsponsored riders.
 
nope, this isn't even a pro contract, its an amateur flow contract. the purpose was to use this event to make those connections and get their foot in the door with opportunities for more stuff down the road. kids like matt walker already have made these connections and have their "foot in the door"
 
I agree, that's why companies make it hard to get sponsored in the first place...You have to be super motivated and dedicated to the sport all in one...only a few kids will fully have this drive in the long run, which is what they are looking for...long term relationships.
 
I'd say it depends. If you are sponsered by a local shop or something fine. But the kids that have been winning have been kids with ski sponserships from Liberty kids that already have goggle helmet and every other kind of sponsership. It gets ridiculous for kids who are trying to win their first sponsership
 
if you can't beat an am whos sponsored what makes you think you deserve to go to the orage masters and ski with the pros? sorry anyone should able to compete in the ygo sponsored or not.
 
yep, you gotta go against the best to prove you can hang with the best..otherwise, what is the point? What's next, do we want to give young kids handycaps like in golf too...Young kids need to focus more on living and growing up while they ski for themselves for a while...There are too many young kids focusing way to hard on getting sponsorships and the sad thing is, with these contests and shit, we are only encouraging it...remember when tanner broke out and he was like 16 or so and that was SUPER young at the time? what's all this 12-14 year old bs...these kids don't even know right from wrong yet. I think the sport needs more structure..but that is too obvious.
 
But there's so many levels of sponsorship, a kid could be sponsored by his local shop and just like 15% off stuff there, or some kid could be sponsored by a ski company and get as many skis as his heart desires, so it's kind of a gray area.
 
i say fresh talent if your sponserd even just alittle bit be thankful and give another kid a chance to feel how you felt when you got sponserd
 
yeah have you ever wondered WHY its overlooked....because you all think you are good but you suck....you huck and think that you are sick becuase you can do two switchups on a 6ft flat bar.....and do "tech" rail tricks that are cool and like rollerblading....fuck off buddy you and your whole area suck.
 
as someone already said...the YGO is an event to showcase NEW talent, not talent that everyone has seen. if you have your name on the am or pro list for a skiing company...you should be thankful...let some other people share the spotlight..yea i know no one thinks like that...but they should.
 
ok, so how are you guys going to implement this plan? if you only get 25% discount off your local shop then you can enter, but 50% off is way too pro. it would be ridiculously hard to decide, much less enforce who is sponsored enough to be eligable or not, so the Siver guys did the easy thing, they made it so you take all of the sponsors and prizes or none of it, so you have to give up all your existing sponsors, so makes it your decision, if you are happier with your present sponsor situation than you would be if you won, you dont enter, if you would be happier with your sponsor situation after winning the ygo, you enter. tanner could enter if he really wanted, but if he won, he would either take the ygo contract or stay with oakley/armada, so he doesnt enter because oakley and armada gives him more, there are no you cant enter if your at this level, its your own decision, but all this complaining about the ygo is kinda gay, you guys should just learn some new shit and go win instead of complaining until the level of competition at the YGO gets to your level.
 
that wasnt very nice...and the way you said it makes it seem like everybody from the midwest sucks when probably most of them are better than you are
 
I respect that, but I feel kids that are already hooked up should let kids thats are fresh and have NOTHING have the spot before them, maybe the already competitive and amateur riders as back-up or in a worst-comes-to-worst situation. I don't know, I always thought it was NO sponsored riders (companies or anything) got to join, then I heard about all these kids winning that were already hooked up.
 
My opinion is that i think that if you have the name of a team behind you, and discounts then you already have your foot in the door. I live in a place where there are no huge mountains......or companies, or scouts looking around for new tallent. I know i suck at skiing, but there are guys who are AWSOME here.

We then get the news that there is this comp where you can get the foot in the door, and guarenteed that people are gonna check you out. But then you get everything thrown away by people who already have support because they were born in the right place. I say that if you back by ANYBODY for anything then just stick with it, why not let the guys with nothing have a chance.
 
Ummm....born in the wrong place? I am from Virginia and grew up skiing east coast shit until I was 19 years old. I moved to Colorado and took it into my own hands to become the rider I've turned into...no one wants to hear your sobb story ...If you don't like where you live, then move...if you can't move, then you aren't old enough to drive which means you should be thinking about middle school girls and funny jokes to tell at lunch time.
 
bassically i am gonna have to agree with the ginger kid that they call "MAtt walker" if ur not willing to compete against sponsored kids to ern sponsorship then you don't deserve to win the majority of the kids that were at the copper stop ( only one i was at) were sponsered also the main point of this comp. wasn'to go out there and give some kid some free stuff and then expect to never hear from him again. the point of this comp was to give a rider that had the skill level to be pro the exposer oppertunities that are needed for pro and semi pro riders
 
well you obviously dont really see any kids who are on the am teams of any companies. I think with matt walker it was ok and stuff cuz he was on liberty, a small company. He wanted to move up onto better things and i think that iwas cool. They said in the rules that sponsored kids could enter, just had to drop the sponsors if they won. Which he did. I see no problem with it if you follow the rules of winning
 
Mike Nick decided to put on a comp for skiers. It's his comp. He can set it up, make the rules, and allow entrance to whoever he wants, because he's the one running it. However, if you don't like the way he's set it up, here's what you do:

Shut the fuck up.

There is so much constant bitching on this site. Every 15 year old "in this industry" (I use the phrase loosely) has an opinion, and all of those opnions manifest themselves as idiots complaining about something they have no right to. You haven't been hard done by because Strenio or Walker can enter a comp and win. If you want to start your OWN comp, and say they can't enter, go right ahead. Until then stop whining.
 
if you can just drop your "sponsor", then you arent really sponsored are you? sponsorship, in the professional sense, means you have a legal, binding contract, to essentially be a living advertisement for a company. if you dont have that, then by all means, enter the comp and show whoever has been hooking you up that they should have signed you on for real. i'm curious to see what goes down at stratton. you might be surprised to see what some of the kids from the mid atlantic can bring to the table.
 
its already been explained that the situation kinda sorts itself out, the sponcorship from the companies given from winning the ygo is set at a certain level and that level is either better or worse than someone's prexisting sponcors and its their decision to either take the offer or not to take it
 
u can drop ur sponnsors with a resignation letter and exceppting the penelties on it if there are ne for breaking contract
 
I know this is kinda pussy, but I think they should maybe have two different ages. I mean I wouldnt consider a 17 year old a "young" gun. maybe like 15 and under and 15 and over. I mean theres kids that are younger and have not as much experience so the younger kids would have there sponsors and the really good skiers like Matt Walker here could havea his own.
 
Yeah, I think it's kind of lame that a lot of the kids in the YGO had ski sponsors. I mean, if you get some free stuff from your local shop, that's cool and all...but if you're already on an am team, go to the US Open, not YGO.
 
Nah, kind of kills the purpose of YGO if they allow sponsored riders in.

I think that no riders sponsored by a company: Unlimited Amount of Skis, Money, one pair of skis, w/e, shoudln't be allowed in.

Store discounts? : Unless its a "big" kind of thing, then yes. They're not getting anything for free or really have any contract yet.
 
this comp is to help kids blow up. say maybe a kid is hooked up with a ski company and gets free skis but no body knows about him. it really isn't that big of a deal about kids already being sponsored entering the comp. many kids that entered had hook ups with companies
 
hahaha this is kinda funny

Well if your on flow team with a ski company and that you only receive a pair of skis per year and not much chances of making it up thwe ladder without having to compete ALOT and travel everywhere, then the YGO is one hella good oportunity.

One pair of skis dont make much difference most of the kids get their skis paid by their parents anyway (some doesnt, i know) So the guy that get al his skis stuffs from his parent dosent pay for his skis, just like the small sponsored kid.

My opinion is that if you can drop your actual sponsor, it's because it's not going anywhere and you need to move on. Seriously, A spot at the masters and an actual contract definatly make a lotof people wondering if they should enter or not.

It's just as the forum yung blood and all those make it to the bigger level comps.

By the way, why would you call out Matt Walker on that. If your not as good as a sponsored rider, why would you get sponsored???

Anyway, anyone who cant beat Matt dosent deserve to be sponsored cause matt is just a silly little leprechaunt, well he is kinda good at skiinng too
 
yeah i agree, i was thinking that myself. 18 year olds shouldn't be "young guns". there should be two divisions. A young gun, and a well... older gun. why should kids that are really good for their age (15-16) lose to someone who's 18 and already sponsored. my idea: 2 divisions. 16 and under, and 16 and up.
 
this thread is annoying, because everyone keeps bitching about how non-sponsored riders should be the only ones able to compete. Honestly, if they are wanting to compete, there sponsors must not be fulfulling there needs, or they're looking for something bigger. Flow teams are great, but just because you get a few pairs of skis a year, doesn't make you unable to compete, or look for bigger, better things. And it's a great experience too. The masters is the best event in skiing, and it would be amazing to be involved.
 
exactly...if you can't beat matt in the first place, why should you think you are good enough to get deals with companies? sounds like a lot of kiddies better start practicing...
 
I think that this is an open arguement and will go nowhere because there is no right and wrong. Anyone can get sponsored its easy shit I did it. Anyone these days can know a rep and get a free pair of skis and goggles. What I'm trying to say is being sponsored means nothing but being sponsored and getting paid means something. I believe that if you are good enough, on contract and getting paid you should not be allowed to compete at the YGO. Thats my rant on this and I think its legit. Peace out A-Town
 
OH MY FUCKING LORD THE WORLD HAS COME TO AN END!!! SOMEONE WHOS APARENTLY BETTER THEN THE OTHER KIDS WON!!

serious guys, how many of you competed? ok now why should it matter to you who wins? aparently walker is pretty sick and can ski well so he deserved to win. everyones claiming they are the ones who know exactly what its about: " BUT ITS FOR UNSPONSERED RIDERS ONLY!!!" did it say that anywhere? were you kids the ones who created the competition and know exactly what it's intended for? because last time i checked, it was mike nick who made the rules, had the intentions and knew exactly what he wanted. i'm sure if something happened he didnt want, he would have changed something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top