Hey Bud wrote:
rojo wrote:You are thinking about it wrong 100%.
What if an athlete fails/trips or is sick at the Olympic Trial or Olympics? It's called earning it. The regionals are AMAZING.
You use a govt analogy. IN reality, people who don't want regionals are like people on welfare, you think you deserve something for no work.
I like the Regional System as well. If you can't finish in the top 12 of your event at Regionals you really don't deserve to go to nationals.
The big money programs hate the concept because they can spend significant resources going to the biggest and best meets (with the best conditions.....see Stanford, Mt. SAC)
Complaints about the heat in the 10k at Texas (or a few years ago in Greensboro) really fall on deaf ears because every competitor has to deal with the same conditions. The heat and humidity is just another factor than the competitor needs to be aware of.
Every competitor does not have to deal with the same conditions.
Kids coming from Minnesota have a disadvantage over kids coming from say...Texas.
The system was fine before the regionals, almost everyone barked about the advent of the regionals system...and it really is useless. You can't win anything.
The system was fine for DECADES before the implementation of this unnecessary intermediate meet.
It is especially burdensome for the distance runners.
The key thing, is it isn't needed. Things were fine before the regionals.
The only thing that is good is some kids get to run one more meet than they would have for the year.
The head coaches in the NCAA hate these meets, and they will be done away with eventually -- mark that.
The stands are empty, holding the meet on Th/Friday, taking kids out of school an extra week in the season...is crazy.
Just take the 12 fastest after conference meets like they used to with min A standards.