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'm the coach of AGUA Masters in New York City and we brought 17 swimmers to Austin and we placed 20th overall in the combined standings. I think percentage wise we did exceptional and I am happy to be in the company of the independent swim clubs ahead of us.
When I got here 3 years ago we were a part of Metro Masters--in Coral Springs we comprised 20% of the "team" but we scored 70% of the points. That's when I went to the Board and we went independent. I did it specifically for branding and so that our swimmers could be better recognized nationally.
Personally I don't really care that there are conglomerate teams. I'm very happy we finished 20th, I think with more team involvment we can do better, we certainly have the athletes. I will say that I don't want USMS to get to the point of East of the Mississippi versus West of the Mississippi.
To what Paul referred to L/M/S teams when the standings were posted Saturday morning (I assume by some renegade)--the men's small team divison had us ranked second behind Maine Masters (thanks Michael Ross) and the men's cap was 9 swimmers. The women's small team was capped at 10 swimmers and had our friends Red Tide of NYC ranked first. Our women with 11 swimmers were in the Intermediate Division ranked 8th. If I remember correctly the cap for all Intermediate Teams with that posting were 25 swimmers for both genders.
I know Red Tide and they too have the same philosophy as us regarding branding and recognition. They did great and finished 16th in the women's scores with only 9 swimmers. I think it's good to be independent, I think it elevates our program locally and nationally, and I think it fosters better team camraderie. The result of our showing is that I've received emails from our team wanting to compete either more or for the first time.
On a side note I heard two women from Colorado meet each other for the first time--and that was behind the blocks for a relay. Great meet everyone, look us up if you are ever in NYC.
Patrick
I'm the coach of AGUA Masters in New York City and we brought 17 swimmers to Austin and we placed 20th overall in the combined standings. I think percentage wise we did exceptional and I am happy to be in the company of the independent swim clubs ahead of us.
When I got here 3 years ago we were a part of Metro Masters--in Coral Springs we comprised 20% of the "team" but we scored 70% of the points. That's when I went to the Board and we went independent. I did it specifically for branding and so that our swimmers could be better recognized nationally.
Personally I don't really care that there are conglomerate teams. I'm very happy we finished 20th, I think with more team involvment we can do better, we certainly have the athletes. I will say that I don't want USMS to get to the point of East of the Mississippi versus West of the Mississippi.
To what Paul referred to L/M/S teams when the standings were posted Saturday morning (I assume by some renegade)--the men's small team divison had us ranked second behind Maine Masters (thanks Michael Ross) and the men's cap was 9 swimmers. The women's small team was capped at 10 swimmers and had our friends Red Tide of NYC ranked first. Our women with 11 swimmers were in the Intermediate Division ranked 8th. If I remember correctly the cap for all Intermediate Teams with that posting were 25 swimmers for both genders.
I know Red Tide and they too have the same philosophy as us regarding branding and recognition. They did great and finished 16th in the women's scores with only 9 swimmers. I think it's good to be independent, I think it elevates our program locally and nationally, and I think it fosters better team camraderie. The result of our showing is that I've received emails from our team wanting to compete either more or for the first time.
On a side note I heard two women from Colorado meet each other for the first time--and that was behind the blocks for a relay. Great meet everyone, look us up if you are ever in NYC.
Patrick
