• working on DNS.. links may break temporarily.

Team of the Year Board Debacle

kihrer

kihrer

Full Fledged Farker
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
443
Reaction score
192
Points
0
Location
Harleysville, PA
After listening to the BoD debate I think there should be only one head cook listed for a team. I know people are probably tired of NASCAR references but let's take the 99 team. The team driver is Carl Edwards but there are several who make up the team. If Carl is sick and doesn't race, the 99 team doesn't get any cup points towards the championship even though a backup driver will most assuredly race the 99 car that week. It seems to me you could do away with all the potential unethical practices (hired guns) if you just ensured the head cook had to be present at the competition. If they're sick, that's just a bad break.

Now if the rest of the team wants to cook without the head cook, that should be fine. They can still win prizes and money but not gain points towards TOY or qualify for invitationals.

What are your thoughts?
 
kihrer said:
After listening to the BoD debate I think there should be only one head cook listed for a team. I know people are probably tired of NASCAR references but let's take the 99 team. The team driver is Carl Edwards but there are several who make up the team. If Carl is sick and doesn't race, the 99 team doesn't get any cup points towards the championship even though a backup driver will most assuredly race the 99 car that week. It seems to me you could do away with all the potential unethical practices (hired guns) if you just ensured the head cook had to be present at the competition. If they're sick, that's just a bad break.

Now if the rest of the team wants to cook without the head cook, that should be fine. They can still win prizes and money but not gain points towards TOY or qualify for invitationals.

What are your thoughts?
Click to expand...

Following your logic it should be Cook of the Year, and that was discussed.

I know too many teams where there ARE multiple cooks. If someone can't make it the slack is picked up. If there was a rule that said the chief cook was required to cook everything, I could go along with what you suggest but that's not the case. I don't want to see anyone penalized, for the sake of convenience.

The discussion was...painful, but I think they are on the right track. Pick a # and track that and allow an additional cook or two to fill in if needed. Beyond that teams interested in ToY need to opt in at the beginning of the year and declare their cooks. There is record keeping overhead involved but it addresses the immediate issue.

The database issues are manageable either through the new software and database management software or separate operations that could filter the data provided by the software.
 
kihrer said:
After listening to the BoD debate I think there should be only one head cook listed for a team. I know people are probably tired of NASCAR references but let's take the 99 team. The team driver is Carl Edwards but there are several who make up the team. If Carl is sick and doesn't race, the 99 team doesn't get any cup points towards the championship even though a backup driver will most assuredly race the 99 car that week. It seems to me you could do away with all the potential unethical practices (hired guns) if you just ensured the head cook had to be present at the competition. If they're sick, that's just a bad break.

Now if the rest of the team wants to cook without the head cook, that should be fine. They can still win prizes and money but not gain points towards TOY or qualify for invitationals.

What are your thoughts?
Click to expand...

99 team would get owner points just not driver points.:grin:

Sorry back on subject though. I can only dream about TOY, heck i can only dream about GC at this point but saying that my team consists of myself and my wife and for whatever reason if one of us couldnt cook the other is just as important, though my wife says she is more important than me-she only needs me to watch the temps at night so she can sleep. But regardless this team is BOTH of us together.
 
Jorge said:
Following your logic it should be Cook of the Year, and that was discussed.

I know too many teams where there ARE multiple cooks. If someone can't make it the slack is picked up. If there was a rule that said the chief cook was required to cook everything, I could go along with what you suggest but that's not the case. I don't want to see anyone penalized, for the sake of convenience.

The discussion was...painful, but I think they are on the right track. Pick a # and track that and allow an additional cook or two to fill in if needed. Beyond that teams interested in ToY need to opt in at the beginning of the year and declare their cooks. There is record keeping overhead involved but it addresses the immediate issue.

The database issues are manageable either through the new software and database management software or separate operations that could filter the data provided by the software.
Click to expand...

Hi Jorge,

I know they discussed Cook of the Year but what they are proposing doesn't solve the problem. Let's say they go with two head cooks. You and I could form a team and you are down in Texas and I am up in the northeast. Our team consists of you and me as head cooks and we also have 4 or 5 assistant cooks. Now if we plan carefully (and we're both pretty good cooks), we could cover a lot more contests. I might not be able to travel every weekend and you may not be able to either but we could work our schedule out so we didn't miss many weekends. We can even pick up a few weekends were we can score double because you might find a Saturday comp and I a Sunday comp. The entire year we may never even cook together.

If we did this, we would not be breaking the letter of the rules or the possible proposed change by the board. But wouldn't we be breaking the spirit of the competition? Couldn't we hit more qualifier comps that would also give us an edge getting an invitational bid or a chance at the Jack?

I go back to NASCAR, when the championship is awarded, while the driver is the main recipient of the championship, the crew chief and crew also say they were part of the "championship team." They had their part and while they weren't the driver, they certainly played a major part in the championship. This year, one additional dropped lug nut by a tire changer could have changed the outcome.

I just don't see what they are proposing will change anything. Maybe I am not seeing something.
 
Fat Freddy said:
99 team would get owner points just not driver points.:grin:
Click to expand...

Exactly! And owner points don't count towards a championship. That's why I say the team should still be allowed to compete without the head cook and even win awards and prize money - just not points towards TOY. Nor do I think they should be able to win a GC that would count towards an invitational if the head cook isn't present.
 
Simple way to do it would be have a team declare at the start of the season or prior to their first competition the following:
1. Team name
2. Team member 1 and their kcbs membership number
3. Team member 2 and their kcbs membership number
4. Etc………..
5. Other team members can be listed but at least one person in attendance must be a card carrying member of kcbs and present and on the list submitted at the start of competition for any points to be earned.
No person can declare themselves as members of more than one team for TOY purposes.
The only numbers tracked are kcbs membership numbers and must be verified by the above criteria.
 
Go down the list of top 25 teams for TOY. How many have multiple cooks? Are multiple cooks on the majority for those that are going for TOY?

This whole comparing to NASCAR is a bunch of crap. This isnt NASCAR folks. If they need to change it to Cook of the Year, then do it. But for so many folks to ne in an uproar over this issue that will never have any effect on them, just makes me scratch my head. I believe someone came up with 1% of the KCBS members are going for TOY points.
 
Scottie said:
Go down the list of top 25 teams for TOY. How many have multiple cooks? Are multiple cooks on the majority for those that are going for TOY?

This whole comparing to NASCAR is a bunch of crap. This isnt NASCAR folks. If they need to change it to Cook of the Year, then do it. But for so many folks to ne in an uproar over this issue that will never have any effect on them, just makes me scratch my head. I believe someone came up with 1% of the KCBS members are going for TOY points.
Click to expand...

Precisely.
 
Scottie said:
Go down the list of top 25 teams for TOY. How many have multiple cooks? Are multiple cooks on the majority for those that are going for TOY?

This whole comparing to NASCAR is a bunch of crap. This isnt NASCAR folks. If they need to change it to Cook of the Year, then do it. But for so many folks to ne in an uproar over this issue that will never have any effect on them, just makes me scratch my head. I believe someone came up with 1% of the KCBS members are going for TOY points.
Click to expand...

You may be correct for TOY. It doesn't change the fact that teams are entities unique from cooks and show have their own entity within a database. A big part of the point is to reduce errors in spelling. Having each team member enter team name seperately (duplicating data) is part of how you introduce errors into a system, not to mention increasing the space it takes. One team, one field to hold the team name.

dmp
 
I say we just keep it the same. But thats no fun. For discussion:

We couild make an iron man division. Only 1 cook, no assistants, no runners, just the cook.

Or maybe declare what your 10 contests will be for the year (that would count for TOY) ahead of time, which would take away an advantage of cooking lots of contests.

Or lets assign a handicap to cooks to level the playing field. Therefore hired guns wouldn't really help, they would have to score too high to make up the points of a new team. Boy, wouldn't THAT be a nightmare to track?

Or.... I dunno, just leave it be and try and win without changing the rules.
 
dmprantz said:
You may be correct for TOY. It doesn't change the fact that teams are entities unique from cooks and show have their own entity within a database. A big part of the point is to reduce errors in spelling. Having each team member enter team name seperately (duplicating data) is part of how you introduce errors into a system, not to mention increasing the space it takes. One team, one field to hold the team name.

dmp
Click to expand...

Yes, but I believe what he is saying is you could also make the cook the unique entity and the team around them is irrelevant. Not saying I agree with that, but that would be a COY (cook of the year) system.
 
Scottie said:
Go down the list of top 25 teams for TOY. How many have multiple cooks? Are multiple cooks on the majority for those that are going for TOY?

This whole comparing to NASCAR is a bunch of crap. This isnt NASCAR folks. If they need to change it to Cook of the Year, then do it. But for so many folks to ne in an uproar over this issue that will never have any effect on them, just makes me scratch my head. I believe someone came up with 1% of the KCBS members are going for TOY points.
Click to expand...
How many teams have multiple cooks? Only a few, probably. How many teams could have multiple cooks? All of them. Why not get ahead of the game and come out with a system that addresses a few major potential issues instead of always being reactionary?

And while this issue may or may not affect me, it does and has affected people I am friends with, as I'm sure is the case with others here. So if I express concern over the fact that the system needs to be proactively addressed, even though it may not affect me directly, just know that it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside to think that a thoughtful discussion on the matter may eventually help out some of my friends. Fair enough?
 
As it has been clearly pointed out, I have no dog in this hunt as I am in no way one of the few who are competing for TOY. If it is preferred that I keep my mouth (keyboard) shut, I can do that. It will be hard but I can do it:becky:
 
Dan - 3eyzbbq said:
Or maybe declare what your 10 contests will be for the year (that would count for TOY) ahead of time, which would take away an advantage of cooking lots of contests.
Click to expand...

I kind of like this idea. It would allow more teams to compete for the title. Or maybe just take your top 10. That way those who invest more have a better shot.
 
Dan - 3eyzbbq said:
Yes, but I believe what he is saying is you could also make the cook the unique entity and the team around them is irrelevant. Not saying I agree with that, but that would be a COY (cook of the year) system.
Click to expand...

You certainly could do that. I know a lot of the top teams only have one cook. On my team, we each take two meats though, so we really are a team. Would it be fair that only I got an award? How would Chris feel if you and only you were recognized at some point?

Even if you still feel that it should be cook of the year, teams enter competitions, not individuals. It makes sense to me from a database perspective that teams should be recorded in the database. The reason why it is right now (I bet) is that member pay fees, so KCBS only tracks members. From an accounting standpoint, they have what they need, but from a data standpoint, it's not normal(ized). If you and Chris are both members and you have your team set to "3Eyz" and due to a clerical error, he is "3 Eyz" or "3eyes" or "Three Eyz" or even "3eyz" then you are not on the same "team" in the system being proposed. Is that acceptable to you? (I'm not asking to be snarky, but you are the customer, and the customer should get what he expects.)

dmp
 
dmp - I worked with quite a few database systems. You just assign a unique number to either the team or the cook. It works either way. So, #1 can equal 3Eyz or it can equal Dan Hixon. So, you track the #1 and eliminate that data variation.

If you read the thread I was saying to keep it the same. Just pointing out it would be just as easy to track COY as TOY for discussion.
 
I think this special meeting shows the need for active committees. All of this stuff should be hashed out in a committee meeting and then their suggestions should be presented to the board. To try and resolve these issues in an open meeting of the board is next to impossible. They talk and talk and talk and nothing gets resolved
 
If it's cook of the year then the team name shouldn't even matter. I should be able to cook as a different team every week with a different supporting cast and have my points count towards cook of the year. I'll cook as the 99 percenters one week and Team Breast cancer awareness the next. Who cooks with me is obviously inconsequential so If I can get Rod Gray as an assistant one week then tuffy the next and Woz the following I'll be rockin.
 
For the record, I never said who you cook with is inconsequential. The stronger the team the better. I think I was clear on my concerns about the current system. Maybe it's just too complicated for anyone to figure out the proper solution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Team of the Year Points Question
Replies
3
Views
485
Squeeze
S
U
KCBS Team of Year bonus points drops again to 25 teams
3 4 5
Replies
96
Views
6K
Smoke'n Ice
Smoke'n Ice
K
New member of the 270 Smokers family!
Replies
7
Views
2K
kevinb67
K
Slamdunkpro
Regional Team of the year champions
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
Slamdunkpro
Slamdunkpro
R
Bbq 2015 season need team mates for Rusty Kettle Barbecue
2
Replies
27
Views
2K
Ribeye Republic
Ribeye Republic
Back
Top