NXN with top local talent?

it would definitley pale in comparison i agree. it is only another option which some have pursued in the past.

next, i refer to the mindset that your best 7 reperesent your team/school/club. i stand by that. those are the rules of the game, and should be the rules of the game.

re scoring, what i meant is that if you had multiple teams from the same program competing, the best of those teams could gain an advantage by scorers of your school's b team, if the b team scorers were up far enough to impact the team scoring, and could aid your so called a team in the team results. being from the same school/club, i would think this might be unethical. if you had kids from your program qualify for and run as individuals at nxn and run great, they would still not impact the team scoring.

the most logical, and best comparisions are within the same sport. we have a perfect model with ncaa's and worlds to consider. with those as templates, all other sports scenarios (ie tennis, and yes even track) fall by the wayside.

i realize and understand your best of the best argument. i am in philosophical disagreement with you. pursuant to the example you have noted (ie could have made it to nationals on the A team, seniors etc), that is the the way it is. brutally fair and objective, and the way it should stay. same rules for everyone everywhere.

your 'problem' is a pleasant problem to have, but should not be 'solved' as you have suggested, to the detriment of the event itself. obviously yours is a somewhat self serving argument. btw, i mean no disrespect with that last comment. it is what it is.

there are those who see the letter of the law and do anything they can to dissect the law in order to gain benefit, usurping the spirit of the law in the process. plenty of examples of that (see the news on any given day).

then there are those who emphasize the spirit of the law, who see it as superior to the letter of the law. both the letter and the spirit are important of course (and neither are absolutely perfect), but one must prevail over the other in each instance. in this case, the spirit of the event is how it has been conducted, as with ncaa's, worlds, and ntn/nxn to now. i hope it stays that way.

Individuals have competed separate from their teams at the regional but I am unaware if any school has attempted to field 2 teams. It would interesting to see how Nike would determine which teams should be placed in the A race. There are always teams who are disappointed that they are not allowed into the A race. I don't know how Nike would determine the competiveness of 2 teams from the same school. They usually put teams in the A race who have finished top 3 at their state meet.

This brings up some other questions that can be asked too. Should there be a small school national xc championship? Should there be a state vs state national championship for bragging rights?

Rememberingright wrote:

It has to be a school team. A few runners in our area (from different high schools) looked into it last year because they were all on school teams that wouldn't qualify so they wanted to make up their own team with top runners from different high schools from our district. It was a no go. Found it on the Nike NXN site and I believe they also talked to the region Nike NXN rep as well. That is a really cool concept if Nike would allow it ...make an "all-star" team from your region. Unfortunately that isn't allowed (at least last year it wasn't). Luckily a couple of the guys that were trying to do that qualified as individuals for their region anyways.

Why would an all star team be cool? Proves nothing. Just take your state's too 5 runners and be done with it then.

Gingervitis wrote:

This brings up some other questions that can be asked too. Should there be a small school national xc championship? Should there be a state vs state national championship for bragging rights?

I like the idea of both, although I go to a small school so I'm biased. NXN Small School Division?

And I could see something like the (undoubtedly sponsored by Milesplit) Milesplit50 Championships or something with the top 7 from all 50 states. The issue is kids might be burned out from 2 previous weeks of postseason-postseason racing (3 in the Midwest for those who race NXN, FL, and a national meet).

Gingervitis wrote:

This brings up some other questions that can be asked too. Should there be a small school national xc championship? Should there be a state vs state national championship for bragging rights?

There should not be a "small school". We should only celebrate the best of the best schools!

There is currently a "state vs state" meet for Oregon vs Washington (Borderclash)

Or bigger picture.... State vs State is your NXR races.

So no state should have divisions then? Just one championship race? And are you a Moran? NXR is state vs state?

kid from PA wrote:

And I could see something like the (undoubtedly sponsored by Milesplit) Milesplit50 Championships or something with the top 7 from all 50 states. The issue is kids might be burned out from 2 previous weeks of postseason-postseason racing (3 in the Midwest for those who race NXN, FL, and a national meet).

Please God don't let Milesplit touch anything. You'd have to pay to watch it and every article leading up to the race would have a video at the top you have to pause.

kid from PA wrote:

Gingervitis wrote:

This brings up some other questions that can be asked too. Should there be a small school national xc championship? Should there be a state vs state national championship for bragging rights?

I like the idea of both, although I go to a small school so I'm biased. NXN Small School Division?

And I could see something like the (undoubtedly sponsored by Milesplit) Milesplit50 Championships or something with the top 7 from all 50 states. The issue is kids might be burned out from 2 previous weeks of postseason-postseason racing (3 in the Midwest for those who race NXN, FL, and a national meet).

Same for me. My school has about 120 kids and we compete very well for our size, (3-5 sub 17 5k each year often with 1-2 sub 16), but definitely not good enough to qualify for nxn and no barely sub 16 guy can qualify individually

Op poster wrote:

kid from PA wrote:

I like the idea of both, although I go to a small school so I'm biased. NXN Small School Division?

And I could see something like the (undoubtedly sponsored by Milesplit) Milesplit50 Championships or something with the top 7 from all 50 states. The issue is kids might be burned out from 2 previous weeks of postseason-postseason racing (3 in the Midwest for those who race NXN, FL, and a national meet).

Same for me. My school has about 120 kids and we compete very well for our size, (3-5 sub 17 5k each year often with 1-2 sub 16), but definitely not good enough to qualify for nxn and no barely sub 16 guy can qualify individually

Same here, although we're in the ball park of an NXN run in a year or two (don't quote me lol)

Gingervitis wrote:

kid from PA wrote:

And I could see something like the (undoubtedly sponsored by Milesplit) Milesplit50 Championships or something with the top 7 from all 50 states. The issue is kids might be burned out from 2 previous weeks of postseason-postseason racing (3 in the Midwest for those who race NXN, FL, and a national meet).

Please God don't let Milesplit touch anything. You'd have to pay to watch it and every article leading up to the race would have a video at the top you have to pause.

Facts, but this would be right up their alley. I'd be willing to watch and maybe (don't tell Milesplit) pay a minimal fee, but the real question is if the top runners would be willing to run yet another postseason meet. In the Midwest, you have at least one round of Districts, States, FLR, NXR, and possibly two national meets. That's 6 weeks of high quality racing already. In a lot (most?) other regions you max out at 4 but still.

kid from PA wrote:

Facts, but this would be right up their alley. I'd be willing to watch and maybe (don't tell Milesplit) pay a minimal fee, but the real question is if the top runners would be willing to run yet another postseason meet. In the Midwest, you have at least one round of Districts, States, FLR, NXR, and possibly two national meets. That's 6 weeks of high quality racing already. In a lot (most?) other regions you max out at 4 but still.

Agreed. Already, on a yearly basis, the welfare of the kids is expressed on LetsRun, for good reason. Adding another championship race is just not going to fly because of the concern for the meet-after-meet-after-meet late-season grind. Many top kids will say they'd welcome the extra travel and race, and for the majority of them, an extra big meet will have no downside. For some, though, the mental and physical burdens of another championship competition at the end of a long season, and often far from home, would be detrimental, and so for the good of these few, another championship is going to be out of the question.

However, that's not Marc Hunter's topic. I believe in putting the best into championship races, so if, say, Loudoun Valley can field a second team that is still one of the best groups of seven runners in the region, then this second LV team deserves an opportunity to be entered in the NXR race, as the equal to any other team in the same race. If two seven-runner teams from the same school make NXN through merit, then that's absolutely fabulous. If one of this school's teams wins NXN and the rules allow the second qualifying team from the same school to run NXN, then - ARE YOU READING THIS, NIKE? - that's a superb, positive story on many levels.

And there will always be detractors, gripers, whiners - and legitimate and intelligent points of view to the contrary.

Op poster wrote:

kid from PA wrote:

I like the idea of both, although I go to a small school so I'm biased. NXN Small School Division?

And I could see something like the (undoubtedly sponsored by Milesplit) Milesplit50 Championships or something with the top 7 from all 50 states. The issue is kids might be burned out from 2 previous weeks of postseason-postseason racing (3 in the Midwest for those who race NXN, FL, and a national meet).

Same for me. My school has about 120 kids and we compete very well for our size, (3-5 sub 17 5k each year often with 1-2 sub 16), but definitely not good enough to qualify for nxn and no barely sub 16 guy can qualify individually

go to footlocker then. it doesn't matter how big your school is, only how fast you are.

I still don’t know how the second squad would get into the regional. We run at the Heartland where there are always teams complaining about not getting in. How would Nike determine that a second squad from Wayzata is better than a state champ from South Dakota? The second squad would be JV so they wouldn’t have competed against he other varsity teams. Teams have replaced runners from regionals to nationals so would they be locked into the 7 entrants for the 2 teams?

Dril wrote:

Op poster wrote:

Same for me. My school has about 120 kids and we compete very well for our size, (3-5 sub 17 5k each year often with 1-2 sub 16), but definitely not good enough to qualify for nxn and no barely sub 16 guy can qualify individually

go to footlocker then. it doesn't matter how big your school is, only how fast you are.

Not the point, bud. We’re talking about teams.

Next rules wrote:

How would Nike determine that a second squad from Wayzata is better than a state champ from South Dakota?

For this determination, the clock should not to be ignored. The second-seven would have accumulated times from at least some individual races run during the fall, even if "only" run in JV or freshman/sophomore races at big invitationals where they were not entered in the Varsity A races. At any one meet, the course would be the same, whether in the JV (or other non-elite) race or the Varsity race. It would not be dissimilar to a track event where a time run in a heat, compared with times run in other heats, would be the deciding factor in advancement to a semifinal or final.

Admittedly, times can be deceiving due to hills, wind, rain (or snow!), temperature, height of grass, legitimacy in the course's measurement, etc. However, some next-seven runners at a school such as Great Oak or Loudoun Valley could make unmistakably bold statements by posting impressive times, even if they are not state meet-run times.

As with choosing an at-large team for NXN, or choosing kids for post-season first-team, second-team, and honorable mention awards, there would be a need for a committee of some sort to rate the second-seven runners for eligibility to run NXR as a Varsity A team, alongside the school's first-seven Varsity A team. Subjectivity with intelligence can lead to excellent choices.

It's possible. It really is.

Yes, those who would be shut out by one school's second seven bumping them out of the team competition at NXR would complain - but, to them, I'd say put up or shut up. If those schools couldn't or hadn't delivered prior to NXR, and where one school had a recognized strong second seven, then those weaker teams just wouldn't deserve to be in the team competition. I'm talking about NXR, not the state meet, where even a slow team should get a chance to compete as a team (alongside, maybe one day, two teams of seven runners from the same school, like Loudoun Valley this year).

Choosing teams to go all the way to NXN would still be the same as always, and fundamentally based on NXR team results. There would be teams which automatically qualify, and there would be bubble teams which would be chosen for at-large berths. If any one bubble team deserved to go to the finals, it should go, regardless of whether or not it was a second team of seven from the same school as an automatic-qualifying seven runners.

To me, it's a no-brainer to allow one school to field more than one seven-runner team at NXR if, by previous times run up until then, the second team was deserving of the honor.

Some coaches would claim that their second-seven were deserving of entry into the top race, when they were not. Some deceptive or self-deceptive coaches would occasionally need to be put in their place. But that's probably always the case with coaches pushing for recognition and opportunities for their own teams.

I've mostly been talking about NXR and NXN. State meet rules and reasoning really are different, but for a national championship-related two events - NXR and NXN - I absolutely feel that Nike officials can, and should, make logical decisions which might benefit the Loudoun Valley or Great Oak-types of programs which have a wealth of talent.