Log in

View Full Version : Information on the proposed restructuring of US regionals & sectionals


Aaron W
12-06-2002, 10:25 PM
Here's the link:
http://www.usfsa.org/news/2002-03/12-4plan.htm

Proposed new plans:

1)9 region, 3 section (9/3) plan
2)12 region, 4 section (12/4) plan
3)A percentage system of qualification (PSQ) for advancing a proportional number of juvenile girls and intermediate ladies to U.S. Junior Championships


The 12 region/4 section plan looks interesting.

sk8rzmom
12-08-2002, 12:23 PM
All things considered the 12/4 plan looks the best to me. I agree that thiw sould be reviewed every so often (maybe ten years is too long term, but some kind of system) to make it equitable for all. Especially when some intermediate groups can number over 120, how can the judges possibly sift out the best. IIRS this plan could have been in place for next season, but it was throuwn back inopt commitee.

blue111moon
12-09-2002, 07:26 AM
The problem with ALL the plans is that NONE of them address the issues they were created to resolve: inequality of membership numbers between regions, inequality of competitors at regions, inequality of level of quality of skaters advancing from regionals, and distance skaters travel within regions to qualifying competitions. The issues of synchro teams aren't even considered.

Creating the extra regions/sections didn't really balance the numbers. I'm not sure that a true balance can be achieved at all but from what I saw of the proposals none of them come close enough for my comfort. If a were leaning in favor of one of the three plans (the fourth option is to change nothing) it might be the proportional plan and from a club official's standpoint it would be a nightmare to explain to club members every year.

sk8rzmom
12-09-2002, 11:26 AM
IMHO, the basic problem is that the large population centers of the country have proportionately the largest numbers of skaters, and the second largest number of skaters seem to come from areas where skaters congregate to be within commuting distance of a certain program and/or coach. These issues will always be there, and redistricting cannot break up these areas for equities sake. We would have to make Colorado a region of it's own, and break up the megalopolis that stretches from DC to Boston into smaller yet smaller regions. SoCal being in the same situation.
Basically, unless every member of the team envelopes is given a bye to Natl's, there are always going to be some very good skaters left behind.

Scott
12-09-2002, 04:54 PM
Originally posted by sk8rzmom
IMHO, the basic problem is that the large population centers of the country have proportionately the largest numbers of skaters, and the second largest number of skaters seem to come from areas where skaters congregate to be within commuting distance of a certain program and/or coach. These issues will always be there, and redistricting cannot break up these areas for equities sake. We would have to make Colorado a region of it's own, and break up the megalopolis that stretches from DC to Boston into smaller yet smaller regions. SoCal being in the same situation.
Basically, unless every member of the team envelopes is given a bye to Natl's, there are always going to be some very good skaters left behind.

Very True. Some skaters who are able do relocate to work wqith higher level coaches but not everyone is capable of doing this; therefore good skaters from lower level rinks are often left in thge dust.

sk8rzmom
12-10-2002, 07:25 PM
I thought the redistricting was to help with the cost of travel, as well as to even out the distribution of skaters at regionals and sectionals.
What it all comes down to, again, is money. The skaters with the most can afford the more expensive ice time and coaches that live in the larger metro areas, or their families can afford to relocate the skater or the entire family to an elite program. They all congregate together, in programs that the average family just cannot support without help.
Even regionally, the skaters that attend qualifying competitions are only the ones whose families can afford a week in a hotel and who can cover the cost of the coaches expenses.
I'm getting this kind of garbled. I hope it's understandable.