New D1 Regionals System

you're thinking of D2.

In Da Know wrote:

D-1 Regionals are dead. Old system to return. Announcement pending.

I can not wait until they do go back to the time qualifying that worked great for years and still works great for the pros. And to all those Nay-sayers who complain "my slow athletes cant make it to nats you should give them a chance" I say quit being a wuss and go out and race someone fast. That way you can always say you have the fastest people in the country racing, under the current system not necessarily true.

hell yes wrote:

I can not wait until they do go back to the time qualifying that worked great for years and still works great for the pros. And to all those Nay-sayers who complain "my slow athletes cant make it to nats you should give them a chance" I say quit being a wuss and go out and race someone fast. That way you can always say you have the fastest people in the country racing, under the current system not necessarily true.

What better way to drive interest in the sport then have a bunch of people time chasing in rabbited races where it doesn't matter what place you come in. All that matters is that you run some arbitrary time that no one outside the sport understands.

Competition is what drives sports. If people are going to care about this sport, competition is what is going to do it. Not hiding in a rabbited pack.

A solely time-based system is a horrible idea for distance events. Al it will test is who is willing to get in their best shape too early and go out to Stanford and run in a rabbited race in a line, run a basically bogus time that they will never touch again.

It's just like the DMR in indoors and the Notre Dame meet. Providence ran a 9:36 on their own in a different meet and did not get in to nationals, but were way more qualified to be there than many teams that made it.

To get to nationals, you should have to earn your way in by beating people.

another question wrote:

In addition to all this there's the question for distance events of HOW to narrow down a field of 48 to 12.

In the 1500 ... 4 heats of 12, take top 2 from each heat and next 4 times to nationals?

In the 3k, 5k, and 10k ... have 3 heats of 16, fast heat medium heat slow heat, take top 12 times to nationals?

Whatever it is, it won't be completely fair since not everyone will get to race everyone. If it's done this way, there will be intense last-minute racing to not only get in to the regional meet but get into the fast heat as opposed to the slow heat.

my guess is that the 1500 will run 2 rounds at the first round site. so maybe 4 heats of 12 in the prelims, take the top 6 from each heat, then two heats of 12 in the semis and again the top 6.

not sure about the other events, but this seems logical for the 1500. people were already running two rounds at regionals - don't see why they would cut it back.

I think that the main reason for returning to the descending order list is economic. Simply, keeping athletes around for 2 weeks after school ends busts the budget.

I like the regional meet but it is very expensive.

Your right it doesn't matter how fast you run lets all stop training run slow and the race each other that should keep us competitive in the world. BTW if you have ever been to regional's then you know nobody goes except the competitors and some of their parents. Heck if nationals isn't in Eugene the stands are about half empty, trust me I've been there. Face it nobody is ever going to like track as a spectator sport in the US. How many average football fans do you think are just going to flip on a 10,000 meter race at regional's, my guess negative 52. I cant even remember seeing regional's on TV and Im an avid track fan. We should stop worrying about getting the mass market and focus on getting our athletes to be competitive on the world stage. How many college kids get to go to Europe to chase a decent time every year maybe 10. If you think that it should be possible to win a D1 national championship and never have run faster than 14:10 in your career then you don't understand the point of track racing.

hell yes wrote:

I can not wait until they do go back to the time qualifying that worked great for years and still works great for the pros. And to all those Nay-sayers who complain "my slow athletes cant make it to nats you should give them a chance" I say quit being a wuss and go out and race someone fast. That way you can always say you have the fastest people in the country racing, under the current system not necessarily true.

Agreed 100%.

It's time to stop giving these Mid-America programs that are actually D-2 schools ( except for their money grubbing March Madness Basketball program ) to GET REAL and stop fantasizing about being something that they aren't.

Under a Super Regional format, can you imagine how long the LONG JUMP competition would take???

How about over 5 hours!!!

Not too mention that some of these athletes would be competing in other events.

Ridiculous!

TK1451 wrote:

Maybe they should follow the lead of the Olympic qualifying system, where the event that takes longer to recover from (Marathon for Olys, 10K for NCAAs) is done prior to the rest of the events. Might make the season go too long though, as you probably couldn't hold the 10K qualifier any earlier than the current regionals so you'd have to push the non-10K meet and national meet back a week.

You are just stupid and must be in high school. How many rounds of the 10K are there in the Olympic Games? The "best" athletes have no issue with running the rounds. The NCAA is not a time trial it a national championship race. I believe the 10K should have always been in the regional system.

Again, you just need to grow some balls.

Hey "a readl D1 coach", are you a member of said coaching association and how come you havent made yourself known to not only this message board, but the coaching association as well.

Seems to me your a bit cowardly in your actions by standing behind a comment with no truth to back it up.

There is one round of the 10k in Olympics.... This isn't 1972

What about how long the pole vault will take?

I heard there is nobody intersted in hosting the East line, so that may also force things back to decending order list!

The steeplechase will drop to 9:12 under the new format which is so ridculously much easier than the 14:13 I have heard for 5000m

I think this system sucks and was only made to stop the whining sprinters from the east that couldnt make nationals because their regionals were "too tough". Even though distances on the west are much tougher. Now people in the 5k and 10k will end up over-racing because 14:12 and will no longer guarantee them a spot. I think it will drag the last time in to about 14:04-05...and the result will be a bunch of burned out distance athletes at regionals, with 4 guys way out ahead winning easily.

This is because the best athletes will probably not be as affected, because if they run a 13:30-40, they can sit back and wait as usual. I just dont think there was a problem with the old system and this one will hurt a lot of people rather than help

come onn wrote:

You are just stupid and must be in high school. How many rounds of the 10K are there in the Olympic Games?

1

The "best" athletes have no issue with running the rounds. The NCAA is not a time trial it a national championship race. I believe the 10K should have always been in the regional system.

Again, you just need to grow some balls.

Stop trolling my thread.

Johnny:

What comment did I make with no truth to back it up? Yes, I am a member of said coaching association, and yes I have been vocal in my facts about regionals.

It seems you have a problem. What exactly is it since your message is somewhat disjointed. Please clarify.

Thanks

Has anyone heard rumors or possibilities of where these two regions might host their meets in 2010?

I have heard Ohio State for East and Sacramento for West. Are there any allowances for at-large bids at all?

The sites have not been picked as of yet and both listed have not shown an interest. There is no provision in the current protocol for at-larges.