Bill,
You are excused and I can understand how people are upset that anyone would suggest that 7th & 8th athletes not go to the meet. On the flip side of that, the same people who want to be excused for arguing for middle schoolers and not wanting to be judged for it, are some of the ones passing harsh judgement on the ones that do not believe it creates a level playing field and that it should be eliminated from the rules to allow for a true 9-12 high school championship, which you have shown was the original intent by Nike in the first place. Until the time we go 9-12, there truly is an asterisk next to the results of any teams that win using middle schoolers, or even just to attend the meet.
I’ve often said that Nike made a backroom deal in 2004 to get the New York teams to come, and it looks like that belief is not unfounded. Just the basis that a deal like that exists shows how un-level the playing field has been since the beginning of the event. Now 13 years later, we can look upon the results on the girl’s side and see how that deal has panned out vs. the boy’s side:
Regions # of Titles
New York 12
Heartland 1
Regions # of Titles
Northwest 3
California 3
Midwest 2
Northeast 2
New York 2
South 1
Why are the girl’s dominated by one region and the boys are not? New York is just better at XC? The boy’s results don’t show that to be true. California kids aren’t tough enough to win? The boy’s results don’t show that to be true. School size is the biggest factor? The boy’s results don’t show that to be true. What factor could give the New York and Heartland (MN) regions an advantage on the girl’s side that doesn’t really factor much on the boy’s side? Middle schoolers. The ability to tie together top end athletes that otherwise would not have ever run together because they are spaced too many grades apart. Having 6 classes to choose from vs 4 makes a huge difference for putting superstars together on the same team. Also, the ability to fill the gaps with younger girls when you are running short on talent. You can’t do these things on the boy’s side often as 7-10th graders rarely factor on a varsity boys team compared to girls. Boys teams take time to build, and rebuild, but a girls’ team that is 1-2 girls short can be filled in with younger girls to stay in contention. This is evidenced by 2013 Saratoga below:
2013 Saratoga Girl’s NXR Team (same group ran at NXN)
15 10 Samantha Vetter 8 Kinetic RC 19:11.7 9:32 9:40 125.10 125
21 15 Carley Vetter 8 Kinetic RC 19:22.6 9:41 9:42 121.47 121
24 18 Spencer Hayes JR Kinetic RC 19:25.0 9:49 9:36 120.67 121
26 20 Estela Smith JR Kinetic RC 19:27.9 9:58 9:30 119.70 120
32 25 Peyton Engborg 8 Kinetic RC 19:32.9 9:50 9:43 118.03 118
46 35 Sarah Morin SR Kinetic RC 19:48.3 10:06 9:43 112.90 113
86 71 Gabrielle Robens SO Kinetic RC 20:44.0 10:29 10:15 94.33 94
Also, everyone likes to shout out STATE ASSOCIATION rules are the reason middle schoolers are allowed, but they aren’t. Nike can make all NXR and NXN meets 9-12 without losing any state associations. You still see NY teams attend Penn Relays, they just can’t use their middle schoolers there. The deal that Nike made has nothing to do with State Association rules, it has to do with pacifying the NY teams in the early years to get them to agree to come. It is easy today to say “they would have come anyway†but that is just a guess at best and probably one Nike didn’t want to risk. The 2004 Saratoga team was something that doesn’t happen often with the combination of talented teams, and something we will not see often. I can’t blame Nike for wanting them at their meet. I do think the time has come to level the playing field by making it a 9-12 meet. This doesn’t keep anyone out of the meet, it just gives everyone the same amount of time to be a participant…4 years.
Feel free to bash me if you like. My job is to advocate for my athletes to have a level playing field, and I will continue to do that. I encourage more coaches to do the same.