DI Mens At Large.....Again

Round 11 and 12 point changes should read UCLA(1)...typo.

Regional finish (Note: A fourth-place team in a region may not

be selected for an at-large berth ahead of a third-place team

from the same region; however, a fourth-place team from a

region may be selected ahead of a third-place team from

another region). The situation may arise when the next team

under consideration from a region (Team X) does not have

enough wins (points) to earn an at-large bid, but the team

immediately behind Team X (Team Y) does have enough wins

(points) to be selected. In this case, both teams X and Y will

receive at-large bids. Any additional teams still under consideration

for at-large selection will not be awarded wins (points) for

having beaten any team (Team X) advancing to the championship

finals by virtue of the wins accumulated by the team

In your round 7 you are comparing Columbia(1), Clemson(1), Ohio State(1), New Mexico(1) and not taking into consideration rule a(the rule above, which comes before the common opponents rule) which means they will look at the teams behind them to see if they have enough points to get in. In this case CSU is behind New Mexico with 2 points which is enough to get in in this round there for pusing in New Mexico and leaving NAU with a point less. So you might wanna consider redoing the calculations after that point.

The Prophecy wrote:

The situation may arise when the next team

under consideration from a region (Team X) does not have

enough wins (points) to earn an at-large bid, but the team

immediately behind Team X (Team Y) does have enough wins

(points) to be selected. In this case, both teams X and Y will

receive at-large bids. Any additional teams still under consideration

for at-large selection will not be awarded wins (points) for

having beaten any team (Team X) advancing to the championship

finals by virtue of the wins accumulated by the team

You are right this is the rule. However, I don't believe it applies here. If New Mexico gets in on their own they are not considered a blocker of CSU. In the rule above, team Y does not simply push in team X because team Y has more points at the time of consideration. They push them in if team X cannot get into the meet on their own merrit. New Mexico can get into the meet on their own merrit.

The common opponents stat might want to be checked. At great american Central Michigan beat New Mexico. Yesterday OSU beat Central would then be a common opponent as well to both OSU and NM. This would give each team with 2 wins by common opponent. Where would this go from here?

JUST A CHANCE wrote:

The common opponents stat might want to be checked. At great american Central Michigan beat New Mexico. Yesterday OSU beat Central would then be a common opponent as well to both OSU and NM. This would give each team with 2 wins by common opponent. Where would this go from here?

If this is right and common opponents are even, then it would be based on top individual runner. I would expect UNM would still get the nod with Matt Gonazalez running so well.

MAC, Since you appear to know alot about the rules. When does the Push rule come into effect. And exactly when is it considered valid to apply it and what are the terms of this rule.

So basically what this comes down to is how the committee interpets the 7th round. According the the 2002 rule book (Cant find the 2004 one so who the hell knows what's different) it says that the "push rule" will be put into effect before the "common opponents rule." So wouldnt it be a possibility that new mexico gets pushed in since that rule has priority over the common opponents rule? if anyone knows where a copy of the 2004 rules are online let me know.

The push rule supposedly comes into effect when a team cannot EVER make the meet on their own merrit. Thus, if a team can get into the meet in the 31st spot on their own they would not be a blocker team. In this years meet, if Ohio State were to get the 31st spot on their own, then Michigan State would be S.O.L. However, if Ohio State will never get one of the 13 at larges on their own. So, they get pushed.

I think the easiest way to calculate blockers is to go through the at large process never applying the blocker rule and see who the first teams out in each region are. These teams are the "blockers". If you do this, Columbia, Clemson, and Ohio State are the blockers. Then, you go back and recalculate the process using the teams immediately behind them. If you do this, Brown(1 win over Iowa), UVA(2 wins-New Mex and NAU), and Mich St(2 wins-W&M and Georgia) are the "pushers". These "pushers" can always be considered over the "blockers".

There are some ambiguities in the wording of the rule, so how the committe interprets it vaires. For example, if a team gets in 31st are they a blocker for the team immediately behind them at regionals that may be team 32? I say no, by the letter of the law, but sometimes the comittee disagrees. As they did last year when they deemed Washington a blocker of Oregon b/c Washington would have gotten in 31st and Oregon would be left out. So, they removed the last 3 teams(Butler, Notre Dame and Washington I believe), allowed Oregon to push in Washington for spots 29 and 30, and allowing Portland in at 31, thus keeping Butler and Notre Dame at home.

Official announcement of at large teams

http://www.ncaasports.com/crosscountry/story/7888113