Since LetsRun's search function is garbage I gave up on trying to search for this...
I heard that the two-regional system is going into effect for 2010, not 2011 as I had previously thought was up for discussion, and I was wondering if the standards for the new meets will be higher or if they'll just expect double the field size.
Anyone who is in the know and wants to help me out would be much appreciated.
Top 48 athletes in each region make it. No standards. Just be in the top 48
Anybody done the research to see how far off the current regional standards would place you? Example, 5000m still around 14:09 to place top 48?
Regional Runner wrote:
Since LetsRun's search function is garbage I gave up on trying to search for this...
I heard that the two-regional system is going into effect for 2010, not 2011 as I had previously thought was up for discussion, and I was wondering if the standards for the new meets will be higher or if they'll just expect double the field size.
Anyone who is in the know and wants to help me out would be much appreciated.
0/10
To attain 48 in each event (although this is not done yet) here are the standards using the past 2 years of data.
Men
100 - 10.65
200 - 21.45
400 - 47.50
800 - 1:51.75
1500 - 3:49
3kSC - 9:09
5000 - 14;22
10,000 - 31;30
110H - 14.50
400H - 53.50
LJ - 23' 10"
TJ - 48' 10"
HJ - 6' 8 3/4"
PV - 16' 2 3/4"
Shot - 54' 5"
Discu - 166' 4"
Jav - 198' 10"
Ham - 183
Women
100 - 11.85
200 - 24.15
400 - 55.00
800 - 2:10.50
1500 - 4:29.80
3kSC - 10:52.25
5000 - 16:55
10,000 - 37:30
100H - 13.99
400H - 61.30
LJ - 19' 6"
TJ - 40' 3"
HJ - 5' 7 1/4"
PV - 12' 4"
Shot - 46' 8"
Discu 154' 6"
Jav - 139'
Ham - 172' 3"
There may be qualifying standards attached to the 2010 regional format, but that has not been decided. If a data management system can be used, then no qualifying standard are needed. There is a counter proposal that only the top 32 will compete in each event. The final decision will be reached in September and then it will be made public.
This entire fiasco is due to poor leadership within the coaching association.
They don't even have sites set.
This is even easier to make and a huge increase in team's costs of housing/feeding people because of the easier standards across the board.
Clarifying questions,
Top 48 (or 32 in each event) attend the meet and top 12 advance to NCAA's?
Are there at-large bids still?
Is the decathlon still descending order list?
5000 - 14;22
10,000 - 31;30
From readint these boards I thought every D1 runner was faster than this.
so with the new system, will you have to declare for events? will people who qualified in multiple events count towards the 48 even if they don't run at regionals??
Mr. Obvious wrote:
5000 - 14;22
10,000 - 31;30
From readint these boards I thought every D1 runner was faster than this.
To make nationals in D-3 takes a 30:30 most years. If you're in D-1 you better be going at least 31:30 or you're wasting everyone's time.
D-1 Regionals are dead. Old system to return. Announcement pending.
Would the new regional format impact XC as well as T/F?
Where did you get these numbers? There were 40+ runners in the East Region alone last year who hit the (faster) regional qualifying mark in many events. I'm sure there were more who ran between 1:50.4-1:51.75 and 14:09-14:22. But then, no one ever claimed the new set-up was balanced.
Wouldn't each of the two regions have different standards?
If those end up being the actual standards that's a joke.
Those who posted earlier are talking out their arses.
I love how people that actually know the answers to legitimate questions come on here and try to provide information, and then there are assholes who claim that it is misinformation. The standards presented are factual, and represent what it would take to yield 48 in each regional. Of course, there will be instances where one region is stronger in an event than the other region, but you can't have separate standards. So this is what the standards would be based on actual data (entrants from the four regionals) from the last two years. Take it or leave it. As far as declarations, under the proposed new system every athlete must declare in an event, and once declared must compete in that event. There will be no scratching out of an event which means coaches have to think more clearly about how they do entries. If an athlete declares in the 100 and 200, and qualifies in both, then they must participate in both at the nationals. If they scratch out of one, they are completely out of the meet. There are no at-larges. When you walk away from the meet, the top 12 in each event are going to the big dance. The only event not being contested in the first-round competition (formerly called the regionals) is the combined events.
Given it is now a first-round, all applicable NCAA rules for competition will apply.
As far as the dude who says that the regional system is gone and will return to the descending order list. As of today that is not the case. At this point the only way for that to happen is for the Presidents to step in. While they might, they might not. We will just have to wait and see until the end of August after the presidents group meets.
Thanks.
Those times just look too slow to me. They certainly are slower than the regional marks of previous years. Additionally, the 10k times are pedestrian.
I don't mind the 2 region system, nor do I mind abandoning the system. But I think settings standards too low is going create problems.
If a time of 37:30 for the women's 10k is used, there could be a field of 200+ in that event alone.
No super-large fields, only 48 per event.
The only standard will be the one that will be needed to make the list. If the standard is 45 minutes in the 10k there will be 100s on the list, but only 48 athletes at each meet. Got it?
the 10k has previously been an auto and provisional standard that goes straight to nationals, so 31:30 probably wouldnt be accurate as this year it took 28:56 to make it which shouldnt change very much, unless they are planning to run it at regionals now
yes! 10k will have to run at new regionals to advance to NCAA FINALS
A Real D1 Coach's number are way off. Stop and think. Most of the old region standards were set based off of the 100th best time in the NCAA a few years back. The new system will take somewhere near the top 96 athletes in the NCAA to a region. Yes that is a drastically broad generalization. For example the 48th best athlete in the women's pole vault in the west region will be a much higher vaulter than in the east region so in essence the regional "standard" if you will in the new west will be higher than the old standard and will be lower in the new east region.
There will be no standards and don't trust the numbers above. After the information was released I went through and divided the descending order list in 2008 into the 2 new regions and then found the 48th best in each region to see about where the cut-off might be (not a standard mind you). I'll have to go find that and share the results with you.