[NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1

[Jay Marshall]

Good points Jon. Perhaps part of the qualification could be a rollover from
the previous season?

-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of
jonlowe at aol.com
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 11:09 AM
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1

Qualifying for the NATS might work if it is at the end of the season, 
but not in the middle.  They would have to be in September at the 
earliest to make this work.   Some districts would be lucky to get in 3 
or 4 contests by the current date.  How many contests would be needed 
to qualify?  How may will get invited from each district?  Will some 
districts get more invitees than others?   Points would have to 
accumulated until just before the NATS if we keep the current time of 
the year, especially for districts in the frozen north, not allowing 
people to have adequate time to plan vacations around attendance at the 
NATS.  You also run into school vs. vacation issues for those people 
with kids if you do it late in the season.  If you have a regional 
qualifying event, then people who want to go to the NATS have to plan 
around another single event.

Another issue is who at the national level is going to keep track of 
the points that are accumulated, and then send out the invites to 
people who qualify?  Since you have fewer people to spread costs over, 
who is going to absorb those costs?  NATS entry fees are already 3 
times higher than any other contest you go to, and I think people would 
balk at fees going even higher.

Would this change be applied to all of the NATS events and not just 
pattern?  If "they" want to shorten the time period, why don't "they" 
have other dsiciplines compete at the same time as we do? Certainly 
controline could go on at the same time. Who are these "so many people" 
who are complaining?  The competitors?  The organizers?  
Non-participants?  If it is non-participants, they get 46 other weeks a 
year to fly at the AMA site; if that isn't thier beef, what is?

It is great to talk about things like this, but until someone lays out 
the answers to all of these questions and presents a plan, it is all so 
much BS.  Someone has to define the problem, get agreement that it IS a 
problem, and from whose vantage point, and then lay out a plan that 
fixes the problem.  I haven't seen that.

Attending the NATS is a great experience, and the only time in the year 
where anyone can compete against people from all over the country and 
see how they stack up.   You can be at the top of your district in a 
class, and be an also ran at the NATS.  Changing it so that only the 
best of the best can attend will change the very nature of the event.  
Why change what works?  What problem are we trying to fix?

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: tony at radiosouthrc.com
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Sent: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 7:40 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1

Buddy:
As I said at the beginning of this discussion thread, I am involved 
with a total NATS review.  We are talking about all of the NATS, 
nothing is too sacred to be up for discussion.

 

One question I always had is why it the NATS an open event?  Most all 
sports NATIONAL championships require you to qualify.  With so many 
people complaining that the AMA NATS is 6-weeks long, this was brought 
up as a way to shorten the event.  It also would elevate the status of 
the NATS.  I don’t see how this would reduce participation at the local 
level.  It may actually increase it!

 

Keep in mind that this is just DISCUSSION!!!  Don’t get all bent out of 
shape because we are talking about it.

 

 

Tony Stillman, President

Radio South

3702 N. Pace Blvd

Pensacola, FL 32505

1-800-962-7802

www.radiosouthrc.com


 

--------

 From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org 
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of 
BUDDYonRC at aol.com
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 6:56 PM
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1


 

I have a question


Why all of a sudden are you talking about special requirements needed 
for


Nat's entry.


My take on this, is if this is done we will reduce participation. I may 
be wrong but if I am not how is this going to help pattern and the 
NSRCA?


I think it will be the first step toward a further reduction in 
membership and a step toward an all professional Nat's


 


Second question


Tony are you pushing this idea for real?  


Buddy 






--------

See what's free at AOL.com.




_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

________________________________________________________________________
AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free 
from AOL at AOL.com.
=0
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion