first of all, congrats to the meet directors and all the volunteers on a job well done. so organized and efficient!! very impressive. the only thing i wish someone could explain to me is why the usms champ. committee changed the team scoring from large, medium and small team to clumping everyone in the same category. seems extremely unfair to have what i call "real teams" competing against state mega teams. there is no possibility for "real teams" to ever come close to competing against them. if you are going to give team awards at the end of the meet, is there any way you can do it fairly? our team is extremely proud to have gotten as many team members as we did to go to natls. (most of them for the first time), but unfortunately they were very disillusioned (as was i) with the idea that we would be competing against state teams. as one of the coaches i didn't have an explanation. even though we were very proud of our 7th place finish in men's division, and our 12th place in combined, we were only one of a few "real teams" in the top ten. would appreciate responses. maybe even someone from the champ.committee could explain how they felt this scoring system would be more fair to the majority of swimmers. then i can pass it along to my teammates.. i don't want them to be so disillusioned that they lose interest in attending any future natls. thanks
I liked the idea of having 60 awards because the number 60 is closer to the actual number of people who are passionate about the issue.
Am I passionate about it?
Nah...
Why not?
It would affect maybe 0.05% of our 43,000 members, and a majority of the 0.05% probably wouldn't notice any difference.
:dedhorse:
And Bill I would respectfully argue that us .05% may be the most passionate...and vocal...of that entire membership.
I don't see/hear very many of the other 40,850 engaging in the "process", asking for things, trying to promote growth and improvement. The silent majority if you will is pretty much just that....silent....
Which brings us to the question of who should USMS focus on building more support/growth from? In my (always humble) opinion....it would be from current and past competitors who want things like fair/simple scoring, more open water events and coordination with the Tri world, etc. etc.
I liked the idea of having 60 awards because the number 60 is closer to the actual number of people who are passionate about the issue.
Am I passionate about it?
Nah...
Why not?
It would affect maybe 0.05% of our 43,000 members, and a majority of the 0.05% probably wouldn't notice any difference.
:dedhorse:
And Bill I would respectfully argue that us .05% may be the most passionate...and vocal...of that entire membership.
I don't see/hear very many of the other 40,850 engaging in the "process", asking for things, trying to promote growth and improvement. The silent majority if you will is pretty much just that....silent....
Which brings us to the question of who should USMS focus on building more support/growth from? In my (always humble) opinion....it would be from current and past competitors who want things like fair/simple scoring, more open water events and coordination with the Tri world, etc. etc.
