Random observer wrote:
Thanks for the perspective.
Looks like you missed Denner from California in your NXN preview.
Isn't she out for the season with injury?
Random observer wrote:
Thanks for the perspective.
Looks like you missed Denner from California in your NXN preview.
Isn't she out for the season with injury?
Didn’t realize that. So is California only sending 4 individuals? Couldn’t they have done a twin swap if so? Who would know?
Cartarn wrote:
Random observer wrote:
Thanks for the perspective.
Looks like you missed Denner from California in your NXN preview.
Isn't she out for the season with injury?
In my mind NXN has always been team-oriented, emphasizing the team over the individual, pitting team against team. I don't understand why they let individuals compete to begin with.
It's not a bad idea. Definitely one of the better solutions for this whole double championship problem. One issue I already see happening is people debating whether the FL champ is actually the best given that some of his/her top competition were in a championship race the previous week.
Another issue, as someone already brought up, is the amount of traveling these high school kids will have to do over those weeks. It's easier for people on the west coast but east coasters are at a big disadvantage. Two trips across the country in as many weeks at the end of a long season will take its toll. Not to mention those that have to travel to regional qualifying meets.
Ideally, we would need to merge the two events into one true championship (as many have stated), but that seems unlikely to happen unless one side caves. Unfortunately, it looks like Footlocker would have to be the one to give into Nike. It kills me to say that because I've always recognized FLN as the one real XC championship and love the history behind the meet, but Nike has the power now. Cross country is a team and individual sport. I'm surprised it took so long for someone to create a high school team championship but it's here now. NXN is clearly trending up and it seems the only thing keeping Footlocker alive these days is its history.
I think the best solution would be Nike taking over the Footlocker meet, providing one championship that decides both team and individual champions, but also preserves the legacy of the original Kinney/Footlocker meet. I'm not sure how you do that last part. Maybe hold the championship at Balboa Park (although I don't think it would be able to host a meet as large as NXN). If Nike could find a way to honor Footlocker's past then I think that would appease a lot of people. Again, I think most people love Footlocker because of the history and they don't want to lose that, but that can only carry the meet for so long. Eventually, NXN will have its own rich history making it even more likely that kids choose them over Footlocker.
I know it won't happen, but I think that solution is better than painfully watching the slow death of Footlocker that has likely already begun.
(And, ideally, this one national championship meet would rotate its site every year between regions but that's a debate for another day/thread)
Take it from someone that knows first hand. In 2004 I competed in BOTH Nike Team Nationals and Footlocker.
In my opinion (and this was shared by others such as Sean McNamara from York) the NTN meet was MUCH better than Footlocker.....at least that was the case in 2004. Not knocking the FL meet, they did a great job of making each athlete feel like a rock star and they put on a good race but NTN in 2004 was on another level. I think a lot of it had to do with Josh Rowe at Nike (now at New Balance I believe) and his staff.
Just my $.02
wejo wrote:
It's a shame some years the top boys and girls don't get to race all of each other at one true high school cross country national championship.
A great solution would be for Footlocker which is a week after NXN to let the top 5 or 10 athletes at NXN into their meet.
This seems to be like a great solution for everyone. NXN still has what it has, nothing changes.
Footlocker can ensure that it gets the best individuals racing each other year after year.
Then fans get the best athletes to race on another.
What are the drawbacks to this? Can anyone see why Footlocker shouldn't do this?
They're kids. Relax.
She is here in Portland and fully intends to run.
Cartarn wrote:
Random observer wrote:
Thanks for the perspective.
Looks like you missed Denner from California in your NXN preview.
Isn't she out for the season with injury?
The best solution is for both meets to go away and allow these youngsters to be high school kids after an already long cross country season.
OdanEPNavi wrote:
In my mind NXN has always been team-oriented, emphasizing the team over the individual, pitting team against team. I don't understand why they let individuals compete to begin with.
You dunce.
In this concept, the USATF (or similar, national, NON-shoe company oriented) championship would be in place of both foot locker and Nike meets, which would abolish their current format and jointly sponsor the new championship.
Rotating championship locations with a unified championship and NO title corporate sponsor is the way to go for the future of the sport. The general public will care more if there is ONE big meet, with no confusion over who is the real champion. Hell it might even be able to land some TV time on ESPN.
Take it from this guy, who was born in the upper Cretacious period and actually met infinity several years back, to tell it like it is. Y'all want to save the world and stop burning out the children? Off with the heads of NXN and FLN. Long live HAL-9000.
Hal Harkness wrote:
The best solution is for both meets to go away and allow these youngsters to be high school kids after an already long cross country season.
To state the obvious, Nike added individuals to dilute and compete against FL. At the end of the day, Nike has more money, resources than FL and is more committed to XC/T&F. At some point, I feel Nike will win out. Hopefully, they keep the legacy of FL going.
OdanEPNavi wrote:
In my mind NXN has always been team-oriented, emphasizing the team over the individual, pitting team against team. I don't understand why they let individuals compete to begin with.
They should combine the races into one event over 2 days and have a long course sponsored by one company and a short course sponsored by the other.
Qualifying in shouldn't need to change.
Have individual and team champions for each race and then have a overall team and individual champion for the combined scores of the two races.
Each race would be on a different day.
Maybe to make it interesting and limit the races to only 5 runners per team, but between two races all 7 runners have to race
Cartarn wrote:
Random observer wrote:
Thanks for the perspective.
Looks like you missed Denner from California in your NXN preview.
Isn't she out for the season with injury?
There are two Denners. They are twins. Elena Denner ran NXN. Maddy Denner is out with injury.
Letting people in who haven't qualified would be a very bad thing to do.
Letting 10 if them in would be horrendous!
Besides that, the added competition of a national meet the week before the finals would give anyone added a huge unfair advantage.
If they want to Footlocker Finals, run the Footlocker Regionals! because that 's what is done by the runners who qualify.
Why is Nike always frigging complaining, the very same ones who have caused the divisions.
If you want to clean up the mess you perceive, then go talk to the ones who caused it in the first place.
Footlocker is fine. Footlocker is great, the way that it is.