Jump to content
twoAC

NDT First Rounds

Recommended Posts

From the CEDA Forums

 

California Brockaway/Jaswa

Emory Inamullah/Weil

Georgia Cambre/Lacy

Harvard Jacobs/Parkinson

Kansas Kennedy/Quigley

Kansas Kennedy/Stone

Mary Washington Kallmyer/Susko

Michigan State Lanning/Wunderlich

Missouri State Foley/Kearney

Northwestern Fisher/Spies

Oklahoma Giglio/Watts

Texas-Dallas Baker/Rubaie

Wake Forest Carlotti/Maza

Wake Forest Crichton/Sears

West Georgia Boykin/Schultz

Whitman Cohn/Straus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe BP is saving another year of eligibility

 

I think that might be true because they are entered for districts either. Plus, they were ranked top 5 the whole year in coaches poll and practically everyone in that list got a first round bid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this the equivalent of "red shirting?" In the "old" days you had 8 semesters, one round, one tournament, counted as a semester of eligibility. When did they change the rule?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is a "first round" team? What exactly does all this mean?

 

Teams can submit themselves for a "First Round" Bid to the NDT. The teams that submit themselves are then ranked based on a varying number of factors (how often did they break at National Tournaments, did they win any elim rounds or just flop out after breaking, what about head-to-heads against other applicant teams? etc.). Then the top 16 of those applicant teams are released and those team receive what are called "First Round Bids". This means that these teams do *not* have to compete at their district tournament to attend the NDT, but bypass that altogether.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The teams that submit themselves are then ranked based on a varying number of factors (how often did they break at National Tournaments, did they win any elim rounds or just flop out after breaking, what about head-to-heads against other applicant teams? etc.).

 

I believe this is based on a poll of NDT coaches. Increasingly I think coaches are being more open and transparent about their methods for determining ranking--but I imagine some coaches vote with their gut/intuition.

 

The two other ways to qualify for the NDT:

Qualify out of district (usually two to four teams qualify out of a given district)--I think there are 9 or 10.

 

Get a second round bid. Second round bids I believe require a 60% win percentage at varsity tournaments, plus an application and coach voting.

 

As a caveat, bigger teams are limited to having two teams compete at the NDT.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As a caveat, bigger teams are limited to having two teams compete at the NDT.

Just to clarify, all schools are limited to having two teams compete at the NDT, except for schools that have a 1st round team. Those schools are still able to send two teams to districts and thus are capable of fielding 3 teams to the NDT.

Right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just to clarify, all schools are limited to having two teams compete at the NDT, except for schools that have a 1st round team. Those schools are still able to send two teams to districts and thus are capable of fielding 3 teams to the NDT.

Right?

 

If you have one team with a first round bid, you can send your teams to districts. If two of those teams qualify, one of them gets a district bid. However, the other team can apply for a second round bid, which can result in a school have three teams at the NDT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the baseline is also 50 percent for second-round at-large bids, rather than 60. 60 is a pretty high winnng percentage if you're mostly attending national tournaments and outrounds count against you.

 

There's also a limit on the number of schools than can send three teams to the NDT in a year - six, I think.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe the baseline is also 50 percent for second-round at-large bids, rather than 60. 60 is a pretty high winnng percentage if you're mostly attending national tournaments and outrounds count against you.

 

There's also a limit on the number of schools than can send three teams to the NDT in a year - six, I think.

 

50 is a pretty low baseline, its realistically closer to 55. Additionally, I know teams last year that had 65+ winning percentages. Its really a matter of success i.e. if you get to quarters at Wake and occasionally break elsewhere and end up with a 55% win percentage, versus a team that never goes deep but has a inflated win percentage because of weaker regional tournaments, the former will commonly get the bid.

 

Also you are right, there can only be 6 "Third teams" at the NDT. It gets messy when considering whether a squad's top team got a first round or not, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
65% W/L record on an exclusive national travel schedule is flirting with a first round.
Bruce wins. For the geeks among you:
  • Other than the two teams with absurdly high W/L percentages (Emory IW - 90.1% and Northwestern FS - 87.9%), the high-low spread on overall winning percentage (minimum 25 rounds in all cases) was 77.9% (Wake CS) at the high end and 64.4% (Wake CM) at the low end...
  • There were 59 teams listed on the Bruschke site with at least a 60% winning percentage in all rounds (again, 25 rounds minimum). 36 of those teams were at 65% or better...
  • Two teams (Northwestern FS and West Georgia BS) have a higher winning percentage in elims than they do overall. In fact, Northwestern FS's elim percentage (90.3%) is higher than the overall winning percentage of every 1st Round Bid team. 28-3 in elim rounds. Yikes...
  • Nearly half of the 1st Round Bid teams (6) have losing records/percentages in elim rounds...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not positive on the reason but they definitely didn't apply. Debateresults has the teams who did

 

yeah that's what our coach said as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe this is based on a poll of NDT coaches. Increasingly I think coaches are being more open and transparent about their methods for determining ranking--but I imagine some coaches vote with their gut/intuition.

 

The votes themselves are open. Thus, while the voters may be opaque about their methodology, it's very easy to call someone whose vote appears political or just incorrect.

 

This correction process has happened before.

 

This forms a useful point of contrast with the high school Tournament of Champions, which makes its admissions decisions (for partial qualifiers) with no transparency or democratic accountability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike brings up a good point. In the earliest days of the NDT, all teams were selected by coaching committees within the region. The coaches would get together and decide who the "top" teams were - those teams would then go to the NDT. The district tournament was later created as a way to lessen the chances of teams getting through on political or reputation grounds. I forget why the first round system was implemented, but I believe it was to ensure that truly quality teams would get to the NDT without risking a bad weekend at Districts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you have one team with a first round bid, you can send your teams to districts. If two of those teams qualify, one of them gets a district bid. However, the other team can apply for a second round bid, which can result in a school have three teams at the NDT.

 

There is an exception in D3 (maybe others) where the third team doesn't get to debate at districts. Both teams are ranked along with all other district entries, but only one team gets to debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The votes themselves are open. Thus, while the voters may be opaque about their methodology, it's very easy to call someone whose vote appears political or just incorrect.

 

This correction process has happened before.

 

This forms a useful point of contrast with the high school Tournament of Champions, which makes its admissions decisions (for partial qualifiers) with no transparency or democratic accountability.

I missed this on the first read-through. Call me bitter over not getting an at-large, but it would have been nice to see a vote count. Is there any particular institutional reason the TOC committee declines to publish their selection process?

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...