Jump to content
Creighton_Coleman

DCI

Recommended Posts

Blue Valley North Alex Reynolds & Ethan Bennett

Blue Valley North Cowin & Gluek

Blue Valley North Dan Janvrin & Jeff Kaplan

Blue Valley North David Horen & Noah Garfinkle

Blue Valley North Li Hu & Michelle Hammer

Blue Valley North Spencer Kubin & Alex Simon

Blue Valley Northwest Nick Mott & Andy Krantz

Buhler Becca Rodriguez & Beth Goertzen

Campus Brian Box & Adam Cortelyou

Emporia Mary Yanik & Alex Bonnet

Hutchinson Andrew Allsup & Trevor Curiel

Hutchinson Rachel Shannon & Emily Graham

Manhattan Helen Bolton & Andrew Jack

Manhattan Kelley Nelson & Heather Lund

Manhattan Tim Ellis & Pat Lin

McPherson Amanda Keim & Caprice Applequist

Olathe Northwest Jesi Egan & Alex Parkinson

Salina Central Stuewe & Shier

Shawnee Mission East Kate Oâeill & Aishlinn Oâonnor

St. Thomas Aquinas Tom Hartung & Chris Sevedge

Tonganoxie John Davis & Justin Smith

Topeka Stephanie Atwood & Peter Ebeling

Washburn Rural Ben Goossen & Jeanette Shultz

Washburn Rural Ben Schroeder & Joe Schroeder

Washburn Rural Jacob Hamilton & Blake Shipley

Washburn Rural Nathan Fredrickson & Mark Wilkins

Wichita Northwest Grant Brazill & Creighton Coleman

Winfield Taylor Stevenson & Joseph Astrab

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of very, very good teams didn't apply. Only 5 of the 18 teams that qualified to NFL nationals, for instance, submitted applications. No Newton, no SMW, no Salina South, no Miege, and only O'Connor/O'Neill out of the SME stable.

 

That is, of course, their privilege, and I'm sure nobody would fault them for it. All I'm saying is that if you see someone missing, you shouldn't necessarily blame the voters.

 

It's still an excellent field, I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh certainly. I wasn't saying that at all. No the tournament is going to be awesome. I just thought a couple people that were probably shoe-ins were going to apply and didn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair enough.

 

And your point is taken; I personally would have liked to see some of the teams I listed in the mix, and some others as well. Every year, when I look at the DCI applications, I find out about a lot of very good debate teams from other parts of the state. I'm not sure people from KC really understand just how good those Newton and Salina South teams are, for instance (though STA's had an eye on them for obvious reasons). There's some fine teams in the Wichita area who I only learn about by seeing that they beat DCI teams; there's those Fort Scott and Ark City teams as well. A western voter might be interested to see the accomplishments of Olathe East, Olathe North, and SME. And of course there's those excellent smaller programs like Moundridge, Sterling, Rock Creek, Hoisington, and Louisburg, who often don't get as much credit as they deserve.

 

The idea is that DCI's supposed to give everybody a shot at demonstrating their skills in an atmosphere of mutual collegality with a pool of experienced judges. The best of the best, from all classifications, regions, and styles. And the committee really has done everything in their power to make the process as open to newcomers as they can. I think the voters are eager to see the pool expand; I know I am.

 

But sometimes teams have good reasons for not applying, and sometimes they just don't feel comfortable doing so. All we can do is keep the door open, trust each others' judgment, and respect the decision of those who choose not to be part of the process.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well put Mr. Dubois.

 

On a side note I have a question for those that have gone in the past when they merge the divisions. How's the judging look when they do that? Any chance I'll be able to persue our previous strat or do I actually have to cut policy args for this? A quick response would be tight. Our Zizek tub and backpacks need to know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The judging is still plenty experienced, and you'll likely encounter a few people who'll be fine with a K debate (or even *GASP* topical counterplans :)).

 

In previous years, the committee has provided a judge list to the teams as they arrive, and teams have had the opportunity to strike a couple of judges and assign preference categories to the remainder; I think that policy may have changed at last year's meeting, but I don't recall how.

 

STA has debated 21 rounds at this tournament in unified divisions. We have never had a judge who wasn't qualified and whom we didn't respect. We have not always had a judge who suited our IDEAL PREFERENCES for how we'd like to debate the round, but nobody should expect that. The bottom line is that you should probably bring more than just the K expando. I'm sure you'll be fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha alright fair enough. I dont mind I was just crossing my fingers that I wouldn't have to lug the boxes around. I'm quite lazy so any chance to get out of extra effort always peaks my interest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will timekeepers be able to get those t-shirts this year?

 

 

I'll talk to my friends at Washburn Rural and ask if they can get you one. You might have to pay for it though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a heads up to you alex. I debated at DCI the last year they had 2 divisions and then the first year they had one division. It was in my experience that when there were two divisions you received exactly the judges you were wanting. When I debated at dci the second year with one divsion it seemed that we did not quite get the judges we were looking for and that certainly changed the way we had to debate the rounds as well as how the rounds were judged. I am not saying that the judging pool was bad. I am saying that you need to understand that in your pool of judges you are going to half at least half that you didn't want and half that you do want (since you want all contemp judges I am sure). So you don't need to put that zizek box away, but I would suggest having a strat for the not so critique/counterplan loving judges that you will be receiving for probably 3 or 4 of the rounds. This was at least my experience when the combined fields, and it may be different now.

Again, i would like to note that i am not saying the judges aren't qualified. I am saying they might not be the judges you are necessarily wanting every round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We weren't going to be able to go and sadly didn't even have the time to make our application because we had lots of other things going on that week.

 

Hope it turns out well and all parties have a good time. I wonder what they're serving this year...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will give a ton of credit to the teams that applied/got in. I know that Highland Park's application was going to be 1 day late, and by the time we got ready to fax it, we were told that there were already too many high-record teams to allow late applications.

 

I guess that happens when you have teams like Alex and Jesi who get 39 wins in a season. I mean, damn.

 

Good luck and enjoy everyone.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fair enough.

 

And your point is taken; I personally would have liked to see some of the teams I listed in the mix, and some others as well. Every year, when I look at the DCI applications, I find out about a lot of very good debate teams from other parts of the state. I'm not sure people from KC really understand just how good those Newton and Salina South teams are, for instance (though STA's had an eye on them for obvious reasons). There's some fine teams in the Wichita area who I only learn about by seeing that they beat DCI teams; there's those Fort Scott and Ark City teams as well. A western voter might be interested to see the accomplishments of Olathe East, Olathe North, and SME. And of course there's those excellent smaller programs like Moundridge, Sterling, Rock Creek, Hoisington, and Louisburg, who often don't get as much credit as they deserve.

 

The idea is that DCI's supposed to give everybody a shot at demonstrating their skills in an atmosphere of mutual collegality with a pool of experienced judges. The best of the best, from all classifications, regions, and styles. And the committee really has done everything in their power to make the process as open to newcomers as they can. I think the voters are eager to see the pool expand; I know I am.

 

But sometimes teams have good reasons for not applying, and sometimes they just don't feel comfortable doing so. All we can do is keep the door open, trust each others' judgment, and respect the decision of those who choose not to be part of the process.

 

Newton usually does not apply for DCI. Tim and Elliott wanted to apply for this tournament. (they are still mad at me) They would have loved to debate such a qualified list of teams. I would not let them apply as I wanted our team to focus on state preperation. The judging at DCI is awesome, and if state had a pool like this, we would have applied.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love DCI as one big division, and I actually wish it would always be one division with the floating number of entries forumla currently established maintained. The best lasting memories I have from the two years of competing at this tournament are not the 14 great rounds of debate I had. They were memorable and I can still talk to you about some of them. Rather my fondest memories are the people, the community, and the passion to debate. Sitting down for lunch with kids, coaches, and judges from multiple different schools and having a great conversation. Playing a joke on a couple debaters, and watching a couple kids sing along to Ice, Ice, Baby.

 

It was a big tournament to all of us. We were honored to get in and be recognized as one of the top 20 teams in the state by the coaches. We prepared hard and we competed harder. But when all was said and done, we all "won" because the community won.

 

I hope the best "traditional" teams in the state have to answer a kritik and I hope the best "contemporary" teams in the state have to slow down and argue disadvantage/advantage impacts with regaruds to the probability of solvency.

 

I hope everyone has a great time at DCI. I can't wait to be there.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kate and I truly appreciate our acceptance to debate at DCI. This is a tournament that I had looked forward to since the beginning of the season, just as most applicants. Despite this, we are not going to be allowed to attend, due to our coach's family conflict. Good luck to all competitors, I wish I could be among you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was 8 last year. We discovered that round 3, which is kind of disappointing because the deskboy time kept our first round. But our opponents didn't know either, so it's all good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...