LETTER FROM THE CEO NCLC Delivers Again


A HUGE PART OF THIS COUNTRY LOVES COLLEGES IN MARCH. While most love it for basketball, we love it for landscaping and lawn care. We love the effort, the competition, and most of all, the inspiration that students all over the country provide for our industry every year.


What I’m referring to is NALP’s annual National Collegiate Land- scape Competition (NCLC). As I described it in my column last year, it is a “shot of feel good” into our industry’s arm right before we tackle a new busy season. And boy, did this year’s competition deliver that “feel good.” Here’s a great story for you to enjoy. Every year NCLC kicks off with an opening ceremony to get everyone hyped and ready to go. The highlight of that opening cer- emony every year is the roll call competition. Every school that is represented is given 20 seconds to do a cheer for their school. All the schools do a great job, but the judges select the top four (I won’t use the term Fin@l F0ur due to copyright laws) and they get to do their cheers one more time and the crowd votes for a winner. There are over 45 schools in


the room, so you have to be loud


and you have to be catchy. It is no small task for any school and can be an intimidating environment. So, with that background in mind, let me tell you what transpired at this year’s roll call competition. The schools began their cheers


and went in alphabetical order by school name. Early on, some of the schools rose to the top. Cincinnati State Technical & Com- munity College had a witty cheer that impressed the judges and North Carolina State’s Wolfpack also had a well-orchestrated cheer. North Dakota State, in their bold green and yellow school colors, also stood out. When we got to the letter “T”


a newcomer to NCLC was up. It was the five young men from the historically Black college of Tuskegee University. Well, needless to say, they


killed it and had the crowd cheer- ing. And as we got further along in the alphabet, the students


from my alma mater of Virginia Tech, also stood out with a very creative cheer. It was no easy decision for the judges…or was it? As I mentioned earlier, there is a 20-second time limit and the young men from Tuskegee had gone a little too long. As NCLC Chair, David Grover


of Pacific Landscape Manage- ment had the unenviable job of informing the crowd that the four finalists were Cincinnati State Technical & Community College, North Carolina State, North Dako- ta State and Virginia Tech. This led to quite a few boos and some chats for “Tus-ke-gee, Tus-ke-gee.” David, being the good chair that he is, reminded the crowd that “rules are rules” which led to louder cheers for “Tus-ke-gee, Tus-ke-gee.” Even the other finalists were pulling for the rules to be overturned for their new colleagues from Tuskegee. David and his counterpart Jenn


Myers, the longtime staff lead for NCLC, quickly decided rules be damned and called for a Final Five! Each team got one more shot at impressing the crowd, and when their turn came up again the young men from Tuskegee were doing great until about halfway through their cheer their lead “cheerer” lost his place. He immediately apologized and in a true moment of levity simply states, “I’m so sorry, I messed up.” It didn’t matter. Tuskegee had


won the crowd’s hearts, including those who they were competing against. When the judges asked the crowd to cheer for their favor- ite, the cheers rang out loudest for Tuskegee. They had won on their very first try. It was one of the best “feel


good” moments I have experi- enced at any event that I have been part of in my nearly 30-year career, and I can’t wait for next year.


BRITT WOOD 6 The Edge //May/June 2023


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40