[eDebate] JV/Novice Nationals

Zompetti at aol.com Zompetti
Thu Mar 9 00:03:05 CST 2006


 

Of course CEDA does not have the "jurisdiction" (to use Josh's term) or the  
constitutional mandate to dictate the location of a novice/JV national  
tournament.  That isn't how I read Beth's post.
 
Instead, it would be nice -- and probably in the authoritative realm of the  
CEDA exec -- to have someone propose a by-law/constitutional change  
sanctioning one, official novice/JV national tournament.  Just  like the NDT or CEDA 
nationals, the location can change from year-to-year  depending on who wants to 
host.  But a coordinated tournament that has  encouragement and support from 
the administration would accrue the following  benefits:
 
1.  higher likelihood of a quality tournament -- if CEDA sanctions it,  folks 
will go.
2.  less tournament infringement -- if there's one "national"  tournament, it 
will be less likely that multiple novice/JV, etc. national  tournaments will 
occur at the same time -- or at least in close proximity.   This is not to 
dismiss the ADA nationals or NDT/CEDA, but rather to say that it  does seem crazy 
to have 2 or more tournaments that call themselves the  "novice/JV national 
tournament" in the same season
3.  more cooperation -- if tournament hosts alternate venues, then  those 
hosts can help each other in the planning and perhaps even in the hosting  -- 
much like the NDT hosts help during the planning of the subsequent year's  NDT
4.  creates less stress on potential hosts -- of course, hosting a  huge 
national tournament is enormous stress, so why should we create more?   If a host 
knows for sure that their tournament will be the sanctioned one for a  
particular year, then folks like WVU don't have to worry that they're  short-changing 
their teams by hosting a tournament and fear that others won't  attend.
 
CEDA probably should, at the very least, look into this matter.  Not  to 
dictate, but to guide and help and foster a community -- isn't that its  mission???
 
zomp
 
 
In a message dated 3/8/2006 11:02:40 P.M. Central Standard Time,  
joepatrice at gmail.com writes:

I'm just going to focus on the concept of the CEDA leadership intervening  in 
this matter.  I cannot speak for the rest of the ole executive branch,  but I 
don't think this fits within the powers of the CEDA  executive.  
 
First of all, two of the "National" tournaments on the schedule are ADA  and 
the NDT...while a blatant CEDA power grab would fulfill a certain  
megalomaniacal vision of CEDA's future (come on...one of us self-identifies as  
"Chief"...you have to see world domination coming), I don't think anyone  thinks CEDA 
can tell ADA and the NDT to stop having their tournaments. 
 
So, beyond CEDA Nats, can CEDA dictate what tournaments call themselves  
"Nationals?"  I think that also goes beyond the Constitution.   Perhaps an 
amendment is necessary to provide the executive the role of  accrediting a JV/Novice 
National tournament, but I don't see that power there  now. 
 
And I would argue that I'm leaning toward this being a power that CEDA  
should not have.  If your proposal is that one location should be  designated as 
the sole JV/Novice national tournament, that would best realize  the word 
"national" but I think it could be counterproductive to what we're  hoping to 
accomplish with JV/Novice Nats.  For a variety of reasons, most  JV/Novice squads 
are not in a position to fly their debaters all over the  country for one 
tournament.  Many JV/Novice programs have small budgets,  many JV/Novice programs 
have 4 or 5 teams they want to travel to these  tournaments, many have open 
teams too and need to balance their budget to  travel to these tournaments AND 
CEDA Nats (and some to the NDT) and  certainly that would be difficult for us to 
afford if CEDA dictated that THE  novice national tournament was the Sac State 
JV/Novice nats.  While it is  not perhaps "National" the current structure of 
3 "Super-Regional"  championships (West, Middle, East) that allow cross-over 
maximizes the  national feel without sacrificing one geographical set of teams 
to the altar  of defining a single national tournament (and I say 3 because, 
despite its  title, I think we can all agree that this thread is not focusing 
on  Northwestern tournament, whose eligibility rules make it more accurately  
"Frosh Nationals" or "TOC Part 2: The Quickening"). 
 
To conclude, I do not think this is an area for CEDA leadership  intervention 
and I would argue strongly against dictating one tournament as  the sole 
JV/Novice Nationals because that necessarily leads to some  novice teams having 
nowhere to go. 
 
Joe



 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20060309/0f305263/attachment.htm 



More information about the Mailman mailing list