Bosley runs 26:19 on the well-groomed Zimmer course. Surprising he has maintained academic eligibility at Harvard. Maybe he is in a Gen Ed program. Kudos to him, Grandpa Diçk and Daddy Boz must be so proud.
I think at this point, the sectional is anyone's game. Deforest has been the favorite, but their times haven't really gotten much better, while everyone else is catching up. Meanwhile, Verona looks really strong on paper, and they have the (potentially unfair) advantage of being on the home course, but they just barely were able to beat a Madison West team that did not have great races from their top couple. Middleton has also shown they can be strong, but if just one of their top 5 has an off day, they're done for. Will be very interesting to see what happens, but it still will be absurd that two top-ten teams will be left out of the state meet, especially since Deforest just got put into this already very strong sectional for some reason.
I dont think it's very fair to have four of the top ten teams bracketed in one sectional. This is going to be a a zero-room for error, complete blowout, almost like a state meet itself. The teams that get through might be physically exhausted by the state meet in comparison to other teams that can coast (ahem--cough--Stevens Point).
I don’t understand why DeForest was added to the “already competitive” section that includes Verona, Mad West, and Middleton.
Because of this, we are seeing more weak sections in the state
Wisconsin high school coaches prize their time with their runners, because rules set by the WIAA dictate that coaches cannot have contact with their runners outside of the track or cross country season. Contrast this with places like Minnesota.
Wisconsin Lutheran has always been an exception to this rule. They gain exceptions through:
1) The Wisco Mile (June)
2) Supervised July & August weekly runs w/ coach who swears to God he isnt coaching (even leaves clipboard in the car)
3) Winter Distance Running Club Clinics at Wisco Mile Arena (December-March)
4) The Winter Wisco Mile (March)
5) Wisco Bible anti-LGBTQ Conversion Camps
6) Un-taxed international student housing and scholarship programs
Four way battle for top two is a spectacle in and of itself. Not to mention it's held on a course designed to be exactly as tough as the Ridges. I would count this as a miniature State meet.
Bosley runs 26:19 on the well-groomed Zimmer course. Surprising he has maintained academic eligibility at Harvard. Maybe he is in a Gen Ed program. Kudos to him, Grandpa Diçk and Daddy Boz must be so proud.
Hey Zen, go check out the women's roster for a school a couple miles down the street -- you'll see a familiar last name if you've paid attention to the running dynasties of Wisconsin. Blue collar true blue hard worker at the meat grinder college versus white collar affluent suburb rich kid at the legacy.
Raises the question, should the state meet be representative of the different regions (sectionals) or of the best talent? You absolutely risk killing the sport in entire regions if they have a down turn for just two seasons. Gerrymandering sectional assignments around team talent isn't the right idea, but based around population centers, there should absolutely be a "Madison South" and "Madison North" sectional this year.
How are enrollment sizes and population numbers figured into Sectional assignments? How do team strengths get weighed?
Individuals have a path out of sectionals not tied to the performance of their team. Cross Country sectionals are auto-qualified, unlike the various regionals to sectionals and other paths of other sports to their state meets, so the only advancement and separation comes from a state qualification. WIAA needs to recognize this and materially change several aspects of the process. Since there's no "qualifying" to Sectionals, teams don't get the same postseason experiences and thus whichever team ends up getting fourth and fifth at that sectional is basically getting jobbed. Getting to sectionals doesn't matter and the WIAA isn't providing teams a uniform experience across its sports.
Someone should record the sectional 4 meet from the leading cart. Then they would have better coverage than the state meet itself. Serves WIAA right for creating such a monster sectional.
Raises the question, should the state meet be representative of the different regions (sectionals) or of the best talent? You absolutely risk killing the sport in entire regions if they have a down turn for just two seasons. Gerrymandering sectional assignments around team talent isn't the right idea, but based around population centers, there should absolutely be a "Madison South" and "Madison North" sectional this year.
How are enrollment sizes and population numbers figured into Sectional assignments? How do team strengths get weighed?
Individuals have a path out of sectionals not tied to the performance of their team. Cross Country sectionals are auto-qualified, unlike the various regionals to sectionals and other paths of other sports to their state meets, so the only advancement and separation comes from a state qualification. WIAA needs to recognize this and materially change several aspects of the process. Since there's no "qualifying" to Sectionals, teams don't get the same postseason experiences and thus whichever team ends up getting fourth and fifth at that sectional is basically getting jobbed. Getting to sectionals doesn't matter and the WIAA isn't providing teams a uniform experience across its sports.
The WIAA is tied into a geographic representation philosophy and will die on that hill when debated until someone shows the governing body a way to generate increased revenue or a decrease in costs using a different methodology.
The sectional layouts otherwise aim to encapsulate school enrollment totals and not burden any particular schools with excessive travel (i.e. Ashland and the Lumberjack Conference theory). The enrollment aspect of the tournament alignment completely omits in-sport participation totals which are unavailable at the time of sectional layout design. This has also been a heavily debated topic as some smaller cross country programs do not traditionally field full teams and the team scoring at the sectional becomes an irregular triangular, meaning the spacing between competing team scorers can extend into the minutes resulting in incredulous results that do not mirror what would take place in the state meet setting.
Several sectionals in the layouts are somewhat land locked and are coerced by sensibility factors, mainly travel. The D1 Racine / Kenosha southeastern schools are probably the best example of this with Indian Trail, Tremper, Bradford, Park, Case and Horlick which are all large schools of 2000 enrollments. If the average sectional enrollment size in D1 encapsulates approximately 11500 total students at a given group of schools, that southeastern grouping becomes locked quickly with room only for Wilmot Union. For example, if the design of that sectional grouping extends out further, it picks up either Oak Creek or South Milwaukee (losing their course) or the Beloit schools and the enrollment size it represents (over 13000) is lopsided compared to other sectionals. Other examples of landlocked sectional alignments come from the D2/D3 southwest schools which typically struggle to represent similar enrollment totals of other D2/D3 sectionals unless they stretch north toward La Crosse or east to Janesville/Beloit where the travel sensibility factor comes into play.
Milwaukee, Madison, Green Bay and the Fox Valley do not have too many issues save for Washington Island and other nether regions.
Bottom line, if people want a better qualifying system the WIAA can likely only be swayed with an increase in revenue or a decrease in costs. Otherwise these qualifying conversations are somewhat moot despite how unfair it seems for the Madison area. People are lucky to still have a sport sponsored by the governing body given how much of a net loss cross country (and track) incurs.
The WIAA is tied into a geographic representation philosophy and will die on that hill when debated until someone shows the governing body a way to generate increased revenue or a decrease in costs using a different methodology.
The sectional layouts otherwise aim to encapsulate school enrollment totals and not burden any particular schools with excessive travel (i.e. Ashland and the Lumberjack Conference theory). The enrollment aspect of the tournament alignment completely omits in-sport participation totals which are unavailable at the time of sectional layout design. This has also been a heavily debated topic as some smaller cross country programs do not traditionally field full teams and the team scoring at the sectional becomes an irregular triangular, meaning the spacing between competing team scorers can extend into the minutes resulting in incredulous results that do not mirror what would take place in the state meet setting.
Several sectionals in the layouts are somewhat land locked and are coerced by sensibility factors, mainly travel. The D1 Racine / Kenosha southeastern schools are probably the best example of this with Indian Trail, Tremper, Bradford, Park, Case and Horlick which are all large schools of 2000 enrollments. If the average sectional enrollment size in D1 encapsulates approximately 11500 total students at a given group of schools, that southeastern grouping becomes locked quickly with room only for Wilmot Union. For example, if the design of that sectional grouping extends out further, it picks up either Oak Creek or South Milwaukee (losing their course) or the Beloit schools and the enrollment size it represents (over 13000) is lopsided compared to other sectionals. Other examples of landlocked sectional alignments come from the D2/D3 southwest schools which typically struggle to represent similar enrollment totals of other D2/D3 sectionals unless they stretch north toward La Crosse or east to Janesville/Beloit where the travel sensibility factor comes into play.
Milwaukee, Madison, Green Bay and the Fox Valley do not have too many issues save for Washington Island and other nether regions.
Bottom line, if people want a better qualifying system the WIAA can likely only be swayed with an increase in revenue or a decrease in costs. Otherwise these qualifying conversations are somewhat moot despite how unfair it seems for the Madison area. People are lucky to still have a sport sponsored by the governing body given how much of a net loss cross country (and track) incurs.
Incredible response.
Can think of a couple things:
Don't do Sectional assignments until October. Teams make their bids for hosting a sectional and the WIAA selects amongst them all the most appropriate eight...
Four mega sectionals. If a regional is out of the question, four super sectionals where five teams advance. This may limit courses, so what.
I dont think it's very fair to have four of the top ten teams bracketed in one sectional. This is going to be a a zero-room for error, complete blowout, almost like a state meet itself. The teams that get through might be physically exhausted by the state meet in comparison to other teams that can coast (ahem--cough--Stevens Point).
Back in 2015, in Minnesota, Edina and Wayzata took 3rd & 4th in their section (didn’t make state), but then took 2nd and 3rd at NXR and qualified for NXN where they took 13th and 14th
