Team Numbers

[ScottMaurer19]

So if next year Vermont has a single team sign up they get a bid to nationals?

See how stupid this is?

Nationals was never intended to have the best teams. It was intended to have the best teams from each state. The reason this debate is where it is right now is because the number of second bids has gotten so low that states the size of Texas have single bids (hence why the simplest solution is adding bids).

They could increase the number of national bids by 6 or 12 (add 1 or 2 teams per time slot)

[Unome]

So if next year Vermont has a single team sign up they get a bid to nationals?

See how stupid this is?

Nationals was never intended to have the best teams. It was intended to have the best teams from each state. The reason this debate is where it is right now is because the number of second bids has gotten so low that states the size of Texas have single bids (hence why the simplest solution is adding bids).

They could increase the number of national bids by 6 or 12 (add 1 or 2 teams per time slot)

I'd agree that an increase of 6 would be a pretty good solution. Although, that depends on the capabilities of typical university laboratories, and would probably necessitate dealing with existing future national tournaments and bids. The main problem with any temporary size changes is that it sets a precedent for arbitrarily decreasing the size.

[EastStroudsburg13]

I don't know that I've mentioned it on the forums, but the National Tournament Wiki indicates the last time Nationals was expanded was in 2005. Since then, nationwide participation in Science Olympiad has increased by about 50%. (Number of Teams per State Wiki) In addition, in 2005 when the expansion first occurred, 18 states had two bids for B division and 19 states had two bids for C division. Of course, that is now down to 10 in B division and 9 in C division. This is also by far the longest time Nationals participation has remained steady, as the longest prior span was 7 years of 54 teams between 1998 and 2004, and even then there was a year of 60 in 2002.

Basically, an expansion of nationals to 64, 65, or 66 may be overdue, and should probably be seriously considered.

[phoenix2000]

Assuming we figure out a flawless solution, how and when would it actually become a rule with NSO?

[Unome]

Assuming we figure out a flawless solution, how and when would it actually become a rule with NSO?

After a lot of deliberation and convincing on the part of various people. The exact amount depends on the solution in question. For a change in the bid allocation process, I expect that at the least this would require several members of the advisory committee to be heavily on board, and would ultimately probably require a decision from the executive committee. For an increase in the size of the national tournament, that would probably require less effort but still need support from the executive committee and agreement with the planning boards of future national tournaments. (note that this is mainly guesswork, I don't know for sure what would be required)

[EastStroudsburg13]

On the bright side, only two future tournaments have been assigned thus far: Cornell in 2019 and NC State in 2020. Both are good opportunities for expansion in my mind; Cornell hosting nationals can be thought of as the start of a new phase of alumni-involved tournaments, and NC State is a large school in a the state that pretty much originated the idea of Science Olympiad (plus 2020 is a nice year).

[Alex-RCHS]

On the bright side, only two future tournaments have been assigned thus far: Cornell in 2019 and NC State in 2020. Both are good opportunities for expansion in my mind; Cornell hosting nationals can be thought of as the start of a new phase of alumni-involved tournaments, and NC State is a large school in a the state that pretty much originated the idea of Science Olympiad (plus 2020 is a nice year).

Plus, NCSU probably has the capacity to expand beyond 60 teams. There are 50 teams at states, plus FPOWs which adds an equivalent of maybe 2 teams. Throw in the fact that NC teams are 20% larger than others (18 members) and you get the equivalent of ~62 teams at states alone.

[kenniky]

On the bright side, only two future tournaments have been assigned thus far: Cornell in 2019 and NC State in 2020. Both are good opportunities for expansion in my mind; Cornell hosting nationals can be thought of as the start of a new phase of alumni-involved tournaments, and NC State is a large school in a the state that pretty much originated the idea of Science Olympiad (plus 2020 is a nice year).

Plus, NCSU probably has the capacity to expand beyond 60 teams. There are 50 teams at states, plus FPOWs which adds an equivalent of maybe 2 teams. Throw in the fact that NC teams are 20% larger than others (18 members) and you get the equivalent of ~62 teams at states alone.

Keep in mind you need to account for both divisions

[Unome]

On the bright side, only two future tournaments have been assigned thus far: Cornell in 2019 and NC State in 2020. Both are good opportunities for expansion in my mind; Cornell hosting nationals can be thought of as the start of a new phase of alumni-involved tournaments, and NC State is a large school in a the state that pretty much originated the idea of Science Olympiad (plus 2020 is a nice year).

Plus, NCSU probably has the capacity to expand beyond 60 teams. There are 50 teams at states, plus FPOWs which adds an equivalent of maybe 2 teams. Throw in the fact that NC teams are 20% larger than others (18 members) and you get the equivalent of ~62 teams at states alone.

Keep in mind you need to account for both divisions

NC runs simultaneously. Most states do, we just happen to both live in states that are unusual in that respect.

Also, a site holding Nationals is generally expected to run a combined tournament at least once to prove that they can do it.

[DarthBuilder]

Deleted