Looking for practice material?

Find thousands of free archived packets for practice and study from the Quizbowl Packet Archive!

Advisory Committee Summary

Discussion of quizbowl topics not related to specific tournaments
Post Reply
User avatar
Jeffrey Hill
Posts: 6651
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 12:00 am
Location: In between the bright lights and the far unlit unknown (aka Johnson County, KS)
Contact:

Advisory Committee Summary

Post by Jeffrey Hill »

http://www.mshsaa.org/advisory/index.asp?Committee_News_ID=284 wrote:1. Went on record that interest exists in increasing the number of teams that qualify for the state finals from each district.


2. Went on record to eliminate the one-hour wait for classes 3 and 4 between the semifinal and final matches.


3. Went on record to stress in the district managers packet that the district winning team that has qualified for the state tournament should attend. Teams that have a scheduling conflict for the state tournament should not compete in the district tournament.


4. Went on record that the moderators may spell unfamiliar or hard-to-pronounce words.


5. Went on record that instructions for all-district and all-state team selection by the MACA be placed in the school packets, district managers packets, coaches packets at the finals, and the coaches meeting announcements at the finals.

All items approved but will not be implemented due to lack of quorum at meeting
1-This would be interesting, but it wouldn't hurt to give more teams a chance, especially in tough districts. I think it would actually hurt us; if our district stays the same as it is now, managing it will not be too terribly difficult.

2-The extra wait is so annoying! We could use it to our advantage, but most of us never do. I would rather just get it over with.

3-I forgot, who in Class 1 didn't show up? I think that's a good idea. Does anybody remember the circumstances leading to #3 (which Class 1 team didn't show up and why not?)

4-They weren't able to before? Or were they not aware of it? This is a fundamental of Scholar Bowl...

5-It wouldn't hurt anything, although it seems pretty self-explanatory.

Lack of quorum is kind of pathetic... how many people of the 8 needed to be there?

Online
User avatar
L-Town Expatriate
Posts: 6904
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 12:00 am
Location: Riding a Mule down the Katy Trail to the State Fair
Contact:

Advisory Committee Summary

Post by L-Town Expatriate »

ScoBo1987 wrote: 1-This would be interesting, but it wouldn't hurt to give more teams a chance, especially in tough districts.  I think it would actually hurt us; if our district stays the same as it is now, managing it will not be too terribly difficult. 

2-The extra wait is so annoying!  We could use it to our advantage, but most of us never do.  I would rather just get it over with.

3-I forgot, who in Class 1 didn't show up?  I think that's a good idea.  Does anybody remember the circumstances leading to #3 (which Class 1 team didn't show up and why not?)

4-They weren't able to before?  Or were they not aware of it?  This is a fundamental of Scholar Bowl...

5-It wouldn't hurt anything, although it seems pretty self-explanatory.

Lack of quorum is kind of pathetic... how many people of the 8 needed to be there?
1) It would make the district championship game kind of pointless, especially with both teams going to state. Maybe expand the number of districts to 12? However, coordinating more state matches might cause a conundrum, and even more teams go home without hardware or wooden maps.

2) Easy - PRACTICE! (It also would help if prom didn't fall on the same night. From what I hear, this year it won't in L-Town.

3) New Covenant, I think. Stupid senior trip to Houston. Shouldn't there be a "default to second place" clause? They didn't leave Clayton's district empty when they were disqualified in FB last year!

4) Must be addressing complaints. Then again, the "second from center" rule isn't written out either.

5) Ditto.

Q) I think five plus a MSHSAA exec. Three spots were vacant, so that was quite a dent.

P.S.: If I didn't report this earlier, Don Arni of Glasgow now represents Northeast Missouri on the committee.

mujason
Posts: 1587
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2004 12:00 am
Location: Lincoln, MO

Advisory Committee Summary

Post by mujason »

Well, if MSHSAA switched to NAQT format, they could hold an 8 team round-robin and a double-elim playoff among the top four in about the same time as the current state tournament (as NAQT packets take about a half-hour per round).

As for the extra hour, that enables the Class 1 and 2 finals to be in the spotlight instead of being completely overshadowed by the Class 3 and 4 finals. That way, one could see both Mound City and Savannah play for titles (or Richland and Liberty, or whatever small school-large school combo rocks your boat).

User avatar
Jeffrey Hill
Posts: 6651
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 12:00 am
Location: In between the bright lights and the far unlit unknown (aka Johnson County, KS)
Contact:

Advisory Committee Summary

Post by Jeffrey Hill »

I personally think that 2 from each district isn't the best option. I think that the top four non-District champions (by record and points) should get to go on.

I tried to study during that hour (especially on improving our crappy math) but most everybody else wasn't there. And Jason's point is very valid on the hour wait...








:blink:

Online
User avatar
L-Town Expatriate
Posts: 6904
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 12:00 am
Location: Riding a Mule down the Katy Trail to the State Fair
Contact:

Advisory Committee Summary

Post by L-Town Expatriate »

ScoBo1987 wrote: I personally think that 2 from each district isn't the best option. I think that the top four non-District champions (by record and points) should get to go on.

I tried to study during that hour (especially on improving our crappy math) but most everybody else wasn't there. And Jason's point is very valid on the hour wait...








:blink:
Okay... do what Jones and Luce came up with two years ago. I would have done something slightly different.

DavidH
Posts: 258
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 12:00 am
Location: Savannah, MO

Advisory Committee Summary

Post by DavidH »

I agree that some wild-card spots would be appropriate as several good teams get elminated at districts who could do well at state. (Cameron, NKC etc... I figure the same happens on the east side)

wca
Posts: 163
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2004 12:00 am

Advisory Committee Summary

Post by wca »

It would be a big help to a team like Priory. They probably would have been number 3 last year in class 3. How exactly would the wild card spot be decided? District Record? Also, as I was looking at the advisory committee page, why is the representative from the St. Louis area from De Smet? De Smet doesn't have a team and never showed any interest in academic competition during my time at WCA. It just seems that the representative from a certain area should be involved in scholar bowl in the area to some degree.

Ramza Goltana
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 12:00 am

Advisory Committee Summary

Post by Ramza Goltana »

NKC needs to go to state, they would do well, espicially if they stayed at the Columbia Drury Inn. They should also go to ASCN in Chicago, they might not do so well there, but who cares.

User avatar
Jeffrey Hill
Posts: 6651
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 12:00 am
Location: In between the bright lights and the far unlit unknown (aka Johnson County, KS)
Contact:

Advisory Committee Summary

Post by Jeffrey Hill »

L-Town Expatriate wrote: Okay... do what Jones and Luce came up with two years ago. I would have done something slightly different.
Oh duh, we did do that... I forgot about that... lol

DavidH
Posts: 258
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 12:00 am
Location: Savannah, MO

Advisory Committee Summary

Post by DavidH »

MSHSAA is a POS organization that is full of power-hungry a-holes who feel better about themselves, because they have the power to put restrictions on high school activities like Academic Competition. This is pathetic. The only help quiz bowlers get is from the coaches who actually have a clue whats going on to be on the advisory board. Well... I'm not sure how democratic the choosing of this board is, so I think that may explain why this unheard of coach is a member. I think we should make our own organization specifically for A.C. It would take an insane level of organization and commitment but it would be worth it when Missouri became the new state powerhouse replacing the East-coast giants like Virginia, Maryland and the Carolinas. MSHSAA literally has been known to make regulations that are a detriment to the success of AC teams, simply to prove that they have power. This is dumb. But hey, MSHSAA isn't all bad, they are great for athletic activities. Moral of the story: wrestling coaches don't do a great job of making quiz bowl policy.

Online
User avatar
L-Town Expatriate
Posts: 6904
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 12:00 am
Location: Riding a Mule down the Katy Trail to the State Fair
Contact:

Advisory Committee Summary

Post by L-Town Expatriate »

DavidH wrote: MSHSAA is a POS organization that is full of power-hungry a-holes who feel better about themselves, because they have the power to put restrictions on high school activities like Academic Competition. This is pathetic. The only help quiz bowlers get is from the coaches who actually have a clue whats going on to be on the advisory board. Well... I'm not sure how democratic the choosing of this board is, so I think that may explain why this unheard of coach is a member. I think we should make our own organization specifically for A.C. It would take an insane level of organization and commitment but it would be worth it when Missouri became the new state powerhouse replacing the East-coast giants like Virginia, Maryland and the Carolinas. MSHSAA literally has been known to make regulations that are a detriment to the success of AC teams, simply to prove that they have power. This is dumb. But hey, MSHSAA isn't all bad, they are great for athletic activities. Moral of the story: wrestling coaches don't do a great job of making quiz bowl policy.
Where did this come from!?

And as I recall, it's not wrestling coaches... they all play basketball.

DavidH
Posts: 258
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 12:00 am
Location: Savannah, MO

Advisory Committee Summary

Post by DavidH »

I was responding to WCA's comment about the zero coach from the St. Louis district. I got a bit off topic... I'm passionate about hating MSHSAA.

Online
User avatar
L-Town Expatriate
Posts: 6904
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 12:00 am
Location: Riding a Mule down the Katy Trail to the State Fair
Contact:

Advisory Committee Summary

Post by L-Town Expatriate »

wca wrote: It would be a big help to a team like Priory. They probably would have been number 3 last year in class 3. How exactly would the wild card spot be decided? District Record? Also, as I was looking at the advisory committee page, why is the representative from the St. Louis area from De Smet? De Smet doesn't have a team and never showed any interest in academic competition during my time at WCA. It just seems that the representative from a certain area should be involved in scholar bowl in the area to some degree.
The same thing happened in KC when a no-nothing coach was picked because the outgoing rep was from the same district. Fortunately they got that squared away with Camp now representing KC.

MACA should say something about this. Maybe reps should be voted on during the annual convention.

Post Reply