I was off-list for a few weeks early in the year, and stockpiled a few subjects on which my never-shut-up-for-long mentality makes me feel compelled to comment.
In a message dated Fri, 4 Jan 2002 6:23:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, Ed and Dana Parrot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >.... Ideally what I'd like to see is this: > 1.A series of "local" meets, possibly 57 of them, hosted by the USATF associations. >.... > > 2. Six regional meets, 2 weeks before nationals. > 3. Nationals. 18 athletes come from regional meets - top 3 from each. The rest of >the field is filled based on performance> I can really see the value in such a system, but unless you can convince the powers that be to make the Nationals later (as they should be!) (and as the Oly Trials prove they can be) I don't see it working. Just too much clog on the schedule earlier. You've got to have the Regionals timed so that the collegians (and occasional preps) can compete without compromising either their schedules or the few remaining high-caliber invitational meets. With all the top-ranked people surely choosing to qualify on time/distance, there's not going to be any room for them to qualify via that route. Numbers can always be tweaked, of course, but qualifying 18 through Regionals and adding more would already be viewed as a no-fly deal, I fear. The field event people are already getting screwed to the tune where not every event even has 18 competitors allowed now. (don't believe me? check out the field sizes in jumps and throws in Eugene last June) gh
