Jump to content

JMAN

Member
  • Content Count

    215
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

17 Good

About JMAN

  • Rank
    Longtime Member

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • AIM
    coolzerdude

Profile Information

  • Name
    David Holzman
  • School
    University of Kansas
  • Location
    Lawrence
  • Interests
    school
  • Occupation
    Student
  1. I will be happy to vouch for the Skoglund queso because I have had it many times and it has always been delicious, however, I question whether the queso warrants judging at a high school debate tournament...
  2. 1. Good food 2. THE EAGLES 3. Fall Break Why was I not invited
  3. I hear they have coaches who pretend to be novice debaters that are idiots...hope the tournament runs smoothly.
  4. JMAN

    NFL Nationals

    i believe klinger won 2 consecutive nfl championships with 2 different partners.
  5. JMAN

    NFL Nationals

    You kids are a little ridiculous sometimes because you are debaters and don't listen to what you are saying. Discussing the round from a "flow" standpoint is pointless. The round was extremely slow and most likely somewhat jumbled (from a flow standpoint) for a reason, as it was every year I debated. We all have had rounds with judges that never saw a debate round before and don't care who won the flow let alone know what a "flow" is. They judge from the standpoint of who made arguments that fit into their rationale. Since none of US know what the judges viewpoints on life and society and policy are and what their rationale for decision making is, then we can discuss the round all day from OUR viewpoints, but it makes absolutely no difference because we are not the judges. Whether SMW or GBN completely destroyed the other team on the flow or the line-by-line is absolutely irrelevant to who will win the round.
  6. JMAN

    NFL Nationals

    obviously the decision has yet to be made, or it has been made and no one knows, or people that were there and heard the decision have yet to post it. Regardless of which of these the situation is, STOP POSTING WHO YOU THINK WON! Just wait until it is announced and then post that decision.
  7. I think many people have been wondering this from quite some time. This is just good evidence to back up the point that these wondering people have been making all along. Don't get me wrong, I support and commend the people that run our NFL district qualifiers in all districts in Kansas, but you would think they would eventually understand what they need to change if they want to represent Kansas on the national level to the best of its ability. No need to continue this discussion for it has been discussed many times on this very site. Just making Jared's point louder.
  8. JMAN

    Nationals Housing

    it would seem he is referring to housing teams as opposed to the other thread which is about housing judges...maybe a need for two threads???
  9. i love how nearly every debater thinks they are going to be a polisci major when they go to college.
  10. I would talk to deskboy, he may have an assistant coaching position for his timekeepers.
  11. anyone else believe that some coaches may have too much time on their hands....
  12. My judging this year has been much more limited than last year, so i will go with a more combined approach. Best Overall Team - Parkinson/Egan Best Champ Team - Cook/Gill or Kennedy/Mapes Best Open Team - Weiner/Baker Best K debater - cook hands down, and this was from his junior year against mr. kennedy. It was a debate that didn't come down to the K that kennedy/o'connerz ran, and that basically proves my point. Best c/p - no one. Of my two years of judging I haven't seen anyone (in state) run a c/p well. Which means that not enough people are running counterplans (or doing it well). Best Squad - SME/BVN/WE Prettiest Speaker - Parkinson/Sevedge (i will finally give you some props after my harshness) Best Coach - Anderson/Fellers , they are consistently providing great insight and producing good teams. Hands down.
  13. chris- note number one: i stopped reading partway through because it was so darn long. i would suggest trying to summarize or at least just put your main points out there. Just because you CAN continue to do well at districts (and consequently at nationals) with a mixture of judges, does not mean that that is how it should be done. at eknfl i went 7-0 my junior year and 6-1 my senior year. There was no difference in the judging, a couple flow a couple lay, but never a solid panel of either. At nationals i don't recall having a single judge either year that didn't flow in any sense. Junior year i had 3 fast rounds and 3 slow rounds (prelim), arguments ranging from a capitalism kritik to some weird counterplan to an inherency debate. the second year was a lot more in depth. We never had a round with lay style argumentation, and every round had a line by line included. Out rounds were all "contemporary" except one, which had a PM, a Stock, and a TAB. None of these judges were like some of the inexperienced ones we had at regionals. The point is: even though some teams that can do well at nats will get by your district qualifier, some really good teams (for nationals) may not be able to. So are we really allowing Kansas to represent itself well?
  14. Sean you are right that there is no way to determine what the "best" is. However, it is obvious that KS is not always sending the teams to REPRESENT them the best at nationals. As it was previously put, the judging at districts is not representative of the judging you will receive at nationals. If that is the case why put moms in pops in to judge a tournament that qualifies people to get judged by people of years of experience. the same would hold true if you were trying to qualify to a tournament where you would have moms and pops judging, you surely wouldn't want to send people that are getting strictly judged by college kids. people argue that you have to be able to adapt at nationals for your judges, but there is a big difference when you have to adapt for your two judges where one is a policy maker and the other is tab with counterplans being acceptable, as opposed to someone that has judged debate for years and someone who is judging it for their second time. two different types of judge adaption. The funny thing is that none of us are arguing. We are all agreeing yet expressing our opinions. Doesn't that imply that something should be done to fix the system that you are debating in?
×
×
  • Create New...