Has Nike's NXN ruined Footlocker National?

I've been trying to understand the talk of Footlocker's demise and you're starting to help me but not quite there---you're contradicting yourself here which is only more confusing. On the one hand, you say that NXN is "siphoning off a ton of talent" from FL. Then you say it's "great" that runners and teams who don't make FL can run in Nike. So is it a little of both or what? Isn't FL still the prestigious race?

Progress. Footlocker is an outdated model, and you simply can't hold two separate races for teams and individuals because it puts too many runners in conflict with themselves.

Well wrote:

Progress. Footlocker is an outdated model, and you simply can't hold two separate races for teams and individuals because it puts too many runners in conflict with themselves.

what runners are in conflict with themselves and why?

I am conflicted with myself, but that is a personal issue.

I agree that the Footlocker model is outdated and ultimately will not survive. However, I don't think that will happen for several years. At this time, Footlocker is still getting enough top runners to maintain prestige.

I'm not sure I agree with other posters who say that Footlocker is an outdated model. It is what it is...an individual championship meet. The runners who are "conflicted" about running with their team or alone are far outnumbered by the runners who are not.

I don't like how NXN skirts the post-season team issue. I don't think national team championships have a place in high school athletics. Of course, Nike would say that there are no high school teams at NXN, only club teams (wink wink).

FL is going stronger than ever. Nike does a great job with NXN too. Both are very good races.

stringer bell wrote:

I don't think national team championships have a place in high school athletics. Of course, Nike would say that there are no high school teams at NXN, only club teams (wink wink).

I agree, team championships should not matter. High school is all about the individual...then those individuals go on to college where team DOES matter.

The worst part is there was no POINT to the individuals being there. Its not as if they even had a regional competition; they were just there for the sake of pulling people away from FLN.

Sad.

I don't really understand the appeal of NXN. It is kind of cool, but is really a bit silly for high school IMO. HS running is much more about the individual than the team, and at NXN you're having teams compete who are at totally different stages in their training. Some teams from the west coast have just finished their season while others fromt the mountain west and midwest had their state meets 4-6 weeks earlier.

Besides all that, I feel it kind of dilutes FLN.

Since the termination of NXN is extremely unlikely, I think FLN and NXN should just merge and do it NCAA style. Have one race between the best individuals and the best teams. They should cut down on the field size too.

Sorry Brit here who follows the US stuff fairly closely but must admit that the structure of Nike Cross Nationals etc. has me slightly bemused.

High school teams are not allowed to compete at all after the state championship and hence they aren't "officially" being pushed on by the school and the coach so what would stop just a group of the top athletes who know each other I'm sure from meets just forming a "team" of their own and winning the thing comfortably?

Sorry- is very different over here as schools play almost no role whatsoever (aside from a very few schools who generally have a runner on the PE side) as there are no real high school teams and everyone trains in clubs which often have nothing to do with the high schools which usually have no coach etc. The one schools championships there are, are just with everyone competing essentially as individuals at the county level and then a "county schools" team being sent on.

you have to be all from the same school to be on a club team when you enter....

I still consider Footlocker (it was Kinney in my day) to be the real deal and NXN to be the bastard, wannabe, overhyped event. And I probably always will.

That said, I don't really see how the existence of either or both really helps the sport in this country. NXN is what it is, a contrived celebration of affluent amateurs caught up in the moneyed Nike hype.

How does everyone feel about USATF xc junior olympics? Isn't it the same thing has NXN? And if it's not, then why?

rustys wrote:

The worst part is there was no POINT to the individuals being there. Its not as if they even had a regional competition; they were just there for the sake of pulling people away from FLN.

Sad.

actually, they qualify at a regional meet just like the teams do.

I don't mean this as offensively as it might come across, but where have you been for the last 4.5 years? Before Nike came along and the "best high school team in the nation" was decided by voters there were plenty of people who screamed for a team championship.

So Nike came along and created it. For the first few years FLN and NTN tried to thrive together (Footlocker even expanded to allow for top NTN finishers from the west who couldn't compete in the FL Regional) and eventually I believe Nike offered (not sure who initiated contact and what actual contact went down - it was more just hearsay) to merge with Footlocker and the deal never went through. Now we have Nike trying to take over.

Look, I don't get how there are people on here saying high school competition is about individual only. I would argue that in high school cross country should be more team oriented than at any other point in a person's career. That is the point where you have the most participation by those seeking friendship more than personal and individual accolades in the sport. The team aspect is born by this camaraderie and expressed to the fullest by those that have the individual drive for success that translates into team oriented goals.

As for the "how many run into this conflict?" The best teams tend to have the best individuals. One example is the three CA kids or so. One from the Dana team, that soph from the Loyola team, and the one that got second to him at the state meet. They were the 3 fastest at the CA state meet I believe and all accompanied their teams to NXNs. I don't think any of them really performed up to par by looking through the results, but there are still something like 5 or 6 CA kids going to Footlocker (none of the 3 fastest from the state meet). Just pointing it out...

stringer bell wrote:

I don't like how NXN skirts the post-season team issue. I don't think national team championships have a place in high school athletics. Of course, Nike would say that there are no high school teams at NXN, only club teams (wink wink).

I agree and I think this is leading our sport in the direction of club youth soccer, which isn't good for either the participants or the sport. Inviting high school kids to be thrown into a meat grinder of competitive pressure beyond what had already existed doesn't seem right to me. Why wouldn't Nike just throw their money into taking over Junior Olympic xc and extend the benefits to all age levels high school and below? NXN just seems really sketchy and phony to me.

THen surely that doesn't make it a club team but a high school team?

Sorry - club over here is jsut completely independent of schools and it seems like total hypocrisy to have a "club team championship" when it's only high schools that can enter, or more to the point the only members of a "club" need to be from the same high school...

BOHICA wrote:

NXN is what it is, a contrived celebration of affluent amateurs caught up in the moneyed Nike hype.

I'm glad someone used the word affluent. This has been my main problem with NXN: it's for the rich teams. How many schools, even after fundraising, really have the budget to send seven runners plus a coach to the regional meet, wherever it may be? A lot of teams just stay home. So you're left with the rich kids having the cash to run at NXN regionals and nationals.

North Central is certainly not an affluent team (or from an affluent zone). Neither was Coatesville. They both won team titles.

Yes, The Woodlands, the Illinois teams, they are affluent, but I dont think the affluent argument can be made completely.