kb
Squire
Posts: 261
|
Post by kb on Jan 24, 2008 15:59:37 GMT -6
I've checked the Section Calendar, and see that the GCD qualifiers are April 12/13. Since this is an Olympic Year, and Div I championships are in Oregon...will there be Sectional qualifiers and if so, when and where? Thanks in advance for all the knowledge I know will be spewing forth! Kb
|
|
|
Post by schlager7 on Jan 25, 2008 8:52:40 GMT -6
Which division hosts sectionals is a simple rotation in a fixed order among the divisions (not unlike how we award qualifiers within our own division).
This year it was Border Texas Division's turn. In the past, they have declined and it would move on to the next in line. From what I understand (and please, someone, correct me if I am wrong), this year, they have NOT declined. Ergo, sectionals will, presumably, be in El Paso.
The dates I have consistently heard, somewhat tentative as they are, would be May 3-4, 2008.
Again, if anyone has info that contradicts this, chime in.
(and as soon as possible, some folks need to start planning.)
|
|
kb
Squire
Posts: 261
|
Post by kb on Jan 25, 2008 17:36:17 GMT -6
Which division hosts sectionals is a simple rotation in a fixed order among the divisions (not unlike how we award qualifiers within our own division). This year it was Border Texas Division's turn. In the past, they have declined and it would move on to the next in line. From what I understand (and please, someone, correct me if I am wrong), this year, they have NOT declined. Ergo, sectionals will, presumably, be in El Paso. The dates I have consistently heard, somewhat tentative as they are, would be May 3-4, 2008. Again, if anyone has info that contradicts this, chime in. (and as soon as possible, some folks need to start planning.) Yes, I had heard the same, but was hoping for an "official" announcement of some sort. Not that you aren't official enough JT! It would be nice to know something sooner rather than later, so the flights and hotel can be arranged, etc. Thanks for the info! kb
|
|
|
Post by schlager7 on Jan 25, 2008 18:45:25 GMT -6
Not that you aren't official enough JT! You forget that I revel in my UNofficial status.
|
|
|
Post by JEC on Jan 26, 2008 0:36:17 GMT -6
I had discussed this issue in a prior thread.
Why do we need a rotation for sectionals based on the numer of divisions? Why not consider awarding sectionals to the top 5 divisions every 5 year - like a census of USFA members? This will encourage the local division to make sure all fencers are USFA members for that year. Other solutions to engage more fencers also exist.
According to the USFA Membership database (1/23/08), there are 17693 USFA members. The Southwest section has 1435 members, about 8.1% of all USFA membership.
Division ****** USFA members % ARK-LA-MI ----------- 135 -- 09.41% Border TX ------------- 51 --- 03.55% Gulf Coast TX ------- 454 --- 31.64% Louisiana ------------- 85 --- 05.92% North TX ------------- 321 --- 22.37% Oklahoma ------------- 91 --- 06.34% South TX ------------- 298 --- 20.77% **************** 1435 ** 100.00%
The 3 largest Divisions (GC, NTX, STX) account for 75% of all fencers and there are facilties that are central (population geography) in Waco, Austin or College Station (second alternative).
A third (and fourth) alternative is to rotate sectionals to each of the top 3 (or 4) divisions with a fourth (fifth) spot that then rotates among the smaller divisions every 4 (or 5) years.
A fifth alternative is a lottery based on the above percentiles every year (or every 3 years).
Any of the above alternatives is more fair to the average USFA members in the section than the current status where less than 4% of the fencers get the same advantage of holding sectionals at their division than a division with 32% of fencers.
Lastly (to finish my rant), I think that the current structure with divisions and sections is obsolete. I believe that the structure should be divided into regions that are somewhat in between these two sizes.
|
|
|
Post by DavidSierra on Jan 31, 2008 22:25:13 GMT -6
I had discussed this issue in a prior thread.
Why do we need a rotation for sectionals based on the numer of divisions? Because, quite simply, it is set up that way in the Sectional Bylaws. It used to be that it rotated between Waco, College Station and San Marcos. Then in... 1994? '95? Somewhere around there, I believe it was under one of BJ's tenures as Chair, but I might be not remembering quite right... anyway, somewhere in the early 90's, a bylaw amendment was voted in to go to a rotation system. And, JEC, if you have a system you think is better, then you should submit a bylaw amendment for ratification. I don't know what the deadline is, but its coming up soon, I think. Check the section bylaws (I don't mean to sound snide - I am sincere here, if you have a better system in mind, then you should write it up and see if enough other people agree with you to vote it in). And yes, Sectionals WILL be in El Paso this year - that is what I keep hearing. And the last time I talked to the El Paso folks, they had a venue and everything was being confirmed. Bear in mind, I am not an "official" source of information, but I do keep in pretty regular contact with the Section Officers, so I'm sure I'd have heard something by now if not. Lastly (to finish my rant), I think that the current structure with divisions and sections is obsolete. I believe that the structure should be divided into regions that are somewhat in between these two sizes.No argument with me there! I'll agree whole-heartedly. And I think we're going to be headed that way, relatively soon. Depending upon the outcome of the national election. As you all know, I was on the USFA Nominating Committee. One of the reasons that we chose the nominees we chose, was because ALL of them understood, viscerally, just how broken the current Division/Section model is (most have been involved in one capacity or another in fixing messes resulting from the current sytem), and are committed to fixing it, without being tied to any particular system in place - they want to find the BEST one, not the one that best benefits their particular constituency. And, we believed, they had the capabilities and political "capital" to actually fix the system. We'll see what happens!
|
|
|
Post by D on Feb 1, 2008 11:54:22 GMT -6
Soooooo glad i pre-qualified and dont have to go...
|
|