But there are more than three of them . . . .

So did the IHSA Swimming Advisory Committee address any of the issues put forth in this blog last week? No. Not one. The minutes are pretty vague on all but 3 items that were discussed. In fact the minutes look like a lot of cutting and pasting was used from last year's minutes. Of the three big items one was expected, one was really needed and one was WWTT. Recalculating the qualification times was, of course, expected. They all got faster except the 50 and 100 free on the girls side. The needed one, the committee decided that diving coaches for schools with divers competing could not judge at the state meet. What you say, you thought that was the case. Well it was, with the exception of schools with different boys and girls coaches. The girls coach could do the boys meet and visa versa. This happened at this year's girls' state meet. In fact, the state champion diver was judged by the boys coach from her school. I am not saying that he impacted the results in any underhanded way. However, it doesn't look good. It puts everyone involved in a questionable situation. And finally, the one that didn't need to be messed with but was: changing the order of entry onto the pool deck. I think the overwhelming consensus of opinion on the "new" (boys 2009) process to get teams onto the deck is highly favorable. This is from teams with the most qualifiers to teams with the least number of qualifiers. At least you know, there is no sitting around and it is basically fair. The new method which, seems to have been pushed by a coach on the committee, with a personal stake in the change, puts the sectional winning teams entering on deck in positions 3-17 or 18. If this method would have been used for the 2010 boys state meet it really would have changed things. The eventual state champion team would go on deck number 18, rather than 3rd, the 4th place team would go on deck. 19th instead of 4th . The 70th position team (a sectional winner) moves up to 17th and is one of three of the sectional winning teams don't score any points. So why is this unfair? Simple, it takes the criteria (state qualifiers) that is the same at all sectionals and makes at least part of the criteria based on factors specific to each sectional. Loyola moves up two slots because they were at a sectional they could win, instead of thier traditional sectional with NT. Glenbrook South moves down 10 because inexplicitly Loyola was moved into the Glenbrook North sectional. Of course they could have won the sectional and kept a higher slot. Don’t even start with the Surf War in Naperville. Naperville North and Central just flat out get wacked majorly with the new procedure. In all about 15 (that would be all sectional winners with the exception of NT) schools move up, 55 moved down and 35 stayed in the same position. Common sense says, if you are trying to get jar as full as possible,you fill the jar with the big rocks first. All this took so long that they didn't have time to do anything to improve high school swimming in the state for the athletes. Or at least not telling us if they talked about, increasing alternates, scoring 16, in season qualifications, raising entriers to 3 or 4 per team, or going to two divisions. As, the great philosopher,  Moe Howard would say “Wake up and go to sleep.”