Re: NAQT Bids (3 of 3)

Shaun says:

"In last year's ICT, there
were _nine_ teams from the Mid-Atl region, including
six in the top 20.
Yet this year, we only qualify
six. Why? Because the stats don't measure up. Give me
a break."

Now, let's look at
this:

Last year, Duke and South Carolina played at the
Mid-Atlantic SCT. Last year, John Nam and Josh Allen played
for Maryland, while Rob Knobel played for Penn State.
Last year, Johns Hopkins played in Div-I and
qualified.

This year, Duke and South Carolina (both considerably
weaker, if stats are to be believed) were in the
Southeast. John Nam is persona non grata at UMCP, while Josh
Allen is graduated and moved on. Rob Knobel has left
Penn State. Johns Hopkins went from team to host, and
decided to play in Div-II.

The point? You can't
base anything on last year. Each year should -- and
must -- stand on its own.

Furthermore, Shaun
also said:

"Field strength is a variable that
cannot be adjusted for via statistical means.
Hypothetically, if each of the top 10 teams in the country are in
one region, the 10th best team will NOT have stats
sufficient enough for a nationals entry
bid."

Actually, that's where you're wrong. If the top 10 teams
are in one region, they will have the top 10 bonus
conversions, and be really high in TU points per TU heard.
Furthermore, these stats are excellent cross-field
comparisons, since they eliminate opponent's strength in the
first case, and moderator (in)competence in the second.
These two stats are crucial to determining bids, from
what I've heard through the proverbial
grapevine.

However, if you had your heart set on St. Louis, may I
suggest going as a freelance moderator for NAQT. It's
what I plan on doing should only our D-2 kids wind up
getting called off the waitlist.

Andy
Goss
sitting and praying in the Kudzu and Tobacco

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:43 AM EST EST