NXN v. Footlocker

What do I have to say about that?

If you are an elite athlete, you shouldn't need to weave through 18:00 5K Boys, unless you have no understanding whatsoever of tactics.

HODOR

clutch cargo wrote:

Funny thing is, if Nike really wanted to bury Footlocker, they'd just pull their account from Footlocker. Footlocker could not last a month if they could not sell Nikes.

I want you to really think about want you just said, I know you probably thought, while sitting in a Econ class at the highly academically esteemed university of Oregon, that Nike can just 'bury' any part of its distribution chain, and flex it's big muscles without consequences, but let's think how much money they'd lose if they pulled their product from a national chain like FL, then let's think again about what Nikes competitors would do, let's even go further and think about how timid stores similar to FL would be about selling nike when they pull their products so whimsically... Face it you're a pawn of Nikes, and a true n00b to the sport

Take into account the regionals themselves. FootLocker regionals in the South and Midwest are on awesome courses and attract the top runners in the region. Why would you pick NXN when at FootLocker you can go to McAlpine, break 15, and/or challenge a very hallowed course record? Admittedly the Northeast and West, in my opinion, are not on good courses.

NXN is also highly watered down because there are something like 9 regions which accept team and individual runners. If you make FootLocker, except in the Northeast I suppose (as nearly all of NY's best choose Nike) you know you're legit. Not so with NXN.

As a HS runner, I know neither of these races are even popular. Local turkey trots are where the legit runners go. FL and NXN are a joke.

runnerfan34 wrote:

Take into account the regionals themselves. FootLocker regionals in the South and Midwest are on awesome courses and attract the top runners in the region. Why would you pick NXN when at FootLocker you can go to McAlpine, break 15, and/or challenge a very hallowed course record? Admittedly the Northeast and West, in my opinion, are not on good courses.

I won't argue about whether McAlpine is an inherently "bad" course but it is a terrible course for a race the size of the qualifier for Footlocker South. It has always played to speed runners since you have to go out with the leaders to have a shot at qualifying.

The NXN course is just as fast but can be run any number of ways to win (and I have seen just about every race run there).

J.R. wrote:

What I don't like is the constant bashing of FL by Nike, which gives a really low class aura to NxN. As a result, and because Footlocker has always stayed out of the fray, keeping their focus on the kids, I like them the best.

It would be good if Nike would calm down, stop trying to make it a corporate competition, stop trying to put pressure on the kids, and let them decide for themselves. The same thing goes for the coaches.

This is laughable. You do realize that Max Mayo has called coaches and threatened to ban them from Footlocker if they go to NXN? You know that half of these posts on these threads are from Max himself or his cronies who he passes his "talking points" to? (I have seen the talking points).

I am definitely not saying that Nike is somehow "above the fray" (they aren't). But, to suggest that Footlocker has stayed out of it is absolutely laughable.

PDX guy wrote:

I stand by my statement that Fl did not know how to score a team meet.

That is not so.

Footlocker continues to have a team championship every year.

The Rocket.. wrote:

If Footlocker would accept the top 5 CA from their state meet (whether they are on an NXN qualifying team or not) automatically they would get the cream of the crop from CA. Instead they get only the leftovers.

Good idea.

watchout wrote:

Participation numbers at the Nike and Foot Locker meets for NCAA Top-100 finishers this year is VERY similar over the last four years.

Boys -

2012 NXN: 0/2

2012 NXR: 1/2

2012 FLN: 2/2

2012 FLR: 2/2

What are the numbers referring to? 0/2 = 0 of 2?

This is not a good comparison, unless I'm misunderstanding how you got the results, because NxN has ten times the runners.

If you took the top 400 runners from the Footlocker Regionals, then they would have more in the top 100 at NCAA.

It's not every day you have one of the biggest, most influential, companies in the world treating you like a king or queen for a long weekend.[/quote]

I see this kind of comment get tossed around the board a fair bit. While Nike is a bug part of our sport, it is by no means one of the biggest or most influential companies in the world. A comment like this just shows how little most people understand about the size and power of large corporations.

J.R. wrote:

watchout wrote:

Participation numbers at the Nike and Foot Locker meets for NCAA Top-100 finishers this year is VERY similar over the last four years.

Boys -

2012 NXN: 0/2

2012 NXR: 1/2

2012 FLN: 2/2

2012 FLR: 2/2

What are the numbers referring to? 0/2 = 0 of 2?

This is not a good comparison, unless I'm misunderstanding how you got the results, because NxN has ten times the runners.

If you took the top 400 runners from the Footlocker Regionals, then they would have more in the top 100 at NCAA.

0/2 in that case means that 0 of the NCAA Top-100 Mens finishers competed at the NXN National meet while there were 2 men that were in high school at that time.

1/2 in that case means that 1 of the NCAA Top-100 Mens finishers competed at the NXN Regional meets while there were 2 men that were in high school at that time.

(etc.)

There is no part of the post analyzing how highly the runners finished in the races, just whether they competed in the meets.

I agree, it's not a great comparison, but mostly due to the reason that these athletes have completely different training (or, at the very least, more years of training) than they had in high school, so it's not a great representation of how good the kids were in high school (I've made posts in the past on Dyestat regarding how the top X athletes ran in track, specifically focusing on 3200m/2 mile marks, which shows the meets are pretty similar - top-10 in the US is pretty well split, but NXN is deeper - probably because of having more kids in the race; the balance certainly isn't significantly one way or another in most cases, although I think the girls have been pretty heavily tilted towards NXN this year and last due to the runners at the top - Baxter, Cain (though not this year), Efraimson, Cranny, Neale, Knight, Hauger (the only one of the above who ran both), etc.).

Once again, the reason I posted those statistics is because people were asking about such statistics. It was not my intention to promote a viewpoint one way or the other, just post the findings and point out that the meets seem similar in the analysis that was asked for.

HS coach.... wrote:

stryker drilling wrote:

+1

The best runners run at the Foot Locker National Championship. Always have, always will.

wrong, very wrong.

Seem to remember Baxter and Cain going 1,2 last year at NXN, hard to top those two.

The reason Baxter ran at NXN is that she is from California. When you are from California, the CIF State meet is also the qualifier for NXN, meaning when she won the state meet, she automatically qualified for NXN. For ANY California runner who automatically qualifies for NXN, it doesn't make sense to turn that down just so you can do a different qualifier race for Footlockers. Why would anyone take the risk when they have a guaranteed entry to NXN? Footlocker West qualifiers and NXN Nationals are the same weekend. Every California runner who gets the autoqualifier from the State meet will always choose NXN - anybody would because it would be stupid to risk doing another qualifier and not making it. So putting Sarah Baxter in this argument makes no sense.

Putting Mary Cain in this argument also is a horrible argument. She will obviously run NXN because her coach is Alberto Salazar, period.

NXN is great. Can't say the same for FL.

How do you start a new thread? I am new here and looking to start a thread about getting some swift running tips.

A nice little history of how NXN came about:

http://www.runnerspace.com/gprofile.php?mgroup_id=89&do=news&news_id=196552

"The event was originally tossed out as a potential Foot Locker/ Nike event but Foot Locker management quickly shot the, "Tournament" idea as they stated down stating the team concept was not important. As a result the Foot Locker/NXN(Nike) relationship has been fractured to this day."

PDX guy wrote:

"The event was originally tossed out as a potential Foot Locker/ Nike event but Foot Locker management quickly shot the, "Tournament" idea as they stated down stating the team concept was not important. As a result the Foot Locker/NXN(Nike) relationship has been fractured to this day."

That is someone's twist, not a quote by footlocker, like me saying "Nike wanted to destroy high school cross country, as a result they started NxN."

Footlocker Nationals has a team competition every year.

PDX guy wrote:

Please don't give the Taylor brothers any attention. They're the most self-serving people in the sport.

Two things:

First,

on the boards I see a lot of hate towards NXN. Then I go and read people saying that NXN is bashing Footlocker. I haven't gone back and counted all the posts that go back and forth between the two, but I feel that it would be pretty even. So saying that one is bashing the other is not a valid argument because it happens a lot from both sides. The differences is the arguments. Pro-Footlocker posters say NXN is a crap course, too crowded, not a true national champhionship (too many mediocre runners), and backed by Nike (This is bad somehow? Footlocker was backed by Nike for a long time). Pro-NXN say NXN is a true national championship (school teams and individuals rather than only individuals.), NXN course can be sloppy (Nike is trying to fix this)but can be a good course (and more spectator friendly), and the weather is more neutral compared to the hot weather Footlocker race.

Secondly,

What is so wrong about NXN? They do offer the opportunity for individuals and school teams to compete in one race (like all XC championships through college except for Footlocker). The weather is neutral (So not too hot for the northern states. We tend to be in the teens in December so racing at 70+ degrees does not sound nice.) Sure the weather outside of racing may not be the best. Both races put up the athletes in awesome hotels and have great events for the kids. Is the only reason you bash on NXN because they are in competition with Footlocker? Is there any other reason? Remember NXN started as teams only. It sucked for the kids that had to make a choice for team v individuals honors. With a championship meet with combined teams and individuals, there is no hesitation about which race those kids will do. So what is wrong with NXN? Besides arguing the course and weather. Some people prefer these conditions over Footlocker.

NXN is not even cross country. The course is a joke. Rather NXN is just trying to sell gear to high school coaches who can't get a JC job by filling as many kids as possible onto the horse doo doo track for the lowest cost.

FL is not a team event. The girls look frumpy and appear as dykes in those baggy shorts made for the Girl's Basketball Team. The tops are loose fitted not showing lady features for approval by the Islamic Track Team under Sharia Law.