Unofficial 2019 D3 XC Thread (Official)

Stupid stupid wrote:

maligned wrote:

https://imgur.com/a/Hcb8T9P

This would be terrible. Why do some regions need to be split for being “too big”? The teams that are supposed to go, go (generally speaking, there are obviously some outliers in some years). Why split up the current Atlantic and current New England regions? Giving auto bids to teams in New Hampshire and Maine would be so pointless. Same with NJ and NYC. Why give them bids? Because they could compete with the rest of the Atlantic. That means they have no business being at nationals. The way the regions are now is pretty much as good as it can get. It creates so much competition. You want the best of the best at nationals, not representation of garbage schools who can’t compete in a big region

Two teams from Maine qualified under the current format this year, and they'd still be in the same region as MIT. I really don't see the problem there.

admittedly, I didn't know Bates and Colby were in Maine so my mistake there. But the NJ/NYC still comes up. No matter how you break it down, that makes sure teams that shouldn't be there get in. I just don't see an issue with having big regions. There might be a team or two every year that can be argued they should've been in over another, but I don't see that as a region to split up

stupid stupid wrote:

admittedly, I didn't know Bates and Colby were in Maine so my mistake there. But the NJ/NYC still comes up. No matter how you break it down, that makes sure teams that shouldn't be there get in. I just don't see an issue with having big regions. There might be a team or two every year that can be argued they should've been in over another, but I don't see that as a region to split up

It has everything to do with size of race fields and courses that can even host the race. For example...there are no courses in the mideast that can meet the actual course requirements that are posted in the rule book.

stupid stupid wrote:

admittedly, I didn't know Bates and Colby were in Maine so my mistake there. But the NJ/NYC still comes up. No matter how you break it down, that makes sure teams that shouldn't be there get in. I just don't see an issue with having big regions. There might be a team or two every year that can be argued they should've been in over another, but I don't see that as a region to split up

The new Midwest region would be significantly weaker, a cakewalk every year for NCC and WashU with Chicago fighting for third with Wartburg and occasionally another Iowa or CCIW school.

The Minnesota schools will have a much tougher road to nationals having to go through the WIAC schools.

Mapquest wrote:

stupid stupid wrote:

admittedly, I didn't know Bates and Colby were in Maine so my mistake there. But the NJ/NYC still comes up. No matter how you break it down, that makes sure teams that shouldn't be there get in. I just don't see an issue with having big regions. There might be a team or two every year that can be argued they should've been in over another, but I don't see that as a region to split up

The new Midwest region would be significantly weaker, a cakewalk every year for NCC and WashU with Chicago fighting for third with Wartburg and occasionally another Iowa or CCIW school.

The Minnesota schools will have a much tougher road to nationals having to go through the WIAC schools.

Fun fact: in the entire history of their program, WashU has never received an automatic bid to nationals. That's a good argument for breaking up the Midwest, IMO.

The Straved Elephant wrote:

Mapquest wrote:

The new Midwest region would be significantly weaker, a cakewalk every year for NCC and WashU with Chicago fighting for third with Wartburg and occasionally another Iowa or CCIW school.

The Minnesota schools will have a much tougher road to nationals having to go through the WIAC schools.

Fun fact: in the entire history of their program, WashU has never received an automatic bid to nationals. That's a good argument for breaking up the Midwest, IMO.

2013

Nope wrote:

The Straved Elephant wrote:

Fun fact: in the entire history of their program, WashU has never received an automatic bid to nationals. That's a good argument for breaking up the Midwest, IMO.

2013

Whoops. Even then it was really close though

maligned wrote:

https://imgur.com/a/Hcb8T9P

This seems very impractical for the "old" New England and Atlantic regions. Really waters down the competition to the point where the regional meet wouldnt have that much significance anymore for some teams. New jersey/NYC hasn't had a team qualify for nationals on the mens side in the past 2 years. Why do they need their own region?

Wowzerwe wrote:

maligned wrote:

https://imgur.com/a/Hcb8T9P

This seems very impractical for the "old" New England and Atlantic regions. Really waters down the competition to the point where the regional meet wouldnt have that much significance anymore for some teams. New jersey/NYC hasn't had a team qualify for nationals on the mens side in the past 2 years. Why do they need their own region?

It is NYC, NJ, and Philadelphia meaning Haverford is in the region. NJ schools also qualified 2 and 3 years ago (and women’s teams most years) so it isn’t quite as bad as you are making it out. The real problem is that the Atlantic region contains 70 teams and the Mideast and New England regions are around 80 teams. With fields of 40-55 teams showing up courses don’t meet the standards the NCAA sets. There would also be 34 teams in this proposal making up for the possible auto team that wouldn’t have gotten in.

Here is the entire proposal.

https://www.scribd.com/document/437389454/DIII-XC-Championships-Regional-Realignment

Seems like the winners would be the decent but rarely making nationals schools in the new Metro region like Ramapo, TCNJ, Rowan, Widener, Swarthmore, Moravian. They'd now have a good shot at grabbing a second auto after (one would usually expect) Haverford.

Berea would be a loser here, as they'd be out of the South and into the much tougher Midwest region.

nnnsss wrote:

Seems like the winners would be the decent but rarely making nationals schools in the new Metro region like Ramapo, TCNJ, Rowan, Widener, Swarthmore, Moravian. They'd now have a good shot at grabbing a second auto after (one would usually expect) Haverford.

Berea would be a loser here, as they'd be out of the South and into the much tougher Midwest region.

Berea would actually be in the Great Lakes. Not quite as bad, but your point still stands.

The Starved Elephant wrote:

nnnsss wrote:

Seems like the winners would be the decent but rarely making nationals schools in the new Metro region like Ramapo, TCNJ, Rowan, Widener, Swarthmore, Moravian. They'd now have a good shot at grabbing a second auto after (one would usually expect) Haverford.

Berea would be a loser here, as they'd be out of the South and into the much tougher Midwest region.

Berea would actually be in the Great Lakes. Not quite as bad, but your point still stands.

Situations like these are probably why they would increase the field by two at large teams.

They actually decrease the number of at large teams in this scenario because they go from 8 regions to 10. That means they increase the number of auto teams and decrease at large. The overall field grows though. Read the proposal.

Smart not wrote:

They actually decrease the number of at large teams in this scenario because they go from 8 regions to 10. That means they increase the number of auto teams and decrease at large. The overall field grows though. Read the proposal.

I guess I just assumed that no matter what, a region would always get two bids. When you have twenty auto qualifiers, that leaves 12 spaces left w/ the current field size. Add two to that to get 34.

I was suggesting that in order to compensate for an increase in auto bids and a decrease in at larges, the writers of the proposal chose to increase the size of the national meet by two teams.

Stupid stupid wrote:

maligned wrote:

https://imgur.com/a/Hcb8T9P

This would be terrible. Why do some regions need to be split for being “too big”? The teams that are supposed to go, go (generally speaking, there are obviously some outliers in some years). Why split up the current Atlantic and current New England regions? Giving auto bids to teams in New Hampshire and Maine would be so pointless. Same with NJ and NYC. Why give them bids? Because they could compete with the rest of the Atlantic. That means they have no business being at nationals. The way the regions are now is pretty much as good as it can get. It creates so much competition. You want the best of the best at nationals, not representation of garbage schools who can’t compete in a big region

Everything's fine, just fix the NAMES. As it stands, awful. Maine/Boston is East but Vermont/CT is Mideast?? No northeast? Preposterous. Lazy. Why is MN/WI North? We can do better.

East = Bear

Mideast = Dragon

North = Ice

Mid-Atlantic = Presidential

Metro = Region of Trash

West = Beauty

Great Lakes = Nothing

Niagara = Mist

South = Slow

Midwest = Chicago and Fields

Seems like the discussion of North Central doping has died down. I wanted to bring everyone's attention to these allegations of North Central cheating through course cutting:

https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=9651955&page=1

Thoughts? When will this travesty end? Are the rules no longer rules?

On to indoor! Anyone running this weekend? Interesting to see who is taking advantage of XC fitness to throw down some fast track times.

honest predictions wrote:

Team

1. Wartburg

2. Carleton

3. La Crosse

4. NCC

5. WashU

6. Williams

7. Hopkins

8. Geneseo

9. CMS

10. PP

Individual

1. Mueller

2. Schraeder

3. Ryan

4. Cox

5. Matteucci

how did I do?

1 Pomona-Pitzer (10)

2 North Central (Ill.) (4)

3 Williams (6)

4 Washington U. (5)

5 Johns Hopkins (7)

6 Claremont-Mudd-Scripps (9)

7 Wis.-La Crosse (3)

8 SUNY Geneseo (8)

9 MIT (NR)

10 RPI (NR)

I missed MIT and RPI completely and only placed Geneseo correctly. That being said, 8/10 from May isn't too shabby. Individually, only Schraeder backed me up and got into the top five. All were All-Americans (and within in the top 30), however, and it's worth noting that Mueller had an unforeseeable injury. Early season predictions seem to be pretty difficult in terms of individuals, but maybe a little easier in the team competition. That being said, my top two finished 13th and 11th, respectively.