OAC elections

[QuizBoss]

By an official count of 7 to 5 (an unofficial 8th vote came in after the deadline), I will continue to be the head of OAC for 2015-2016.

My family and I appreciate the chance to allow me to continue serving in this role. I can't claim this as a victory, since it came with less support than I enjoyed last year at this time (10-2 in favor).

Nominations for open positions on the committee were proposed but tabled until a summer meeting, the date of which is currently being debated.

[BobKilner]

Is this done by secret ballot? I'm curious to know who did not vote in favor of re-electing you and what the reasoning was. I for one think you did a tremendous job this year.

[gbdriver80]

Before I say anything, please note that the following views are my own and do not reflect anyone else’s views – whether it be Sidney High School, my players, my fellow “no” voters, David (who people may assume since I played for him we always agree, which is not true), or Michael (who people may assume since we are related we always vote the same, which is not true).

I am not sure whether the ballots sent to Greg on his position through Google were secret or not but regardless, I have no problem saying that I was one of the “no” votes this year. After several things I viewed as problems this year, I felt that I could in no way give Greg a vote to continue in this position. Now do I hope things change this year and he can continue? Yes, absolutely because there are several things Greg brings to the position that no one else probably would; however, there were also many problems over the course of this year leading to my “no” vote.

1) The sealing aspect for my vote was OAC State this past weekend. In my opinion, the most important aspect of the head of the committee’s job is the running of the state tournament. As a committee member, there were a few times this weekend when I was embarrassed to be known as such due to absolutely inexcusable problems with the execution of the tournament that easily would have been preventable. At the meeting this spring, I was told that a group of six readers were approved; however, the group reading on Saturday was not the same six. While I understand some of those six may have had other obligations arise, the replacements were never run by the committee to be okayed and on sight Saturday morning, I knew two of the six were nowhere near the caliber of reader that should be allowed to read matches at the OAC State Tournament. This led to several problems throughout the day. I am not one to argue with readers no matter how poorly they are doing their job because I know they are volunteers and trying their best; however, I had to do so very heatedly and publicly twice this weekend during the same game as the rules were not being followed during the match leading to much confusion for both teams. The second major problem that I witnessed was a reader telling a team that had a buzzer malfunctioning that they would just have to play without that buzzer for the remainder of the game because there was not an extra (there were numerous sets not in use at the time). Furthermore, because of the obvious buzzer malfunction one word into the question (if you moved the buzzer at all, it buzzed instantly without being pushed), the reader wanted to disqualify the other team from the question, at which point I stepped in and said I was perfectly okay with them still answering the question because they did absolutely nothing wrong. Finally, I am not sure what was said in the readers’ meeting run by Greg, but either it was told to the readers wrong or not emphasized properly that ALL protests would be heard regardless of the outcome of the match as total points could decide who gets to play for a state title or not.

2) At the spring meeting, Greg was very adamant on wanting OAC State next year to fall on the same weekend as History Bowl Nationals. I cannot buy into any line of thinking that would allow this to happen. And before I continue, if you are worried this might actually happen, I assure you it will NEVER happen as a majority of the OAC Committee members have vowed that they would never okay a date conflict like that. What Greg’s motivations were for pushing that agenda, I cannot speak to, as no one but Greg knows his thoughts but it would be hard to believe that other obligations (to NAQT) or past frictions (with History Bowl) did not play at least a small role in the initiative. As many members of the committee have noted, we hope to never have to go against History Bowl or SSNCT again; however, no small school has qualified for OAC State in as many years as I can remember, whereas many state title contenders attend History Bowl every year. Please do not take that as me advocating for a conflict with SSNCT – I am not – I am just noting it is much more okay than any conflict with History Bowl would ever be.

3) The bull-ish demeanor Greg has on adding regionals also turns me off, as we simply do not have the teams to do it and have a system that works very well right now. The state tournament format would need to be completely overhauled, two additional sites and hosts would have to be found for regionals (and for those of you who have been around a while, you know how hard it has been to finally get six running appropriately as it just happened in the past few years), and there are simply not enough teams registering yet to justify it. However, Greg has made this his number one initiative again and again since becoming head of the committee despite pushback from at minimum many of the members. That is not to say Greg’s vision may not be a future plan but it is nowhere near coming to fruition and needs to stop being called into question at every meeting again and again. Especially by bringing other coaches to the meeting to be added to the committee as soon as we create a new regional in their area. I am obviously all for coaches not on the OAC Committee coming to meetings and participating in the dialogue; however, it is blatantly irresponsible to pitch such a person as a future committee member at that time as the merits of said person cannot appropriately be discussed in front of them. And once again, please do not think we as the committee just throw people to the wayside that might disagree with us – we do not. I simply want to make sure anyone being added is thoroughly vetted first and is not going to bring back the days of uninvolved coaches making decisions for the state when they only attend one tournament a year and never interact with coaches and players around the state.

I know that to some people, some of these things may not seem like big issues but to me, they are, and something I need (and hope) will be fixed in the future so that next time this question comes around I can vote “yes.”

Also, with my resignation from Sidney, please do not think my “no” vote was in any way angling for Greg’s position since I will be unaffiliated with any team next year – I made it very clear to the other committee members that were voting no (and at least one that was voting yes) that even if Greg were not renewed, I would not be interested in the position.

[BobKilner]

Joe,

Thanks for the reply - my original post wasn't intended to come off like Greg was some kind of quizbowl god, I just was unaware of any issues that had arisen and was just curious. Please don't take that the wrong way.

Good luck in your future endeavors, whether you continue to teach or move on to do something else.

[gbdriver80]

Joe,

Thanks for the reply - my original post wasn't intended to come off like Greg was some kind of quizbowl god, I just was unaware of any issues that had arisen and was just curious. Please don't take that the wrong way.

Good luck in your future endeavors, whether you continue to teach or move on to do something else.

Thanks Bob! And no, I did not take it that way at all, I just wanted to make sure I was open about my vote with everyone and Greg himself too because I would definitely like things to continue to improve and hope those changes can be made without an upheaval in leadership this year.

[QuizBoss]

Regarding the vote, all I see is a timestamp and yes/no. I do not see who voted and how they voted unless and until they declare it themselves.

0) Joe, I assume you will stay as West Central's at-large rep and the webmaster. If I am wrong, please let me know.

1) There were conflicts with some of the readers (family/school commitments and the like) that were agreed to at the spring meeting. These conflicts led to changes in the reader pool, including inserting myself into a reading role. It is perhaps because of this that I was not made aware of the issues which you present, though the one issue that you did present to me, Joe, via text prior to your round 4 match with Copley was settled quickly and to your satisfaction. Next year, once we get the date sorted, I hope that you will be able to be one of the six readers, as you won't be involved with any team in the tournament.

2) My views regarding History Bowl are known. If anyone wants further clarification on them, I will discuss them privately. Regionals will be April 16, 2016. State will be decided at the summer meeting, hopefully, which looks for now to be the Monday after NASAT. I have no vote on that date (or any other matter, unless there is a tie), so whatever the majority of the committee decides, it will be.

3) There were 20 schools that could have participated in Regionals but did not. When a reason was given, the most common reason was conflict with the ACT test. Since we have already picked a date that will not conflict with the ACT next season, one would expect that more schools will register. 93 schools took part this season; if we disregard those that entered the field via the wildcard process, that number goes down to 88. It does not take much imagination or foresight to see that the current maximum field size of 96 would be insufficient if even half of the 20 schools mentioned previously decide to come in to the field. This is not a future need. It is a current need that we have been lucky to avoid due to conflicts. We have seen 17-team or larger brackets. Those are not viable. Similarly not viable is a situation where teams qualify based on the rules we set down but then are told there is no room for them. Moving to eight regions expands the maximum field size to 128, a number that will see us through for a very long time, hopefully.

Getting those schools into the field is part of what I consider to be my wider mandate in this job: to grow the game. This is my primary reason for being involved in the activity. Regardless whatever faults might be found in doing the other portions of my job, I feel comfortable and confident in that one.

I do want to address one point specifically. Joshua Queen, the coach at Chillicothe, was the coach that attended the spring meeting that Joe mentioned in his post. Coach Queen came to the meeting of his own accord and took a personal day to do so. If the southeast slate weren't already full, I would nominate him for that region. If the South Central region does come to pass, he will be the first I put forward to represent that area. I would hope that those on the committee would trust me in my judgment regarding Southern Ohio as well as the former East Central region as those are the two places where I have been able to actualize the most growth in the circuit and, thus, are the most likely places to be able to get new regions established with a minimum of effort. The idea that Coach Queen would be a poor nominee because he attended one tournament only or didn't interact with enough people around the state is incongruent with who he is and what he does. If he chooses to respond, he will.

I am bullish about the eight region plan, which I will outline in another post. I am outspoken on it because I believe it is key to my job to have a vision about where this organization needs to go and how to get it there; speaking on it is merely one way to present that vision. I hope that, in the other post I make outlining the eight-region plan, this part of the vision will become clearer and garner more support. Regardless, it is a primary objective of mine and I will not be moved from it. This is about growth. This is about bringing an activity that has meant so much to me, to you, and to so many other people to more schools around Ohio. This is what I have done since I started working from an administrative perspective in the Mahoning League in 2004 and what I will continue to do, with or without the title of OAC Executive Director, in the future.

[Get Lynned]

I'm posting as an observer and as someone that has a vested interest in the future of Ohio quiz bowl and its growth due to my experiences as a player, and my current (and future) experience as a reader along with being an assistant coach.

I'm posting before Greg outlines his plan so I apologize in advance for apparently cutting him off if I do, the only rational way to go about adding regions in my opinion would be to do a study. A survey would work wonders, yes, but there needs to be some guarantee that with the addition of newer regions comes with them viable hosts that will do their end of the tournament right, there will be consistent participation, and they are represented by professionals that have an interest in the state of Ohio quiz bowl and improving it not just for the schools and teams in their region, but also in other regions.

To segue into what Joe C. brought up... I definitely agree that vetting and seeing what your potential future board-members are all about is imperative to fielding a committee that best represents the state of Ohio. At the risk of speaking for Joe, interpersonal interaction and fielding teams at competitions outside their neck of the woods - in my opinion - is desirable because Ohio quiz bowl for the most part is close-knit and to a certain extent there are quite a few programs that rely on each other to survive but it also fosters a sense of community (and obviously, many programs survive by having teams come to tournaments). However, to counter Joe just a little bit, the bigger prerequisite should be a willingness to actively learn more about the game of quiz bowl and the Ohio quiz bowl community so in the future - when the vote comes - you have a well-formed opinion when it comes to pertinent issues. For example, if terms such as "NAQT", "HSAPQ", "NASAT", "NTAE", etc come across as acronym soup to you, perhaps reading about what those things are about and what Ohio stands to gain/lose from participation in such competitions can only ensure that all committee members are on the same page and it's not a matter of it being comprised of learned figures of the game of quiz bowl sitting alongside people who are out of touch with Buckeye State quiz bowl and what constitutes change for the better. I think previous instances of the committee having too many (n>0 quite frankly is too many) out of touch representatives has made more established figures in Ohio quizbowl feel hesitant about adding on unfamiliar faces right off the bat, and perhaps rightfully so.

I am going to bring up a tidbit I feel is worth discussing: on the OAC regionals sheet of registered schools, the timestamps for six schools (two in the NC, three in the NW, and one in the SE) are on 3/21 or after. Unless the OAC decided to extend the window of applying for regionals a little bit longer, I am somewhat miffed at this. To me, this gives off the impression to the effect of "every school is entitled to OAC Regionals, regardless if they can't get their registrations in on time." Obviously I would disagree with such a notion because had this been the OHSAA, and not the OAC, it would've been an immovable stance that said schools would not have been admitted for postseason play. I am not looking to allege anything along the lines of misconduct, however as a non-member I feel the OAC should make known what their stance is about this and whether or not this will be permitted in 2015-2016.

[QuizBoss]

Speaking to the post-3/21 registration point...

Seneca East and Ontario were paper registrations that were postmarked prior to 3/21 that didn't get put into the Google form until afterwards.

Symmes Valley won the Lawrence County League. The league coordinator didn't know that the league was a qualifying event in and of itself; she had always submitted the tournament winner alone as the sole representative. Once Symmes Valley was made aware of the fact they had qualified, they needed time to get the permissions needed to travel, which included the coach asking me if the OAC would allow another person besides her to bring the team to OU-L.

Hoover's wildcard application was denied on grounds of being late.

Parma Padua qualified at Firestone, which was held on 3-21.

Badger's coach emailed me to tell that there were team conflicts he wanted to work out before registering.

[gbdriver80]

The idea that Coach Queen would be a poor nominee because he attended one tournament only or didn't interact with enough people around the state is incongruent with who he is and what he does. If he chooses to respond, he will.

I was in no way applying those comments to him - I was saying that everyone just needs to be vetted. Those comments were about past committee members who had no idea what was going on in the quiz bowl community whatsoever, and thankfully those individuals have moved on, some even before I was around, some more recently.

[BobKilner]

Those comments were about past committee members who had no idea what was going on in the quiz bowl community whatsoever, and thankfully those individuals have moved on, some even before I was around, some more recently.

This used to drive me insane back when I first started coaching. I'm cool with anyone who wants to be involved, even if you are not a coach or never were a player, but the least you can do if you're involved is understand the game, the goals of the committee, etc. And you're right, there used to be a bunch of board members who either weren't involved, didn't care or both and I'm glad to see most, if not all of them are gone now.

[BobKilner]

And Joe, if you want to move to northeast Ohio, my school has two math openings and I'd love a co-coach on our newly-formed team

[gbdriver80]

And Joe, if you want to move to northeast Ohio, my school has two math openings and I'd love a co-coach on our newly-formed team

That is certainly tempting but I can't bring myself to move up there right now.

[ThePocketProtector]

This post is all I am going to say on the matter in the open forum. I am not going to waste my time even attempting to respond on any of the threads. I just find zero benefit to getting into a debate on anything with people that do not respect my opinion because I have not been thoroughly “vetted” and I know of no way to prove myself. All I will say is if you would like to talk to me or get to know me, you should send me an email, private message, or come find me at a tournament. I would love to get to know anyone that is interested in helping my students or the wider quiz bowl community of southern Ohio to grow and get better. Some of you who are reading this have already done that and I thank you from the bottom of my heart for helping my area without judgement about us not being up to other people’s standards. I owe you and I know many students that do as well.

I am sorry I decided, of my own volition, to use a personal day to attend your open meeting your website suggested I attend.

You can find my email on http://www.ccsd.us/.

[swwFC]

Joshua,

I'm not sure if you missed it or if you just aren't taking him at his word (which is, of course, your prerogative), but in case it is the former, Joe clarified that the comment making reference to you was to state a general principle that proposing a new member would best occur at a time when that individual was not present so that a frank discussion could be had regarding that person's merits (which seems like a very sensible position to me). Here was the post above:

The idea that Coach Queen would be a poor nominee because he attended one tournament only or didn't interact with enough people around the state is incongruent with who he is and what he does. If he chooses to respond, he will.

I was in no way applying those comments to him - I was saying that everyone just needs to be vetted. Those comments were about past committee members who had no idea what was going on in the quiz bowl community whatsoever, and thankfully those individuals have moved on, some even before I was around, some more recently.

I certainly didn't see any indications from Joe's post that he does not respect your opinion, is passing judgment about you not being up to certain standards, or is criticizing your choice to attend the OAC meeting (in his original post, he noted that “obviously all for coaches not on the OAC Committee coming to meetings and participating in the dialogue”). If you are as enthusiastic about getting more teams involved and improving the quiz bowl standards in your area as you appear to be, then I imagine few, if any, Committee members would take issue with you.

If I may say so, it seems that you fell into that easy trap of assuming someone is criticizing you by mistaking the tone of and/or reading too much into a typed message.

[gbdriver80]

This post is all I am going to say on the matter in the open forum. I am not going to waste my time even attempting to respond on any of the threads. I just find zero benefit to getting into a debate on anything with people that do not respect my opinion because I have not been thoroughly “vetted” and I know of no way to prove myself. All I will say is if you would like to talk to me or get to know me, you should send me an email, private message, or come find me at a tournament. I would love to get to know anyone that is interested in helping my students or the wider quiz bowl community of southern Ohio to grow and get better. Some of you who are reading this have already done that and I thank you from the bottom of my heart for helping my area without judgement about us not being up to other people’s standards. I owe you and I know many students that do as well.

I am sorry I decided, of my own volition, to use a personal day to attend your open meeting your website suggested I attend.

You can find my email on http://www.ccsd.us/.

Joshua, I am sorry that you feel that way. Steven summarized what I was trying to say very well, and I am sorry that you were the example I used without knowing you. I in no way was intimating anything about you, your knowledge of the game, or anything else. My point was simply that it wasn't a good idea to have someone at a meeting at which their candidacy was to be discussed because it causes a very awkward situation. For instance, Bob Kilner, who I have known for almost ten years is in consideration for one of the open North Coast seats. Would I automatically vote for Bob? Absolutely, because I know everything I need to know already. However, would I want to do that without any discussion or "vetting", no, as I recognize that many other committee members may have no idea who Bob is or what his interest is. It would not be favorable for Bob or the committee members to try and approve him while he is sitting there at a meeting - it just is a very awkward situation.

The commentary on people being shut off from the circuit and everything was my attempt at not naming names of those no longer in the picture who had let us just say some rather large misconceptions of what quiz bowl even was, let alone how to run a regional on anything other than a wrestling bracket. I in no way intended you to think that those things were being applied to you - I was simply saying that we need to make sure that we do actually discuss everyone so that everyone is aware and can make an informed decision while voting rather than trying to vote on someone blindly.

Edit: And just to be clear too, I apologize if it came off that I had any problem with you attending the meeting - I definitely do not and hope that more coaches not on the committee attend in the future. I was just saying that if you - or anyone - were to ever be discussed as a potential committee member, it should not be done in a public forum or just thrown to a vote without any discussion (as we just shot down this idea pretty unanimously for Bob and one other person until some dialogue was had to ensure everyone was informed and got any questions answered).

[ThePocketProtector]

Thank you for your apology. I apologies as well for any part I may have had in the situation. I look forward to talking to you more in the future.

[BobKilner]

I had the privilege of meeting Joshua last year at NAQT states I think and enjoyed reading for Chillicothe. When I was a player from 1999-01, nobody knew anything about teams from that area or from the northwest. I'm happy to see we have somebody in that area not only on the board here but also getting involved.