If your rep is burned out, that isn't on NVSL, it's either on the rep (micromanaging and/or not delegating) or your team (lack of support from the team families). I was a rep for a handful of years and yes, while I wasn't disappointed to get a part of my life back on Aug. 1 every year, I never felt like I was burned out. Filling out the seeding survey takes maybe an hour.

Maybe we're just lucky. Never once when I was rep of our middle division team, did anyone complain to me or the Board about our seeding. They really didn't care. They just wanted competitive meets, which we mostly got (absent a couple with extenuating circumstances -- injuries to and absences by key swimmers).

Honestly no wonder our NVSL team reps are burnt out. Way too much “work” and “thought” (aka schmoozing and gamesmanship) involved in the whole mess!

I’d love to compare the automated seeding to what eventually comes out of the seeding meeting for NVSL!

At least the MCSL system is transparent. It is interesting to see the results created by the computations. Our entire division got blown apart at the end of the season, and the major regret I've been hearing is that we were pretty evenly matched against several of our competitors and had several very close meets _that everyone really enjoyed swimming regardless of the outcomes_. We are moving down and are going to miss some of the new teams we met this year: we really liked them! Good folks, friendly kids, great attitudes, lots of fun. Hoping our next new friends will be as good.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NVSL is so bonkers compared to MCSL

MCSL:

"Division assignments are determined by a computerized swim-off. The median of the top 3 times from each team for each event from every dual meet is
computed. Using these 3 times, each team is then swum against all other teams. Placement for the subsequent year is based on the number of wins, with ties
broken by total points scored. No allowance is made for aging up or other potential changes. "

And that's it!
And it's already been done, except for teams who might not return or new pools that might join.

It’s simple but it has its flaws. Doesn’t account for teams losing lots of seniors or teams with lots of kids in their up year. We got moved up to A this year because most of our best kids were in their up year two years ago. We then got crushed this year when they were in their down year. We’ll be in B next year and will likely dominate.

You know that every system will have flaws, right?

There are tradeoffs to be made in any process you come up with. The MCSL system is transparent and efficient. The "flaws" are applied evenly and uniformly across all teams without any biased human "tinkering" or input. So, while the impact isn't evenly felt by every team every year, I think their approach is better than the smoky backroom Byzantine approach, that NVSL has - while I'm sure that the intention is likely "good", it just strikes be as being "too clever by half".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NVSL is so bonkers compared to MCSL

MCSL:

"Division assignments are determined by a computerized swim-off. The median of the top 3 times from each team for each event from every dual meet is
computed. Using these 3 times, each team is then swum against all other teams. Placement for the subsequent year is based on the number of wins, with ties
broken by total points scored. No allowance is made for aging up or other potential changes. "

And that's it!
And it's already been done, except for teams who might not return or new pools that might join.

If by "bonkers" you mean "thoughtful" (albeit labor-intensive and open to potential gaming), sure. But it's summer swim. The goal should be to have competitive meets. Most NVSL pools get that, so "gaming" seems to be pretty rare.

+1

I appreciate that so much thought and consideration goes into seeding. They look at meet performance, pipeline, team size, number of club swimmers, kids graduating, families moving. Sure some reps could "game" the system but I don't think that is the case.

Anonymous wrote:Yes labor intensive and subject to gaming is what I had in mind.

Hahaha, NVSL to a T.

NVSL team rep and we have to complete a multi-page survey for the seeding committee. The division coordinator weighs in as well. In addition to the information others have referenced regarding losing top point-getters and the ages of this season's top swimmers, we provide feedback on each meet and our perspectives on the match-up. We're asked if our coaching staff is returning. We are asked if we feel that we or any other team were appropriately or inappropriately seeded. We are asked if there are particular teams in our current division or elsewhere that we feel are competitive with us.

I'm sure there could be gaming, but it's also a chance for a team rep to justify why they should move up or down a certain amount. A team in our division this year had been moved up two divisions last year, and promptly lost every meet by a wide range. That was poor seeding. The rest of the teams seemed to have decent match-ups, indicating an overall well-seeded division IMO.

Yes labor intensive and subject to gaming is what I had in mind.

Anonymous wrote:NVSL is so bonkers compared to MCSL

MCSL:

"Division assignments are determined by a computerized swim-off. The median of the top 3 times from each team for each event from every dual meet is
computed. Using these 3 times, each team is then swum against all other teams. Placement for the subsequent year is based on the number of wins, with ties
broken by total points scored. No allowance is made for aging up or other potential changes. "

And that's it!
And it's already been done, except for teams who might not return or new pools that might join.

If by "bonkers" you mean "thoughtful" (albeit labor-intensive and open to potential gaming), sure. But it's summer swim. The goal should be to have competitive meets. Most NVSL pools get that, so "gaming" seems to be pretty rare.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And you care why? It’s a summer rec league for white suburban kids so they don’t drive their mothers crazy at home. It’s not the Olympic tryouts.

Oh shut up. If you don’t want to discuss it just don’t respond and scroll on by.

To the op- there are lots of factors that go into it. Record is part of it. Overall ‘time in water’ is part of it. The team reps do a seeding survey where they talk about whether they think their team is better in even or odd years and how their record may or may not reflect their ability. If you look back a few years ago swim ninja did an interview with the NVSL official in charge of seeding, Chris Mack.

Type A Mom has entered the room.

I’d rather hang out with type a mom than b&$&y mom who responds to a question with a why do you care

Anonymous wrote:NVSL is so bonkers compared to MCSL

MCSL:

"Division assignments are determined by a computerized swim-off. The median of the top 3 times from each team for each event from every dual meet is
computed. Using these 3 times, each team is then swum against all other teams. Placement for the subsequent year is based on the number of wins, with ties
broken by total points scored. No allowance is made for aging up or other potential changes. "

And that's it!
And it's already been done, except for teams who might not return or new pools that might join.

It’s simple but it has its flaws. Doesn’t account for teams losing lots of seniors or teams with lots of kids in their up year. We got moved up to A this year because most of our best kids were in their up year two years ago. We then got crushed this year when they were in their down year. We’ll be in B next year and will likely dominate.