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
Point of clarification: NCMS is set up like the classic LMSC team setup (compete for workout group in LMSC, compete for NCMS out of LMSC). I was trying to phrase it as if the setup were changed (and I wouldn't put it past some team to try, no offense intended by saying that).
The point I was trying to originally make is that this is not going to be the only weak point of this definition that is found. And given the push back and forth about whether or not Article 104 issues should be Championship Committee policy with minimal results, I'm not sure that kind of "or at the Championship Committee's determination" clause is going to fly.
If we're going to go out set down these definitions, we need to do it right so a club can read these definitions and know exactly where it falls. Is there any particular reason we can't say:
A regional team is so-and-so.
A local team is any team that is not a regional team.
Patrick King
Point of clarification: NCMS is set up like the classic LMSC team setup (compete for workout group in LMSC, compete for NCMS out of LMSC). I was trying to phrase it as if the setup were changed (and I wouldn't put it past some team to try, no offense intended by saying that).
The point I was trying to originally make is that this is not going to be the only weak point of this definition that is found. And given the push back and forth about whether or not Article 104 issues should be Championship Committee policy with minimal results, I'm not sure that kind of "or at the Championship Committee's determination" clause is going to fly.
If we're going to go out set down these definitions, we need to do it right so a club can read these definitions and know exactly where it falls. Is there any particular reason we can't say:
A regional team is so-and-so.
A local team is any team that is not a regional team.
Patrick King
