Re: "Covert" revision of D2 elligibility rules


In response to R. and some of the other posts regarding this issue, I 
can see how/why the decision was made. However, I still think this is 
an absolute shame for the people planning to attend Div II ICT. 
Playing against a team with two "veterans" of the tournament, who 
happen to be outstanding, and whose team's S-Value is far above that 
of any other Div II team at Sectionals last weekend is extremely 
disappointing. The tournament essentially has gone from one where any 
team in the field could win, depending on luck, packets, etc. to one 
where it is almost a de facto result ahead of time. We might as well 
send them the trophy already, if the same four that played at West 
Coast SCT are playing at ICT. I really don't understand why UCLA 
can't keep its bid, but Meigs and Sherman be declared ineligible.

I don't know if the other Div II competitors are as outraged as I am, 
because frankly, I don't know how many of them check this board and 
are aware of the situation. However, I do think that an explanation e-
mail should be sent out to every team that qualified for Div II ICT. 
Furthermore, this only furthers the argument in my mind that people 
should have two years of Div II ICT eligibility. That way, issues 
like this could be avoided entirely. I'm eager to hear what the 
resolution/fallout of this issue will be as soon as everyone is made 
aware of what happened. 

Rather irked,

Nick Walters
President, Penn College Bowl

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:47 AM EST EST