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
Here we are mixing apples and oranges again!
How can you categorize teams (Regional, Local Club, or ANY other kind!) at Nationals based on how many people are registered to that team?! That is idiotic (IMHO, and let me say I think the idea is idiotic, not Jim) and that is the least inclusive idea I have heard. How many registered swimmers actually compete in USMS? Are we going to make them compete? Or penalize those swimmers that do?
Example:
Many of our swimmers at WCM are triathletes, lap swimmers, or just join to be social and splash around. They have absolutely no interest in competing, let alone at Nationals! We would drive them away if we told them they HAD to compete! Or, on the other hand, WCM would seemingly be penalized at Nationals because we didn't bring these people (Kerry would NEVER make anyone go). What is the mission statement of USMS again?
The heck we didn't earn that banner! Masters is NOT NCAA, USA-S or anything like that! Masters has adults swimming for a myriad of reasons. All of the other swimming programs you mentioned are strictly there to swim fast and compete at the highest level they can! The way the meet (Nationals in Mich) was set up by SML teams, we did earn it. We swam well and earned the points necessary. (Keep in mind the banner was NOT the goal- we just wanted to swim fast and have fun. I still don't even know what place we got to be honest. I just remember our coach had picked up a banner and we took a picture.) All other competitive swim programs are NOT trying to be inclusive like USMS, they are striving to swim fast, period. The time standards alone for USMS Nationals show that we are trying to be inclusive, or the idea you can swim 3 events without actually qualifying!
Maybe I'm off here, but Jim, it seems that you think people have to bring a large team to even be considered for a team banner? We've beaten teams with many more swimmers than us... that Michigan meet is an example. If anything, your argument that having a large group to "earn" banners, makes me think the idea of Team Pacific may have some merit. But wait, how about Team-West-of-the-Rockies, or??? Let's just take what we have, concensus that their should be two divisions, work on that, and move forward.
For the record, I think their should be two divisions: Regional and Local Club and they should be scored 1st-10th (combined only; no men, no women). Perhaps here your team might have incentive to bring more men or more women who want to compete and can afford the trip?
Here we are mixing apples and oranges again!
How can you categorize teams (Regional, Local Club, or ANY other kind!) at Nationals based on how many people are registered to that team?! That is idiotic (IMHO, and let me say I think the idea is idiotic, not Jim) and that is the least inclusive idea I have heard. How many registered swimmers actually compete in USMS? Are we going to make them compete? Or penalize those swimmers that do?
Example:
Many of our swimmers at WCM are triathletes, lap swimmers, or just join to be social and splash around. They have absolutely no interest in competing, let alone at Nationals! We would drive them away if we told them they HAD to compete! Or, on the other hand, WCM would seemingly be penalized at Nationals because we didn't bring these people (Kerry would NEVER make anyone go). What is the mission statement of USMS again?
The heck we didn't earn that banner! Masters is NOT NCAA, USA-S or anything like that! Masters has adults swimming for a myriad of reasons. All of the other swimming programs you mentioned are strictly there to swim fast and compete at the highest level they can! The way the meet (Nationals in Mich) was set up by SML teams, we did earn it. We swam well and earned the points necessary. (Keep in mind the banner was NOT the goal- we just wanted to swim fast and have fun. I still don't even know what place we got to be honest. I just remember our coach had picked up a banner and we took a picture.) All other competitive swim programs are NOT trying to be inclusive like USMS, they are striving to swim fast, period. The time standards alone for USMS Nationals show that we are trying to be inclusive, or the idea you can swim 3 events without actually qualifying!
Maybe I'm off here, but Jim, it seems that you think people have to bring a large team to even be considered for a team banner? We've beaten teams with many more swimmers than us... that Michigan meet is an example. If anything, your argument that having a large group to "earn" banners, makes me think the idea of Team Pacific may have some merit. But wait, how about Team-West-of-the-Rockies, or??? Let's just take what we have, concensus that their should be two divisions, work on that, and move forward.
For the record, I think their should be two divisions: Regional and Local Club and they should be scored 1st-10th (combined only; no men, no women). Perhaps here your team might have incentive to bring more men or more women who want to compete and can afford the trip?
