Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Hi-dig-air

MSHSAA State 2008

Recommended Posts

Oh yeah, to add: I don't care what the judging pool is comprised of--old women, lawyers, homeless men--the fact is that it does not matter. Debate is about being able to adapt and win over everyone, not just a particular college debater who judges that happens to like shitty theory and critical arguments that make no sense outside of the vacuum of debate. If you're only able to win with those type of judges then you are no better than the team that only wins with lays. Quit being a sissy and admit that some team from an area other than Springfield could do well.

 

 

Who are you? You don't give us a name, thus, at least my, curiosity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's a claim about where Neosho is, so much as teams that have demonstrated a high level of talent within the event (i.e. Liberty A, Truman A, etc.) are not represented in the bracket. It's not a claim about schools outside the Springfield area either. Note that no one expressed surprise at any of the other non-Springfield schools presence in elimintation rounds. I think you're getting a bit hung up on what other members of the community think about you.

 

1)It doesn't matter, it's the internets.

2)It doesn't matter, your perception within the community is ultimately unimportant... let it go.

...

and if you don't like 1 or 2

...

3)If you really want to keep people from knocking your program, prove to them that you deserve respect, as opposed to whining on a web forum.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think it's a claim about where Neosho is, so much as teams that have demonstrated a high level of talent within the event (i.e. Liberty A, Truman A, etc.) are not represented in the bracket. It's not a claim about schools outside the Springfield area either. Note that no one expressed surprise at any of the other non-Springfield schools presence in elimintation rounds. I think you're getting a bit hung up on what other members of the community think about you.

 

1)It doesn't matter, it's the internets.

2)It doesn't matter, your perception within the community is ultimately unimportant... let it go.

...

and if you don't like 1 or 2

...

3)If you really want to keep people from knocking your program, prove to them that you deserve respect, as opposed to whining on a web forum.

 

Who is the one whining? Look at earlier posts--maybe you're reading without your glasses. It DOES matter because it is a cycle of repeated bashing of Neosho and other extreme Southwest Missouri schools. I think by virtue of the fact a Neosho team is in finals at state should suffice to deserve at least an ounce of respect. Schools that have demonstrated a high level of talent naturally deserve respect--I would never disagree. The fact remains no matter how good a team or school is, rounds are won and lost for a reason. Thats the way the cookie crumbles. Ok, so a really good team gets screwed over supposedly? That doesn't change the fact they lost for a reason.

 

My point is that if it were a Springfield school (or St. Louis or Kansas City for that matter) in outrounds then there would NEVER, I repeat NEVER, have been a single comment about the judging pool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really true. I can think of a few Kansas City (and probable some Springfield) schools that would raise some questions if they were to be found in late outrounds at State. I can't attest to the issue you raise about St. Louis because I'm not familiar with the area, and because a few of the schools there are active on the national circuit.

 

If you're suggesting that people are disrespecting rural schools categorically, well, then you're just wrong. I can think of some rural schools that have garnered enormous respect within the community (some of the kids from Savannah or Monett for example).

 

Again, you're claim that it's simply a regional issue is asinine. There are ways for rural schools to gain respect within the community. Either way... 1 and 2 still apply.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Kevin Satzinger and Bonnie Lyons,

 

Win, or face the cold, bloody, painful wrath of Ben Campbell and Will Griffin, we two crazy muthafuckas with beards...

 

Seriously,

 

BCam and willyg

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dear Kevin Satzinger and Bonnie Lyons,

 

Win, or face the cold, bloody, painful wrath of Ben Campbell and Will Griffin, we two crazy muthafuckas with beards...

 

Seriously,

 

BCam and willyg

 

Lulz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're just another one of those people who are blind to what happening because your school has never been the target of people who seek to disparage the talent of teams. Give me some examples of community outrage when a random team from KC (or wherever) has done well. Its not so much that rural schools are disrespected--its that Neosho has been consistently put down for being capable of only winning lays. I'll tell you whats asinine--being that Neosho always has good showings at state and nationals and yet still gets bashed for only being able to pick up lays...that is asinine.

 

1 and 2 are ignorant points. So, someone is not supposed to take offense when their (former) school is constantly attacked for being the lowest tier in debate? Thats rubbish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its really useless to argue this point and I'm not really sure why I even try. Maybe some person randomly strolling through cross-x will realize the incredible hypocrisy that exists within the community. Eh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Its really useless to argue this point and I'm not really sure why I even try. Maybe some person randomly strolling through cross-x will realize the incredible hypocrisy that exists within the community. Eh.

Welcome to the community,

all we do is bitch :D

It gets fun after a while

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow. You figured out that I'm from Kansas City... Ok, I'll go ahead and throw it out there... my own school is well, not existant in the Policy community currently. Either way, the fact that historically, no one has been surprised to see prominant Kansas City/St. Louis/Springfield squads go deep into the tournament is probably suggestive of those teams competitive qualities. I'm much less surprised to see Neosho deep (I'm not familiar with your region), than I am at the lack of the presence of Liberty A, Truman A, Greenwood, Springfield Central, Parkview, Parkway, etc. (all considered to be amongst the best teams in the state) this deep. It demonstrates that there are problems with the system, simply indicating that there may be some substance to the claims that others are making about the quality of the debating being done by Neosho.

 

And yeah, I think there's a lot of truth in the idea that you shouldn't get defensive if your team isn't loved and adored by the community. Their perception of you is ultimately pointless. Debate is not life, and even then, very little in life is significant, but if the way you are perceived matters that much, then MAKE others respect you.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow. You figured out that I'm from Kansas City... Ok, I'll go ahead and throw it out there... my own school is well, not existant in the Policy community currently. Either way, the fact that historically, no one has been surprised to see prominant Kansas City/St. Louis/Springfield squads go deep into the tournament is probably suggestive of those teams competitive qualities. I'm much less surprised to see Neosho deep (I'm not familiar with your region), than I am at the lack of the presence of Liberty A or Truman A (both considered to be amongst the best teams in the state) this deep. It demonstrates that there are problems with the system, simply indicating that there may be some substance to the claims that others are making about the quality of the debating being done by Neosho.

 

And yeah, I think there's a lot of truth in the idea that you shouldn't get defensive if your team isn't loved and adored by the community. Their perception of you is ultimately pointless. Debate is not life, and even then, very little in life is significant, but if the way you are perceived matters that much, then MAKE others respect you.

 

Look up how well Neosho has done in the past at state and nationals--not to mention regular invitationals throughout the year. Its alright if you are not familiar with Neosho, however, do realize its not just some crappy school loaded with untalented debaters. My question to you is how can a team like Neosho that is, as you say, of sub-par debating quality make it as far as they have? I've been to state, albeit several years back and in another event, however, I remember well qualified judges in every event back then. I'm going to go out on a limb and say not much has changed since then; judges are still qualified. That being said, is it impossible to concede that maybe, just maybe, a Neosho team took down some other teams that had talent?

 

It all depends on your perspective as to whether perception matters. I would wager that most people have pride in their school and don't especially like to see it trashed (for no good reason). In fact, I would find it rather odd that someone NOT take offense if someone badmouthed their school.

 

You keep with the theme of "Make others respect you." A Neosho policy team is in finals at state--is that insignificant? Not worthy of being perceived well? Oh wait, I forgot. Of course the judging pool is crappy so that explains why they got so far. Are all the other times that Neosho teams have been in outrounds at state and nationals inconsequential? Must have been bad judges too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Welcome to the community,

all we do is bitch :D

It gets fun after a while

 

I've been in the community for a long time. Well, I'm not actually "in" anymore considering I'm not in high school any longer. I've refrained from ever posting but that singular comment made earlier compelled me to say at least something. Its useless to argue but what the hell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's reason by way of analogy; if your favorite sports team was playing in an important game (for instance if the Royals or the Cardinals are in the playoffs) and the umpire had literally never seen a baseball game before and made some rather specious calls, would anyone say that the result had been correct?

 

That is what I think about Missouri high school debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Look up how well Neosho has done in the past at state and nationals.

 

http://www.mshsaa.org/Activities/ChampionshipEvents.aspx

 

State results since 2001.

 

Four Neosho teams in outrounds in eight years. Not really the most dominant of all programs. Best showing were 2003 and 2005 semifinals round.

 

I think the reason Neosho gets so much disrespect is because they win a larger percentage of lay judges than they do flows. Now don't get me wrong, some Neosho debaters have gone on to have some success at the college level of CEDA/NDT. Simon Mahan, Britton Jobe, Ryan Childres, Gabe Cook, these are all debaters who have competed for Missouri State debate, each with some level of success.

 

But judge adaptation as a standard for what makes a "good" team goes both ways. Neosho teams aren't really known for adapting to college judges. I've only judged one Neosho team this year (it could be the same team in outrounds this year), in sems at Parkview and they were just straight lost when it came to arguing a K or a c/p with two college judges. If we expect teams to adapt to lays why shouldn't we expect teams to adapt to college judges, and that includes knowing something about K or c/p debates. Seriously, is the term "perm" really all that hard to learn? It's not about speed either. Probably the best round I saw this year included one team that was substantially faster than the other, but the slower team was able to win the round based on their arguments, and that was with two college judges.

 

From what I know about state judging is prelims have two judges, one coach one paid judge. Paid judges are usually college debaters or college students who used to debate. Quarters is usually two coaches, one paid, with sems being the exact opposite. Finals being all coaches. Yeah, adaptation is important for you to pick up five ballots, but it's not the most important if each of your coaches are old school.

 

Really there wasn't much Neosho bashing going on in this thread here. I think you're just a little sensitive because Neosho is historically one of the most hated schools in the state when it comes to speech/debate. Some of it has to do with the stick, some of it has to do with the fact some real quality teams lost to Neosho because Neosho had the better speakers with a lay judge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh yeah, to add: I don't care what the judging pool is comprised of--old women, lawyers, homeless men--the fact is that it does not matter. Debate is about being able to adapt and win over everyone, not just a particular college debater who judges that happens to like shitty theory and critical arguments that make no sense outside of the vacuum of debate. If you're only able to win with those type of judges then you are no better than the team that only wins with lays. Quit being a sissy and admit that some team from an area other than Springfield could do well.

 

I used to be like you....Yes, debate is about adaptation, but adaptation at a certain level. The ultimate goal of debate is to promote good argumentative abilities and it does this by forcing people to judge and debate at a standard. The so called, "shitty" critical and theory arguments may not be relevant outside of the vacuum of debate, but it does develop skills that can be applied elsewhere in life. Being able to read critical text promotes excellent reading abilities which can be beneficial if one wants to go into law, journalism, communication, politics. Thinking about debate theory allows us to develop our ability to reason. Additionally, the main problem with "lay" judging is not so much that we can't use our Ks or Theory arguments, but rather, that the level of argumentation must be dumbed down.

 

I have debated Neosho teams time and time again, and there are some good teams aka: (Jessica Pimm and Tony Rosequist). However, others lacked any conception of what debate is. Their sole strategy was winning over judges through "pretty speaking" as some would call it. Non responsive arguments and lack of impact analysis shouldn't win debate rounds, but unfortunately it does. I'm not saying that these problems lie exclusively with Neosho, I've seen teams from Springfield have problems with these things to, but it stems from their inability to have good debates due to the judging pool. However, they at least recognize how to debate well, and do the appropriate things when they need to.

 

Now, I don't know what happened at state, nor have I seen the Neosho team that is in finals, but what I do know, is that Liberty A, Truman A, SPC RR, Parkview A etc, are very capable debaters, having debated all of them myself. Honestly, its inconceivable to me that such teams aren't represented in the later brackets. Sam Rowland has been ridiculously successful at state for the past two years going 7-1 or 8-0 in prelims, so he might be decent...i guess. Jace and Max are two time national qualifiers and have won, what is it, like every tournament in the state? lol. obviously that's an exaggeration but they've been very successful. Truman A, was in sems last year, where they lost to us on a 2-1, a very good round. Parkview was in finals of Liberty, and qualified to NFLs out of the SWMO district (which I'd contest is one of the toughest in the state). I've also judges Will and Ben, and they are excellent and have a lot of talent.

 

I just think that empirics aren't on Neosho's side, and the fact all of the aforementioned teams have had proven success, just worsens the situation.

 

P.S. - All of the teams that I listed can very easily pick up the lay, its just that they have another dimension to their debating.

 

The Neosho philosophy, at least in my experience, places an overriding focus on winning. Sure, Neosho teams can pick up some rounds, but they resort to tactics that are regarded as, to a large extent, morally abhorrent by policy debaters. I will give you this: Neosho is respected for its ability to produce slimy 2AR's, but not for its ability to debate in a respectful manner.

 

QFA

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude, all's fair in debate. I have no problem with voting for someone who makes a morally repugnant argument IF THEY WIN IT.

 

Neosho has put out some of the best debaters in the country who've gone on to compete at the top levels of NDTCEDA. I don't think you can fairly criticize their 'tactics' on any level. I have no problem with anyone placing an 'overriding value' on winning. You don't walk into a debate round to get a haircut.

 

My argument is that I think debate is one of the best activities that you can engage in and I think it is a crying shame that programs are chronically underfunded and undervalued. I hate to see kids put their hearts into an activity like this and then see their efforts go to waste when unqualified critics are in the back of the room, especially at state or districts.

 

I commend anyone who has the time and the desire to return to the activity after graduation as a critic, to judge rounds and participate in the activity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dude, all's fair in debate. I have no problem with voting for someone who makes a morally repugnant argument IF THEY WIN IT.

 

Neosho has put out some of the best debaters in the country who've gone on to compete at the top levels of NDTCEDA. I don't think you can fairly criticize their 'tactics' on any level. I have no problem with anyone placing an 'overriding value' on winning. You don't walk into a debate round to get a haircut.

 

My argument is that I think debate is one of the best activities that you can engage in and I think it is a crying shame that programs are chronically underfunded and undervalued. I hate to see kids put their hearts into an activity like this and then see their efforts go to waste when unqualified critics are in the back of the room, especially at state or districts.

 

I commend anyone who has the time and the desire to return to the activity after graduation as a critic, to judge rounds and participate in the activity.

 

I agree with your post to the extent that quality of judge is absolutely crucial in an activity as subjective as debate. But I also think its problematic, when teams exploit the judge's ignorance in order to pick up ballots. Aka: Slimy 2ARs - and Neosho has done this on many occasions when we debated them. Additionally, I think there should be a regard for good argumentation. I mean, stupid arguments are stupid arguments and don't/shouldn't garner any respect for the community.

 

I don't know about you, but putting an RVI on T is the stupidest BS ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh yeah, to add: I don't care what the judging pool is comprised of--old women, lawyers, homeless men--the fact is that it does not matter. Debate is about being able to adapt and win over everyone, not just a particular college debater who judges that happens to like shitty theory and critical arguments that make no sense outside of the vacuum of debate.

 

If you spend your entire time debating in front of people who are more likely to vote because you have a pretty voice or dress better than your opponents, congratulations. You've learned very little. Additionally, if you think that theoretical arguments or critical arguments make no sense outside of the 'vacuum of debate', you have an extremely poor understanding of what they are and how they work (eg: Robert's Rules of Order is the 'theoretical' framework for most parlimentary organizations and congresspeople make 'critical' arguments all the time. You just don't recognize them.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eapen, I think BlueOrange was getting at the bastardized Ks that most debaters run which skew the intent of their authors. But I agree with you, being able to read philosophical texts can really help in the real world. But unfortunately, not many people in Missouri cut their own Ks, or understand them for that matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just throwing this out there...not trying to cause any more discontent than is already current on this thread. There are many teams that should be represented in later out rounds as was stated above, but tournaments like this truly are a crap shoot. In our rounds we had 1 school judge and 1 paid judge. Only one of our paid judges was a former debater (the round against max and jace) but even then I'm not sure how familiar she is with modern debates i.e. she didn't seem too pleased whenever I asked about k's because I wanted to run bioptx. The other paid judges were maybe students at the law school? i'm not sure, but I did manage to get a young woman who rolled her eyes when i said hundreds of thousands of people were dying from genocide in darfur...

 

The problem with the school judges is as follows; Coaches are forced to judge events in which they have NO qualifiers. This means that the schools like liberty, truman, and blue springs who have VERY qualified coaches will NOT be the ones in the back of the room. This theory of judging assignments is to avoid conflicts of coaches bias but lets get real - as policy debaters we should have individuals who UNDERSTAND what we're saying and can help us, especially as we prepare for nationals. Having a coach from a school that HATES policy, or doesn't even do debate does nothing to help the Missouri Policy debate program what so ever. Fortunately we had the pleasure of having Wedgeworth as a judge because parkview didn't qualify any teams but its coaches like HER (with 2 nat'l qualifying policy teams) that should be judging us. Reading her ballot will improve our skills more than a ballot that says "the 2AR yelled and wouldn't let the other team answer in c-x you lose". Our coaches are all grown individuals who know how to put their bias aside, its unfair to punish the competitors by not allowing those coaches to judge us.

 

-and to the small town argument, you must prove yourself to create a legacy like the bigger towns have created. In KC there is a smaller school named Savannah. Most people don't hear about them, but David Kozminski has made a name for their school. He has over 2000 points and has qualified to nationals in multiple events, competing in almost every debate and drama event. Success will get you recognized, but it must be consistent and garner some legitimacy. Seeing the upsets and lack of representation by certain talented debaters it is understandable that there is some warranted merit to the comments that have been made previously.

 

congratulations to all teams but KSATZ YOU BETTER WIN THIS

 

ROXANNNNNNNNE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just like clockwork. Anytime a team outside of the Springfield area does well it instantly has to be at fault of the judges. Why is it that every single time Parkivew won state that the qualifications of the judges were never called into question? How about when Greenwood won state? Were the judges ill qualified back then? I'd be willing to take a bet if you had gotten to semi-finals that the judges would have been quite up to par, right? Ridiculous.

 

1. parkview has always had some good fucking policy debaters

2. greenwood will always have one of the best policy teams no matter what year it is.

3. i wouldnt make it to sems, so i wouldnt be questioning anything

 

im just wondering how a team who ran a plumpy'nut aff was able to break this far.

i beg your pardon but you can shut the hell up

  • Upvote 1

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...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...