Texas A&M coach RIPS NCAA regional system.

This thread and Pat Henry's comments dealt with multiple issues. However, there are two in particular that have been conflated: 1 what should a T&F TEAM competition look like and 2 what should individual event competition look like? The current approach addresses these questions with a single meet or championship series. But it doesn't have to be.

T&F shares a problem that several other college sports face that have include individual events. Some, like Tennis and gymnastics handle the two parts of their sport well. Others, like swimming and T&F do not.

All these sports do a good job of selecting individual event champions. In T&F, you could argue that everyone who deserves to be there isn't, but the majority of the time the very best athletes either win or have an opportunity to compete head-to-head for a crown. Yes, some people miss out, but most years, most of the people who should be there are there regardless of the selection process.

Some sports, however, do a better job of creating a team competition. In addition to individual event competitions, Gymnastics and Tennis have a relatively compelling team competitions as well. Last week, the Ladies D1 tennis team competition came down to the final match between UF and Stanford's number 3 players. Tied 3-3 (it takes 4 points to win) and UF ahead 5-4 in the last and decisive set, the Stanford player won three straight games to secure the national crown for Stanford. This was a true head-to-head competition between the two best TEAMS for the title. Swimming and T&F have nothing like this.

Whereas it can be fun watching individuals vie for individual crowns, casual fans could care less. In this year's NCAAs, most agree that Oregon, TAMU and UF are the best "teams." Yet, out of the 19 (excuse me if I'm off by an event or two) events, TAMU and UF will go head-to-head in maybe 6 events and Oregon will go head-to-head in at most 2 events with either of these teams. How can anyone call this head-to-head competition?

Several people in this thread concur with Pat Henry that a true head-to-head team competition is possible without eliminating the individual event championship component. Read back through this thread to see some of the proposals. The individual event championship meet/invitation could follow the team championship.

While this approach adds to the current apparatus, the advantage is that it creates a package that is more TV friendly, which could be enough to pay for it, and is more understandable to casual fans and athletic directors. Please tell me how such a format hurts the individual athlete competing for weak teams. These athletes will still get opportunities to compete for individual crowns.

Perhaps this proposal is just a pipe dream. However, it is clearly fair. Everyone would still have the opportunity to compete as individuals, and the well-funded teams, who dominate the "team" competitions currently, would continue to compete for team titles just in a more compelling format. It actually has the possibility of raising the visibility of our sport and possibly raising revenue.

I have a few problems with some of the ideas proposed:

We can't just have an all finals NCAA meet. While it would be GREAT for our TV audience, professional track and field is all about running rounds and being in good enough shape to run 2-3 races at your distance in superb fashion. Unless we expect to also change the IAAF qualification procedures, I do not see it best to change those for the NCAA. Many of these athletes will be trying to pursue a career in T&F and it is imperative that we try to prepare them to handle it on the global stage.

Qualifiers based solely on time/distance is a somewhat silly idea. This sport is about winning. Granted, winning usually means achieving a great time/distance, but if we are trying to appeal to the general public, they are going to love seeing the cinderalla story no-name win a regional or national 1500 with a superb kick, and so emphasis should be placed on being the best racer/performer in your event at the regional event.

the idea of separate individual and team championships is just unwise. winning in this overwhelmingly challenging sport is all about periodization and peaking, everyone knows this. this event would destroy the hopes and dreams of some athletes and teams alike, because at the end of the day this is an individual sport. however, we can apply a team aspect...see below.

ok so here's an idea:

-there are 31 conferences right? so have 6 "regional" meets with 5 conferences per region, distributed relatively fairly( 6 in one conference, not a big deal) according to geographic location.

-qualifiers for the regional meet consist of the top 3 per conference in each event and then top 9 times/distances (6 in the "larger" region, sorry guys) for a total of 24 athletes per event

-maintain a 2 day prelims/finals system like many high school state meets. this is not a problem in drawing public attention, there is generally a HUGE pull for the Penn relays and that is, what, 4 days?

-to qualify for nationals, you must place in the top 2 in your event and then there are only 4 time/distance qualifiers nationally, for a total of 16 athletes qualifying individually per event at nationals. this places a MASSIVE emphasis on being able to WIN your event at the right time and showing the goods at the right time of the year, even more so than the current system.

-to handle the team dispute, have a standard team championship scoring system at each region, and only the winner in each region will qualify for nationals. Thus, 6 total "teams" at nationals who can submit 2 athletes per event (however only a total of 3 if they already have 2 time qualifiers, so only 1 in this case). this keeps the amount of athletes in each event at nationals under 28 and most likely close to 24 or even lower. this means only 4 heats MAX in any event, so have a standard prelim/semi/final in the sprint events and prelim/final in distance and field events

-this does NOT mean that only these 6 teams can win the team title however, let's say an SEC school sends a QUALITY sprint team out to nationals but did not qualify an entire team. if they still have the individuals to get the job done at nationals, they are certainly deserving of the team title, so every school will be scored at nationals

I realize this is a lot to take in and most likely has some flaws, so I'd appreciate some input.

I would vote to cancel regionals and go back to single nationals. It should be up to each coach, AD, school and local USATF association to hold time trials in their local geographic areas to enable athletes to meet the standard. Folks should get together on their own and set up time trials to be held in April and May. Or if you want to you can run at Stanford Invite, Mt Sac, Long Beach St, Payton Jordan if you can get an entry.

He's an old fart

While I'm not totally against the idea I think that there is a major problem conducting a team championship in a sport w/ so few scholarships for so many different event groups. Something like you are imagining would end up with many, many races which were simply not competitive because the system as now designed forces schools to pick and choose event groups to compete in. Perhaps a different system would create different incentives (like allowing a team which is above average in many event areas to compete for a national crown). I have to say that a dual meet (and I know you are not proposing a dual meet, just for discussion) between Texas A&M and Oregon sounds awful.

Can Rgns:

Here is the one major part in your thought process. Right now the meet directors of the Stanford, Mt. SAC, Payton Jordan, Texas A&M indoor meets, Arkansas indoor meets control who gets into nationals. How? They will not let anyone in to the meet, or to the fastest sections. I have many examples where Stanford or Mt. SAC refused to let a college athlete in the fast section, even though their actual performance would dictate it. Why? Because they didn't go to one of the name schools, they went to one of the smaller NCAA DI schools. Indoors Pat Henry is controlling who gets into his meet. Therefore, he is acting like a gate-keeper in who can actually race fast. Lets say you have a very good athlete who is ready to run fast. If TAMU will not let you into the meet given you are not one of Henry's cronies, then you lose out on a situation where you might qualify. All one has to do is look at the number of NCAA qualifiers out of about 6-7 meet during the indoor and outdoor season, and you can see that if you don't get into the right section at the right time, your potential qualifying opportunity just got diminished.

Greg Kraft allegedly started hisown meet the same time as Mt Sac bc of the situation at Mt Sac. I heard Vin Lanana did the same because of Mt Sac. Yes they are the big name schools and yes they get paid to maintain the status quo. The bottom line is everyone is out for themselves. So how about you guys in other parts of the US starting your own regional time trials in April/May. I mean, I like Coach Goff, Mike Todd, Mary Jo, and Edrick too, but ...