@Just Ducky wrote:
@N Dynamite wrote:
To be fair, it only cost the team two places (at most).
Oh well, I guess since you put it that way, it didn’t really matter.
I was responding to a post that got deleted before mine was posted – I should have quoted the person. They made it sound like the team would have improved to top 5 with her on the prelim relays. There are so many reasons why this could have happened. My point was supposed to be that Nichols made a decision that we’ll really never know the rationale behind. Had they qualified for consols you may have seen her on the relay then. I’m taking the opinion that he took a gamble to help her (more rested for her individual events), that he didn’t expect to hurt the team (thinking they would have made consols either way), that didn’t work out the way he expected. He may have been sending a message to the other women that he believed they could do it without Stern – something they’ll have to do next year – thinking his display of confidence would be enough to put them over the top. Regardless, given that we’re even having this discussion about her value to the relays, doesn’t this further strengthen the argument that she was the most valuable female swimmer? Would any team at the meet not trade their top person for her? I don’t think you can say that about any other person there.