NIRSA National Campus Championship Series

5 Year Plan for Flag Football

2009-09-30T11:14:00.000-07:00

As I mentioned in my last article the NCCS Committee began to look strategically at the next 5 years for all of the NCCS sports properties. The underlying emphasis is to bring the extramural championships to the next level by formulating a “true” national champion, and Flag Football is the first sport we tackled. Listed below is the 5 year plan for growth and development of the sport:
2009/2010 Championships - Will be an “open” format in that any colligate or military team is eligible to register and play.

2010-2011 Championships – Will be a “modified open” format, which any collegiate or military team that has participated at a NCCS Regional tournament will be eligible to register and play

2011-2012 Championships – Will shift to an qualifying tournament, which top teams in each division (up to 4) qualify from every NCCS Regional. That would allow for a 48 team tournament, (24Mens, 12Womens, 12Co-Rec or 16Mens, 16Womens, 16 Co-Rec, depending on the saturation of teams). If a qualifying team can’t attend the tournament a waiting list will be made, and replacements will be drawn from the waiting list. The waiting list can consist of NCCS regional participants only.

2012-2013 Championships - Same as 2012

2013-2014 Championships – Tournament format will stay the same as in 2012 and 2013, with the exception that the waiting list would be derived from the order of finish at each NCCS regional tournament. For instance, if the 2nd place from the Region 4 tournament was unable to attend, one of the quarter final teams would receive the invite.

The NCCS is committed to providing travel stipends for the teams that finish first, in each division, at each NCCS regional for all five years. However, as the committee continues to solve the puzzle of balancing the budget this may change positively or negatively in the years to come.
The focus of this plan is twofold, 1) increase the growth at the regional level and 2) create a quality National Championship. In this down economy when our participants and institutions are restricted with how much extra funding they may have, a regional tournament can hopefully be more affordable while still providing a great opportunity for the student participants. By moving to a format where all teams have to participate at the regional level to be eligible for Nationals, we hope to see an increase in teams at the regionals. That growth at the regional level can increase the benefits of hosting, as well as looking further into the future to seeing more regional sites added to accommodate that growth, which means more professionals and students can experience the benefits of hosting a tournament.

The second focus is to create a “true” national champion at the Championships. By qualifying through a regional, the National Championship takes on a more serious tone and provides an experience that no one else can provide to the students. The NCCS committee has been working closely with the NIRSA National Center to continue to add enhancements to the National Championships to be a truly unique event for the student participant, professional volunteer, and student volunteers.

Check the NCCS Web page for a listing of the upcoming Flag Football Regional hosts, the first one starts Oct 17. http://www.nirsa.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Sports/FlagFootball/flag_football.htm

Flag Football Update

2009-04-09T08:01:00.000-07:00

At the 2009 NIRSA Conference several actions were taken by the NSC Board and the NCCS Committee to address concerns about Flag Football Regional and National tournaments for the Fall of 2009.

First, concern was expressed about the entry fee and the percentage of revenue that was being used to support the national flag football budget -- that per team "royalty fee" that each host would pay. It has been decided that each regional host can set their own entry fee, as long as they contribute the per team fee as previously discussed. That "royalty fee" has been reduced from $75/team to $50/team for the fall 2009 season.

We have also been given 5 years, instead of three, to reach our goal of a balanced budget for flag football and basketball. Therefore, we will begin anew, in earnest, to identify a 5-year plan that brings us to that goals. We will be intentional about including hosts in our dialogue.

Announcements of our regional tournament hosts and their dates has been delayed as they review these new host criteria. As soon as we get committments from schools, we can announce our dates and locations for 2009.

Revenue Sharing -- What's Too Much?

2009-03-27T09:05:00.000-07:00

OK -- here's your chance to give us guidance on the "Revenue Sharing" part of our plan.

As you should know, part of our plan for addressing revenue generation is to increase the entry fee for teams and to share the revenue between the regional hosts and the national program budget (by national I mean all expenses at the regional and national level).

Our basic formula was this (for football):

10% goes straight to the regional host as revenue.
7% goes to cover costs of insurance
25% Goes to the NCCS to cover expenses
58% is used as operational funds for the tournament. If there is additional revenue here, the host keeps it.

Additionally, the NIRSA stipend of $2000 would go to the host as support for the regional. And insurance wouldn't be taken out because the entry fee has covered it (7%). And last year, Powerade provided an additional $1000 for schools that could implement their sponsorship at their regional tournament.

Breaking this down to dollars -- in a $300 entry fee -- $30/team goes to the school. $21/team goes for insurance. $75/team goes to support the national program. And $174/team goes to support the operational costs of the tournament.

The $75/team is used to fund travel stipends or the national tournament operations costs or the regional stipends, or t-shirts for regionals or whatever other expense comes with running the national/regional program.

Please give me your perspective on "fairness" for each party. Again, fairness is not defined. Does it seem right? Is it unbalanced? What's the best formula?

Thank you.

Possible National Flag Football Tournament Formats

2009-03-26T13:12:00.000-07:00

Historically, our national flag football tournaments have been open tournaments in which any team meeting our eligibility criteria could participate. At this moment, that's the plan for Fall 2009 at the University of South Florida.

Let's discuss some alternative possibilities to the open format.

Championship Format has been adopted by the NSC and NCCS as the tournament format we will employ in future tournaments. What does that mean? Very simply, it means that we use our regional tournament structure to determine our national tournament field. That definition provides us quite a bit of flexibility to "shape" the national tournament.

Why do we need to "shape" the tournament? Primarily because we have to control costs for these tournaments. Determining the number of qualifying teams allows us to set our expenditures, and therefore, our target revenue for that event.

Here are some options.

1) Regional Champions Only are invited to the National Championship.

2) Regional Champions are invited, along with a select number of invited teams who have participated in an NCCS regional tournament. This could be additional teams from larger tournaments, it could be historically strong IM teams that didn't win their tournament, or it could be other criteria to draw good teams from our national pool.

3) Establish a number of teams in each Championship Tournament (this keeps cost predictable), plus a collegiate open division for teams that did not qualify.

16 Men's Championship + 16 Men's Open

12 Women's Championship + 12 Women's Open

12 Co-rec Championship + 12 Co-Rec Open

In a recent survey of NIRSA professionals, the Championship with Concurrent Open Format was the most popular of these tournament formats, followed closely by the second option -- a weighted invitational tournament.

I like these concepts, but how do we account for the additional financial burden these teams place on the tournament (i.e. more staff hotel rooms, meals, apparel -- more player awards, etc.)?

If we can answer this question, we are much closer to implementation than one might think. Please feel free to provide input on your format of choice and an suggestions on financial structure.

Regional Fairness in a National System

2009-03-24T08:47:00.000-07:00

One issue that needs to be resolved by the NCCS Committee is how to create fairness in the national flag football and basketball systems. Inequities are created when you have large tournaments in one region, and smaller tournaments in another, particularly when revenue is generated at these tournaments that support a national program.

For example, this year in flag football Stephen F. Austin hosted the Region 4 flag football tournament. They drew approximately 60 teams. Iowa hosted the Region 5 tournament and drew eight men's teams. When comparing revenue generated at these tournaments (using 2009 fees), Stephen F. Austin will have generated $5760 to support the national program, while Iowa would have generated $768. Yet, these two regions have the same representation at the national tournament. This is fundamentally unfair to Region 4.

What recommendations do you have to balance this uneven equation?

2009 NCCS Regional and National Basketball

2009-02-04T08:47:00.000-08:00

Basketball season is upon us and I wanted to make you aware of some of the new developments in the NCCS Basketball Regional and National Tournaments this year. I'll try to lay out how basketball will happen this year as we incorporate a Championship Format and push forward with standardization.

First of all, most of you are aware that the National Championship will be played at the NCAA Final Four site in Detroit, Michigan . Our intramural sports teams must qualify for the National Tournament by winning one of eight regional tournaments held throughout the country. For a list of those regional tournaments, go to http://www.nirsa.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Sports/Basketball/basketball.htm on the NIRSA web page.

Each of these eight regional tournaments is an open tournament, meaning any of our intramural teams can sign up and compete. They don't have to be our campus champions. ANY team that meets our eligibility criteria can enter and play. The cost to enter each of these tournaments is set at $300. Each of these eight tournaments will send a men's team and a women's team to the national tournament.

Each qualifying team will receive a $3000 stipend to cover costs of hotel, travel, and other expenses (except for the four closest teams from Miami and Western Michigan -- which will receive $2500 each) . Since hotel reservations for teams needed to be made in advance, the NNC has committed part of this $3000 to each qualifying team's hotel expense. One less thing for teams to worry about, right? The remaining balance of their stipend can be used for travel, food or other expenses incurred.

The regional tournament directors will determine which teams advance. Of course, winning teams will be offered the first right of refusal to attend. If the winning team can not attend, the regional tournament director will offer the "bid" to the runners-up. We will have 16 teams present at our championship, each of which will have qualified through competition.

POWERade is the title sponsor of our national basketball program. They were instrumental in getting the NCCS access to the Final Four and have accepted a substanital financial burden to make it happen. Additional partners in this event include Champion, who will be providing apparel for teams and staff at the national tournament. CBS College Sports will be televising parts of the men's and women's tournaments, and will televise, in their entirety, the championship games for each division. These games will be televised live nationally on CBS College Sports. These partners provide significant enhancement to the student experience and provide substantial value to our regional and national tournaments.

Now, I know the current economic environment is pretty dismal. But, because of our business partners and thier support of our championship format, we are in a very good position to continue to provide a very high quality experience at our National Basketball Tournament. Our students should see enhanced quality and access. To provide that, in these times, is pretty darn good.

So, please do what you can to (1) inform your intramural teams about the opportunities at your region's NCCS tournament(s), and (2) support your intramural teams if they show interest in attending.

Moving forward on Standardization

2009-02-04T08:09:00.000-08:00

Hello all, thank you for your patience as I worked through some "technical" issues with the blog. This series of blog topics will focus on the two newest of the NCCS charges.

Those charges are:

(1) creating and implementing a self-sustaining funding model for basketball and flag football regional and national championships, and

(2) standardizing, to the extent possible, our regional tournaments in basketball and flag football.

Whether or not you have noticed, the NCCS has actually tried to make progress in that regard this year. In flag football regionals, we tried to use a decentralized approach to financially support the national tournament. In this model, which had mixed success, regional hosts were asked to provide entry fees for winning teams ($400/team), travel stipends for officials (4 @ $150) and cover the cost of their insurance. The cost of these expenses to the regional host could have been as high as about $3000, depending on the number of divisions that actually occurred at their tournament. Multiplying that by 8 regionals comes to $24,000, which is a decent percentage of what it costs to run the tournament. Due to a number of factors, we didn't actually generate that much revenue. Regional hosts did receive the $2000 NIRSA stipend (minus insurance) and the $1000 POWERade stipend, for a total of $3000 of financial support from the NSC/NNC. Fees were not standardized. Each regional tournament set their own entry fees.

Now, in basketball, we are attempting to do the same thing through a centralized model. In this model, fees are standardized at $300 for every regional tournament. Of that $300, $90 of it flows back to the NSC to financially support the national tournament. That's it. In theory, it relieves the host's burden of having to deal with regional travel stipends, regional officials and their stipends, entry fees and so forth. It simplifies the process. Critics might say it takes away the professional development aspects of running a tournament like this. That might be true, but the host still has to do everything they did before, including developing a budget (to run on $210/team, plus the NSC and POWERade stipends), recruiting teams, finding local sponsorship, all of the operational elements of the tournament; I could go on and on. In the end, a centralized approach seems to be more efficient administratively, with less financial risk, for the host institution.

The other difference between basketball and flag football this year is that in basketball, we employed a championship format. Championship format means that the only way a team gets to play in the National Championship is by winning a regional championship. Teams must participate in and win a regional championship to advance to the national. Flag football employed open regional tournaments and an open national tournament. What difference does this make? Well, financially, it makes it much easier to determine expenditures and staffing levels if you know the number of teams you are going to have. From a budgetary perspective, championship format makes life easier.

Let me know which model -- centralized or decentralized -- you would prefer. And, of course, let me know why you feel one is more appropriate than the other.

What's an appropriate entry fee for extramural tournaments?

2008-11-17T13:02:00.000-08:00

OK. Easy question here.

What would you consider more important --

(1) a low entry fee for a regional basketball tournament, or
(2) a higher entry fee with enhanced quality, like entry into the national tournament?

Please provide a rationale so we can follow your thinking (and create some debate).

What about Volleyball?

2008-10-14T11:51:00.000-07:00

I've had several committee members and colleagues ask me recently, "Why all the focus on basketball and flag football? What about soccer and volleyball?"

Okay -- let's talk about them.

What should we do about the Volleyball Championships? In their current form, the volleyball championships attract approximately 250 collegiate teams each year. This tournament is easily the largest and most representative of our national championship tournaments. So what's the problem?

Well, here are a few of the concerns that surround the volleyball championships.

1) Size and Format of the Tournament
The size of the tournament requires us to rent convention centers to hold our tournaments. This has both positive and negative outcomes. There are those that suggest we should return to campuses to host regional qualifying events -- consistent with our National Championship format adopted by the NCCS. The NCCS Committee has taken this stance. The question is, "What would this look like and how will it impact the existing championship?" Do we truly understand what it will take to accomplish this and are we, the NCCS and the NIRSA membership, willing to commit what it takes to see that through? Regional qualifying events require regional hosts. They require professionals willing to run tournaments. They require teams willing to attend and pay entry fees that can support the tournament and the winning teams qualifying expenses. Are we prepared for that? Are students?

2) Behavioral Issues
When you have 250 collegiate teams in one or more hotels surrounding the convention center, there will inevitably be behavioral issues that lead to increased expenditures -- we call it security. This has proven true for the NCCS. These behavioral issues are not uncommon when you get 2500 college students together in the same place. Issues of concern include alcohol use and abuse, sexual health, safety and security, among others. The question is, what does the NCCS do about it? Are we doing enough to safeguard the students that attend? Is that our role? The problem -- and yes there has been a problem -- hasn't been in the convention center or competitive venues. The problems occur in the hotel rooms that are reserved by these students. Noise violations, property damage, alcohol and alcohol related behaviors do pose a reputational risk to the NCCS. So we must address it in some way -- and we have. Is what we have done enough?

3) Cost
There are inherent costs involved when you rent out a large convention center -- costs that increase the amount of money a team must pay to attend. Facility rental, maintenance and custodial services, set-up and take down, staff meals, security and a host of other expenses are incurred at a higher rate than at a college or university (generally speaking). Moving these same expenses back to campus might create lower teams costs, but you then would be adding an additional level of play required for qualification to the national championship. Add these costs up -- which is better for students or institutions that foot the bill?

That's all for now. I know I haven't covered all of the issues, but I hope there are those of you who will help drive this conversation. Let me hear your feedback.

Hot Seat: How's the water?

2008-10-07T09:57:00.000-07:00

I recently had a pool built in my back yard. It's nice. It's got water (no kidding), Shasta stone, an in-ground cleaning system, some crazy ozone injector, and even a couple of water features called Wok Pots (I don't know – whatever). Oh, it's nice! The anticipation of this pool has had my family giddy for weeks and weeks. Even through the construction delays, optimism was all around them.

We've had the pool operational for a month now. I've been in it twice!

I write this not to share with you how sad and depressing my life is (though there is considerable room for debate there), but to draw a comparison with our National Sports Program and its purpose within NIRSA.

I ask myself, "Why have I been in only twice?" Sure, there are a lot of demands on my time. Maybe I don't even like to swim. For Pete's sake, I live in a desert – why wouldn't I get in the pool?

The answer, I have concluded, is because the pool is not for me.
Like so many professionals in our field, our joy comes in building things that others will use. We serve without asking what's in it for us, and we take pride in the benefits others derive from our work. It's who we are. I built this pool so I could watch my family frolic in the water and avoid melting in the Arizona sun. My joy comes from that.

The NCCS is building a National Sports Program so our students and professionals can enjoy the benefits of that program. And when I say National Sports Program, I don't just mean playing basketball or any of our other sports – though certainly benefits come from that. I am referring to the professional skills developed through working in a regional or national tournament, or any of our NCCS work teams. Event management skills, supervisory skills, leadership, prioritization, compromise and vision are just a few of the characteristics one refines in these roles. At tournaments, we employ human relations skills, we teach, we learn, we watch others grow, and we employ the skills we use in our everyday jobs – and we refine them and bring value back to our campuses.

Some folks ask what the value of these tournaments is for NIRSA. There it is. For many NIRSA professionals in the intramural sports and sport club realm, these tournaments serve as our living laboratory – our ongoing symposia. And I shouldn't limit that to IM and Sport Club folks. Facilities people, fitness/wellness folks and upper administration can all benefit from participating in these events. In fact, we've had them all.

I got in the pool the other day, with my family. Yes, that was the second time. It's the first time in weeks we were all together at the same time. That has value. Thinking back on it, I realize that we need to take the time to enjoy the things we build. There are benefits that we know exist, but do not take advantage of: stress-relief, cardiovascular strength and conditioning, social networking, and family time to name a few.

Yet, many in our profession choose not to get in the pool (blatant pool-NCCS analogy). Many have been in the pool so long their skin is wrinkled and blue. We all have our reasons. But I encourage you to jump in and give it a try.There are a ton of pool analogies I could draw on to make my next point, but I'm tired of them already. So, I will simply invite all of our profession to experience one of the many NCCS National Sports Programs this year. Visit the NIRSA website to find out how, when and where.

One final note. I haven't quite figured out how to pay for my pool. Therefore, next month's column will center on that topic – paying for our pool (insert analogy here).

NCCS Vision from 2008 Summit

2008-09-15T16:38:00.000-07:00

The NCCS – A 5-Year Plan for Flag Football and Basketball

What will these National Sports Programs look like in 5 years?

This was the question I asked the NCCS committee at our annual summit just a few weeks ago. It touched off what I might describe as a colorful debate. Our task was to forge a vision of what these programs might look like in 2013-14. This is a summary of our vision.

· Flag Football and Basketball will employ a Championship format. Teams will qualify for this tournament at one of up to 12 regional tournaments throughout the country. Two teams from each of these regional tournaments will advance to a national tournament site to compete in the national championship tournament. An open collegiate tournament would take place alongside this championship tournament, balancing our dual missions of participation and championship play.

· Qualifying teams will receive support from a number of agencies, including the NSC and their corporate partners, the NCCS through the regional tournament structure, and from the team’s own college, university or military institution.

· These tournaments will be run by NIRSA professionals selected by the NCCS committee. These selections will be based upon the stated interest of the candidate and his/her qualifications relative to the standards established by the NCCS (these standards can be viewed on-line at http://www.nirsa.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Sports/NationalCampusChampionshipSeries/nccs_staff.htm )
· The professional development experience that NIRSA members take part in will be grounded in learning outcomes and professional development goals consistent with the NIRSA mission and NCCS guiding principles.

· These tournaments will be both affordable to students/institutions and fiscally responsible in their operation. We will partner with corporate sponsors when that partnership advances the interests of our programs and adds value to the student and professional experience. We will operate these tournaments regardless of partners in the business world.

· The student experience will be outstanding. By creating a financial infrastructure that reduces barriers to participation; by selecting time frames that minimize conflicts with school; and by selecting host sites that offer a broad recreational and social experience with a variety of exciting ancillary activities, students will identify the NCCS brand as being synonymous with high quality competitive sports activities.

From this point forward our goal will be to fulfill this vision. Our decision making process will be shaped by it. At the same time, we will be alert to opportunities that can enhance this vision; we extend our hand to all students and professionals who share this vision – and those who do not.

Steps to achieving this vision have already begun. The NCCS committee and its various work teams have already partnered with many other NIRSA committees and professional and student members to start this process. Please join us as we chart this new path together.

Future Hot Seat Articles will touch upon the critical decisions necessary to fulfill this vision. If you have input regarding this vision (pro or con), or the steps necessary to achieve it, visit the NCCS Blog site at http://nirsa-nccs.blogspot.com/ and share your thoughts.

Permanent Regional Sites: A Regional Structure….what if?

2008-08-12T11:26:00.000-07:00

Recently, the NCCS adopted a regional map that is consistent with the 6-region NIRSA map. Within the NCCS regional map, each region is divided into two sub-regions, making our maximum tournament capacity equal to twelve tournaments.

Why did we adopt such a map? Well, it was a bit of a compromise.

First, between the NIRSA regional map (used more often by sport club championships) and the 8-region map used exclusively by extramural tournaments, there was an obvious lack of consistency, which led to confusion all over the place.

Second, the sub-regions were developed to reduce the distances teams might travel to attend a regional tournament.

Third, it provides us flexibility if our regional tournament structure requires growth or retraction.

And finally, a more controversial – and I think, exciting – opportunity for the NCCS. If we choose to, we could designate four to six of these tournaments as permanent regional sites, or super-sites, and still have up to six regional tournaments rotating on an annual or bi-annual basis.

Let’s be honest with ourselves – there are a number of regional host sites that have hosted forever and will continue to do it every year, whether or not they are selected as an NCCS host site. Maryland, Southern Mississippi, Arizona State, Ohio State might be examples of such tournament hosts. Others might become so if they knew we were serious about this possibility.

What do we have to lose? Not much, in my opinion, as long as (1) we provide opportunities for other schools and professionals to host, if they so desire, and (2) as long as each tournament upholds NCCS standards of competition.

What do we stand to gain? Consistency…Dependability…Predictability….all of which are desirable for students, professionals and participants.

Let me hear your thoughts on this topic.

Standards and Qualifications for NCCS Tournament Staff

2008-08-06T08:19:00.000-07:00

The 3rd annual NCCS Summit took place last week, July 28-30 in Phoenix, AZ. The group addressed a number of important issues regarding NCCS events.

The NCCS committee approved job descriptions and qualifications for tournament staff, including the Director of Officials and Director of Competition positions at the national tournaments. Flag Football nationals will be the first tournament effected and then move into full effect with basketball regionals in the spring.

For those wishing to apply to work at the NCCS Flag Football National Tournament, more details will be forthcoming via eFASTNEWS and NIRSA KNOW. In the meantime, click on the following link to check out the minimum qualifications:
http://www.nirsa.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Sports/FlagFootball/flag_football.htm -- located in the box on the right hand side.

A special "Thank You" to Jacob Tingle and the entire professional development work team and the many other NIRSA professionals who contributed to the development of these standards.

If you have comments or concerns about these standards, please post them here.

What would make a Championship Model Successful?

2008-07-14T14:05:00.000-07:00

For about a year now, the NCCS committee has been discussing the concept of changing the format of our national competitions from an Open Model of competition, where any team can participate in our national championship, to a Championship Model, where teams must qualify to compete at the national tournament. In a recent conference call, the committee agreed to move forward with the concept – to look at implementing a Championship Model for all of our national championships. Within those same discussions, there was a majority opinion that a Hybrid Model might work best, where a Championship Tournament takes place alongside an open tournament, at the same facilities, at the same time. I call this the Soccer Model, because it is currently employed with great success in our Soccer Championships.

A somewhat modified format exists for our tennis championships, where teams qualify at sectional tournaments. Moreover, non-qualifying teams that have competed in a sectional tournament can sign up for the national tournament on a first come, first served basis.

That leaves volleyball, flag football and basketball. Well, volleyball seems to be the furthest from this structure, where a very successful national tournament employs an open tournament format. Let’s leave that one alone for a while. Mr. Gary Colberg will be joining us at the summit in a couple of weeks to help us understand how this might or might not work in a future NCCS volleyball tournament.

That leaves football and basketball – two traditional “extramural” events – as the most likely tournaments to be initially transitioned. But what are the issues that we need to consider in this transition? Why do it? And how do we make a National Championship Tournament successful in this format?

Let’s make the case for the transition.

· Creates a true national championship
· Emphasizes participation in our regional tournaments
· Financial support to regional winners may be only avenue for teams to compete at the national level, thus increasing interest at the regional level
· Creates a unique collegiate tournament experience
· Creates a financial infrastructure that can help support the national tournament
· This format is more attractive to corporate America, increasing the likelihood of attracting and keeping important partners in the business world.
· For some schools, this format validates their student participation in national sports programs, creating greater opportunity for institutional financial support for their participating teams.
· We have the ability and flexibility to offer a Hybrid Model

Let’s make a case against transition:

· Why change? What we have works.
· A Championship format abandons our traditional roots – our philosophy of open participation for all.
· Emphasizing regional tournament play will put a greater burden on regional tournament hosts.
· It takes a lot of money to make this work – particularly if we provide travel stipends to regional champions (and runners-up).

Now, we understand that this shift to a Championship Model isn’t enthusiastically accepted by everyone. We also understand that this model may not be the best format for all of our championships; and that, even if it is, the timeline for transitioning to this model varies greatly between our championships. That’s why we are posting it here.

The NCCS Committee is interested in your thoughts. Please feel free to provide your opinions on this topic and/or new variables to consider when its time to reach a decision. The only thing we ask is that your comments:

1. Are on task to the matter at hand;
2. Provide input based on facts and not conjecture (if you need information, please email me…I’m happy to provide what I can); and
3. Are conducive to follow up comments.

Our summit occurs July 28-30, and we will discuss this issue extensively. The committee would appreciate any perspective you can provide prior to those dates.