NVSL Athlete Eligibility

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't have strong feelings about ASR or IAS. I do think there's case for making both 14U as a way to reduce the logistical burden and length of the meets.

Honestly that is a great idea and something the league should consider. The fast HS kids skip divisionals/IAS anyways. It shows when you pull the fastest kids each year and then compare it to the fastest kids from IAS. They are not the fastest because they are at other meets.

Not true across the board. There are still some very fast swimmers who attend both. Please don’t suggest this, it’s not within the spirit of summer league.

^+1 15-18s deserve IAS and ASR just as much as the other age groups.

If looking to cut numbers, go back to top 12 vs top 18.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't have strong feelings about ASR or IAS. I do think there's case for making both 14U as a way to reduce the logistical burden and length of the meets.

Honestly that is a great idea and something the league should consider. The fast HS kids skip divisionals/IAS anyways. It shows when you pull the fastest kids each year and then compare it to the fastest kids from IAS. They are not the fastest because they are at other meets.

Not true across the board. There are still some very fast swimmers who attend both. Please don’t suggest this, it’s not within the spirit of summer league.

^+1 15-18s deserve IAS and ASR just as much as the other age groups.

If looking to cut numbers, go back to top 12 vs top 18.

I don't think that the 15-18s care as much about IAS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't have strong feelings about ASR or IAS. I do think there's case for making both 14U as a way to reduce the logistical burden and length of the meets.

Honestly that is a great idea and something the league should consider. The fast HS kids skip divisionals/IAS anyways. It shows when you pull the fastest kids each year and then compare it to the fastest kids from IAS. They are not the fastest because they are at other meets.

Not true across the board. There are still some very fast swimmers who attend both. Please don’t suggest this, it’s not within the spirit of summer league.

^+1 15-18s deserve IAS and ASR just as much as the other age groups.

If looking to cut numbers, go back to top 12 vs top 18.

I don't think that the 15-18s care as much about IAS.

Now if you really want to reduce the burden, do 14U for both meets AND go back to top 12.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't have strong feelings about ASR or IAS. I do think there's case for making both 14U as a way to reduce the logistical burden and length of the meets.

Honestly that is a great idea and something the league should consider. The fast HS kids skip divisionals/IAS anyways. It shows when you pull the fastest kids each year and then compare it to the fastest kids from IAS. They are not the fastest because they are at other meets.

Not true across the board. There are still some very fast swimmers who attend both. Please don’t suggest this, it’s not within the spirit of summer league.

^+1 15-18s deserve IAS and ASR just as much as the other age groups.

If looking to cut numbers, go back to top 12 vs top 18.

I don't think that the 15-18s care as much about IAS.

My 15-18 cares.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't have strong feelings about ASR or IAS. I do think there's case for making both 14U as a way to reduce the logistical burden and length of the meets.

Honestly that is a great idea and something the league should consider. The fast HS kids skip divisionals/IAS anyways. It shows when you pull the fastest kids each year and then compare it to the fastest kids from IAS. They are not the fastest because they are at other meets.

Not true across the board. There are still some very fast swimmers who attend both. Please don’t suggest this, it’s not within the spirit of summer league.

^+1 15-18s deserve IAS and ASR just as much as the other age groups.

If looking to cut numbers, go back to top 12 vs top 18.

Totally agree. Don't cut the 15-18s. Even if some scratch for a club meet, it's a really big deal for the next tier swimmers to get a chance to shine. And having all age groups represented helps the team spirit aspect of it.

I do think cutting down to 12 is a reasonable idea.

- Parent of a teen who got in when someone else scratched and was so excited to be there. Wouldn't make the cut for 12.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't have strong feelings about ASR or IAS. I do think there's case for making both 14U as a way to reduce the logistical burden and length of the meets.

Honestly that is a great idea and something the league should consider. The fast HS kids skip divisionals/IAS anyways. It shows when you pull the fastest kids each year and then compare it to the fastest kids from IAS. They are not the fastest because they are at other meets.

Not true across the board. There are still some very fast swimmers who attend both. Please don’t suggest this, it’s not within the spirit of summer league.

^+1 15-18s deserve IAS and ASR just as much as the other age groups.

If looking to cut numbers, go back to top 12 vs top 18.

I don't think that the 15-18s care as much about IAS.

Do you have a 15-18? My 15-18 cares.

Same type of logic, cut the 8 and unders then…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't have strong feelings about ASR or IAS. I do think there's case for making both 14U as a way to reduce the logistical burden and length of the meets.

Honestly that is a great idea and something the league should consider. The fast HS kids skip divisionals/IAS anyways. It shows when you pull the fastest kids each year and then compare it to the fastest kids from IAS. They are not the fastest because they are at other meets.

Not true across the board. There are still some very fast swimmers who attend both. Please don’t suggest this, it’s not within the spirit of summer league.

^+1 15-18s deserve IAS and ASR just as much as the other age groups.

If looking to cut numbers, go back to top 12 vs top 18.

I don't think that the 15-18s care as much about IAS.

Do you have a 15-18? My 15-18 cares.

Same type of logic, cut the 8 and unders then…

That's a good suggestion too, making the meet 14-9.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't have strong feelings about ASR or IAS. I do think there's case for making both 14U as a way to reduce the logistical burden and length of the meets.

Honestly that is a great idea and something the league should consider. The fast HS kids skip divisionals/IAS anyways. It shows when you pull the fastest kids each year and then compare it to the fastest kids from IAS. They are not the fastest because they are at other meets.

Not true across the board. There are still some very fast swimmers who attend both. Please don’t suggest this, it’s not within the spirit of summer league.

^+1 15-18s deserve IAS and ASR just as much as the other age groups.

If looking to cut numbers, go back to top 12 vs top 18.

Totally agree. Don't cut the 15-18s. Even if some scratch for a club meet, it's a really big deal for the next tier swimmers to get a chance to shine. And having all age groups represented helps the team spirit aspect of it.

I do think cutting down to 12 is a reasonable idea.

- Parent of a teen who got in when someone else scratched and was so excited to be there. Wouldn't make the cut for 12.

There is no team spirit for IAS.

[Anonymous]

All the people wanting their teen or 8&U to swim better be lobbying their team rep and pool board to host.

[Anonymous]

This is a bummer, but I really don't blame anyone for not wanting to do this. ASR is one of my kids' favorite part of the swim season.

I think they probably need to charge fees per relay though, and give that money to the hosts. Then have 2-3 teams work together to get enough volunteers and the host team gets the biggest chunk of money but the other teams get a small cut for helping out.

The smaller teams just don't have the adults to run this kind of thing- and honestly why would they want to?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a bummer, but I really don't blame anyone for not wanting to do this. ASR is one of my kids' favorite part of the swim season.

I think they probably need to charge fees per relay though, and give that money to the hosts. Then have 2-3 teams work together to get enough volunteers and the host team gets the biggest chunk of money but the other teams get a small cut for helping out.

The smaller teams just don't have the adults to run this kind of thing- and honestly why would they want to?

The teams that send the most swimmers to these events generally lack facilities or they have zero need for the money that could be generated. This year there are no entry fees (that will be next) so all revenue is concessions which is still a LOT of work for a lot of volunteers.

The teams that could benefit from the money (at least next year) generally don't send a lot of swimmers or any swimmers in some case. That would be a hard sell to any Board. Pool dues are getting more expensive (pool management fees and chemicals are expensive) - membership is not going to like closing the pool down. For ASR, I think it is an easier sell. Less closure time, middle of the week, etc. But IAS is a holy mess and on a weekend.

I know more and more pools are catching grief just for swim meets on Saturday mornings. I imagine that when pool memberships were smaller and swim teams madeup a good proportion of membership these events were easier to sell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a bummer, but I really don't blame anyone for not wanting to do this. ASR is one of my kids' favorite part of the swim season.

I think they probably need to charge fees per relay though, and give that money to the hosts. Then have 2-3 teams work together to get enough volunteers and the host team gets the biggest chunk of money but the other teams get a small cut for helping out.

The smaller teams just don't have the adults to run this kind of thing- and honestly why would they want to?

The teams that send the most swimmers to these events generally lack facilities or they have zero need for the money that could be generated. This year there are no entry fees (that will be next) so all revenue is concessions which is still a LOT of work for a lot of volunteers.

The teams that could benefit from the money (at least next year) generally don't send a lot of swimmers or any swimmers in some case. That would be a hard sell to any Board. Pool dues are getting more expensive (pool management fees and chemicals are expensive) - membership is not going to like closing the pool down. For ASR, I think it is an easier sell. Less closure time, middle of the week, etc. But IAS is a holy mess and on a weekend.

I know more and more pools are catching grief just for swim meets on Saturday mornings. I imagine that when pool memberships were smaller and swim teams madeup a good proportion of membership these events were easier to sell.

I agree about the facilities issue- that's partly why I think they need to have teams work together. I think Chesterbrook could host (using Chesterbrook ES and the church that's adjacent) but otherwise it might need to be a lower division team that could use the parents of an upper division team. Crosspointe would also be pretty ideal (just looking at division 1 & 2).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why don’t we force teams who send the most swimmers, to host??

Those are the D1 pools and they will all swear that just don't have the ability due to blah blah. Chesterbrook could do it, but there is a parking issue there. OKM could probably do it. But I would say D1-D3 pools should all be stepping up. They send the most swimmers.

OKM pool is slightly the wrong length. They can't host this type of meet. It does seem like Chesterbrook could do it, ideally st dunstan's would let them use parking lot, and they could also use chesterbrook elementary school for overflow.

In D2- Crosspointe could host. Wakefield Chapel probably could too. Vienna Aquatic probably could- using ideally Vienna Baptist church and Marshall Road elementary as overflow.

In D3- Little hunting park could host. Hunt Valley probably could too.

I don't really think any of the other D3 pools could host a league wide meet.

I don't really think, however, that any of these pools are particularly strapped for cash.

I thought one of the D1 teams did step up last year (can't remember which one) and provided all the volunteers for the ASR meet at LP.

Maybe the thought that they won't have it will make them finally step up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a bummer, but I really don't blame anyone for not wanting to do this. ASR is one of my kids' favorite part of the swim season.

I think they probably need to charge fees per relay though, and give that money to the hosts. Then have 2-3 teams work together to get enough volunteers and the host team gets the biggest chunk of money but the other teams get a small cut for helping out.

The smaller teams just don't have the adults to run this kind of thing- and honestly why would they want to?

The teams that send the most swimmers to these events generally lack facilities or they have zero need for the money that could be generated. This year there are no entry fees (that will be next) so all revenue is concessions which is still a LOT of work for a lot of volunteers.

The teams that could benefit from the money (at least next year) generally don't send a lot of swimmers or any swimmers in some case. That would be a hard sell to any Board. Pool dues are getting more expensive (pool management fees and chemicals are expensive) - membership is not going to like closing the pool down. For ASR, I think it is an easier sell. Less closure time, middle of the week, etc. But IAS is a holy mess and on a weekend.

I know more and more pools are catching grief just for swim meets on Saturday mornings. I imagine that when pool memberships were smaller and swim teams madeup a good proportion of membership these events were easier to sell.

I agree about the facilities issue- that's partly why I think they need to have teams work together. I think Chesterbrook could host (using Chesterbrook ES and the church that's adjacent) but otherwise it might need to be a lower division team that could use the parents of an upper division team. Crosspointe would also be pretty ideal (just looking at division 1 & 2).

Chesterbrook would be great. They have multiple pools so they could have continuous warm up and cool down, that could actually make IAS faster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a bummer, but I really don't blame anyone for not wanting to do this. ASR is one of my kids' favorite part of the swim season.

I think they probably need to charge fees per relay though, and give that money to the hosts. Then have 2-3 teams work together to get enough volunteers and the host team gets the biggest chunk of money but the other teams get a small cut for helping out.

The smaller teams just don't have the adults to run this kind of thing- and honestly why would they want to?

The teams that send the most swimmers to these events generally lack facilities or they have zero need for the money that could be generated. This year there are no entry fees (that will be next) so all revenue is concessions which is still a LOT of work for a lot of volunteers.

The teams that could benefit from the money (at least next year) generally don't send a lot of swimmers or any swimmers in some case. That would be a hard sell to any Board. Pool dues are getting more expensive (pool management fees and chemicals are expensive) - membership is not going to like closing the pool down. For ASR, I think it is an easier sell. Less closure time, middle of the week, etc. But IAS is a holy mess and on a weekend.

I know more and more pools are catching grief just for swim meets on Saturday mornings. I imagine that when pool memberships were smaller and swim teams madeup a good proportion of membership these events were easier to sell.

I agree about the facilities issue- that's partly why I think they need to have teams work together. I think Chesterbrook could host (using Chesterbrook ES and the church that's adjacent) but otherwise it might need to be a lower division team that could use the parents of an upper division team. Crosspointe would also be pretty ideal (just looking at division 1 & 2).

Besides money (which our pool doesn’t need), why would our higher division team want to close our pool for multiple days for sending 1-2 kids to all stars? It’s still a lot work for the home pool, even if the parents of another pool “worked” the event. It would cause wear and tear on our facility.