At 09:12 AM 3/4/2002 -0800, t-and-f-digest wrote..
>Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 22:03:39 -0500
>From: "Edward Koch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: t-and-f: SEC Champs and regional qualifying
>
>If we had regional qualifying, athletes might be able to concentrate on
>
At 10:47 PM 3/1/2002 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Rich,
>What you guys fail to understand is the following. In regards to Mt. SAC, I
>have spent countless hours recruiting major colleges from across the US to
>come to Walnut. With regionals, there is absolutely no incentive for them to
>come
But, Ed, where is the money to send these athletes to the Relay meets going
to come from with regionals? See my last post.
Scott
Ed Koch
>
> -Original Message-
> From: John N. Friedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Friday, March 01, 2002 12:57 AM
> Subject: RE: t-and-f: SEC Champs and regional qualifying
>
> >I am open to arguing about th
under our present system.
Ed Koch
-Original Message-
From: John N. Friedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Friday, March 01, 2002 12:57 AM
Subject: RE: t-and-f: SEC Champs and regional qualifying
>I am open to arguing about the val
Rich,
What you guys fail to understand is the following. In regards to Mt. SAC, I
have spent countless hours recruiting major colleges from across the US to
come to Walnut. With regionals, there is absolutely no incentive for them to
come. Moreover, if conference meets back up to the last we
At 01:49 PM 3/1/2002 -0800, t-and-f-digest wrote..
>Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 08:36:52 -0500
>From: Bruce Lehane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: t-and-f: SEC Champs and regional qualifying
>
>Some of the costs of going the regional route:
>
>1. There will be grossly disp
At 11:57 PM 2/28/2002 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Any way you want to cut it, Rich, with all due respect, the worst thing about
>regional qualifying is the fact that it is just plain wrong. Wrong---that's
>all there is to say about it. And this is not my original statement; I have
>heard it
unning one extra race at
> Penn.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 11:58 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject:
than have stanford running one extra race at
Penn.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 11:58 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: t-and-f: SEC Champs an
Any way you want to cut it, Rich, with all due respect, the worst thing about
regional qualifying is the fact that it is just plain wrong. Wrong---that's
all there is to say about it. And this is not my original statement; I have
heard it put this way by many coaches at both DI and DII school
At 08:53 AM 2/28/2002 -0500, Bruce Lehane wrote:
>Your point about prefering athletes who compete well against others over those
>who post strong marks would carry much more weight if all athletes in a given
>event were competing head to head for spots. But in regionalization they
>do not,
>they
Bruce Lehane wrote:
> Your [Richard McCann's] point about prefering athletes who compete well
against others over those
> who post strong marks would carry much more weight if all athletes in a
given
> event were competing head to head for spots. But in regionalization they
do not,
> they only co
Your point about prefering athletes who compete well against others over those
who post strong marks would carry much more weight if all athletes in a given
event were competing head to head for spots. But in regionalization they do not,
they only compete against the athletes in their own region.
At 05:59 AM 2/27/02 -0800, "Barto" wrote:
" The proposed >regional system only applies to outdoor
track. Besides I think Dan makes a good point about helping
the relay meets..."
Don't try to sell that "helping the relay meets" story
to the folks at Penn, Drake, Texas and Mount SAC...
Wouldn't
At 10:27 PM 2/25/2002 -0800, t-and-f-digest wrote..
>These great conference meets would all but disappear with that silly
>concept, not
>to mention the blows which would have to be absorbed by the big relay meets.
>Scott
With proper structuring (1) the conference meets could become more integral
I don't see how indoor conference meets would be
affected at all by regional qualifying. The proposed
regional system only applies to outdoor track.
Besides I think Dan makes a good point about helping
the relay meets and I would assert that even the
conference meets will become better based upo
In a message dated Tue, 26 Feb 2002 1:28:35 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
> Well gang,
> Kebba summed things up pretty well. All I can tell you is that I have
> certainly never announced a more powerful meet at the collegiate level. And
> this was my 12th SEC meet. An
Well gang,
Kebba summed things up pretty well. All I can tell you is that I have
certainly never announced a more powerful meet at the collegiate level. And
this was my 12th SEC meet. An absolutely fantastic meet with great
performances on both the men's and women's sides. Very well organiz
19 matches
Mail list logo
