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
A couple points:
1) AWARDS
I agree with Jerry's idea about the electronic certificates as a cost effectice alternative to the banners. However, assuming the cost of banners is not preventative, I still like the idea of actually receiving a something tangible at the meet, as a team. The awards are presented within 10-15 minutes of the final relay, so waiting around is not a problem.
For me, it's not even so much receiving an award as it would be TO SIMPLY BE RECOGNIZED IN THE APPROPRIATE LIGHT. Meaning, if my team finishes 8th in the Men's Local Team division, and that is posted as such in the final team standings, then I'm happy. It's not the awards, or lack thereof, on which I base my argument - it's the method of calculating the final standings.
2) DEFINITIONS
It seems that now we have a few examples of Regional teams that are not covered under the current definition of a Regional team (VMST and NCMS, and likely others). It may be that we will need to add a provision that gives deference to the Championship Committee for classifying such Regional teams. Continue with the currently proposed definition of a Regional team, but then add, "or when determined by the Championship Committee to be a Regional Team."
Seriously. That's all we need to add. There is nothing wrong with adding this language. In fact, most laws are written with similar provisions to allow for exceptions when one would arise.
We all know who these Regional Teams are, and there's relatively little (or no) debate that I've heard in determining classifications. The swimmers from VMST and NCMS do not contest their status as a Regional team - they are merely pointing out that under the proposal, their team falls outside the current definition.
The legislation still offers a method of contesting a team's classification in those rare cases, so I do not see why we wouldn't cover our bases and allow for some discretion on the part of the Championship Committee. Unless there is some bias of which I am unaware, I have faith that the Championship Committee would appropriately designate teams.
Brian
A couple points:
1) AWARDS
I agree with Jerry's idea about the electronic certificates as a cost effectice alternative to the banners. However, assuming the cost of banners is not preventative, I still like the idea of actually receiving a something tangible at the meet, as a team. The awards are presented within 10-15 minutes of the final relay, so waiting around is not a problem.
For me, it's not even so much receiving an award as it would be TO SIMPLY BE RECOGNIZED IN THE APPROPRIATE LIGHT. Meaning, if my team finishes 8th in the Men's Local Team division, and that is posted as such in the final team standings, then I'm happy. It's not the awards, or lack thereof, on which I base my argument - it's the method of calculating the final standings.
2) DEFINITIONS
It seems that now we have a few examples of Regional teams that are not covered under the current definition of a Regional team (VMST and NCMS, and likely others). It may be that we will need to add a provision that gives deference to the Championship Committee for classifying such Regional teams. Continue with the currently proposed definition of a Regional team, but then add, "or when determined by the Championship Committee to be a Regional Team."
Seriously. That's all we need to add. There is nothing wrong with adding this language. In fact, most laws are written with similar provisions to allow for exceptions when one would arise.
We all know who these Regional Teams are, and there's relatively little (or no) debate that I've heard in determining classifications. The swimmers from VMST and NCMS do not contest their status as a Regional team - they are merely pointing out that under the proposal, their team falls outside the current definition.
The legislation still offers a method of contesting a team's classification in those rare cases, so I do not see why we wouldn't cover our bases and allow for some discretion on the part of the Championship Committee. Unless there is some bias of which I am unaware, I have faith that the Championship Committee would appropriately designate teams.
Brian
