Dartmouth ran well enough to deserve to go to NCAA championships

you forgot some teams, one was east. mich

those combined scores were from pre-nats...EMU wasn't at prenats

Dartmouth deserves to go, Didnt they beat princeton at HEP's head to head?

This is the exact reason we need to go to the super-regional meet. Many very good teams, on both the men's and women's side will sit home while shitty teams from the South, South Central, MidWest, etc go. When you sit down and look at the teams who won't go and how many times they beat people that do go it's sickening.

Geography is saving some crappy teams that should be sitting home.

It's bad luck, but it's life... Dartmouth is a solid program, they develop talent and they don't get much better than McArdle. Hope they get it, though.

Mkimbiaji wrote:

Dartmouth deserves to go, Didnt they beat princeton at HEP's head to head?

Beating Princeton doesn't matter because they didn't get in. Columbia beat Princeton at Griak AND Heps, but doesn't get to go either.

college coach wrote:

This is the exact reason we need to go to the super-regional meet. Many very good teams, on both the men's and women's side will sit home while shitty teams from the South, South Central, MidWest, etc go. When you sit down and look at the teams who won't go and how many times they beat people that do go it's sickening.

Geography is saving some crappy teams that should be sitting home.

NO!!!!! THIS IS THE REASON THAT PRE-NATS SHOULD RUN A SEEDED RACE!!!!! THen the best teams can compete head to head and the better teams will get to go.

SUper-regionals does not solve the problem!!!!

A seeded race would solve the problem!!!!

In the past they have required at least 2 points in order to get a team into the meet before looking at the next criteria. The head to head criteria is used when teams have the same number of points or when deciding between teams that don't have enough points.

I submit that ND does not have enough points and the selection committee will then look at the next criteria. ND was beaten head to head. Florida was beaten head to head.

Dartmouth will get the last spot!!!!Not ND.

What's more Dartmouth deserves that last spot and the interpretation of the rules allows for Dartmouth to be chosen.

they DESERVE to go...... yea... that wins my vote

I do not like the idea of the Super Region. There isn't enough time. Ok, the way the Super Region works is there's the regions as we know them today. That meet will be run before the conference meets. Then each conference runs its championships. Then we have the three super regions. Then we have the Nationals. Assuming that there was one week b/t each race that would mean a championship season that lasted 4 weeks!!! that's just crazy. Trying to sustain form for that long is silly, and you'd be taking away from what the sport is really about. ANd that's assuming that there's only ONE week b/t meets. What if there were longer periods of time like there is today. if there were two weeks that would extend it to 8 WEEKS!!!

Instead perhaps only ONE (seeded) race should be run at the Pre-Nats. I mean there were teams in the seeded races that definitely DID NOT belong there: Youngstown State (#1 finisher=130), Indiana State (and I know that they are the host team and all, but they didn't deserve to run, put 'em in the non-seeded race like they deserve to be - where at least they'd be more competitive... I mean, a couple of years ago at the national outdoor track champs at Duke, a Duke guy missed out qualifying by .01(1500m) should they have let him in??? well they didn't... that's my .02) ANyways... ISU's #1 154). If you weed out these types of teams a single race is more feasible. ANd if the teams that were definitely going to make it didn't run, i.e. Colorado, that would make more room.

I am all for head to head competition. If it were possible I'd line up every team in the NCAA D-I,D-II, D-III,NAIA, NJCAA all together and then we'd see who REALLY had the best team. I just think that the super region is an easy way out and it sacrifices the kids to unnecessary wear and tear.

I'd really like to hear what others think about this. I mean... I think this thing is going to be a reality and it kind of bothers me. But if I am mistaken, as I have ben in the past (push in rule, sorry) please let me know.

Robert is that a former rule or does that rule still apply?

Facts of the case:

Dartmouth had no points but did beat us head to head at PreNats when I ran injured.

No win is 'favored' more than another. Having beat Stanford would have had as much weight as beating Tennessee. Which coincidently we did earlier in the year before points were allowed. We also beat A&M at PreNats but you don't get points off teams that were pushed in. So technically we had one point.

We lost the tie-breaker to MSU. I don't like the tie breaker system, but we lost, those are the rules. Rather than going to 6th man or 5th man, or even scoring as a dual (which would have been 28-28 with ND better 5th and 6th), they go with the head to head of 1 vs 1, 2 vs 2, etc upto 5 vs 5. MSU wins 3-2 over us. After that, it didnt matter if we had the same point total or finished 80 back of them (still ahead of #10 Purdue).

And for the guy that said ND doesn't deserve to be there - I'm sorry the best 31 teams in the country didn't get in (obviously Dartmouth is one of the top 31 in most of our minds), but ND is not the worse team in the field. All those teams that beat us at PreNationals beat us when I was injured. I'm not 100% obviously, but I'm much improved and will be even more improved in another 9 days.

Don't hate on a team because they made it. They made it under the rules that govern them. I don't doubt there is a better possible system, but this is the current one and those are the breaks. We were preparred to take our tie-breaking loss and likely have our season come to an end. We were fortunate enough to have things fall our way in other districts that allowed us to race again. Luck of the Irish maybe, but I'll take it and not feel guilty in doing so.

Good luck to all of those running at Nationals.

Robert, I agree with you that Dartmouth deserves the last spot but NOWHERE in the NCAA rule handbook does it stat anything about requiring 2 points to get into the meet before looking at the next criteria. Maybe you are looking at an older version.

well put Mobley. good luck next weekend, and i hope that you feel better. as for dartmouth, that really sucks that they didn't make it in. same for lasalle and princeton, who are perenially left out for peaking at regionals. it is a shame, but the current system is what everyone has to play by. and i agree that superregionals is not a good idea at all. kinda like regional track is the worst idea ever. (look at the regional breakdown. 112 teams in the east, 78 in the mideast, 37 mid west, and 40ish in the west, yet all of the regions qualify the same number of athletes? i feel like i'm taking crazy pills! i mean seriously who the hell thought up this stupid ass idea. also it doesn't encourage ncaa athletes to perform at a higher level, rather to sit and kick at a conference, a regional and ncaa meet. this doesn't promote the sport, or develop talent at all. but enough, back to xc.....) anyway, best of luck to all of the athletes who made the show, and safe travel to all as well. for those of you who didn't make it in, you have a 1 week headstart on everyone for the indoor season. - tantino

There is no where where the 2 wins is written. It has just been a rule of thumb used by the committee. This was used several years ago. I do not know if they will or won't use it this year.

Let me use a football example: A touchdown is worth 6points, a feild goal worth 3, a safety worth 2 and a extra point worth one. It is possible for a team that scores only field goals to beat a team that scores only touchdowns.

In this case beating teams that are already in the meet is a touch down. Head to Head is the field goals.

I do not know what the committee wil decide to do but I do think enough of a case could be made for Dartmouth, using the rules, that they will be considered.

I do not mean to give "false hope nor do I mean to degrade ND. I just thought I had something to say that no one else had mentioned.

I sit on the committee which originated, and streamlined the Super Regional concept. It is important for you to know why it came around. First of all right now we have the most important meet of the year in the middle of October. Its called the PreNCAA Invt. You all know that if you screw up there, your season could be over. Putting the regional meet on that weekend will not, absolutely will not cause people to race any harder than they already do at PreNCAA's. So from an effort point of view, just about everyone was already running hard that weekend. The real issue was the horribly weak regions around the country who are guaranteed two automatic spots in the NCAA meet, even though they are often inferior to other regions. I could bore you with actual data to show you how weak these regions are, but won't. Simply put, you have the 8th,9th,10th finishing teams in some regions, beating the tar out of the 1st, 2nd,3rd finishing teams in other, weaker regions. So to say that we get the best 31 teams to the nationals is incorrect. We get the best 31 teams to the nationals based on geographic make-up. And that is plain wrong.

The Regional meet, which will be held two weeks before conference will produce 10 or 11 teams (not decided yet) that will get to go on to the super regional. There will also be individual qualifiers. Any conference champion will also advance to the super regional. The biggest dilemma will be how to combine which regions. Do we combine the Great Lakes, MidWest, and South Central, or do we combine the West, with the Southeast, and North East. That will take some thinking.

What I really like about the Super Region concept is that it finally forces the weak southern teams to have to line up and race the stronger regions. And how can that be bad?

The chances of a good, solid team getting left behind is far less than the current system. EAch year for the last 5 there have been teams which were ranked in the top 25 all year long (on both the men's and women's side) who got left home. This year will be no different.

And I don't think that any system that does that is very good. When our committee examined the super region system we knew that it wasn't perfect. But it will for once and for all put people on the line and make them race to get to the nationals. The NCAA basketball tournament makes those guys play every couple of days. While fatigue is a factor, coaching, training, intelligent planning can all overcome those.

I think for most college teams the super regional will eliminate those thoughts of getting "screwed" by the committee when it comes time to advance.

Personally, my team will be sitting home next weekend even though we have beaten 7 teams that will be in the NCAA meet. How do you think I feel after lining my team up, and racing those teams, and beating them head to head. Why are they getting in? They are geographically located in weak regions which gives them a ticket to the NCAA meet. In the new system when we all line up I won't have those problems.

Is the super region concept perfect - of course not. But it is a far cry better than the current one we have. And we explored every new idea that coaches brought to us from around the country. There were dozens of new formula's, meets, etc. When it came right down to it, the Super Regional idea was the very best option we had.

Now it is up to all of us to make it work so the best 31 teams do get to the NCAA meet.

Thanks for participating in the greatest sport on the planet.

Coach

Chugger wrote:

Assuming that there was one week b/t each race that would mean a championship season that lasted 4 weeks!!! that's just crazy.

All teams would have to do in the first regional meet is get top-10/11 in the current region. Any team that has a legitimate shot getting into nationals won't have difficultly doing this and won't have to consider this a "championship" meet. Then, after that, it's conferences, super-regionals, NCAAs, just like it is now. I think it beats having to peak in the middle of october to race in pre-nationals (which would be better titled "nationals in the middle of october" the way you propose it) Plus, how do you put get teams in the seeded race in a fair fashion? After 20 teams, it's a complete toss-up for the last 15 or so that get into the seeded race, and 30 teams would have a legitimate claim to those 15 spots. Instead of getting screwed in November, teams would be screwed in october.

I think the super-regional format is as fair as its going to get for the time being.

robert,

the fact remains that ND has 1 point (win over smu at nd invite) and dartmouth has 0. those are the rules. ND gets lucky and goes. if the meet had 32 teams, illinois and nebraska or lasalle and princeton would go before ND and dartmouth due to the new "push-in" rules. dartmouth got screwed (as did ND) at pre-nats by being in the race with no real easy points.

the 2 points thing from years past only came into play because all teams vying for at-large spots had points, especially when pre-nats was one big race.

nice try though.