[SmokeJS]

My understanding is the super squads was a big success. A search here didn’t find much.

Saw this quote online “Super Squads will be made up of three random draw shooters per squad. The remaining spot on each squad will be auctioned off with proceeds being split between the USA Sporting Clays Teams and an increased prize purse.” Did anyone here get the opportunity to be in a super squad?

Is the idea of super squads limited to Nationals?

 

[ironhanger17]

My understanding is the super squads was a big success. A search here didn’t find much.

Saw this quote online “Super Squads will be made up of three random draw shooters per squad. The remaining spot on each squad will be auctioned off with proceeds being split between the USA Sporting Clays Teams and an increased prize purse.” Did anyone here get the opportunity to be in a super squad?

Is the idea of super squads limited to Nationals?

the ohio state shoot had a super squad on sunday with the top 5 scores shot on saturday shoot together .

 

[Justin L.]

My invitation must’ve got lost in the mail.

 

[SmokeJS]

My invitation must’ve got lost in the mail.

Wondering if the auctions went well or if maybe the super squads will be expanded because of response?

I’m not sure why super squads were created but they certainly help keep it interesting right to the end of the tournament.

There’s often talk after a big event that the course was too difficult. Maybe, though I have no insight to offer, there’s something in the super squad approach that could separate those who really have a chance of winning from the recreational shooters who want to rub elbows with the big guns.

My opinion is the big shoots should be tough as those shoots are designed to identify the best that week. I believe anyone can enter shoots like The Nationals. Many are going to struggle, and might never come back, but they’re not who The Nationals are trying to identify. Maybe the super squad has a way to keep everyone happy. Possibly a tournament within a tournament?

 

[JacksBack]

The auction slot is a concept steal from PSCA. Overall, I feel the super squad format makes a lot of sense for regionals and up shoots as it levels the playing field for the top guns.

 

[KRIEGHOFFK8013]

I think the Super Squad would work a lot better if there were targets were set up for just the Super Squad.

 

[Justin L.]

Wondering if the auctions went well or if maybe the super squads will be expanded because of response?

I’m not sure why super squads were created but they certainly help keep it interesting right to the end of the tournament.

There’s often talk after a big event that the course was too difficult. Maybe, though I have no insight to offer, there’s something in the super squad approach that could separate those who really have a chance of winning from the recreational shooters who want to rub elbows with the big guns.

My opinion is the big shoots should be tough as those shoots are designed to identify the best that week. I believe anyone can enter shoots like The Nationals. Many are going to struggle, and might never come back, but they’re not who The Nationals are trying to identify. Maybe the super squad has a way to keep everyone happy. Possibly a tournament within a tournament?

I disagree with what you said about the people that might struggle isn’t who the Nationals are trying to identify. Honestly if that were the case, why not just hold a tournament where the top X-amount of shooters whether you use All-American standings or some other measure to decide the top shooters in the country? If it was just for the elite shooters and regular shooters didn’t attend, what reason would sponsors have to give money towards the event, or show up to showcase or sell their products?

Also- if it was just for the top 15 elite shooters, how would the NSCA make money on the shoot? I see the average shooter as the bread and butter of the NSCA, or any clay target organization- because they would have a hard time surviving if they designed shoots around only the best in the game. I have no problem with the super squad, it doesn’t affect me one bit, but I don’t think having targets that are more geared to those 10-15 shooters with a chance of winning it all is a good business model for the NSCA, either.

 

[SmokeJS]

That’s the flip-side of the discussion and you’ve stated it well.

The question for me is does NSCA want to put on a big event for the less than elite shooter with sales and fun the main objective or do they want big time competition that determines the year’s best shooter and host an event that might have broader appeal to an audience.

When I see Nationals set hard it tells me they want the competetion and would like to have a Masters golf type event. At the same time they also want the attendance and the revenue that brings. That attendance is of course competitors, not an interested audience. Having an elite challenging course with an event with wide appeal to the average shooter is probably asking too much when the majority of competitors get beat up and a significant % decide to never return. So NSCA will probably continue taking the middle road and just put up with any grumbling about the courses being too hard.

 

[Rooster booster]

That’s the flip-side of the discussion and you’ve stated it well.

The question for me is does NSCA want to put on a big event for the less than elite shooter with sales and fun the main objective or do they want big time competition that determines the year’s best shooter and host an event that might have broader appeal to an audience.

When I see Nationals set hard it tells me they want the competetion and would like to have a Masters golf type event. At the same time they also want the attendance and the revenue that brings. That attendance is of course competitors, not an interested audience. Having an elite challenging course with an event with wide appeal to the average shooter is probably asking too much when the majority of competitors get beat up and a significant % decide to never return. So NSCA will probably continue taking the middle road and just put up with any grumbling about the courses being too hard.

Good thoughts, but any ‘average’ SC shooter showing up at a regional or natl championship tournament that is surprised they get beat up is naive.

Great thing about this game is we get to compete on the same course as the best. That’s a GREAT thing, and many think they’re gonna have a career week at these shoots. Why, I don’t know.

 

[JacksBack]

I think the Super Squad would work a lot better if there were targets were set up for just the Super Squad.

Disagree with this. Yes, the big targets can be daunting and even discouraging, but it's what they need to throw at the big bashes now in order to separate the top shooters. Us mere mortals will be further separated and need to learn to deal with it--and I include myself in this latter group

 

[Justin L.]

Disagree with this. Yes, the big targets can be daunting and even discouraging, but it's what they need to throw at the big bashes now in order to separate the top shooters. Us mere mortals will be further separated and need to learn to deal with it--and I include myself in this latter group

Why do they need to throw such hard targets to separate the big dogs? Who cares if a few of them post 100’s or scores in the high 90’s? Shoot off targets can be outrageously hard if they are concerned with long shoot offs.

 

[JacksBack]

Why do they need to throw such hard targets to separate the big dogs? Who cares if a few of them post 100’s or scores in the high 90’s? Shoot off targets can be outrageously hard if they are concerned with long shoot offs.

I could reverse the question to you: if three pros shoot 100 instead of separating at 92, 93 and 94, and then you and I shoot 85’s instead of 78’s, what difference does that make? In reality, none. We common folk are still an order of magnitude worse.

Do you really feel better either way? We’re still 15 targets behind them either way.

 

[Justin L.]

I could reverse the question to you: if three pros shoot 100 instead of separating at 92, 93 and 94, and then you and I shoot 85’s instead of 78’s, what difference does that make? In reality, none. We common folk are still an order of magnitude worse.

Do you really feel better either way? We’re still 15 targets behind them either way.

I’m not talking cream puff targets, but targets where a shooter can expect to break a similar score to what they break at a lot of other shoots. You’re basically talking about letting the top 15 shooters dictate how targets are set, not for the other 1700 entrants, or other people that would possibly be interested in coming but don’t.

 

[jwgworld]

I’m not talking cream puff targets, but targets where a shooter can expect to break a similar score to what they break at a lot of other shoots. You’re basically talking about letting the top 15 shooters dictate how targets are set, not for the other 1700 entrants, or other people that would possibly be interested in coming but don’t.

People can break the amount of targets they break at a lot of other shoots at...wait for it...a lot of other shoots. The big blasts are elite events. They are expected to be harder, and they never seem to have a problem filling up.

 

[birdshooter1]

You’re basically talking about letting the top 15 shooters dictate how targets are set, not for the other 1700 entrants, or other people that would possibly be interested in coming but don’t.

First, I wasn't there. But my understanding was that only one course was set for the "Super Squads" -- the yellow, which they all shot on the final rotation. So it's not the whole event.

Two -- You have between 2,100 and 2,300 participants, a number that seems consistent except for the pandemic years. Most of them are returning customers, so I guess they know what to expect. As for the people who would possibly be interesting in coming but don't -- why would you alienate the people who always come expecting what they get, in hopes of luring the people who probably never will come? From what I can tell, the targets are what they are -- most people aren't going because they can think they can win or even to shoot their best score. They're there to experience nationals and everything that goes with it, from vendors' row to the top gun shootout, etc.

Three -- it's the national championship. The fairways and greens at golf's US Open are always set harder, too. And amateurs and pros can play in that Open as well.

Right now there are 1,200 people signed up for this year. There may be a dropoff in attendance this year, but I would bet it has more to do with costs than with target difficulty. But NSCA has a formula that consistently fills the NSC year over year. Why mess with that until the free market decides that something's wrong?