DEAR VIN LANANNA: Here are the reasons to have regionals

La La Lander said: "So, next year you need to be top 17 in order to get a spot.

That really sets up the ideal conditions/time trialers up well. It also will allow them to post a 10k in late March and a 5k in mid-April and a free pass to both events at the NCAAs, where half of them will tank in the second event.

Forget it, Jake, it's Chinatown...."

=====================================================

Yes, this is true, but what is good about holding these Regional meets, where other than Eugene as host site, the crowds are pathetic (look at last year's attendance figures at the four Regionals)? Even with the two Regionals this year, attendance will be too small to produce a profit for anyone. This is why NCAA cannot find sponsors for the Regional Meets -- no one watches them and no one cares. At least with the major programs like Texas A&M, Oregon, Stanford and a few others, they work on building a base by being innovative, putting their money where their mouths are and being smart about how they spend their money.

unexpected Q wrote:

[quote].....a real college coach wrote:

I want to say this again. First round of nationals kills a mid-major teams budget.

I understand your dilemma, but I'd like to say this. Maybe you should think about why you spend money on track in the first place.

quote]

unexpected Q, you are a bit of a knucklehead.

There's a difference between making it to Nationals and scoring at Nationals (or having a ghost of a chance at scoring at Nationals).

The top D1 competitors are completely exhausted after their conference-regionals-nationals triple. They are non-factors for USAs, unlike the relatively rested stand-out D2 or D3 competitors who make USAs. (Nick Symmonds, 2006).

And who cares about leveling the playing fields of big budget schools and little budget schools? Is this board suddenly populated by socialist posters? Part of team competition is how big the athletic budget is and how powerful the recruiting is. Elect to attend a big budget school if you are good enough to do so, and you can go to Nationals as a team. Otherwise, smaller teams focus on winning conference titles, and individual stand-outs get to go to Nationals.

Some of the merits of the regional system include a fairer qualification process, an exciting event for the athletes (yes, I do actually believe that our sport should try to improve the quality of experience for more of the athletes), a greater number of athletes participating in a national (or semi-national) event, and a qualification process so simple that even an A.D. can get it.

There's a reason why cross country is thought to be more fun and a 5K or 10K on the track is more dreaded.

With short races on the track, you can't even compare those to cross country where the majority of the race is spread out. On the track there is pushing, jostling, tripping and spiking happening all the time.

People dread track due to the monotony, not difficulty. And you think a 1500 is harder than 8/10k on hills, mud, getting flag whipped, spiked, uneven footing, etc?

Again, I'm not saying there aren't issues with regionals, but I think there are at least as many issues in cross country as there are w/ track, yet we don't debate their viability in the fall.

You don't make money because of fans in the seats. By that logic, nobody would want to host a cross country regional. You make money by charging entry fees, and indirectly by not having to pay travel costs when you host.

If you agree to charge an entry fee, the total cost of hosting is comparable, if not less than the cost of travel.

The issue is more the inconvenience of finding officials, timers, workers, etc.

NAME ++++ posted: "You don't make money because of fans in the seats. By that logic, nobody would want to host a cross country regional. You make money by charging entry fees, and indirectly by not having to pay travel costs when you host.

If you agree to charge an entry fee, the total cost of hosting is comparable, if not less than the cost of travel.

The issue is more the inconvenience of finding officials, timers, workers, etc."

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

No, the issue is money. The history of Regionals is that they lose lots of money for the host (and yes they change entry fees and sell tickets, and etc). So even at a place like Eugene where they have lots of oficials and volunteers, the issue is still money. Eugene, even with the tickets that they can sell for a regional meet, still loses money (just less of it) on Regionals.

There is no entry fee for regionals. Why do you just make stuff up?

Quote from one of the money school (Wisconsin) coaches, and this guy wouldn't say shit if he had a mouthful:

QUESTION #3: And I asked Jim (Stintzi) this before, about this new setup for the NCAAs, are you in favor of it or do you want to wait and see?

NUTTYCOMBE: No, I don’t have any waiting and see. I think it’s a complete waste of a weekend. I’m not going to pull any punches on it. I think the University of Wisconsin is going to spend tens of thousands of dollars to send a group out there that, through several other methods of qualifying, we would probably end up with the same group going to the NCAA finals. I’ve never been a proponent for the region competition in general. This is just a different version of the same thing. Next year, I’m not sure what is going to come from it, but it will be different than what it is this year. This year will probably be a one and done deal. Sorry if I didn’t speak my mind.

http://www.uwbadgers.com/sports/m-track/spec-rel/052410aaa.html

Haha, totally agree. I guarantee Vin wouldn't have spoken so bluntly about the issue if he didn't feel all the major coaches were of the same mind. Vin is an excellent politician and doesn't say stuff on a whim. They are probably all pissed off at the waste of time, energy and MONEY for something that is NOT NEEDED!

What's worse, having some idiots who peak early (which is what they are going to do anyway because it's either them or their program) and run like toast at NCAA's with a decending order list, or have some of the actual contenders get injured or run flat at NCAA's because they had to run half of their races for the season in the last 4 weeks of it????

Some of the tagalongs are going to get blasted at NCAA's regardless, either because they peaked to early in a decending order scenario or because they used everything they had to slip thru the conference to regionals to ncaas in 4 week method. The tagalongs use so much mental capacity at conference and regionals and round one of ncaa's to get up for the challenge they are wasted if they even make the final. The contenders still get thru but not without wasting mental and physical energy. What this means for fans is races can be less exciting. That's IF they contenders stay healthy thru it all. Keep in mind that Wheating and Centro were both OK at regionals and injured at NCAA's last year and Ulrey was sick.

That's probably 2 of the top 3 in the 1500 hampered at last years meet and the top guy in the 800.

Was it necessary?

This is a no friggin brainer.

wasted time n energy wrote:

Keep in mind that Wheating and Centro were both OK at regionals and injured at NCAA's last year and Ulrey was sick.

That's probably 2 of the top 3 in the 1500 hampered at last years meet and the top guy in the 800.

Was it necessary?

This is a no friggin brainer.

I'd also add that it didn't just keep Wheating and Centro out of NCAA's at 100%, it resulted in them missing the U.S. championships right in Eugene. Luckily Ulrey was sick and not injured, and he managed to make the world championships and P.R. in Europe.

Whether you don't like Oregon or you do, we're talking about top U.S. runners here. Guys that could have gained international experience last summer. You do things that is counter productive to that, when it's not needed, that's just plain dumb.

There are only so many Wheatings, Centros, Andrews, Ulreys, Fernandez, Derricks when you take into account how many e. africans there are. Keeping our top guys healthy, motivated and hungry should be the top priority, not running a charity event for the 2nd and 3rd tier runners. It's more important to let our guys get in the miles and workouts and race the important stuff than have to back off on training and race needless races.

For those who say it's about "racing" that's 100% right. So let them race hard at conference and race hard at NCAA's instead of throwing in an awkward race inbetween which waters the more important races down.

A case of the "Old Guard" combating the "New Guard"

Of course Lananna is opposed to one more potential obstacle between his team and a national championship...this guy is focused on titles. Regionals potentially limit that opportunity. Smart coach.

Regionals:

They are necessary in any honest competition that involves thousands of athletes separated by geography, opportunity, competition, and ability.

Region Championships work at every level of athletics.

If they can't run through a pansy ass NCAA regional meet and come out ok, why are you talking about international experience after the NCAA's? Is there some goblin at the regional meet that hurts people? What nonsense. Do they need a red carpet that takes them all the way to Europe?

la la Lander: With his typical negative attitude poste: "There is no entry fee for regionals. Why do you just make stuff up?"

=============================================

Sorry, we just sent some kids up to the Oregon Relays and paid an entry fee. Correct, they don't charge entry fees for the Regional meet -- one more reason why Oregon lost money, even with 6-7,000 fans in the seats each day. If this isn't another nail in the coffin...

la la land: "If they can't run through a pansy ass NCAA regional meet".

Thank you, "pansy ass" is the perfect description of the Regional mmet. It's a meet that is unneeded, except for the Mother Teresas of the world. If anyone truly gave a damn about it, they would pay $10 and buy a ticket. Aint gonna happen, except for a few bleeding heart socialists who want everything in the world to be a "level playing field". If that's what you all want, then start opening your wallets and making donations to the College of the Poor so they can step up to the real T&F programs.

la la land wrote:

If they can't run through a pansy ass NCAA regional meet and come out ok, why are you talking about international experience after the NCAA's? Is there some goblin at the regional meet that hurts people? What nonsense. Do they need a red carpet that takes them all the way to Europe?

You are a true idiot. Webb is hurt. Ritz is hurt. Teg is hurt. Goucher is hurt. Meb is hurt half the time. Abdi is often hurt.

As was posted above Centro and Wheating were fine and conference and hurt by ncaa's. Centro was starting to hurt at regionals and was done at ncaas. Wheating started after regionals. Both missed USAs.

You know what? They might have both been racing at USA's and when a college sophomore runs 3:36 and another one runs 3:38 and 1:45, those guys need to be at U.S. championships. These guys are training at the level of champions and are already redlining it week by week.

Why the hell should chris derrick be running 5/10, 5/10, 5/10 every other weekend when the set in the middle does absolutely nothing for him?

What you idiots don't understand is that some injuries are career ending, some spinoff into others due to over compensation. Jesus, think where Ritz would be now if he hadn't had so many injuries. Webb too. Mike Fout just started racing again.

Regionals is useless, needless and deconstructive to top runners. In the smallest sense it's an interuption in training due to the travel and multiple races. Potentially guys get sick or injured from the travel. They learn how to qualify for important races at NCAA prelims and the U.S. championships. They don't need a uselss round of races to finish in the top 12 after day long travel for NOTHING! And that's assuming they don't have delays or layovers.

Webb, Ritz, Teg, Goucher, Meb, and Abdi may be hurt, but none of the injuries stem from NCAA regional competition.

The problems that Centro and Wheating had were not caused by competing at regionals, but rather from their reaction to the sum total of their race/training program.

Derrick does not have to run 5/10 every other weekend, even if they want him in the 5/10 at NCAAs.

The top runners and their so called coaches need to balance their entire programs so that they don't overextend themselves. They need to do this with or without NCAA regionals.

I happen to coach someone currently right near the top of the NCAA list. I'm going to limit that person's race schedule for the very reason you allude to. I'm not going to put that person on the track six times in three weeks. Those coaches who are using their athletes up by doubling and tripling them or pushing their training to the break point should know better. Killing a meet that provides a great competitive environment for developing runners isn't the answer to that problem.

What the real problem is, and why regionals is being killed, is that some of these coaches will do anything - ruin their own athletes, reduce competitive opportunities for others' athletes - in order to glorify their own egos by placing higher at the NCAA Championships.

You are more right than you think. When regionals were first discussed (they still had the old system) they also said that it would ruin the chances of the runners to go to Europe and run. Well first they are college athletes first and international athletes second and second it didn't hurt Warner the first year, he ran the gauntlet all the way to the Olympic gold.

la la land wrote:

If they can't run through a pansy ass NCAA regional meet and come out ok, why are you talking about international experience after the NCAA's? Is there some goblin at the regional meet that hurts people? What nonsense. Do they need a red carpet that takes them all the way to Europe?

[quote]try this one wrote:

You are more right than you think. When regionals were first discussed (they still had the old system) they also said that it would ruin the chances of the runners to go to Europe and run. Well first they are college athletes first and international athletes second and second it didn't hurt Warner the first year, he ran the gauntlet all the way to the Olympic gold.[quote]

For a true international class competitor, placing top 12 at the NCAA regionals is a walk in the park. The NCAA Championships is a nice tune up for international racing.

(The exception being the sprints and hurdles - due to the fact that the top NCAA US sprinters/hurdlers are routinely international class.) If someone is struggling to complete a collegiate season, with or without NCAA regionals, he is not of international level or his program is out of whack.

I've had international athletes who competed during the summer months. You have to adjust their collegiate schedule accordingly. That's just one of the sacrifices you have to make as a coach in order to be fair to the athlete's talent level. You limit their collegiate racing, train them through some events, let them try to win the NCAAs and then go compete during the summer. You don't bring them to Texas Relays, Penn Relays, Oregon Relays, double them at conferences, and then whine about a regional meet prior to doubling them at the NCAAs.

I completely agree. If you want to be treated like a pro runner, turn pro. (Or choose a coach who puts your pro career above his own ncaa prospects...like German...remember when he skipped indoor nats his freshman year to play it safe? You were all probably the first to hate.)

If an international-caliber NCAA athlete wants to compete at USAs and in the summer, then 1) they should turn pro anyway, but 2) they should spend March and April training and building base rather than chasing qualifying times. Then they can later run decently enough to get to regionals, make nationals, and run nationals just as they are starting to get in shape. The regional system favors this. It does not favor racing your athletes hard all indoor season and often throughout outdoor season. This is a choice Lananna and coaches like him have made, to race these "pro-level" runners hard several times in indoor and several more in outdoor. If they are burned out or injured now, it is a result of these choices. If you don't like it, change your style or get out of the collegiate system.

Also, NCAA track is a team sport and nationals is not just about picking a winner, it's about a fair way to choose the top 8 and award points. I think many people are arguing based on the perspective of their favorite distance star, and lack perspective on the whole issue.

Bottom line: You can't have it both ways. You can't act like a collegiate runner doubling or tripling at conference to score points, and then complain about not being treated like a pro and forced to run extra races.

How many professionals double on a monthly basis? At big meets like Worlds or the Olympics, you might see a few of the best double. That's once every two years. And yet these NCAA athletes deserve our sympathy because they've chosen to act like collegians, but want the system to treat them like pros?