NCAA Divsion 1 XC Nationals to return to ISU in 2011

The surface (and sub-surface) are not the best and have had a hand in injuries. As I understand it, it was built atop an old dump that was capped with clay, but I am not certain.

More like "NCAA Division I Grass Track Nationals"

More like "NCAA Division I Grass Track Nationals"Run the course. You'll feel differently afterwards. Tougher than it looks.

fFsdafasd wrote:

More like "NCAA Division I Grass Track Nationals"

You want to spread small time champs races like that around. The whole USA deserves some love. You want the small nationals type events like D1 XC at Terre Haute, Louisville, Houston, Charlotte, Eugene, Seattle, Des Moines, Boulder, San Diego, and so forth. You want Los Angeles to host massive global championships such as the Summer Olympics, IAAF Outdoors, FIFA World Cup, and so forth. Show some love for Terre Haute...

SalukiAlum wrote:

What a shit place to have nationals! They should keep them central somehow. But maybe try places like St. Louis, Cleveland, Memphis, or Nashville. Why do they always have it in Terre Haute? (I ran there in college and dont see the attraction)

have you ever even looked at a map?

Terre Haute is an excellent course for the type of field that pre-nationals and nationals consist of. Additionally, they have developed the expertise to put on the races virtually free of errors. To me, those factors are the most important criteria.

Sure, Terre Haute is somewhat dreary, but take a trip to Disneyworld or San Francisco or Rome for kicks on your own time after the meet. On race day, the only thing that matters is the race, and Terre Haute has a first rate course and does a first rate job putting on the events.

Is that really the case? That the surface at Gibson has contributed to injures? Your kidding right? As a local highschool runner I can tell you that our team has trained on that course for several years now and I know Indiana State trains on the course as well.

Hell they even shut down teams from training on it this year because it was so dry here in the Midwest and they wanted to preserve the course as much as possible. The entire front strait has a sprinkler system and is watered in the summer - the place has it's own groundskeeper for gosh sakes, you people are crazy... Their has even been talk of putting in a sprinkler system on the entire course. I can assure you that the surface/course does NOT contribute to injures.

Oh dear god, I can't stand another trip to Terrible Haute!

I'm seeing people say they wish the surface was varied a bit, and I'm wondering if they realize that the NCAA requires that the national championships course be 100% grass.

Just a shit place to get to.

Spread It Around wrote:

You want to spread small time champs races like that around. The whole USA deserves some love. You want the small nationals type events like D1 XC at Terre Haute, Louisville, Houston, Charlotte, Eugene, Seattle, Des Moines, Boulder, San Diego, and so forth. You want Los Angeles to host massive global championships such as the Summer Olympics, IAAF Outdoors, FIFA World Cup, and so forth. Show some love for Terre Haute...

As with many other T&F/XC events in the US, the same cities repeatedly host meets essentially because no one else is bidding (or has viable bids). If what a previous poster said about the UO bid falling through, my hunch is that the only school able to serve as backup was ISU.

master of the land wrote:

SalukiAlum wrote:

What a shit place to have nationals! They should keep them central somehow. But maybe try places like St. Louis, Cleveland, Memphis, or Nashville. Why do they always have it in Terre Haute? (I ran there in college and dont see the attraction)

have you ever even looked at a map?

I am not sure what your point was to SalukiAlum. As far as I can tell, all those places are pretty central, so keeping them central like they were in Terre Haute, is what he was getting at. I don't think he was claiming they would be in the exact center of the country.

It interests me that folks complain without really having any idea about the difficulty in putting on a national championship. It is a major job putting together the infrastructure necessary to have a successful championship. Certainly would having the meet in southern California be more fun? But since no one wants to put the effort and funding into doing it the right way Indiana State should be commended for raising the profile of cross country. Anyone ever been to the NCAA cc championships at Arizona, Iowa State, Northern Iowa, Tennessee? Horrible meet management and sometimes horrible weather. All in all, until someone comes up with a much better course and management I'd rather go to Terre Haute each year and be bored by the city, but energized by the outstanding effort ISU does to promote cross country.

I have heard that the injury to Mead last year was course-related. The year before something unusual happened to German that might also have had an element of causation from the course and surprising footing problems. However, I only have second-hand information that is suggestive.

As for Madison and weather, the previous four years is the snowyest 4-year period in Madison history and they had a total of maybe 4 inches in November. There really is not much snow by the time of the meet; the weather changes after Thanksgiving, usually early-to-mid December.

ISU does have a really good overall setup, with meet management and infrastructure for the meet. However, some course things and, especially, the location are far from ideal, as well as getting a bit tiresome to do every year. I think that if they would rotate through a few similar setups it would be good for all, and provide some competition between the sites for hosting the meets. I am a bit biased in favor of Madison, and do not try to hide that fact, and it is relevant to placing my remarks in context in this discussion. I think that it is a very big deal to have a location that is essentially primarily or entirely dedicated to the big national-level meet and think such sites should get much of the consideration.

I like the idea of one place for the XC National championships every year. College Baseball does this with Omaha and it works great for them. With XC if the championship is held in the same place from year to year we can compare performances year-to-year and even era to era, like we can do with the HS championships Kinney/footlocker, although that is losing some of its luster now with NXN.

Horses for courses have me wanting some sort of rotation. Kinda unrealistic, though.

Neutral permanent sites like Omaha have their appeal. Teams don't feel threatened that the host has the upper hand. That's why Mt Sac Relays is so huge they use three tracks and fields simultaneously. Moving the champs around also have an advantage that it popularizes the sport and gives kids a chance to see different parts of the USA. Having XC races in cold out-of-the-way towns like Terre Haute, Louisville, Waverly, Hanover, Waterloo, Portland, Lawrence, Boulder, etc. gives big city kids a chance to see rural America. With warm tourist spots like San Diego or Orlando, you have a WXC atmosphere with droves of fans plus you can bring the whole family to make a vacation out of it. Personally I like having warm tourist spots for championships since it exposes our sport to the public and many new people who have never seen XC show up. I am proud to show us off to others.

Many coaches have decided to NOT compete at the Pre-NCAA though. Oregon and Wisconsin are hosting meets that same weekend.

Didn't work when FL was moved to Orlando. Fans Didn't turn up at all.

Lets face it, cross country/track and field in the USA need a smaller stage in order shine and get the most attention. Eugene, OR., not exactly a large city is Track Town USA don't forget. There's just too much going on in larger cities for the casual fan to bother come out and support. An advertisement announcing a meet in the paper looks much larger if placed in a smaller cities newspaper.