Teams can already get practice on the course if they come to Firman (something none of the Oregon or Washington teams do for some reason) although the Idaho teams still undoubtedly have an advantage.
I like that Eagle Island is a tough course, even one that's quite technical.
On a side note, if the course does get moved, I really think it should be in Montana. Bozeman is maybe the best team in the last 10 years in the region, and Montana continues to impress me each year at how well their teams and individuals end up doing. I'm sure we could find a state park that would make the course unique and even a bit techinical, without making it as "dangerous" (although I don't really think IT IS dangerous) as Eagle Island.
Already has been said but the reason why many OR/WA teams don't come to Firman is because of other conflicting and often more attractive meets but also it's a 12 hour roundtrip drive as opposed to 8-9 (OR) or 0-5 (WA) for Hole in the wall/Nike twilight, or 1-5 (OR) or 4-9 (WA). Which generally means that an overnight is required. When so many huge invitationals fall in the last few weeks of September most don't have the budget to do many overnights or the will to race their top 7 all out 3 weeks in a row.
I agree that the idea of a manicured course is kind of dumb especially for a meet like NXR where it's about racing to win and not for times and don't think it should be moved to Spokane's new course for that reason. However having raced on the Eagle Island course a few times it is really rough. Cross country should value racing in various conditions, another reason why Spokane's new course shouldn't be chosen (NW courses are becoming closer to woodbridge by the year, a drained XC course is pretty much an oxymoron) but Eagle Island's start makes it so you have to race dumb for at least 1k just to not be boxed in and wasting energy for most of the race. And even then there's a solid chance you get on the inside lane and are forced to make terrible moves, you saw Tayvon Kitchen in the race video passing a bunch of people on the edge of the course 500m in just to get into a decent place. Not to mention the section of the course on the hard dirt/rock road that results in many people cutting (often involuntarily) because there's no proper flagging.
Montana or Spokane would be a poor choice also due to location within the NW. The reality is that many teams have to fly to the race venue already at this point. It would be better to not give NE Washington or Montana kids an advantage just for being lucky to be close to the course while nearly everybody misses out on the same advantage since the region's teams do not visit Montana or Spokane.
I would hate to see the race leave Eagle Island; however the finish and start areas do need to be addressed. The ground is uneven and awful to run on. There is plenty of space to move the starting area back so that athletes have more space before they have to turn into one another. You can bring the finish line forward. They had all of that equipment for the sewer line they added, wish they would have smoothed out parts of the course!
Many other NXR courses are manicured courses. The best teams still make it out of those regionals, the best teams still perform at NXR. I think moving it to a more manicured, like the future Spokane course, or even just manicuring the current course a little bit, will make the whole experience better for the athletes and the coaches. Which is the design for the event.
This post was edited 11 seconds after it was posted.
I'm as east-side homer as they get, but man this looks like a snooze-fest. Looks like all slight uphill or downhill but no real climbs. Boo.
I agree with all the problems discussed regarding the ID course. It's so close to a great course. But the early hairpin is just awful.
The only answer for a Spokane course should be Hangman Valley. It's a shame they don't run meets there anymore. By far the best XC course in the state.
Despite all the issues with the Firman course (which aren't all that many, but they are impactful: hairpin turns and rolling terrain at start/finish stretch), it is going to remain the best option for multiple reasons.
Reason #1: Accessibility. Two points to consider: travel distance by driving, and airport accessibility. The population center of the Northwest region is between Pendleton OR and La Grande OR, so for driving concerns you want the meet somewhere near that area if at all possible. There are 3 regional airports within reasonable distance of that area: Boise ID is a on the small side of being mid-sized hub with nearly 2 million departures a year (1.94 million in 2019) and Spokane WA is on the large side of being a small-sized hub with not even 100k less (1.87 million in 2019), while Pasco WA is an average sized small hub (0.4 million in 2019). For comparison, SeaTac is a Large hub at 24 million departures in 2019 and Portland is a Medium hub at just under 10 million in 2019; Bozeman is the fifth largest airport in the continental Northwest region, behind SeaTac/PDX and Boise/Spokane, at 0.67 million in 2019. So given accessibility concerns, the two obvious choices for areas to host the regional meet is Boise and Spokane (because the Pasco airport is nowhere near big enough to be readily accessible for any team trying to fly in).
Reason #2: Weather. Boise is very consistent in it's early/mid November weather as we have seen over the last 15 years. It's usually pretty dry and cold but not freezing. Spokane is not as consistent in it's early/mid November weather, but tends to be MUCH wetter and slightly colder. The cold isn't a particularly big issue for runners in the Northwest, but a much wetter course would mean much more variable times which is important when people (e.g. the NXN Selection Committee) try to assess how good of a performance a team/runner's race was. If you go back over the years, it's been very rare for teams or individuals to get At-Large invites from regions that had muddy races for the simple reason that not everyone on the committee is likely to agree just how to deal with that. Plus, if you want to use the race as not only a competitive opportunity but as a reward to end the season, you'd prefer to do so somewhere with better weather if all else is equal, and Boise has the edge there.
Reason #3: History. Eagle Island at this point is one of the most tested courses in the nation, having seen many national champions and dozens of NXN podium finishers compete there at NXR Northwest as well as Bob Firman. North Central WA 2008, Gig Harbor WA 2013, Great Oak CA 2015, Bozeman MT 2016, Great Oak CA 2018, and Herriman UT 2023 all won the NXN Boys Championship and Herriman UT could quite possibly add to that list again this year. I'm not sure there is a single course elsewhere that can claim that many national champion boys teams raced on their course. While the girls list of national champions isn't nearly as impressive (Summit OR 2018 is the only one that comes to mind), there have been a lot of good teams and individuals. Being able to compare performances to those of years past is valuable and if the meet moved to Spokane then we wouldn't have that history to point to and put things into perspective with regards to either history or how regional performances compare to other regions around the nation.
Reason #4: The course itself. Eagle Island offers a good mix of flat(-ish) stretches, hills, and even stretches of sand to mix up the terrain and make the course interesting and challenging. There are problems as mentioned, though: specifically the hairpin turns and the rolling terrain around the start/finish area. It would remain to be seen if the new course in Spokane would be anywhere as good aside from avoiding the problems of the Eagle Island course, so it's hard to say it necessarily would be any better. I think the spirit of cross country, and the series of NXN itself, would make a course like Eagle Island that offers a variety of terrain and difficulties to the course would be better than a smooth/manufactured course in general, so unless the Spokane Valley project does a great job building a great course, I'm not sure the course itself would actually be much of an improvement if any at all.
Considering all of the above, IMO the best solution would be for Eagle Island to mitigate the issues (hairpin turns and uneven terrain at start/finish) as best they can rather than just changing courses all together.
So I saw the kids in the Ohana singlets racing and thought, oh that’s cool they’re from Hawaii. My kids said some guy they’ve never heard of got second, and I’m like: that’s because he’s from Hawaii. 🤦♂️
XC should not be track. Courses should be interesting and challenging. The mixed terrain is really good. But hairpins are bad. Seems like the first one at Eagle island could easily be eliminated by continuing straight and not going down to the lake. And as a spectator, while the lake is scenic, it really is in the way.
Considering all of the above, IMO the best solution would be for Eagle Island to mitigate the issues (hairpin turns and uneven terrain at start/finish) as best they can rather than just changing courses all together.
Honestly, to me it's just the hairpin near the start. A hairpin by the finish isn't nearly as big a deal. And, while the terrain is rough enough to be worrisome in a crowd, it's not a dealbreaker imo.
If they could improve the start then Eagle Island has to be in the upper 95% of possible locations.
One more shameless plug for Hangman Valley. Seriously, if you never had the good fortune to race there, then you've been robbed a great XC experience.
Rocky will reload and it's hard to not be top 10 when you have two boys that will run under 15:40 on the course like they will with good depth. If you have Cheney at 8 and Helena, then Mountain View, Eagle and Boise from Idaho should be in the mix as well.
Cheney has 16:09, 16:41, 16:46, 16:50, 17:16 returning times on that course.
Helena has 15:59, 16:01, 16:28, 17:15, 17:37 returning.
Mountain View has 16:00, 16:14, 16:17, 17:23 returning, so they need to find a 5.
Eagle has 15:54, 16:07, 16:28, 16:46, 17:16 returning.
Boise has 16:12, 16:33, 16:37, 17:03, 17:11 returning.
I agree! I was mostly looking at top returners overall with my slight Washington bias that I need to get rid of.
Right now based off of some of the numbers I've crunched teams 7-13 are really close and could probably change. I'm not sure why I didnt include rocky mountain considering their ability the last few years to reload - they are definitely a top 7 team on a good day
and I am sure there will be plenty of other schools I am overlooking, I didnt have Helena and Bozeman in my top ten just a few weeks ago and they crushed it at NXR. There will probably be some school full of seniors that put the work in over the next 10 months and will crack the top 4 that isnt on anyone's radar.
I think the other three teams I named will end up surprising people this next year and they all have nice depth to work with. Rocky currently has the 5th fastest returning top 5 average in Idaho behind CDA and those other 3 schools. I'm sure Rocky will make a huge jump, but it's not like a bunch of guys at those schools aren't doing the same.
Returning top 5 times for Rocky, Mountain View, Boise, and Eagle heading into this season:
Boise's is a little off because of Rose City, but they have the guys to be good next year. Mountain View is going to be better next year than they were this year, Rocky clearly isn't the same as last year but have a bunch of good depth, and Eagle is over 5 minutes better heading into next year than they were this year.
Highland out of Pocatello also brings back a faster total team time than Mountain View did heading into next year. I think Idaho has a pretty good shot of getting 4 or 5 teams into the top 10 between CDA, Rocky, Mountain View, Boise, Eagle, and Highland.