Am I'm that far off base?
 

I sent the following message to the BOD:

Dear BOD Members,
The consideration of a special category for an organizer would be detrimental to cooks and the other sponsors and organizers of cookoffs. The cooks would not have sufficient time to plan their agenda by scheduling vacations and time off and as a result may decide to wait to commit to any cookoff until the “BIG ONE” is firmed up on both date and money. Smaller purse cookoffs would not be able to compete as they have a stringent set of rules that have worked for years for all the cookoffs. Also, how can the density rules, time lines and guaranteed purse be applied to protect both the cooks and organizers on a definite maybe? Cooks not committing can cause some of the backbone contests of KCBS to either fail or seek different sanctioning because of participation.
Now one person who is responsible for a very minuscule percentage of all cookoffs needs SPECIAL rules to do what hundreds and hundreds of organizers and promoters have been doing for years and years. W H Y ?
He has threatened to take his toys and leave the playground after demeaning the BOD and its authority. This has been threatened in the past and KCBS is still the premier sanctioning body while the fly-by-night promoters and pie-in-the-sky conmen tend to come and go.
Mack & Sharon Yarbrough
Smoke’n Ice
Members, cooks and CBJ’s

I received the following from Linda which is what I would expect from any Member:
Thank you so much for your input. This will be a very difficult decision but we will do our bet to make it work for everyone.

Best in BBQ
Linda Mullane

I received this from Candy:


Mack,

Thank you for voicing your opinion. May I ask how you heard this information? From my perspective, it seems that you had to hear this from a member of the board. There is nothing posted publicly (that I've seen) as to the agenda on this special meeting, which leads me to believe that a board member solicited your opinion hoping that your voice would sway the outcome one way or another.

While you and I may need to schedule events early in the year, many don't have to do that. The teams that cook 30+ contests a year are in a different category (and usually ToY) while "little" guys like you and me are lucky to win one once and a while.

In the last couple of years, many teams would hold off committing to a contest until the last minute hoping that that would get them a higher team number and maybe a more preferential spot on the judging table. Rules were changed to eliminate the perceived number preference.

When an organizer lands a big sponsor, like Kingsford or Walmart or NASCAR, and has been doing contests well over a decade, that person is in a different category than the Rotary or Lions Club, which needs 90 days or more to assemble a good event and all the assistance that KCBS can provide. Rules have often been changed and adjusted to deal with circumstances as they arise.

No matter what you say and how acidly you say it, KCBS and it's board can only be demeaned by its own actions or inactions in the service of its members, whether cooks, judges or organizers.

Best regards to you!

Candy

I know that I can be a pain but am I that wrong?

That was a lot of words to say "money talks". http://www.divaherself.com/funny/blank.gif

Please keep us informed on who responded to you and who didn't.

It seems that Candy thought that your email was a bit on the harsh side and maybe a little venomous. It didn't read that way to me.

I don't feel strongly about this one way or the other, so I can't answer as to whether you are right or wrong.

As long as the rules are clear and made available and are implemented after that happens; I really don't care.

I applaud you on writing to the board though. Silence helps no one.

Eric

I don't know what your email is referencing, as I didnt have any background on the "special" catagory you mention.So dont know what is proposed there... But in general, I think some of your suppositions are wrong...

As a cook, unless an event is is going to fill quickly (like the Lawrence Sertoma, or Roots Fest, etc) I will always hang onto my entry fee $$, as long as humanly possible. If for no other reason, than you never know what is going to come up - and you may not be able to get a refund. Or many times, I dont have a weekend free up until literally days before a cookoff. There is more than one event that I paid on arrival last year. I think, esp. in this economy, most folks hold onto thier money as long as possible. I don't think you can blame a looming large purse event for keeping folks from holding that cash off. I will hold it until the deadline everytime.

As far as doing things organizers have done for years and years.... I have not seen many other organizers pull off the kind of Purse Ronnie does. The two I know that do, are both members here... and I know either one will tell you, that it takes alot to bring the big dollars to the table, or Harleys, or whatever... Big prizes, etc mean needing more flexibility sometimes.

I would think the visablity for KCBS with NASCAR, Walmart, etc and the increases prize pots for KCBS members, would allow for flexibility. As a cook, I would be a little angry if I had to cook an event as unsanctioned, that has been sanctioned in the past, due to inflexibility of the board. Esp if it is a $50K, or 100K event.

Also, as a member, the size of the events bring in a nice chunk of sanctioning fees... which should help KCBS with meeting thier goals/vision statement.

Having said that... I would expect that same flexibility for any organizer, that has a history working with KCBS. It is part of the value of the organization, and BBQ family... And maybe changing some of the rules or modifying them, would help more competitions have the flexibility to land larger purses/sponsors.

So who are the fly by night conmen you refer to?

One would hope, but it has recently been demonstrated otherwise.

Yeah, and this is the difficulty with having 'flexible' rules.

Rather than have flexinle rules, as has been said, it might be time for a tiered approach to organizers, which is still dfined and upheld.

That needs to be emphasized.:!:

More tiers and rules dont help, instead of letting pissing matches occur, common sense and what is best the org should prevail. If there weren't constant lil power plays going, you would think these things could be worked out. And they definatley should all be worked out between the organizers and KCBS... vs. played out partially in front of the members, so we can all arm chair quarterback the plays.

We shouldn't even see it.... if an event is sanctioned it is on the site and if it is not, it isnt. Organizers shouldn't have to worry about dealing with all the cooks and thier input on sanctioning to boot. Counterproductive at best right?

Over-regulating, and over defining things is what got us here, IMHO.

What is going to happen, is something similar to what Big Creek is doing.... You will guarantee "X" in prize money.... but it will grow based on team count or new sponsors coming on board. The organizer can keep in contact with the cooks an any updates that are warranted. If the money is there, cooks will come... even if the final value is not determine until after the guaranteed amount is determined.

Many organizers are putting Minimum money "x", but note 100% of all entries will be repaid, etc.... and then put the entries on their website... so you can do your own math...

I believe that Arlie Brag, ArlieQ, spoke to the board at the last meeting about the need to enforce rules that are the same for all. My first large contests for KCBS were the Las Vegas contests at Mandalay bay that he put on. I'm not sure but, I don't think he asked for special rules.

I think Candy's post is spot on. Rules can and have been changed to deal with situations as they arise. We may or may not see them, at the boards perview.

I don't have any skin in the game, or reason to see one side or the other "win" (if there is a winner) -- I would just like to see folks work together as adults. The board should be able to address situations as they come up, and rather than put something up against an arbitary rule ( are the dates/timelines given based on data points, or were they just chosen as a best guess) I would like to see decisions based on passing a litmus test of: Does it further the KCBS Mission/Grow the base? Does it benefit the cooks? Judges? If it does, than it should get consideration based on the specific facts at the time.

Arlie is one of the two organizers I was referring to (trying not to put any names out there...) If he had a big sponsor that he was working with, I would hope that KCBS would work with him, as long as he was in communication with them. What if another Mandalay Bay event came available tied to the rodeo or something... and was at 88 days.... I would hope KCBS would work with whomever it is to make sure the event happens. Again, putting all personal pissing matches, and agendas aside, and furthering the reach of the KCBS by tying it to a high profile event, and giving the cooks another great event with a great purse.

I know that some of the requirements are a little more stringent these days on the guarantee of funds, and timelines. Arlie runs first class events, and I would hope the time he has spent building that reputation would allow him to be able to work with folks in the best interests of the sponsors/events and cooks.

As we get more events with more money -- as TV gets involved, etc. We will have to find ways to be flexible and grow those opportunities... Or we can chose to not be flexible, and those events will still go on, just on thier own.

Maybe we decide to lock in dates, and make things hard and fast. If that doesnt fit another type of event that wants to go in direction "x", then a new group can go there... doesnt make either one bad... or either one right, or wrong... just different. I would think we want folks to work together rather than factionalize and dilute things. But will it effect anything? probably not - right; KCBS will live on regardless, if things dont pan out, it will just be more choice for me as a cook... I can go to KCBS, FBA, IBCA, NEBS, and then there are the 100s of events that have no sanctioning body... but are run by reputible organizations - and they will live on also. As a cook, its all good for me. I am just tired of all the armchair quarterbacks arguing about what may or may not have been said/done behind closed doors, in a hallway or wherever. And all the hearsay. Let's let it play out, and trust that the board is doing what they feel is best. Members will prove out if it is what is best or not.



At the end of the day... I just want to have contests to cook.

Yet another experienced organizer, trying to lock down a hard-dollar sponsor, was denied sanctioning although in communication with KCBS about the timeline on that sponsor.

At the end of the day, I just want to have KCBS-sanctioned contests to cook, where the sanctioning guidelines have been applied equilaterally. The "special circumstances" should not be allowed only when the stack of dollars is high enough.

Very interesting comments. I personally can't abide by a rule setup for a single organizer as is being proposed on the agenda on the KCBS website. Set qualifications for this or handle each contest as an exception.

How can you approve a contest in Phoenix on the same day as another contest? They are less than 15 miles away.

How can you say individual X has these rules and eveybody else follows these rules.

I support Ron's contests but he has to play by the rules or maybe he should continue with his idea to start a new sanctioning body which I also will support. I think any motion for special privlige for Ron should include a guarantee from Ron that he will not start a new organization to sanction BBQ contests for at least 5 years.

Sounds to me like if many are getting denied, then something may be broken. Maybe a change is in order...
It isn't about money to me, I stand by my statement: I would like to see decisions based on passing a litmus test of: Does it further the KCBS Mission/Grow the base? Does it benefit the cooks? Judges? If it does, than it should get consideration based on the specific facts at the time.

I just saw Merl's post that they are looking at moving Ronnie's into the competitor series, I am assuming to allow gas, and any other rules/needs... and to help with a more realistic guarantee deadline on the cash. Might be a good path.

You get enough events that are in the "Competitor" series... and then you can look at trends and consider if any types should eventually move into the "Masters" series. Should make a great proving ground, and help determine what will end up "mainstream" eventually, or stay a one-off.