New Team Events

[catwood1]

Out of curiosity, does anyone know what the rationale was for not having "open" team selection? By this I mean any 3 or 4 people can form a team for any event at a NAC. I'm just curious why isn't isn't the best solution...

[fdad]

Perhaps it's just me, but I would never want to compete on a team with 2 other random fencers. Part of my performance in team events comes from who I'm fencing with. In some events the three of us do much better as a team than we would do individually, I'm not sure this would happen if I was paired with two other random fencers.

I think its obviously not the prefered plan, but...
One very big problem I think folks will experience for the team events that are not sandwiched between Div1 & U20 are team mates that at the last minute don't show up and the team is forced to withdraw. There will be some fencers that are very unhappy they travelled an extra day to find out they wasted their time and money because one or more teamates didnt show up, perhaps the BC would allow last minute combining of team members from incomplete teams?

[Mr.MightyMouse]

Out of curiosity, does anyone know what the rationale was for not having "open" team selection? By this I mean any 3 or 4 people can form a team for any event at a NAC. I'm just curious why isn't isn't the best solution...

you'll eventually end up in a useless "all-star" event a la AYSO, what will the teams be called Bombing Blueberries and Screaming Mimes?
IMHO Flechewounds' idea is one of the fencing.net's most ludicrous and self serving in quite a while, and does nothing to promote camaraderie and team spirit within a particular club, don't even start on who will be coaching the "all-stars".

[fdad]

Out of curiosity, does anyone know what the rationale was for not having "open" team selection? By this I mean any 3 or 4 people can form a team for any event at a NAC. I'm just curious why isn't isn't the best solution...

Rationale? When did rationale enter the decision process?

[catwood1]

you'll eventually end up in a useless "all-star" event a la AYSO, what will the teams be called Bombing Blueberries and Screaming Mimes?
IMHO Flechewounds' idea is one of the fencing.net's most ludicrous and self serving in quite a while, and does nothing to promote camaraderie and team spirit within a particular club, don't even start on who will be coaching the "all-stars".

I disagree. Plenty of clubs run team events as open teams, and its not just an allstar event. In my experience, its usually fencers from the same club, and every once in a while, you get an exception.

Look at the team event at Pomme de Terre.

[pillow]

So is the USFA going to put the team confirmed entries on-line for NAC D so we can see what's really going on? Will the entries be just a team name, or will it specify the individual fencers?
The last I heard, the MS guys were staying at a $5 per night hostel so they could do the team event on the last day.

[misha]

you'll eventually end up in a useless "all-star" event a la AYSO, what will the teams be called Bombing Blueberries and Screaming Mimes?

Baseball is perfectly fine with "all-star" Red Sox, White Sox, Blue Jays etc.
NFL is perfectly fine with "all-star" Vikings, Broncos, Dolfins, etc.

Why do you think fencing would not benefit from it?

Mid-season trade of anchor of Steel Swords for opener and
substitute of Flying Daggers seems like a lot of fun

.

[hello?]

IMHO Flechewounds' idea is one of the fencing.net's most ludicrous and self serving in quite a while, and does nothing to promote camaraderie and team spirit within a particular club, don't even start on who will be coaching the "all-stars".

I disagree. I have very good friends in other clubs that I would LOVE to do a team with -- regardless of our possible 'outcomes.' In fact, someone already mentioned the Pomme teams. That is my favorite team event.

[Mr.MightyMouse]

I disagree. Plenty of clubs run team events as open teams, and its not just an allstar event. In my experience, its usually fencers from the same club, and every once in a while, you get an exception.

Look at the team event at Pomme de Terre.

If they are from the same club - it becomes a non-issue.
I also vaguely recall something about "regional" teams in the initial NAC team announcement, which didn't pertain to me at all - so I did not follow through.

[Mr.MightyMouse]

Baseball is perfectly fine with "all-star" Red Sox, White Sox, Blue Jays etc.
NFL is perfectly fine with "all-star" Vikings, Broncos, Dolfins, etc.

Why do you think fencing would not benefit from it?

Mid-season trade of anchor of Steel Swords for opener and
substitute of Flying Daggers seems like a lot of fun

.

'K then call it an all-star or a National Team Championship, and have a team from each "section" ?
Something similar to the old Olympic Festival that existed in the 70/80's?

[pillow]

I must say the above ideas are all interesting. However, to get back to reality---can anyone on f.net please post here if they have entered a team event, or know people who have entered?

[flechewounds]

you'll eventually end up in a useless "all-star" event a la AYSO, what will the teams be called Bombing Blueberries and Screaming Mimes?
IMHO Flechewounds' idea is one of the fencing.net's most ludicrous and self serving in quite a while, and does nothing to promote camaraderie and team spirit within a particular club, don't even start on who will be coaching the "all-stars".

Harsh... at least.

Listen, my idea was intended to solve two particular problems: (a) the lack of sufficient concentration of fencers in particular disciplines to form a team; and (b) the interest that some of those folks may have in participating in a team.

Self serving? Perhaps... but put simply, there is no team that can be formed at most clubs, at least in WF, because there are either not enough fencers or the weaker fencers correctly recognize that there is little value to traveling to a junior event that they will get smushed in.

The other part of the idea - join the team for the year - would at least restrict forum shopping and put some limitations on the ability to jump to an "all-star" team. Not a lot, but at least some.

Also, it may be possible that my suggestion could avoid NCAA issues (I don't know). If the teams don't represent entities (clubs, schools, etc.), they may not conflict - someone with some NCAA expertise may want to weigh in on this (I know, I need to get some education on that stuff soon).

Anyhow, it wasn't meant to be self-serving from a standpoint of medals (I frankly don't care all that much about team events - ask the section about that). It was, however intended to encourage more participation.

G

[pillow]

Harsh... at least.

Listen, my idea was intended to solve two particular problems: (a) the lack of sufficient concentration of fencers in particular disciplines to form a team; and (b) the interest that some of those folks may have in participating in a team.

Self serving? Perhaps... but put simply, there is no team that can be formed at most clubs, at least in WF, because there are either not enough fencers or the weaker fencers correctly recognize that there is little value to traveling to a junior event that they will get smushed in.

The other part of the idea - join the team for the year - would at least restrict forum shopping and put some limitations on the ability to jump to an "all-star" team. Not a lot, but at least some.

Also, it may be possible that my suggestion could avoid NCAA issues (I don't know). If the teams don't represent entities (clubs, schools, etc.), they may not conflict - someone with some NCAA expertise may want to weigh in on this (I know, I need to get some education on that stuff soon).

Anyhow, it wasn't meant to be self-serving from a standpoint of medals (I frankly don't care all that much about team events - ask the section about that). It was, however intended to encourage more participation.

G

The real point is that none of these schemes to create teams will allow greater participation if the current schedule for team events is not changed. The schedule is not practical, nor is it consistent with NCAA rules, plus it is expensive in that it requires extra hotel stays at the start or end of the NAC.
I'll gladly eat my words if we get 20 teams in each event.

[Mr.MightyMouse]

Harsh... at least.

...Listen, my idea was intended to solve two particular problems: (a) the lack of sufficient concentration of fencers in particular disciplines to form a team; and (b) the interest that some of those folks may have in participating in a team.


...The other part of the idea - join the team for the year - would at least restrict forum shopping and put some limitations on the ability to jump to an "all-star" team. Not a lot, but at least some...

(I frankly don't care all that much about team events - ask the section about that).
G

1.
I'd be shocked if SoCal , OC + SB would not have 3 WF's at the SJNAC, so regional team is an option.
2.
Precisely to the last - section - point - devaluing a team event that existed for eons - does not a team event expert make - IMHO.
Altho' with NT's non-existent JR PCC's and new proposed National schedule - it seems like change for sake of change has become modus operandi.
Thank my lucky stars for O + Teacup who seem to have taken on keeping the track of this revolving wheel & hamster as their part time vocation.

[LordShout]

I'm still holding out for an Ann Marsh, Anatolie Senic, Mike Cho team at a Michigan division event.

[pillow]

'K then call it an all-star or a National Team Championship, and have a team from each "section" ?
Something similar to the old Olympic Festival that existed in the 70/80's?

How does this suggestion affect the problem with the current schedule for teams at NAC D and the JOs?

[flechewounds]

1.
I'd be shocked if SoCal , OC + SB would not have 3 WF's at the SJNAC, so regional team is an option.
2.
Precisely to the last - section - point - devaluing a team event that existed for eons - does not a team event expert make - IMHO.
Altho' with NT's non-existent JR PCC's and new proposed National schedule - it seems like change for sake of change has become modus operandi.
Thank my lucky stars for O + Teacup who seem to have taken on keeping the track of this revolving wheel & hamster as their part time vocation.

Why is "regions" any better?

[Mr.MightyMouse]

Why is "regions" any better?

frankly - I've no rooster in this pupuseria - but at least it will have a semblance of order, and will allow clubs with strong programs still enter teams, and will eliminate a need for change for change's sake to an idea that has not been even tested, yet.

[Mr.MightyMouse]

How does this suggestion affect the problem with the current schedule for teams at NAC D and the JOs?

I am perplexed with the nature of the "schedule" problem?
FW's problem is that his kid does not have any teammates from her club, my suggestion was to go to the fine print of the new event in regards to the "regional teams".

[pillow]

I am perplexed with the nature of the "schedule" problem?
FW's problem is that his kid does not have any teammates from her club, my suggestion was to go to the fine print of the new event in regards to the "regional teams".

Have you looked at the schedule for the team events at NAC D, or perhaps at the earlier thread on this subject?