Dubois, the only problem with this is this idea in Kansas that DCI or state automatically proves without a doubt who is the best debater or best team just because of number of bids or who wins. I think this is bull hockey. Just because you have 9 bids to the TOC doesn't mean a 3 bid team isn't just as good. Some teams don't go to only DCI tournaments. Some teams are terrible in front of tech judges and some are terrible in front of lays. While DCI does decide who can debate the best in front of different judges that weekend, it doesn't speak to performance on a whole. Here's a situation: one team consistently beat up on another all year maybe losing a squirrel on a panel every now and then. Then DCI roles around and the one partner from the first party becomes sick and maybe can't speak as well or cover the same amount of arguments that they could have in full health, drops something important accidentally and the team that has lost 3 or 4 times picks up a win at the tournament that decides who is the best. Does this mean the latter team is better and more deserving of the term best in Kansas. Kinda a specific scenario but I know you could extrapolate that out to many different and very realistic scenarios. So then we get to "well the first party in the above maybe had 4 more bids than the latter, so that will settle who is better." If I remember correctly the team that won my senior year didn't have the highest number of bids, and 2 of the top 4 teams were barely in the top 10 in bids. (I could be wrong with Garden City, but I know we weren't with only 3) I'm not disagreeing that these tournaments single out the better teams from that year's crop, but it doesn't speak to performance for the whole year and take things like speaks (which doesn't matter as the last time I heard Kansas still operated mostly without quality points, something I will never understand) or individual tournament records, or important wins into consideration. Now that this rant is over, I'm not sure I support singling out a debater and stroking his ego to the tune of a big trophy is in any way a good idea. I just wanted to point out the flawed logic behind letting just one tournament decide everything unquestionably. So overall this post is worthless with no points correlating to the actual topic, so please everyone ignore it.
edit: if you don't want to read this probably slightly incoherent babble, the argument is; in no way does the one tournament of DCI unquestionably decide who the best is. Anyone can have a good tournament that weekend. The only reason it speaks to them being good is because there is a qualification process just to even be there. At best DCI says "these are the "best" 32 (or however many qual) teams this year"
One more edit: i did not read a single post past the one quoted. I think the TOC has made me argumentative