NXN 2024 Thread

All these issues of inconsistency across states on rules, school size, transfers, recruiting are exactly why state meets have different divisions by school size, private school, prep school etc and have very specific rules for eligibility.

If Nike wanted NXN to be 'fair', there would be a similar break into divisions.

But the intent was never to be fair, it was just to answer the age old question of who was better, the great team from Saratoga, LA, Boulder or Elmhurst?

Keeping it simple with 1 race for all types of schools makes it fun and easy to understand, but for sure not fair.

The problem with making it fair and moving to divisions is that the value of a title gets watered down and the meet loses its simplicity. (We now have 50 states, but about 200 State champs)

Who wants to be NXN Champion for Non-public Group D?

I'll take unfair and simple.

Of course, it's also Nike's race. No one is forced to participate.

yes, and the way its run allows for at least the potential of a 'Hoosiers' like story line which is everybody's favorite championship trope. tiny school David over big state school Goliath where David could barely field 7 runners at the beginning of the season. not sure this has ever happened at NXN though (I dont consider Fayetteville-Manlius or any of the private schools true 'Davids'). its probably a lot easier in basketball than cross country. and they dont even do post season that way in Indiana anymore anyway...

great stat - they will reload and be back to challenge again. When did those 3 start running? - were they grade/middle school runners or did they start more recently? I know CBA typically gets soccer or football players to switch over - wondering if its any of these 3

Three SW teams scored lower at NXN than at NXR SW (Lone Peak girls, Niwot boys and American Fork Boys). Overall, the girls team scored on average 10.25 points higher at NXN than NXR and the boys teams scored 10.5 points higher. California girls and boys were next closest at 74.33 and 99.67 points higher, respectively. South girls and New York boys had the highest point difference at 351 and 408.5 points higher, respectively. Realistically, there are likely seven SW teams on the girls' side that are among the top 20 in the nation and probably eight on the boys' side.

I didn’t make myself clear, I’m not in favor of divisions at Nike, or any sort of changing of any current rules. NXN is a national championship, there’s only room for one winner. Am I jealous, of course, but I’m also not faulting any coach for taking advantage of open enrollment, why wouldn’t you? My comment is more just for context, that this one singular rule difference unquestionably trumps all other “inequities”. When folks are declaring the SW and CA to be vastly superior, take a step back and realize that if this rule was common elsewhere, you’d have MVs and Buchanans cropping up in all the regions. It would be fun to watch.

looks like the sophomore schmitt ran a few races in middle school not great though.I could only find one race for the older one

Fun facts.

Two SW boys from the same team (Cheyenne Mountain CO) finished in the top 20. Had their 3-5 been dead last at NXN (they did have a bunch of other guys with SBs in the 15:30-16:00 range) they still would have beaten both NY teams and a HL team.

And that team was 12th at SW.

Castle View CO just won RunningLane.

They were 14th at SW.

The signs were there all along that the Southwest was OP. Woodbridge made it clear.

I think where everyone started to get it wrong was after Clovis. Tully was extremely generous with the speed ratings and everyone said, "Oh wow - CA is Back!" despite the fact that it was really just a bunch of Cali schools (and Crater) beating up on each other. The next set of National rankings put like a half dozen CA schools in and bumped out a handful of SW schools...because how could they possibly be that good?

Equating NXR SW to NXN is not as crazy as it first sounds.

Open enrollment certainly favors already strong teams. But just like so many other factors, it's just one thing. How many 8th graders know for certain that they want to be on a national-caliber cross country team in four years? Some, sure, but not a ton.

A whole other can of worms but maybe more states should consider open enrollment. While there are thousands of great programs with great coaches, there are many that simply don't. Imagine if you are an 8th grader who maybe DOES love to run and the HS team is putrid, tiny, etc. Is it really THAT crazy to enroll in a different HS so that you can have XC be a bigger part of your experience?

I’ve stated this multiple times, but speed ratings for Colorado are not accurate. I initially noticed it because I am very familiar with both NE and Colorado cross country courses. Someone from NY actually did an analysis and confirmed this when I posted on a NY thread last month. Since everyone seems to use speed ratings for rankings, this effects both teams and individuals. Everyone thinks Colorado performs well in the mud, but it may be one of the first times some of these kids get an accurate speed rating all season.

Exactly. There are people here saying it’s unfair that Utah isn’t its own Region, yet aren’t considering that Utah can stack their teams with transfers while other states can’t. I think the overall rules are fine. But just something to keep in mind, if Downers Grove North could have transfers from students outside their school district, there could be Hinsdale Central / Elmhurst York / Downers Grove South / Naperville Schools… top talent transferring to DGN. Then the Utah schools wouldn’t look as great.

and yet, for the 16 G from CO who ran at NXN and were on the highest SR list pre NXN, their SRs for NXN averaged what their pre NXN bests were (actually 1 less). A couple got big moves higher like Edwards, but one had a big move down. In total 6 got a higher SR and 8 got a lower SR. I did not look at the Boys SRs.

ah I thought the initial quote was highlighting that the kids waiting in the wings for CBA are inexperienced runners, with significant untapped potential (which still may be true) - but I guess who cares if they haven’t run on a specific course before? Looks like these guys all have some real experience and good miles on their legs from a young age

Look, no apologist here on CBA, they all lace 'em up on same course, as sloppy as it was, I mean one guy who was surely going to be there at the end, went down, the energy to get up and re engage cooked his chances. But it's the same for everybody. No one could have possibly thought Joe Barrett was going to fall all the way to 89th raw score. I would have thought no matter what, top 10, he ran some really great stuff this year. Still I do not think that gets them near Niwot and their 70, but maybe to third and close to second. They had another guy who also did not have a great day compared to Holmdel PR which is a really solid and true test layout. No need to name folks. I only named Barrett as it was so obvious and he was dominant in every race all year. I do think the course and its sloppiness makes for different results especially up top , but it all counts and everyone ran the same route.

On the Boys Side:

AF had 1 move into the school's boundaries

Taylorsville had 0

Riverton had 0

Lone Peak I believe had 0

Viewmont I believe had 0

Herriman got 2 this year, 1 last year, only 3/7 of their varsity has lived in their school boundaries since freshman year. (Tangs live outside Herriman boundaries, Spencer lives an hour away, and Manwaring moved in last year from NJ)

Utah is still a very great state for running, and the transfer rule hasn't affected other teams like it's affected Herriman

Clearly, Hnatt was mentored by Father Padilla.

Well, THAT was out of left field.

Maybe you will feel better about them when you find out F-M is a public high school with enrollment only thru living in the district, ie old school.

Enrollment 9-12 is 1400 students. I'm not sure what Division that would be in CA.

Saratoga also a public high school.

"Enough with the open enrollment and transfer BS. You guys obviously have no idea about Utah's landscape.

Distance running is really popular in Utah and has been for years. A lot of elite athletes' kids are dominating the Utah scene right now. For example, Jane and Lilly at Timpview, AF's top 2 boys, Lone Peak's whole team almost, and Taylorsville's top runner.

Great coaches like Timo and Talley have been open books for years and share their knowledge freely. I know Doug, since he has been in Utah, has taken a lot of young coaches under his wing.

Utah is at elevation. Utah is LDS, and that culture aligns very well with being an elite distance runner. Your open enrollment explanation doesn't explain their success at the college and professional levels.

Every XC team in Utah only has athletes within 3 miles of their school. Schools like Lone Peak, AF, Herriman, and Riverton are right next to each other. So gow are they are taking athletes from each other. Herriman this year was an exception; the previous two years, Herriman was 100% home-grown.

- Taylorsville - 100% within their school's boundaries

- Riverton - 100% within their school's boundaries

- American Fork - 100% within their school's boundaries

- Lone Peak - 100% within their school's boundaries.

So what advantage did open enrollment give American Fork or Lone Peak?"