OK STATE WAS ROBBED!!!!

It was never changed.

They did not use dual meet scoring to break the tie. They gave each team a point/win by comparing #1 runner to #1 runner, #2 runner to #2 runner, #3 runner to #3 runner, #4 runner to #4 runner, and #5 runner to #5 runner. The team with the most points/wins out of the 5 matchups wins the tiebreaker. NAU won 3 of the 5 matchups. Personally I think that is a ridiculous way to do it. 6th man or 5th man should be the tiebreaker.

A team is 5 runners, 6 and 7 are like reserves sitting on the bench in a football or basketball game. You are not required to have or enter 7 runners. So, #6 and #7 should have no bearing on the outcome.

I think dual scoring and the current method always result in the same outcome.

Incorrect

Team A: 1 2 6 8 10 = 27

Team B: 3 4 5 7 9 = 28

Team A wins dual scoring

Team B wins matchup scoring 3-2

If you do the same with dual meet scoring you get the same result. It is the same thing.

It is not the same thing. Be smarter. It yields the same result in this situation, but not always. I posted a counterexample a few posts back that shows the result can be different between the two methods. JTFC.

Dual meet scoring leaves open the possibility of another tie, not?

scoring head to head ensures the tie is resolved.

How about looking at their overall cumulative times as the decision maker.

Most cases of matching runners head to head would be the same as reducing to a dual meet, but there are cases where you could lose the head to head (2-3) while winning the dual (for ex 27-28)

Team 1: 1-2-6-8-10 = 27
Team 2: 3-4-5-7-9 = 28

Interesting thought on which is better though, I did like the idea to reduce to a dual meet

i would have preferred them to keep it as a tie rather than this tiebreaker system, they both scored 83 points, it doesn’t matter how they did it, not using the 6th runner doesn’t show the spirit of the competition

I believe I understnd the rationale, though I disagree with it.

A team's score is determined by how its first five runners finished. That's the sport. If two teams come up with the same score, those were determined by each team's top five; those runners' performances should be compared to determine which team was the better.

The sixth man, meanwhile, had nothing to do with his own team's scoring. Of course, he had the opportunity a) to add points to other teams' scores, and b) to have been one of his own team's top five.

Personally, I don't think ties in cross should be broken. If two teams got the same lowest score in a meet, they were equally good and should both be champions IMO.But I realize that many folks are uncomfortable with ties.

I do, however, agree with the NCAA that IF a tie must be broken, it should be by looking at how each team's scorers did vis-à-vis the other team's scorers. It's a five-runner sport.

AFAIK the NCAA has never used a sixth-man tiebreaker. I could be wrong and would appreciate correction, if so.

Correct. It went from leaving it a tie to the current rule.

My own opinion is use first 5th man. IOW...first complete scoring team across the line.

When I was coaching high school cross country, we qualified to go to the state championship because we won the tie breaker in the sectional meet. Without a tie breaking solution, they wouldn't have known who to send.

This program has been forming for decades without any respect and any wins, when they finally broke through they started getting respect and recruits. Every win now is sweet justice

On god, theres no point in having a 6 or 7 if theres no tie breaker

To me, the 6th man tiebreaker is like the NFL's first team to score in overtime wins rule. I know the NFL has made adjustments, but it cheapens the result. The head to head gives everyone a chance to contribute to the result.

This is the crux of it for us "6th man" advocates. The 6th person is not just there to potentially affect their own team's points - they are adding to other team's points. They are involved in scoring, they are just not there to potentially be the 5th man. So I would argue it is not a 5-man sport, it is a 7-man sport. Adding points to other teams is just the flip side of reducing your own team's points.