Superregional

[SilverBreeze]

D.C. being added as a separate state also ended up taking a Texas bid away, which I'd argue is a bad thing.

angry texan sounds

constant grumbling in SoCal Div. B rises in volume slightly

[SOPomo]

D.C. being added as a separate state also ended up taking a Texas bid away, which I'd argue is a bad thing.

angry texan sounds

constant grumbling in SoCal Div. B rises in volume slightly

or NorCal, which had two teams win Ohio tournaments this year but only will ever send one to Nats

[SilverBreeze]

angry texan sounds

constant grumbling in SoCal Div. B rises in volume slightly

or NorCal, which had two teams win Ohio tournaments this year but only will ever send one to Nats

constant grumbling in SciOly community rises in volume slightly

[Creationist127]

constant grumbling in SoCal Div. B rises in volume slightly

or NorCal, which had two teams win Ohio tournaments this year but only will ever send one to Nats

constant grumbling in SciOly community rises in volume slightly

grumbling in SOInc authority "We can't do that much..."

[sneepity]

I'm know I'm a little late on this...

What if we just hosted superregionals for some areas with less competition (e.g. states with only 1-2 compeitive teams) then gave the extra bids to states like MO, TX, CA?

This is an excellent idea. From the perspective of a less competitive state, I see no problem with combining us with Arizona and Colorado, and giving us two bids instead of three. Additionally, invitational tournaments in our states are practically nonexistent, so if the state competition sent 10 or so teams to the superregional, we would get that one more competition we could go to. So, while this would decrease our likelihood of going to nats, other deserving teams could have the bid, and we would have another competition. A win/win. A similar model could work in other groups of less competitive states.

_{Note: I did no research on information in this post. I don't know for certain how competitive AZ and CO are as states, I assume they are similar to NM, and I don't know about past invitationals, all I know is that Arizona has had invitationals once.}

[Tailsfan101]

I'm know I'm a little late on this...

What if we just hosted superregionals for some areas with less competition (e.g. states with only 1-2 compeitive teams) then gave the extra bids to states like MO, TX, CA?

This is an excellent idea. From the perspective of a less competitive state, I see no problem with combining us with Arizona and Colorado, and giving us two bids instead of three. Additionally, invitational tournaments in our states are practically nonexistent, so if the state competition sent 10 or so teams to the superregional, we would get that one more competition we could go to. So, while this would decrease our likelihood of going to nats, other deserving teams could have the bid, and we would have another competition. A win/win. A similar model could work in other groups of less competitive states.

_{Note: I did no research on information in this post. I don't know for certain how competitive AZ and CO are as states, I assume they are similar to NM, and I don't know about past invitationals, all I know is that Arizona has had invitationals once.}

As far as competitiveness goes for those states, Colorado is definitely more competitive at Nats than NM and AZ. If the three had a superregional, I'd predict two CO teams for top two in both divisions.

[jaggie34]

Random thought from OP, the idea might actually be more viable if state tournaments can't be held in person next year (although hopefully that wont be the case). It would likely make planning much easier since things would be consolidated.