I would like to see us move the XC season up a week so that we can enjoy Thanksgiving, and also have a chance to reset for those fortunate enough to make it to NXN's or those who choose to do Eastbay.
For track, I would like to have double the amount of qualifiers for Master's. Every year you have multiple athletes who hit the state at large standard at CIF Finals, but don't advance to Master's because they aren't in the top 9 or 12 athletes who get to advance. Running two heats of evreything would allow more athletes an opportunity to make the state meet.
I would also like track to go back to alternating No Cal/ So Cal sites for the state meet. As a former XC and track coach, it was tough and expensive to have to travel to Fresno twice a year (3 if you count Clovis Inv.).
IMO southern section as a whole needs change. It is way too large, and it needs to either be split up or have its qualification process completely changed.
Yes they need to do some type of Section realignment. Not sure if that's possible. Has that ever been done?
There needs to be a NXR so that all top teams actually face each other instead of using the merge for NXN bids
A week at the minimum. More would be better to line up closer to other States. I wish they could work out making the divisions by talent rather than enrollment. Some very soft teams made the podiums and much better teams were left out.
I coached in a state that has 7 relays on the schedule. Probably a few too many but the 4 x 8 adds another event for the mid D group of kids that just arent fast enough to be sprinters or strong enough to be distance runners like most of our xc team. Kids that want to participate in a running sport and be a part of a team that truly is based on numbers. I took these "leftovers" because we had good coaches in the other areas and it was a hole that needed to be filled in our lineup. Along with the 800, 1600 we had 4 x 8 and 1600 med.
With 120+ kids on the team, everyone cant be a sprinter. So, i recruited like crazy to get kids out, away from soccer, etc... Like any other event area with depth, times start dropping.
One year I had a 7:48 and a 7:55 with 8 different kids. Could of had a 7:36 if one kid hadnt moved as he was a sub 1:50 runner.
I regularly had a core group of 6-8 varsity guys that could rotate events from one meet to another. Some made good 400 hurdlers as well. Some filled in on 400 legs of relays etc...
Its a pretty good feeling to continue coming back with fresh bodies in a meet lineup while other schools are doubling and tripling their kids. Fresh legs the whole season too.
IMO southern section as a whole needs change. It is way too large, and it needs to either be split up or have its qualification process completely changed.
Yes they need to do some type of Section realignment. Not sure if that's possible. Has that ever been done?
Never been done in recent memory (NCS was split into SF, Oakland, and of course CCS back in '66 but i'm not gonna count that) but it should happen anyway. SF and Oakland shouldn't exist as sections, end of story. Only issue is that obviously the section system is used for other sports too, so unless track and XC can just be in 1 section with all the other sports in another, I don't think a realignment is possible.
Yes they need to do some type of Section realignment. Not sure if that's possible. Has that ever been done?
Never been done in recent memory (NCS was split into SF, Oakland, and of course CCS back in '66 but i'm not gonna count that) but it should happen anyway. SF and Oakland shouldn't exist as sections, end of story. Only issue is that obviously the section system is used for other sports too, so unless track and XC can just be in 1 section with all the other sports in another, I don't think a realignment is possible.
One thing they could do for the enrollment sports is to even out the divisions between sections. Why not have the same enrollment for D1 is NCS as they do in SS?
Make the state meet earlier and also make an NXR region for California like the one there was last year, so that an NXN berth isn’t determined by the merge. All top teams can compete against each other.
No, don't bend over backwards and change the schedule just because a few teams do NXN. You're basically saying shorten the season for 99% of kids in the state for a Nike marketing gimmick.
Make the state meet earlier and also make an NXR region for California like the one there was last year, so that an NXN berth isn’t determined by the merge. All top teams can compete against each other.
No, don't bend over backwards and change the schedule just because a few teams do NXN. You're basically saying shorten the season for 99% of kids in the state for a Nike marketing gimmick.
Not for NXN but they should realign the State to get closer to the rest of the country. No reason to be so much later in the year then everyone else.
Since the State Meet is fresh on my mind, I'll stick with cross country. The CIF absolutely needs to come up with set standards so that at the State Meet schools of equal sizes are competing against each other. School population does matter. It does not seem the all sections or the CIF really care about this issue. If the CIF cared about equity in competition, it would do something. Our section says you cannot move down in divisions if you won the section in the upper division. Yet a school like Newberry Park moved from D1 to D2 this past year. I guess each section is different.
As for holding the meet earllier, as a coach, YES! 100%!!! I cannot tell you the grief we get from family because we are never able to travel to spend Thanksgiving with Family. For athletes and their families, it may be 1-4 years of this. As a coach, it could (of course we want to go to State,) an annual thing. And yes, this plays into our decission as we discuss how long do we want to keep coaching. Having a meet like this on a Holiday weekend does not take coaches, athletes, or thier families into consideration....
Every section is able to determine their own section rules, does CIF have the authority to overrule that?
But why do we play by different rules and then all come together and compete against one another? Seems if it's the "State" meet we are talking about then everyone should be under the same rules when they get there.
Quick reference and comparison between school sizes SJS to Southern Section:
D1 SJS 2970-2178 / SS 2501+ D2 SJS 2172-1827 / SS 2500-2061 D3 SJS 1821-1238 / SS 2060-1521 D4 SJS 600-212 / SS 1520-601 D5 SJS 204-9 / SS 600 & Below
Huge differences there. I also agree that teams that win their Sections shouldn't be moved down a division. Newbury Park being moved to D2 this year was ridiculous.
Quick reference and comparison between school sizes SJS to Southern Section:
D1 SJS 2970-2178 / SS 2501+ D2 SJS 2172-1827 / SS 2500-2061 D3 SJS 1821-1238 / SS 2060-1521 D4 SJS 600-212 / SS 1520-601 D5 SJS 204-9 / SS 600 & Below
Huge differences there. I also agree that teams that win their Sections shouldn't be moved down a division. Newbury Park being moved to D2 this year was ridiculous.
I don't know enough about other sections, but is there a provision for if your school shrinks and starts to suck as well? Like after 5 years of bombing out of sectionals or something you don't get to stay at a bigger division anymore?
Quick reference and comparison between school sizes SJS to Southern Section:
D1 SJS 2970-2178 / SS 2501+ D2 SJS 2172-1827 / SS 2500-2061 D3 SJS 1821-1238 / SS 2060-1521 D4 SJS 600-212 / SS 1520-601 D5 SJS 204-9 / SS 600 & Below
Huge differences there. I also agree that teams that win their Sections shouldn't be moved down a division. Newbury Park being moved to D2 this year was ridiculous.
I don't know enough about other sections, but is there a provision for if your school shrinks and starts to suck as well? Like after 5 years of bombing out of sectionals or something you don't get to stay at a bigger division anymore?
So they get regulated to a worse division? There are some D1 schools that don't care about XC so they would get dropped constantly. I like the idea but there would only be a few teams left in the top divisions.