unnessary events at the conference level meet.

600 yds Big 12

Try 600, 800, 1000, DMR, Mile, 3k, 5k all in one conference meet. 30 entries for the 3k and only 18 for the 5k. Talk about stretching your talent thin. Big schools lobby for this because it's easier for them to score points and win this way. Kinda shuts out the schools with smaller rosters because they don't have 50 donors paying alimony. Conference needs to closely mimic the national meet.

schools with small rosters should be shut out . Track is a team sport, not a superstar athletes do a few triples sport.

I've said it a few times before, but I haven't seen a better conference meet format than the UAA.

25 athletes, three per event. None of this 7 LaCrosse kids in the 200 like the WIAC, or let's take 60 people to the meet and absolutely crush schools 10% of our size like North Central. Two days, gun-to-gun, twenty hours and then it's back on the plane. Love it.

Ok, moran. Not every school can be wartburg and have 50 guys and 50 girls on the cross roster. Track done right is a championship meet without asinine events that do not exist at consecutive championship meets.

what about the other side of that--when the "guns" of some schools in some events are far inferior to the 4th, 5th, 6th-best performer at others. UAA schools have pretty similar profiles why prevent deserving performers from competing by trying to make equity by fiat?

There should be a set number of athletes per event and every school should get to enter at least one. It should be x number by descending order list and then one athlete for school's who don't make the descending order list.

This is college track, not the diamond league. As much as D1 athletics has turned into the minor league (mostly for sports other than track), conference meets should still hold to the principle of schools competing against each other for a title. They shouldn't be glorified last chance meets.

This is the way. Same events as nationals, every school guaranteed at least one entry per event but otherwise use the descending order list.

don't most conferences have a travel squad limit (30-34ish) for the conference champs?

I love a good true team conference meet as much as anyone for all the right reasons. But there's no secret lineups these days, just who has the depth and anyone who has access to performance lists/sites knows, its pretty clear who has the numbers. Unless I had an outside chance at top 2, Im putting more eggs in fewer baskets to win events and maybe qualify something to Nats. There's no honor in 4th at conference. Just a stepping stone for next year. However, I would definitely get my own kids hungry for getting what they can and getting at least a few some recognition for their hard work. With only 3 relays indoors and 2 out, that makes it challenging but Id go there first with a weaker lineup if thats all I had. Anyone wanting to run more events after their main event, fine by me if it doesn't take opportunities away from fresh, able-bodied athletes that could do better. Id be developing culture before ruining kids attitudes by overloading them just to get pounded and risk injury before the outdoor season which is more important to performance anyway. But if I thought we were in the hunt, darn right, get those points for a league title. It's worth the fight and a bigger tool for building that winning culture. Recruits love a chance to be in a top league program. Roster limits and NIL are narrowing conference depth even more. Emphasis is on big points/qualifiers and not much on the nickles and dimes that used to be the difference.

The AD can live with 4th at conference. Perennial bottom of the conference finishes (except for a distance only team) will get a coach fired, even if he ends up coaching a few all Americans.

You want to make conference meets better, meaning more team oriented? The simple answer is to limit the number of athletes any school can enter into an event to either 2 or 3.

If they did that then if a school wanted to win conference championship in track they would actually have to field a track team and not just overload 5 events to win the conference.

Unfortunately, most coaches refuse to vote for that because that would make their job harder because they would have to spread their resources around. (I'm talking to you, distance heavy schools). Btw, I'm a distance coach but feel bad for the direction track is taking. Distance running will be fine but what about the other event groups??

At the end of the day, do we really care about indoors?

Eh, I mean, I hear you, but I don’t know that WashU should crush the meet just because they’ve got the world’s best pole vault recruiting either. Lots of room in the middle.

This is the dumbest rule ever. If a school has 4 guys that all run 21 flat, then that 4th guy is denied a chance at winning a conference title.

In an event like the 100 and 200, 4th on the team can be tied or .01 away from 3rd on the team. Or in the 800 or mile, it's not insane for someone to run a big PR and win as a 4 seed.

It's rules like this that prove D3 is just the junior varsity of the NCAA.

it's like a political darwinism thing where football wants more kids, more training camp lottery tickets, more injury cushion, and TF/XC fans want fewer and fewer involved.

i worded that precisely. i didn't say TF/XC coaches, because i think they realize that if you drastically trim conference meets, no cutesy events, limited enties, etc., then next year the college president can decide your budget can shrink to a dollar number using that finals number, or NCAA or some conference can say, well, you only get 10 kids at regionals, so let's trim XC to 17 kids for the season.

also, i think some of this debate is about when the switch flips. for some of us, conference is the end of the gang together, the gang gets to do that, and at that point it's last chance, regionals, nationals, and that's only the team members who mean business. i think you're saying push it a meet back to the end of the season meets.

i'd say that's (entry limits) more defensible at a scholarship level. at d3, i'm not fascist, it's fine if UAA does it that way, or liberty league has a time cut, but i think d3 is generally more about encouraging sticking with sports. so about every team is some mix of stars and scrubs, more akin to HS. so give people their moment in the sun then they have to qualify onward.

that and most conferences have their quirks. and some of those quirks may be about justifying a slightly bigger roster to their school.

which, full circle, only TF/XC seems to want to operate on the idea it needs lean and less budget. or at least some fans do. meanwhile football justifies 85 SCHOLARSHIPS! then has to redshirt this or that kind ATTENDING ON A FULL RIDE.

i think d1 is fine, they have a regional layer between any team/roster and nationals, setting aside qualifying is a high standard. there's a regionals meet before finals for both TF and XC, and either you or your team has to show up and perform to advance. not sure why that doesn't suffice, why that has to push back to an unconnected standalone conference meet.

d3 i would actually like to see them expand the new england model outwards. new england d3, aartfc. quasi-regional championships. expand the postseason as opposed to run last chance meets. but you earn your way into those on time. the season ratchets up and up but with some purpose and consistent participation, not like 3 people decide to run the last chance in your event, 12 in another, and some guy who thought he had a shot at nationals shows up to find 1 entry in his event -- him.