I left convention again (which was great this year by the way!) with a nagging question...why do we have "Zones" within the structure of USMS?
- They wield little if any "power" within the organization
- LMSC's are already often challenged with getting volunteers
- The only people that can participate pretty much have to be at convention
- One additional "layer" of "management?
- The lines that have been drawn are crazy...have you seen the Breadbasket?
I'd prefer to see a consolidation into 4 Regions...then realign the meet calendar so that "Regional" Championships actually mean something and are a viable alternative to folks that can't make Nationals for whatever reason.
Along with this I would prefer to see the competitive seasons "balanced" a bit as follows:
- Short Course = Mid-December until the end of April. State meets held around the first of March, Regional's two weeks later, Nationals two weeks after Regional's.
- Long Course = May 1 thru the end of August. State championships held around the first of July, Regional's two weeks later, Nationals two weeks after Regional's
- Short Course Meters = September 1 thru mid December. State meets in late October, Regional's in November, Nationals the first or second week of December.
I left convention again (which was great this year by the way!) with a nagging question...why do we have "Zones" within the structure of USMS?
So it seems like your question or problem with zones has several facets
-- the administrative function zones serve (if any)
-- regional championships
-- geographic boundaries: should "zones" -- or "regions" if you prefer -- be larger?
Administrative benefits probably vary by zone. It seems like one of the main functions of ours is to try to get zone championships for pool and OW events and to facilitate communication to swimmers in the zone (eg thru the website -- and the CZ website is very nice, IMO -- and emails to LMSC officers). I think we get pretty good bang for the buck for these things, in our zone at least.
There are also zone reps on the USMS Board of Directors, which (theoretically at least) ensures some regional representation. That's probably a good thing.
I don't have a problem with your ideal championship format, but there are probably local factors (eg, facility availability) that come into play.
As far as making zones bigger, I don't know. Personally I think the area of a zone should be small enough that someone in the center could drive to any place in the zone in a day. If (say) Dixie and Colonies were combined, you'd conceivably have people from Maine travelling to Miami for a zone meet; that's a bit much.
I left convention again (which was great this year by the way!) with a nagging question...why do we have "Zones" within the structure of USMS?
So it seems like your question or problem with zones has several facets
-- the administrative function zones serve (if any)
-- regional championships
-- geographic boundaries: should "zones" -- or "regions" if you prefer -- be larger?
Administrative benefits probably vary by zone. It seems like one of the main functions of ours is to try to get zone championships for pool and OW events and to facilitate communication to swimmers in the zone (eg thru the website -- and the CZ website is very nice, IMO -- and emails to LMSC officers). I think we get pretty good bang for the buck for these things, in our zone at least.
There are also zone reps on the USMS Board of Directors, which (theoretically at least) ensures some regional representation. That's probably a good thing.
I don't have a problem with your ideal championship format, but there are probably local factors (eg, facility availability) that come into play.
As far as making zones bigger, I don't know. Personally I think the area of a zone should be small enough that someone in the center could drive to any place in the zone in a day. If (say) Dixie and Colonies were combined, you'd conceivably have people from Maine travelling to Miami for a zone meet; that's a bit much.
