So in D1 football they use the FBS/FCS system, if this were to happen in track and xc who would you move up a tier and who would you move down a tier.
I would personally move up NAU, Furman, and Portland
I would move down Louisiana tech, Vanderbilt, Louisiana Laffayette
(I know this doesnt logistically make sense, but its a message board. Knock yourself out)
Oh man I absolutely love the idea of this. If there was a tier system in XC then maybe kids would stop being so hell bent on going D1, when really they are just committing to a program that is worse than half the Division 1 xc teams at the high school level. Besides, How can we really even classify schools like Vandy, Toledo, Holy Cross, Evansville, Bowling Green, etc., as even being in the same realm as programs like NAU, Colorado, or Portland? You could have a relegation system based off of Regional results, and the bottom feeders at the regional meets have to move down.
It would be done by conference.
This is actually a great idea, the bottom 10 teams in the country get relegated and top 10 teams from the tier below get promoted. its a lot like european soccer.
Dumbest idea ever. Nobody cares about the 150th team in the country. Why woukd you want them to be a fake national champ? They woukd still run invitational and get crushed. Even the best D3 teams are way better than the bottom 150 teams in D1.
If anything, the way to set this up would be based around the number of scholarships used. Your teams that routinely put more than, lets say, half of their scholarships into XC kids are put into a different bracket /Division than the ones who either don't have all distance kids or aim for a balanced team.
I wouldn't push for it as I like the system we have, but I wouldn't mind seeing a meet where we got to see some schools that buy their team and still can't get it done or teams that really shine without the same funding as an NAU or a Furman.
95% of teams put less than 1/2 into XC. What is somebody trying to accomplish with splitting D1? This is XC. There are few fans and little money to fund a second national meet that absolutely nobody woukd care about.
healthy dude wrote:
95% of teams put less than 1/2 into XC. What is somebody trying to accomplish with splitting D1? This is XC. There are few fans and little money to fund a second national meet that absolutely nobody woukd care about.
I agree that splitting is probably not ideal, but between your and V's post you raise an interesting question. You claim that 95% of programs put less than 1/2 (I'm assuming you mean scholarship allotment) into XC. So roughly based on sport sponsorship numbers you believe that of the 318 programs (as of 9/2019) only 16 programs have more than 6.3 scholarships on their cross roster? So the question has to be asked: which of the 31 teams that made NCAA last year did so on less than that? Obviously we're all going to be guessing, but it would be interesting to see how much scholarship money it takes to be a top 10 team.
Here are some. There are about another 285 teams that provide less than 6 XC scholarships. You have to remember that most schools fund sprints, hurdles, mid distance, throws, jumps,, and multis.
Stanford, Michigan, Oregon, Purdue, Indiana, Harvard, VA Tech, Wisconsin, Virginia, Gtown, Fl St, Arkansas.
EVANDAVID123 wrote:
So in D1 football they use the FBS/FCS system, if this were to happen in track and xc who would you move up a tier and who would you move down a tier.
I would personally move up NAU, Furman, and Portland
I would move down Louisiana tech, Vanderbilt, Louisiana Laffayette
(I know this doesnt logistically make sense, but its a message board. Knock yourself out)
You do know that FBS/FCS does not relegate teams right? Like Rutgers does not get sent down to FCS or North Dakota State doesn't get bumped up.
yeah it was just a hypothetical to where if they were to do a fbs/fcs type system who would move up or down to keep consistency is competition level
The question does not make sense. FCS/FBS does not move teams up and down based on ranking or ability of the teams. There is huge overlap between the 2.
I love this idea
It is called D3.
Go even further and bump Adams State from D2 to D1.
This is about to be Minnesota and William and Mary’s men’s XC teams...
Runner10287 wrote:
Go even further and bump Adams State from D2 to D1.
I think Mines could potentially move up to D1 in most sports if they put proper measures into place.
run run run wrote:
Here are some. There are about another 285 teams that provide less than 6 XC scholarships. You have to remember that most schools fund sprints, hurdles, mid distance, throws, jumps,, and multis.
Stanford, Michigan, Oregon, Purdue, Indiana, Harvard, VA Tech, Wisconsin, Virginia, Gtown, Fl St, Arkansas.
I think it would be hard for Harvard to have over 6 scholarships in distance since they have 0 track scholarships to give out.
That was the point. Somebody is trying to split D1 into more than 6 and fewer than 6 Xc scholarships. You aould have abot a dozen teams that use at least 6 scholarshipss for XC. That's it. Obviously Harvard has fewer than 6, they have 0. You would be surprised at how few some of the other schools in the national championship have. Indiana has a great well balanced track team. They typically put about 3 scholarships in distance.
EVANDAVID123 wrote:
So in D1 football they use the FBS/FCS system, if this were to happen in track and xc who would you move up a tier and who would you move down a tier.
I would personally move up NAU, Furman, and Portland
I would move down Louisiana tech, Vanderbilt, Louisiana Laffayette
(I know this doesnt logistically make sense, but its a message board. Knock yourself out)
Here's a novel idea... since we are talking hypothetical ideas and all... instead of doing something like this... let's give every team the same amount of XC scholarships. that way everyone starts at the same place instead of trying to manipulate the inequitable situation which currently exists.
I know, I know, the NAU's and the Portland's wouldn't like that but that should be the problem of the other 300 + institutions.