The eight-region plan

Any posts that are outdated will be moved here. Please do not post any new topics in this forum.

The eight-region plan

Postby QuizBoss » Thu May 07, 2015 7:06 am

To further the growth of the game, I have pushed to add two more regions to the OAC map. Because of the work that I have been able to do over the past few seasons and the travel time/distance teams in these areas currently face when going to Regional play, I believe the two new regions should be South Central and East Central.

South Central would generally include Ross, Pike, Scioto, and Lawrence Counties as well as points east towards Marietta and some points west to include teams that might traditionally be squeezed into Southwest.

East Central would generally include the boundaries of the Youngstown Diocese (Ashtabula, Trumbull, Mahoning, Columbiana, Stark, and Portage) as well as Jefferson and Carroll.

There are at least three viable sites for hosting a South Central regional -- Chillicothe, Waverly, and Ohio University-Southern. All have hosted tournaments this season; the latter 2 hosted 24 teams each. (The region formerly known as Southeast would now be Central.)

East Central would center around Mahoning County and, if possible, Youngstown State as a regional site. Other possible hosts include the bigger high schools in the county -- Austintown Fitch, Boardman, or Canfield.

Qualification for state would remain the same. The top 2 from each region go. This would mean 16 teams at state. Here's how I would structure that event...

Prelims (5 rounds)

Draws for all rounds are done prior to the tournament and double-checked to make sure that the below pattern holds.

Round 1: Regional champions will play regional runners-up and teams from the same region cannot be paired against each other.
Round 2: The 8 winners play each other, the 8 losers play each other, and regional protection is still in place.
Round 3: The four 2-0 teams are drawn against each other. The eight 1-1 teams are drawn against each other. The four 0-2 teams are drawn against each other. Regional protection is no longer in effect.
Round 4: The two remaining undefeated teams play each other; each is guaranteed a spot in the playoffs. The six one-loss teams play each other; the winners are assured of playoff spots. The six two-loss teams play each other; the losers are eliminated. The two winless teams play each other; these teams are already eliminated.
Round 5: The lone undefeated team gets a bye and a long lunch. The four 3-1 teams play for seeds #2, #3, #4, and #5 in the playoff stage. The six 2-2 teams play win-or-go-home games to determine seeds #6, #7, and #8 for the playoffs. The four 1-3 teams play for final placement; they are eliminated from championship contention. The lone winless team is eliminated and gets to go home early.

Playoffs (3 games)

All records carry from the morning. The undefeated team gets credited with a round 5 victory.

Two groups of four play a single round robin.

Group 1: #1 seed (5-0), #4 seed (3-2), #5 seed (3-2), #8 seed (3-2)
Group 2: #2 seed (4-1), #3 seed (4-1), #6 seed (3-2), #7 seed (3-2)

The group winners and runners-up as determined by overall record advance to the finals stage. Ties are broken, as the current rules are written, by total points. I'm sure that will be a topic for discussion even if expansion isn't approved.

Finals (3-4 games)

Page Playoff, as currently employed.

Group 1 Winner v Group 2 Winner and Group 1 Runner-up v Group 2 Runner-up in Round 9
Loser of Winners' match v winner of Runners-up match in Round 10
State Final in Round 11 and 12 (if necessary)
Greg Bossick, formerly Persona Non Grata
Mogadore '98, Youngstown State '02 and '22
Director of the Mahoning, Ashtabula, Portage, and Toledo Area Quizbowl Leagues
QuizBoss
Varsity
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 9:20 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby BobKilner » Thu May 07, 2015 7:30 am

I guess my feelings on it are something like:

1. Do we have the infrastructure, good readers, etc. to have that many rounds of OAC in one day?

2. Are we over-complicating things here? In terms of, is there any easier way that's just as fair to determine the real state champion. I like the page playoff system in place now, but if you did go to 16-team states, what's wrong with two 8-team brackets, take the top 2, if there's a tie for 2nd, have a 1-game playoff? Then do the page playoff. I'm just playing devil's advocate here.

3. I think the main point that was brought up (by Tom I think was), can we have the continued participation to sustain having 8 regions on a permanent basis... If the first year we put in a South Central lets say and we fill it with 16, but the next year only 10 teams sign up - are we going to ship other teams there to try to fill it, or leave it at 10? Leaving it at 10 would be the same type of bs that happened back in the day where certain teams would fill out their paperwork late, get shipped to another region and make states out of a weak region. I'm all for the growth of the game, and I think you're doing a great job in that regard over the past few years and the years you spent with NHB, but can we get a guarantee to sustenance with regions in those areas is my question. That said, if I do put on an OAC fall tournament, I'd be willing to allow it to be mirrored in such places to help get more teams qualified.

While I think the idea is interesting on paper, I understand the concerns brought up. I think Tom is right in putting some type of study forth somehow to see what results would come out of it.
Bob Kilner
Secondary Admin, ohioqbforum.com
Former Coach, Garfield Heights HS (2001-2008), North High School (2015-19, 21-22)
Kent State '06 / Boise State '10
BobKilner
Site Admin
 
Posts: 402
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 5:43 pm
Location: Garfield Heights OH

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby gbdriver80 » Thu May 07, 2015 8:15 am

BobKilner wrote:1. Do we have the infrastructure, good readers, etc. to have that many rounds of OAC in one day?


This is my main concern because I do not believe we have the infrastructure whatsoever as six regions are still not running perfectly as it is. An actual NW host has never been found such that Greg still has to go run it himself, and I can only imagine the quality of readers at some regionals is absolutely poor. Spreading what good we do have, which is a lot, don't get me wrong, any more thin will dilute the product we are putting out for the teams.

Also, I am okay with having a backup plan in place should well over 96 teams register but I will never vote for any plan to expand until I see that it is needed - the above reason being the principle one.

Also, I like Bob's playoff plan if it were to come to fruition a lot more, as I too really like the Page playoff system we have setup right now.
Joe Czupryn
OAC Committee Executive Director
Sidney Coach 2012-2015
Northmont Assistant Coach 2008-2011
Northmont '08
gbdriver80
Varsity
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Dayton, OH

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby QuizBoss » Thu May 07, 2015 9:10 am

1. Yes, we can get eight readers, given enough lead time and (perhaps) compensation. Those eight readers would only be needed for the first four rounds. In round five, we would only need seven (as the 4-0 and 0-4 teams aren't playing). For the playoffs, we would need four readers. In the finals, we would need two readers at first, then one for the rest of the way. By comparison, the NAQT State Championship ran 13 rounds with all of the readers needed for 10 of them.

2. The main point is to make sure that _no team_ is eliminated with one loss. In a 2-group, 8-team-per-group configuration, the possibility still exists for a circle of death of three teams at 6-1 in each group. It also requires more readers to stay for a longer period. With the power-matched prelims, we are absolutely guaranteed that no team with one loss is eliminated either at that stage or the top 8 stage beyond it. Indeed, if the undefeated team from prelims runs the table in rounds 6-7-8, a single loss won't eliminate them at the finals stage, either.

3. There is always some gerrymandering with the regionals. Let's say that expansion goes through and we only get to 96 teams. Fair enough. We go with 12 in each region. This will help each region because fewer staff will be needed.

For a 12-team, double-elimination tournament, we have...

Round 1: 4 teams on byes, 8 teams play, 4 rooms/readers
Round 2: The 4 losers from Round 1 get byes. 8 teams play, 4 rooms/readers
Round 3: All 12 teams play. 6 rooms/readers
Round 4-end play out the same way as they do now.

As teams 97-128 enter the field, we can adjust each region to make the best fit geographically.

Speaking for the Youngstown area, these teams exist and have always existed. Getting them to regionals will be easier if there is a closer option than Cloverleaf or Solon. This is also certainly the case in South Central. Symmes Valley had a three hour trip to Lancaster. If you play every week or are used to making the trip from Dayton-Cleveland or vice versa, this isn't a thing. But for schools that we are trying to bring into the circuit, that's a tall order. If the teams aren't willing to come to the pre-existing circuit, we extend the circuit to them. Once they are hooked up to the grid, as it were, the chances are greater that we will see the best schools from those areas venture out. It's starting to happen. It needs support.

The main line of argument I have heard is that doing this will dilute the field at state. While this is true, it's not new. Why do we have regions in the first place? Why don't we just have one state tournament, save everyone a weekend, and play it down from N to 1 in one day? We break the event into regionals for the purposes of convenience and time-saving, and the "purity" of the event is sacrificed because of it. We lowered the qualification bar from groups of eight to groups of six. Through the history of OAC, regions have been added and the state field has been increased. This would be another instance of that.

Joe, regarding Northwest, I don't HAVE to go there. We have a good host now in the University of Findlay and I would be comfortable letting Anita direct that regional. I go there because I am not needed anywhere else. I am trying to put myself in the best place that will make the best use of my time. The solution to poor readers is to give them more opportunities to improve. UF is hosting two tournaments a year now, and hopefully I can convince them to do Kilner's fall event to make it three. Prior to this year's regional, Dr. Scoles told me there is interest in getting a college team together. If that comes to pass, it will only increase the reader pool, both in terms of numbers and quality.

Speaking for the Youngstown area, we would be able to get eight readers without trouble for a 16-team regional tournament. Two of the state readers were from the area (not counting myself) and we managed to pull off an SCT with college students reading for the entirety of D2.

In South Central, since they are way more familiar with OAC than NAQT, there would probably be more people available and willing to help in the case of a regional tournament than either of the 24-team, 12-room tossup-bonus events I ran this January. In the case of OU-Southern, they have a team on campus as well.

Lastly, what does it matter if the readers in South Central couldn't complete a round in 45 minutes right now? What effect does that have on any other region on that day? If the teams in that area of the state are ok with it, and if the readers apply the rules correctly, then your objection is invalid. The readers will improve when given more opportunities to read, and especially on questions at the level of Regionals.
Greg Bossick, formerly Persona Non Grata
Mogadore '98, Youngstown State '02 and '22
Director of the Mahoning, Ashtabula, Portage, and Toledo Area Quizbowl Leagues
QuizBoss
Varsity
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 9:20 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby BobKilner » Thu May 07, 2015 9:16 am

The main point is to make sure that _no team_ is eliminated with one loss. In a 2-group, 8-team-per-group configuration, the possibility still exists for a circle of death of three teams at 6-1 in each group.


This was my point about a 1-game playoff to break the tie - that would give one team 2 losses eliminating them if it came to this.

I'm 50/50 on both arguments here with everything.
Bob Kilner
Secondary Admin, ohioqbforum.com
Former Coach, Garfield Heights HS (2001-2008), North High School (2015-19, 21-22)
Kent State '06 / Boise State '10
BobKilner
Site Admin
 
Posts: 402
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 5:43 pm
Location: Garfield Heights OH

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby Djones » Thu May 07, 2015 9:18 am

My biggest problem with the 8 region system is that we clearly do not have enough competent people around the state to make it work. Even with six regions, we have tournament directors using the wrong bracket, readers taking an hour to read a round and other things not appropriate for this level of competition. Greg has to run NW because after my experience with the folks at Findlay, an eight round regional would likely take 12 hours to run if he was not there. As it stands now, the WC regional was finished around the time that NW was starting round 5 according to Greg's twitter posts. Imagine two new regionals run by novices.

Again, as I have said to Greg, I am not opposed to the idea IF we can make it work. I dont think we are there right now, and I for one am absolutely convinced that we will not get to 96 teams anyway, so the point will be moot. Going to 8 regions, three of which would likely not be run competently, that each have 10-11 teams will not make the situation better and is not condusive to growing quiz bowl. Just sending teams to state to be sending them there (Greg didnt like my use of the word watering down the state field, but i think it fits) is not making the state field better. It just forces us to buy more rounds of questions to accomodate four more teams who were not necessary in the first place if we stick to the 6 region system.

If more money is spent on questions, it needs to be spent to pay Steven, Jasper and their team more money, not to unnecessarily pay for more rounds. The questions this year were excellent, but to keep the quality of writers we need, we need to pay them in line with what other organizations pay them. Using the money to buy more rounds at the same discount rate is not a solution- it will make them less likely to take on the contract, and then what?

The proposed format leads to more costs for questions, more costs for plaques and assorted expenses at two additional regional sites with what will likely be no more paying participants. That additional money is better spent paying the question writers since without them, we have no tournament.
David Jones
Coach, Northmont High School
Djones
Varsity
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2014 7:28 pm

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby QuizBoss » Thu May 07, 2015 9:51 am

Regionals will take the exact same amount of rounds. The contract for this year produced 11 rounds for state, so we would need two more under my proposal.

I am fine with paying the writers more money. I would cut the payout for each regional site and state from $500 to $400; this means an increase of $100 in those expenses. Buying four more plaques is not going to break the budget. The money is currently available, and if I'm right and more teams do come, there will either be more money or we can lower the entry fee to something less than the $110 -- $55 per guaranteed game -- currently charged.

Again, throwing out all wildcards, there were at least 108 teams that earned the right to play at Regionals under the automatic qualification system we have set out. We have chosen a 2016 date that will avoid ACT testing conflicts. I don't know what else I can say about that point that hasn't already been said. It comes down to a bet, basically, where you are betting that I won't be able to convince teams to register and I am betting on myself that I can. If I succeed and the expansion is already in place, we're fine. If I fail and the expansion is in place, you are not affected by it. If I fail and the expansion is not in place, status quo prevails. If I succeed and the expansion is not in place, we are then left to scramble. From my experience with NHBB, I hate scrambling. I want things in place ahead of time if at all possible. The only thing keeping this from being possible is doubt.

I was not aware that the regions were racing each other to see who completes their tournament first.

I will let the tournament director of the region that used the wrong bracket comment if he sees fit to comment. I am open to a proposal where we do every regional draw during the spring meeting and take it out of the tournament director's hands, thus ensuring uniformity, if the committee wills it so.

Which three regions would you doubt as to the competency of their directors? I assume Northwest is one of them, from previous comments.

In regards to watering down of the state field, I refer back to my original question. Why have regions at all? Why should we let teams that you know have no hope in hell of winning a state championship play for one? We can tighten the qualification standard, cut the number of teams that qualify to between, say, two or three dozen, MAYBE invite one or two teams to fill out the numbers to something that works well, and save ourselves a weekend. Then we don't have to worry about incompetent regional tournament directors, we can pool all of the best readers at one tournament, buy fewer rounds of questions, and buy fewer awards. If the majority wills it, it will be so. And then I will resign.
Greg Bossick, formerly Persona Non Grata
Mogadore '98, Youngstown State '02 and '22
Director of the Mahoning, Ashtabula, Portage, and Toledo Area Quizbowl Leagues
QuizBoss
Varsity
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 9:20 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby gbdriver80 » Thu May 07, 2015 10:08 am

QuizBoss wrote:I was not aware that the regions were racing each other to see who completes their tournament first.


That is definitely not the point. The point is that some of these regionals take obscenely long to play 7 or 8 rounds.

QuizBoss wrote:I am open to a proposal where we do every regional draw during the spring meeting and take it out of the tournament director's hands, thus ensuring uniformity, if the committee wills it so.


This can't happen. The transparency of the bracket being drawn in front of everyone the day of is important.
Joe Czupryn
OAC Committee Executive Director
Sidney Coach 2012-2015
Northmont Assistant Coach 2008-2011
Northmont '08
gbdriver80
Varsity
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Dayton, OH

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby QuizBoss » Thu May 07, 2015 10:34 am

gbdriver80 wrote:
QuizBoss wrote:I was not aware that the regions were racing each other to see who completes their tournament first.


That is definitely not the point. The point is that some of these regionals take obscenely long to play 7 or 8 rounds.

QuizBoss wrote:I am open to a proposal where we do every regional draw during the spring meeting and take it out of the tournament director's hands, thus ensuring uniformity, if the committee wills it so.


This can't happen. The transparency of the bracket being drawn in front of everyone the day of is important.


----

What does it matter to you if it does take that long? It doesn't affect you, it doesn't affect your region. Would I have preferred to leave an hour or two earlier? Sure. Did I insert myself as a reader because of this? No. I want the readers at Findlay to improve. They can only do that if they get games to read.

Regarding the bracket, the draw can be filmed and the file posted to the site, yes?
Greg Bossick, formerly Persona Non Grata
Mogadore '98, Youngstown State '02 and '22
Director of the Mahoning, Ashtabula, Portage, and Toledo Area Quizbowl Leagues
QuizBoss
Varsity
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 9:20 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby Djones » Thu May 07, 2015 10:40 am

The point is that you expect teams will keep coming when it takes 8 hours to play a double elimination tournament with bad readers. Doesnt exactly jive with the idea of expansion. It isnt a race. It is an effort by those on the committee to get things to run efficiently so that we can be proud of the event wr put on.
David Jones
Coach, Northmont High School
Djones
Varsity
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2014 7:28 pm

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby gbdriver80 » Thu May 07, 2015 10:41 am

QuizBoss wrote:What does it matter to you if it does take that long? It doesn't affect you, it doesn't affect your region. Would I have preferred to leave an hour or two earlier? Sure. Did I insert myself as a reader because of this? No. I want the readers at Findlay to improve. They can only do that if they get games to read.

Regarding the bracket, the draw can be filmed and the file posted to the site, yes?


It is not becoming of our organization to put on a state tournament at which we send out poorly trained readers. If you want to do that at a regular season tournament, go right ahead. By a state tournament is not the place for it. I am sure that they are not trying out new basketball refs during districts or regionals or anything of the sort, and neither should we.

And it still can lead to all kinds of speculation about rigged draws. There simply is no downside to just ensuring competency of those running the regionals and having it done on site.
Joe Czupryn
OAC Committee Executive Director
Sidney Coach 2012-2015
Northmont Assistant Coach 2008-2011
Northmont '08
gbdriver80
Varsity
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Dayton, OH

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby gbdriver80 » Thu May 07, 2015 10:44 am

Djones wrote:The point is that you expect teams will keep coming when it takes 8 hours to play a double elimination tournament with bad readers. Doesnt exactly jive with the idea of expansion. It isnt a race. It is an effort by those on the committee to get things to run efficiently so that we can be proud of the event wr put on.


Yes, especially because no matter when we choose to run Regionals, it is during prom season. An efficiently run regional will lead to continued participation and increased participation. Whereas currently, we can turn teams off with the drawn out process.
Joe Czupryn
OAC Committee Executive Director
Sidney Coach 2012-2015
Northmont Assistant Coach 2008-2011
Northmont '08
gbdriver80
Varsity
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Dayton, OH

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby QuizBoss » Thu May 07, 2015 11:11 am

What are your proposed solutions to the reader problem? I want the current readers to read more during the regular season in preparation for Regionals. If that solution is too slow to affect the change that you want to see, what is your alternative?
Greg Bossick, formerly Persona Non Grata
Mogadore '98, Youngstown State '02 and '22
Director of the Mahoning, Ashtabula, Portage, and Toledo Area Quizbowl Leagues
QuizBoss
Varsity
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 9:20 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby BobKilner » Thu May 07, 2015 11:17 am

I will say I'm enjoying this debate because I think this is part of what Ohio needs is people who care and are involved working on ways to help spread the game successfully and in turn, help us become better on the national level as well. For a long time (not the last few years but in the past) it seemed like the OAC meetings were some kind of secret cabal or good ol' boys and girls club who were afraid of change (I'm exaggerating a bit here I know, but it seemed that way). I'm glad to see what the last few years has held and I'm looking forward to the future as well.
Bob Kilner
Secondary Admin, ohioqbforum.com
Former Coach, Garfield Heights HS (2001-2008), North High School (2015-19, 21-22)
Kent State '06 / Boise State '10
BobKilner
Site Admin
 
Posts: 402
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 5:43 pm
Location: Garfield Heights OH

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby gbdriver80 » Thu May 07, 2015 11:18 am

QuizBoss wrote:What are your proposed solutions to the reader problem? I want the current readers to read more during the regular season in preparation for Regionals. If that solution is too slow to affect the change that you want to see, what is your alternative?


I understand that everything is never going to be ideal but adding more readers spread across the state will just further dilute the pool, not help the problem.
Joe Czupryn
OAC Committee Executive Director
Sidney Coach 2012-2015
Northmont Assistant Coach 2008-2011
Northmont '08
gbdriver80
Varsity
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Dayton, OH

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby QuizBoss » Thu May 07, 2015 11:19 am

Also, the West Central region chose to skip lunch. Northwest did not. That accounts for some, but not all, of the time difference in terms of when the last round ended.
Greg Bossick, formerly Persona Non Grata
Mogadore '98, Youngstown State '02 and '22
Director of the Mahoning, Ashtabula, Portage, and Toledo Area Quizbowl Leagues
QuizBoss
Varsity
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 9:20 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby Djones » Thu May 07, 2015 11:21 am

I think you need to talk to tournament directors who are doing it well and see what they are doing it. Joe Bellas always runs an incredibly efficient tournament, and does it without himself, Joe C, or me having to read. Sue and Cameron always run their site efficiently as well. We have never had the finals at WC end after 2:30, and many times it has ended before 2.

The point we are trying to make Greg is that we know NW is slow, we know another region botched the bracketing. Adding two more regions that would have more inexperienced readers, less committee oversight (since they would likely be run by new members) will slow things down more and lead to more problems. That is my main concern.

Expansion for expansion sake without accomodating how you are actually going to do it correctly is a bad idea. Just look at any tournament that opens with an inifinte number of teams being able to register, and then is scrambling for 12 readers at the last minute.

Also, to follow up on Joe's point about prom. There were numerous teams who had to leave by a certain time to get to prom. Any date we pick in April or early May will not be able to avoid prom. That makes running efficient tournaments all the more important. Some teams may not attend at all if regionals is on prom day, others who do come wont want to still be playing at 430.
David Jones
Coach, Northmont High School
Djones
Varsity
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2014 7:28 pm

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby Djones » Thu May 07, 2015 11:22 am

QuizBoss wrote:Also, the West Central region chose to skip lunch. Northwest did not. That accounts for some, but not all, of the time difference in terms of when the last round ended.


Part of that is that there were only 4 teams left by then because we had already gotten through 5 rounds. The teams left elected to keep playing since it would be over soon.
David Jones
Coach, Northmont High School
Djones
Varsity
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2014 7:28 pm

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby BobKilner » Thu May 07, 2015 11:26 am

I think one of the issues with having competent readers is remembering that they are always volunteers and there's a limited pool to choose from. Sue/Cameron have run it for so long they probably use the same pool of readers to pick from, and I imagine Joe has several readers he uses regularly as well. I'm not sure how to go about 'training' new readers since they are volunteers and getting them to come out to a formal training session, even if its at your practices or something might be extensively difficult.

That's a whole other thing to think about besides the structure itself. I'm not saying it can't be remedied, I'm just saying it has to be taken into consideration.
Bob Kilner
Secondary Admin, ohioqbforum.com
Former Coach, Garfield Heights HS (2001-2008), North High School (2015-19, 21-22)
Kent State '06 / Boise State '10
BobKilner
Site Admin
 
Posts: 402
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 5:43 pm
Location: Garfield Heights OH

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby QuizBoss » Thu May 07, 2015 11:47 am

Paging Joe Bellas...

I don't think you can say that I've not thought about how this is going to break down. You said I didn't accommodate how I am actually going to do this. Would you like me to name eight people who I believe would be available to read at each new regional? I can come very close to doing that.

South Central: Joshua Queen, Amanda Entler, Jeremy Duncan, Brett Oakes, Brian Oakes, Olivia Day, one from the Scioto County ESC and one from the Lawrence County ESC or Ohio University-Southern (the latter two used for the minimum two round period). If there is a concern about who would direct this, perhaps one of the long-serving statesmen/women of the (current) Southeast would be kind enough to lend a hand for the first year.

East Central: Elisabeth Evan (read at the last two OAC States, including last year's final), John Timmer (read this year's final), Travis Beatty, Bonnie Molnar, Zach While, Nicholas McGuigan, Dylan Edwards, Rachel Cline. TD: me. I already mentioned that I would be fine with Anita Zuber taking my place running NW.

I talked about the budget earlier upthread. I do not have the receipt for the plaques in front of me, so I don't know exactly how much 4 new plaques would cost. Let's say $160 ($50 for champion, $30 for runner-up).

What other aspects have I failed, in your estimation, to cover?
Greg Bossick, formerly Persona Non Grata
Mogadore '98, Youngstown State '02 and '22
Director of the Mahoning, Ashtabula, Portage, and Toledo Area Quizbowl Leagues
QuizBoss
Varsity
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 9:20 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby Djones » Thu May 07, 2015 11:53 am

1) Who will run northwest without you there, given that it is already the weakest reader pool by far? Given what I saw in March, I have zero faith in Findlay despite their best intentions.

2) Are these people you mentioned familiar with reading for OAC format, considering a reader at state started a match with "correct me if i mess anything up, I think I know what the rules are". Big difference between reading NAQT and OAC.
David Jones
Coach, Northmont High School
Djones
Varsity
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2014 7:28 pm

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby BobKilner » Thu May 07, 2015 11:58 am

I think regardless if this goes forward or not, whether there are 6, 7 or 8 regions in the future, some type of thought has to be given on how to train more readers efficiently. I can say "hey here are my 8 readers" all day, but if for some reason conflicts come up and some can't make it, yadda yadda, then what happens? We have to figure out a way to train a pool of readers so that we can always have competent ones for regionals. Greg, when I emailed you earlier about the tournament I want to put together, it wouldn't be a bad idea if we could get some mirror sites willing to use it as a training day for future regional readers as well, regardless of where they are located. Its something we can further discuss this summer.
Bob Kilner
Secondary Admin, ohioqbforum.com
Former Coach, Garfield Heights HS (2001-2008), North High School (2015-19, 21-22)
Kent State '06 / Boise State '10
BobKilner
Site Admin
 
Posts: 402
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 5:43 pm
Location: Garfield Heights OH

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby QuizBoss » Thu May 07, 2015 12:07 pm

I would let Anita Zuber take over Northwest assuming she wants it. If she doesn't want it, then I would ask the other members of the committee representing that region. Failing that, I would find someone to take over East Central from me and I would go out there again.

Regarding familiarity with OAC, the South Central almost without exception uses OAC for league play. We've only done NAQT for weeknight or weekend tournaments. The East Central area uses OAC in Trumbull, for its county tournament, both of the Stark County leagues play it (though with 5 players per team and subs after life science), and Harding mirrors your OAC event. All of the readers I've mentioned are from Mahoning County, but I can train them and I can run a mirror of Kilner's event to facilitate the process.
Greg Bossick, formerly Persona Non Grata
Mogadore '98, Youngstown State '02 and '22
Director of the Mahoning, Ashtabula, Portage, and Toledo Area Quizbowl Leagues
QuizBoss
Varsity
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 9:20 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby Get Lynned » Thu May 07, 2015 12:11 pm

I've in the past been a personal supporter for the idea of eight regions because I've never felt a Southeast Regional is best represented by name with having a Prep school from Columbus and a Catholic H.S. from Lancaster come out of the region to states when considering the region has some representation from the counties that best represent "Applachia" on a socioeconomic level, i.e. Lawrence and Scioto. As previously stated, I feel there needs to be a study and a pretty meticulous consideration about who should have these new regions and what they should entail. I like to think enjoy a good relationship on a personal and professional level with Greg and would like to continue so. I'm posting on this topic because, after Greg, I probably have the most experience of anyone on this thread so far in this "south Central/southern Ohio" area from a quiz bowl standpoint given that I played three years in this area and have read for tournaments in Ross, Pike, Scioto, and Lawrence Counties before in addition to having directed a tournament at Chillicothe this past fall, ergo I feel as if I'm entitled to a voice about this matter.

With that said...

I have several doubts about the viability of a new region being created in this area immediately and here they are.

1.) There are obvious concerns about the reader pool and those concerns have merit. Speaking from my experience at the regional tournament formerly held at Shawnee State, all of the ones I recall having, except for one, stick out in my mind as either absolutely awful, not being mindful of/not enforcing the timing rules in the alphabet round, or just don't stand out to me as being particularly good. The only reader from that tournament I would personally vouch for as being capable to do an OAC regional tournament is the coach from Lucasville Valley, Jeremy Duncan. From my experience as a player at Greg's first tournament Saturday tournament at OU-Southern, I'd say Brett Oakes from Minford is another good reader when it comes to clarity and rules knowledge. Josh Queen from Chillicothe is not a fast reader, but has knowledge of the rules and can speak clearly. The problem there is those three are all coaches and you almost certainly can not have the regional tournament director reading a match unless you're Greg Bossick or David Jones. I am also going to call into question OU-Southern's ability to provide readers for a tournament, because I don't believe there were any at Greg's SERIOUS I (UNLESS the middle-age gentleman from South Point that had played college bowl and was actually a pretty good reader, whose name I'm forgetting, was associated with OU-Southern)and I'm pretty sure there were only one or two at Greg's SERIOUS II. Can they prove they're not going to flake out on the idea of leaving Ironton at 6:30 on a Saturday morning to go read a HS tournament in Chillicothe for potentially just two rounds?

2.) To be open, I am going to express my concern there are a few schools in Greg's proposed South Central region that attended SSNCT this year and maybe even an NAQT national from last year - notably expensive tournaments that they don't have much shot of doing well in - but didn't go to regionals this year. I think said schools' voices on this matter should be heard with a grain of salt seeing as how they have opportunities to make known they want an OAC regional (such as going to Lancaster for OAC regionals and playing in a field that incorporates more geographic diversity than the tournaments in Ohio they have been playing in). We're not talking about them going to Athens or Marietta, it's Lancaster as it is. Now... if some of the South Central schools that are starting to establish themselves in quiz bowl have no interest in doing OAC (and as evidenced in the past with several regularly active quizbowl schools in Ohio, some don't. See: South Range), then let's get that established so we aren't fielding a region that may not even justify its creation within a few years after inception.

While in the past I've made comments that it sucks that Symmes Valley has ~3 hours of driving (Google Maps says this is closer to 2 1/6, but I've always said three hours because my senior year Fisher played Symmes Valley in football and I know that's how long it took for the team to get there), here is a reality that is inescapable. Everything in Southeast Ohio is far away for someone. What happens if a school such as Racine Southern (Meigs County) wants to do OAC Regionals? Their options presumably are Chillicothe or Lancaster. What happens if Athens County or Washington County schools want to do Regionals? Chillicothe is only close for schools along Route 23, in Jackson County, and the SCOL (South Central Ohio League) area. It is a by far longer drive mileage wise from Athens, Marietta, Belpre, or Pomeroy (areas that definitely have potential to grow in quiz bowl than Waverly is to Lancaster.

Greg, while you're not wrong that those people you list could be o.k. readers for a new region, the common denominator among all of them is that they are coaches and they probably don't want to read (plus, it has been my impression that OAC doesn't want coaches reading in the regional tournament). As for who would run it, who from the SE do you suppose is actually going to be able to. Of the three SE folk, they either have their own teams to coach or their own tournament to run.
Thomas Moore
Ohio Wesleyan '18

Retired from online, for good.
Get Lynned
Varsity
 
Posts: 309
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 6:56 pm
Location: Self-Imposed Exile, 4ever

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby QuizBoss » Thu May 07, 2015 12:32 pm

Tom, do Mike and Lynn _both_ need to be at OU-L in order for it to run? I honestly don't know, I haven't been there.

Alex C., assuming you look in on this, what are your thoughts about stepping in and helping? If not you, perhaps Doc?

With months to prepare and last year's question set for reference material, I believe readers could be trained properly and practice with local teams to hone their skills. Perhaps you and others don't. I mention coaches because they have the most experience _right now_.

With regards to the teams that went to NAQT but not OAC...

Piketon: won their county competition, but their county only has five schools, therefore not a qualifying event.
Waverly: didn't win a tournament
Huntington: see above
Clinton-Massie: probably would have been assigned WC or SW had they applied for a wildcard, because they're in the same league as East Clinton who did apply for a wildcard and did finish in the top half at WC

There are no teams from Athens, Meigs, Pomeroy, or Marietta to consider at the moment. Would I like there to be? YES, because if more of them come in, it only reinforces the point about expansion being necessary. I believe there has been some movement from Eastern Meigs recently, but I will let others speak to that if they wish to.
Greg Bossick, formerly Persona Non Grata
Mogadore '98, Youngstown State '02 and '22
Director of the Mahoning, Ashtabula, Portage, and Toledo Area Quizbowl Leagues
QuizBoss
Varsity
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 9:20 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby dxdtdemon » Thu May 07, 2015 1:05 pm

If you kept the six regions and used the optimal 24-team double elimination bracket, and just had byes if you had between 17 and 23 teams, you would only need one more round. If the number of packets is still the same from when I was involved with writing the tournament, there were a bunch of packets that were kept in reserve just to be used for replacement questions, and one of them could probably be used in a game without too much harm. Yes, this bracket would involve many teams sitting out round 1, but if the byes were determined ahead of time, you could have certain teams show up later. Why is there no seeding at regionals?
Jonathan Graham
Beavercreek(1999-2003), Ohio State (2003-07), Wright State(2012-fall14)
occasional question writer
dxdtdemon
Rookie
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 5:12 pm

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby Get Lynned » Thu May 07, 2015 1:07 pm

QuizBoss wrote:Regarding familiarity with OAC, the South Central almost without exception uses OAC for league play. We've only done NAQT for weeknight or weekend tournaments. The East Central area uses OAC in Trumbull, for its county tournament, both of the Stark County leagues play it (though with 5 players per team and subs after life science), and Harding mirrors your OAC event. All of the readers I've mentioned are from Mahoning County, but I can train them and I can run a mirror of Kilner's event to facilitate the process.

Here's my question: sure, they use OAC, but do said leagues actually incorporate the newer rules and scoring customs? As Bob and I know firsthand, there's at least one OAC league down by the river that makes us write the American Gov't category to be completely government, no economics as that league apparently has never amended the rules to reflect that change the OAC committee decided on a few years ago. Do any of these leagues use the old scoring format, or do they all use the current one? Do they use the accurate timing rules? Do they still have the five-point bonus for getting 20 questions correct on an alphabet round?

This isn't meant to be negative, but I know from what Bob and I have done there are some areas that do OAC format but are years removed from the current state of OAC, and with changes in the rules it'd only be assuring if these potential readers know said rules and have at least done a tournament or two on them. IMO

Greg - Thanks for clarifying about those five schools, but doesn't this go back to the step we were at? Piketon and Waverly didn't qualify for OAC I see, so it appears the onus would be on them to actually qualify (which may require them playing more events). Huntington did go to OAC Regionals and according to the spreadsheet they did win a tournament in Ross County.

I bring up those areas because while Meigs and Athens Counties don't have any active teams, they are areas to potentially develop a few teams, and before Scioto, Pike, and Ross County got involved with pyramidal quiz bowl, the first SE Ohio county to have any taste of the pyramidal quiz bowl sugar was actually Washington County, as both Belpre and Marietta have done pyramidal, TU/B tournaments on Saturdays before so the door is open. But that's going back to "geographical extremes". No one is immune from geographical extremes, sadly. Mt. Vernon used to have to go to Portsmouth for the SE Regional, for instance.

Regarding the SE Regional: do they have to both have to be at OU-L in order for it to run? Five to ten years ago, maybe not. However, to do what Mike is able to do in the efficient manner he does for the SE Regional would require the work of at least two or three people if you left it up to Lynn simply because Lynn has trouble getting around now. Also, I am under the impression due to Mike's unique work schedule that he is only able to orchestrate the SE Regional tournament the way he has been able to because of the proximity of OU-L/Fisher to where he lives and the fact he is able to get full cooperation from current Fisher players and alumni to make the tournament run as efficiently as possible.
Thomas Moore
Ohio Wesleyan '18

Retired from online, for good.
Get Lynned
Varsity
 
Posts: 309
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 6:56 pm
Location: Self-Imposed Exile, 4ever

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby QuizBoss » Thu May 07, 2015 1:22 pm

We are not a governing body. We cannot make any league do something it doesn't want to do. Stark County leagues play with 5 players per team and they allow subs after life science instead of before and after the alphabet round, to use an example from up here.

If that league only wants government and no economics, that is their choice. They are the customer and they have the right to request that. But the Regional packets are going to have economics in them. The team that gets shortchanged because they have no chance at scoring any points in said (partial) category needs to go back to his or her league and advocate for adoption of modern standards. The same can also be said of pyramidal tossups/final round questions.

I was wrong about Huntington. Sorry.
Greg Bossick, formerly Persona Non Grata
Mogadore '98, Youngstown State '02 and '22
Director of the Mahoning, Ashtabula, Portage, and Toledo Area Quizbowl Leagues
QuizBoss
Varsity
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 9:20 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby Get Lynned » Thu May 07, 2015 1:40 pm

Greg, that's not what I'm getting at. My point is that evidently not all OAC format leagues adapt to the current rules utilized for the regionals & state competition. What ensures that readers from an OAC league that is separated from the circuit and may not have adapted newer timing and scoring rules (plus the fact there's no recognition rule, apparent changes in the balance of time after 2 incorrect answers to team questions) are going to be able to apply the newer rules for the regional competition?

This may be a bigger and different idea to tackle; while the OAC isn't a governing body, I think it'd be beneficial to all interested parties to reach out to separated, obscure leagues and inform them about what may have changed with OAC.
Thomas Moore
Ohio Wesleyan '18

Retired from online, for good.
Get Lynned
Varsity
 
Posts: 309
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 6:56 pm
Location: Self-Imposed Exile, 4ever

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby QuizBoss » Thu May 07, 2015 1:46 pm

I have been reaching out, and I'm fairly sure I'm not the only one doing so. The leadership in these various places and the coaches who play under old conditions need to get with it, I agree. It can only help them if they do. Change is hard, though, and some will resist it regardless.
Greg Bossick, formerly Persona Non Grata
Mogadore '98, Youngstown State '02 and '22
Director of the Mahoning, Ashtabula, Portage, and Toledo Area Quizbowl Leagues
QuizBoss
Varsity
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 9:20 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby AlexConnor » Thu May 07, 2015 1:52 pm

Mike had asked me if I could read at Regionals this year. I attended the readers' meeting but enough Fisher people showed up that he didn't need me. I was relieved that I was able to actually coach my team. I read at almost every tournament over the course of the year but for OAC Regionals and States I want to be there to coach my team. You're kind of punishing the best teams if you're counting on their coaches to read and direct the regional tournaments.

I've been warming up to the idea of adding regions, but I think these complaints are valid. I share the concerns about finding competent directors and readers. There are going to be hiccups, but it's our job to minimize these. A tournament that runs long or has controversy is a negative tournament experience for those teams. That's a waste of their money and it turns them off from being future participants in OAC events.

Whenever we do expand, I would rather see a different format for states. 11-12 rounds of OAC format is way too much. That's a full day of NAQT questions, but you need to allow an extra 10 minutes at least for OAC questions. As it is, states this year ran just over 6 hours for 8 rounds, including a 45 minute lunch.
Alex Connor
Coach, St. Charles Preparatory
AlexConnor
Rookie
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 5:33 pm

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby QuizBoss » Thu May 07, 2015 2:38 pm

What would your preferred format look like, Alex?
Greg Bossick, formerly Persona Non Grata
Mogadore '98, Youngstown State '02 and '22
Director of the Mahoning, Ashtabula, Portage, and Toledo Area Quizbowl Leagues
QuizBoss
Varsity
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 9:20 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby AlexConnor » Thu May 07, 2015 4:55 pm

QuizBoss wrote:What would your preferred format look like, Alex?


My first instinct is to say split into 2 divisions of 8, play 7 rounds of round robin, then do a page playoff. Of course, that still takes 10-11 rounds.

I like the initial structure of your format but I think the middle parts can be cut out. Our current system eliminates teams with 2 losses. It seems likely that in practice the 5-0 teams dispatch the 3-2 teams. Cut rounds 4 and 5 and instead have the remaining 8 do double elimination or 3 rounds of round robin with playoffs after that.

Here's a thought I had off the top of my head:
4 pods of 4. Each has two champs and two runners-up. 3 rounds of round robin. Top 2 from each move on.
The pods are paired up ahead of time. A team then plays the 2 teams from the paired pod. Using total record to that point, the top four move on to a page playoff. That would require the same amount of rounds we currently play. We would need 8 readers for 3 rounds, then just 4 for the next 2.
Alex Connor
Coach, St. Charles Preparatory
AlexConnor
Rookie
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 5:33 pm

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby swwFC » Thu May 07, 2015 5:25 pm

I like a few things about the 8-region states format proposed by Greg:

-All teams (and particularly, the best teams) get to play more games against teams of similar skill level. I think more competitive matches is a major plus for all teams in attendance.
-There is still the potential for top teams to get crappy initial draws against other top teams, but in this format they will still have a chance to make the playoffs (at 3-2 in the prelims) and play their way back in to a high placement.

I don't like the idea that the page playoff could potentially have a 3-loss team (i.e. the 4, 5, or 8 seed team from Playoff Group #1), or even a 4-loss team(!) if the bottom seeds have a 1-2 circle of death, that has the potential to win the whole thing against a team that would only have two total losses (for instance, if the 1 seed team from Playoff Group #1 won their RR, won the first round of the page playoff, then lost their last two games to the aforementioned 3-loss team). This scenario is admittedly very unlikely, but still possible. As an aside, I had a similar dislike about how the page playoff ended up this year: Sidney, as a group winner at 4-1, had the potential to win the whole thing with two total losses, while the rest of the teams in the playoff would have been eliminated with their second loss. I’m not saying this is necessarily illegitimate or anything, just that it felt wrong in some way.

However, I think the major drawback is the extra rounds that would be required. 11 rounds were required for States this year, so the proposed format would require at least 2 more rounds (in order to have 1 extra), and possibly 3 more (if the Committee wanted to keep 2 extra rounds, as they had this year). This would be a challenge from not only an accessibility standpoint (i.e. finding 2-3 more rounds of difficulty-appropriate answers, which is not impossible, but definitely much more challenging), but also from a financial standpoint (I suspect). I know this is going to come off as me being self-serving, but I strongly agree with Dave that for the OAC Committee to attract writers who can write quality sets, they are going to have to significantly increase their per round payment (independent of whether or not I am involved in writing it in the future). I will have more specifically to say about this privately to the OAC Committee based on discussions I had with Ike and Jasper, but I will note that the question payment that was agreed upon ended up being substantially lower than what the writing team could have made if they had submitted their questions to NAQT or HSAPQ instead. Who knows what the future will hold, but I have a hard time seeing that arrangement working long term, given the few people who are able to write an OAC set up to today’s high standards.

Anyways, going back to the proposed format: I think there are both good and bad things about it, and it would be nice for the Committee to be required to come up with the format for a 16 team States tournament. But yeah, before worrying about that issue, the Committee needs to be confident it can run 8 regionals adequately. I’m not knowledgeable enough to say whether or not this is currently the case, but I do know that the Committee needs to carefully consider it (as I’m sure they will), because if you put on a bad tournament(s), you will run the risk of turning off the teams you are trying to attract (and as someone who experienced this with the college team he led, I know something about this).
Steven Wellstead
Fisher Catholic High School, Class of 2007
Case Western Reserve University, Class of 2011
NAQT Writer
swwFC
Rookie
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 1:01 pm
Location: Lancaster, OH

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby swwFC » Thu May 07, 2015 5:32 pm

AlexConnor wrote:
QuizBoss wrote:What would your preferred format look like, Alex?


My first instinct is to say split into 2 divisions of 8, play 7 rounds of round robin, then do a page playoff. Of course, that still takes 10-11 rounds.

I like the initial structure of your format but I think the middle parts can be cut out. Our current system eliminates teams with 2 losses. It seems likely that in practice the 5-0 teams dispatch the 3-2 teams. Cut rounds 4 and 5 and instead have the remaining 8 do double elimination or 3 rounds of round robin with playoffs after that.

Here's a thought I had off the top of my head:
4 pods of 4. Each has two champs and two runners-up. 3 rounds of round robin. Top 2 from each move on.
The pods are paired up ahead of time. A team then plays the 2 teams from the paired pod. Using total record to that point, the top four move on to a page playoff. That would require the same amount of rounds we currently play. We would need 8 readers for 3 rounds, then just 4 for the next 2.


As I noted in my previous message, the current system does not necessarily eliminate teams with 2 losses (as this year's scenario with a 4-1 group winner showed us).

I, too, was thinking a 4x4 pod scenario could have the potential to work. I still hate the potential possibility of a very good team being ousted from contention early with a bad draw (again, like what occurred this year), but I'm not sure there is a good format that avoids this scenario while keeping a similar number of rounds. As I noted in my previous message, I think Greg's format is a little more forgiving to teams with a bad draw, but I feel the additional rounds are a major issue.
Steven Wellstead
Fisher Catholic High School, Class of 2007
Case Western Reserve University, Class of 2011
NAQT Writer
swwFC
Rookie
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 1:01 pm
Location: Lancaster, OH

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby QuizBoss » Thu May 07, 2015 6:31 pm

Taking the feedback received into account, here's a revised state format for 16 teams...

Prelims (3 games)

Power matched as before. After three rounds, there will be two 3-0 teams and six 2-1 teams. These teams remain in championship contention; the others are eliminated and can play for final placement or just go home, whichever is preferred.

Playoff (3 games)

Regional protection can once again be in place, as the worst-case scenario would see four regions advance two teams and four regions shut out.

All records carry.

Draw the 3-0 teams into separate groups. Draw the 2-1 teams into the groups keeping regional protection in mind.

Two groups of four play a single round robin. Ties would be broken however we agree to break them. Top 2 advance from each group.

Finals (3-4 games)

Page playoff as already employed.
Greg Bossick, formerly Persona Non Grata
Mogadore '98, Youngstown State '02 and '22
Director of the Mahoning, Ashtabula, Portage, and Toledo Area Quizbowl Leagues
QuizBoss
Varsity
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 9:20 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby Get Lynned » Fri May 08, 2015 7:35 am

The following hasn't been proposed, and obviously there needs to be a guarantee that all regions are filled and there's demand to be had for new regions (as previously stated), however I think I have an idea for a regional alignment that I think would be a lot more feasible. Right now, it's all hypotheticals anyway.

Central Ohio Region (counties to serve: Delaware, Franklin, Knox, Licking, Madison, Marion, Morrow, and Union). This could be hosted at Olentangy Liberty, St. Charles... or, maybewith the help of Ohio State's team if they want (what better way to get new teams to come to your tournaments than personally invite them to events for next year in person?). If no OSU people read, not all would be lost. Of the eight readers needed, one that immediately would be a good one -if he would want to - is the taller gentleman from St. Charles w/ the wire-rimmed glasses that read the finals/last OAC match played at Shawnee State in 2013 (Alex would know who I'm talking about). Olentangy Liberty could provide at minimum half of the readers needed (Cortney, myself, there are several faculty members/parents that have read at our fall and spring tournaments, or any of our kids with reading experience that will likely have graduated by the time this hypothetical region forms... some of whom are decent). Other people that could potentially help us out would be the coach from Leesburg Fairfield (according to him when he was talking to Cortney and I @ Waverly, he lives in Franklin County), Brandon Shull, maybe Alex if worst came to worst in terms of numbers and we needed an eighth (recognizing you want to coach your kids). Obviously the specifics on who reads is contingent as to who would host, but there is, I argue, a much stronger reading pool in this hypothetical region in terms of experience and depth than the proposed South Central Region.

As to how this region would be able to fill 16 slots, it definitely has the potential. Once Cortney and I figure out what we're doing tournament wise next year (if we can get the OCC project launched off the ground that'd be great), that should give us a good idea on how many spots we can certainly say get filled right off the bat. Hypothetical Central Ohio Region schools that have done the SE Regional in past three years: St. Charles, Upper Arlington, Mt. Vernon, Wellington, Olentangy Liberty, Olentangy Orange, Dublin Coffman, Grove City, Bexley, Licking Heights, and Granville. The two other Dublin schools, Scioto and Jerome, have done OAC regionals in the past three years but got shipped off to NW and WC respectively. That's 13 already. I anticipate with Liberty no longer doing the Paul Boyd 4-County League that the door is extended for a school such as London, Jonathan Alder or a Marion County school to potentially claim a bid. Whoever wins the Columbus City League I imagine would be eligible for an automatic, no?

While 13 is obviously less than 16, there is a lot more promise IMO with this region given that there is an abundance of leagues and ways to qualify through automatic bid with the denser population.

The ideal South Central Region can just fill the gaps in the Southeast Region left by the schools that'd go to the Central Ohio Region. This probably works better given that the regional at OU-L did not have Mike, Alex, the gentleman from St. Charles, or Cortney reading yet was able to move pretty well and from my perspective efficiently and easily with a "house" staff that has a bunch of experience reading OAC. Even the two youngest and "greenest" readers there, Luke Schmelzer (who graduated with me) and I, had both read OAC before as well as TU/B in tournament environments. The only negative would be distance, but obviously many of these schools' athletic teams have done farther drives for their regional tournaments (such as Athens for boys basketball), so I'm sure they can justify it to their activities directors if a dispute were to arise.

It's not perfect, but I think it works as a better solution to making a new region out of an existing region than creating a new one by scratch.
Thomas Moore
Ohio Wesleyan '18

Retired from online, for good.
Get Lynned
Varsity
 
Posts: 309
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 6:56 pm
Location: Self-Imposed Exile, 4ever

Re: The eight-region plan

Postby gbdriver80 » Fri May 08, 2015 10:51 am

dxdtdemon wrote:If you kept the six regions and used the optimal 24-team double elimination bracket, and just had byes if you had between 17 and 23 teams, you would only need one more round. If the number of packets is still the same from when I was involved with writing the tournament, there were a bunch of packets that were kept in reserve just to be used for replacement questions, and one of them could probably be used in a game without too much harm. Yes, this bracket would involve many teams sitting out round 1, but if the byes were determined ahead of time, you could have certain teams show up later. Why is there no seeding at regionals?


This kind of got glossed over I think. If we do have more than 96 teams participating, I believe this is a far superior plan to adding regional sites. It is much easier and requires much less to simply host up to 24 team regionals rather than 16 team regionals. This would mean that no new sites were needed, no new TDs, and no new readers (still requires 8).
Joe Czupryn
OAC Committee Executive Director
Sidney Coach 2012-2015
Northmont Assistant Coach 2008-2011
Northmont '08
gbdriver80
Varsity
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Dayton, OH


Return to Old/Outdated Posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests

cron