[eDebate] NDT Worker Rule- 80% of the schools would benefit???

Matt Cormack mattedebate
Thu Apr 20 14:12:56 CDT 2006

Add KU to the list of schools dependent upon Graduate
Assistant coaching.

***disclamer- i wrote the section bottom first and
think that I must have missed something.  The logical
way teams "benefit" from the new rule is if they have
only two people (non-undergrads) that were cutting
cards/writing stuff at the NDT because if the rule was
implemented everyone would be forced to do the same. 
I noticed Baylor and UTD, two district teams that I
know have more than 2 full time coaches (or atleast
people that coach their debaters at every tournament
throughout the year) listed as beneficiaries and
investigated the other schools.  I am confident that
either A) I am incorrect and each of the schools below
for some reason or another constrained themselves to
only two people cutting/writing arguments or B) my
interpretation of "benefit" is way off.  So my list of
teams that benefit (again, rough estimate based on
eligible card cutters they had w/ a year long link to
the squad)-

Bingamton- (1 coach, one hired judge)
Boston College- (2 coaches, one hired judge)
Case Western- (2 hired judges)
UCO- (1 coach, 1 hired judge)
Concordia- (2 coaches)
Denver- (2 coaches)
GSU- (2 coaches)
Kentucky- (2 coaches, 1 hired)
Macalaster- (1 coach)
Miami-(2 coaches, 1 hired judge)
OU- (2 coaches)
Redlands- (2 coaches)
WSU- (2 coaches)

That is 13 not 35 by my count (this could also be high
because I know that  hired judges may help in argument
writing).  The only conclusion I can make is that the
question is not can you afford to bring judges/coaches
(these people are obviously there--see below) but
there is something different about the type of people
you bring. That is sacry to me that some
judges/coaches are deemed inferior to the point that
they are categorically excluded from having the
potential to contribute to a teams sucess via
research/argument writing.  The logical conclusion is
that of the 3 coaches UTD or Wyoming brought the team
would be better off if one of them just wasn't writing
argument.  Obviously there are people who "benefit"
that don't support the rule and people that don't
"benefit" that do, but to claim 80% are helped by the
rule is absurd and should probably make some people on
that list a little angry.*****

***begin my original attempt to evaluate the benefit

Also, I know that Steve was making a rough estimate
about the schools he claims would 'benefit' from this
rule and I will admit a similar level of uncertainty,
but even the simplest measure of coaches on a team and
my knowledge of our D3 competitors can directly refute
a few of his examples: 

4 full time coaches on the pref sheets (karla was
probably busy w/ tournament duties, none the less one
coach would be axed)

3 coaches on the pref sheet, I know frap and sam are
full time, will admit that I dont know about steve but
he was coaching his teams at CEDA 

Kall, Scotty, Hoe all on the pref sheet, I hear they
cut cards, new rule=someone doesn't.

Vega, Dietrich, Collier, Jordan- 4 coaches all on the
pref sheet.  (cutting cards probably not that relevant
for their strats, but I have seen it happen)- new
rule=todd racks up fees for the tournament by even
more binge drinking

UNT- are you kidding
the following judges in the pool- 
Matheson, Lain, Gagnon, Haddad, Register, Saindon- all
of these guys coached their teams all year long, new
rule=not any more

Richmond- 4 judges on pref sheet, according to
philosophies all apear to be UR coaches...

matt moore appears to help out an old friend and
probably provide some coaching because his team didn't
qualify, new rule=no help

USC- i am still counting the judges they had in the
..........its 8

Texas Dallas/West Georgia/Wyoming-
Burk, Herdon, Kirk/Hester, Koehle, Holbrook/Stannard,
Pinto, Forslund

same story 3 people that i can see cutting a few cards

--- Paul Johnson <paulj567 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> This point of Mike's is huge- at Pitt we had lots of
> talented coaches who only had time to do work AT the
> tournament (because they taught multiple classes and
> also had responsibilities as graduate students). the
> only time they could sit down and cut some cards was
> at the tournament in between debates or during ones
> that they weren't judging. Young graduate assistants
> are often the coaches most likely to sit down and
> cut
> a heaping helping of evidence because they are
> barely
> removed from debating themselves, but because of
> professional obligations often stretch themselves
> thin
> doing work. If they can't do a ton of work all year
> and THEN can't work at the tournament it seems to
> really jack programs that rely on graduate students
> as
> assistants- being attached to a comm program is a
> double edged sword- you can get some talented people
> who have academic interests to coach your team, but
> you often dont have the funding needed to bring in a
> full time assistant- we're lucky at wake to have the
> resources to have the Gravy Man. but schools like
> Pitt, GMU, Miami of Ohio, USC and Wayne <to name a
> very few of many> heavily rely on graduate student
> coaches. some of these schools also have VERY small
> teams meaning their student worker contingent
> wouldnt
> be very large/helpful, as opposed to a team that
> goes
> 10 deep like Emory or Wake Forest. Since no one
> wants
> to believe that these teams are totally screwed to
> begin with, we should certainly not try to make the
> NDT more asymetrical.
> -PJ
> > 
> > b) This would allow full time regular season
> coaches
> > to work at the NDT. It
> > would address one of my biggest complaints with
> the
> > new rule: I think it is
> > unfair for people who are full time coaches and
> cut
> > cards throughout the
> > year to be excluded from at-tournament research
> when
> > it matters most. I can
> > understand why folks don't like big programs who
> > bring in alumni research
> > help. I can understand why folks don't like
> schools
> > who have hired guns
> > throughout the year that never judge or contribute
> > to the community. I can
> > understand why folks dislike programs buying up
> > researchers whose teams did
> > not qualify. But full time coaches *are* different
> > and should be allowed to
> > work as usual at the tournament. Having a third or
> > fourth coach is not
> > excessive.
> > 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com 
> _______________________________________________
> eDebate mailing list
> eDebate at ndtceda.com
> http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate

Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 

More information about the Mailman mailing list