NXN - A case for why individuals should not be at a TEAM race

Ummmm, no.

Ummm no.

It's the same conditions for everyone.

CWRP wrote:

In the girls race at NXN the 2nd team point was 20th place. 5th team point was 35th… Individuals should have their own division and should be separate from the team race.

When going for a team title every runner should be a point. I'd rather see less individuals and more teams. It messes up the team races having them in the race.

Very interesting. I had always assumed the top runners were just apart of the top teams.

5th team point at 35th?! That's embarrassing.

You are correct but that does nor meet the Nike agenda. Nike wants to bury Footlocker.

CWRP wrote:

In the girls race at NXN the 2nd team point was 20th place. 5th team point was 35th… Individuals should have their own division and should be separate from the team race.

When going for a team title every runner should be a point. I'd rather see less individuals and more teams. It messes up the team races having them in the race.

Agreed. Cross Country should be a team sport. I would be 100% in favor of this being established at all levels and no longer having individuals at championships.

CWRP wrote:

In the girls race at NXN the 2nd team point was 20th place. 5th team point was 35th… Individuals should have their own division and should be separate from the team race.

When going for a team title every runner should be a point. I'd rather see less individuals and more teams. It messes up the team races having them in the race.

Why I don't get is why we separate them at all. Count them all the same.

So if you are 20th in the race, you are 20th in the team scoring. Why do we take the individuals out. I agree with the sentiment that we aren't rewarding true excellence. So count them all.

rojo wrote:

CWRP wrote:

In the girls race at NXN the 2nd team point was 20th place. 5th team point was 35th… Individuals should have their own division and should be separate from the team race.

When going for a team title every runner should be a point. I'd rather see less individuals and more teams. It messes up the team races having them in the race.

Why I don't get is why we separate them at all. Count them all the same.

So if you are 20th in the race, you are 20th in the team scoring. Why do we take the individuals out. I agree with the sentiment that we aren't rewarding true excellence. So count them all.

You could very well do that and it would favor and reward the teams with low sticks that's for sure. Not quite sure how the founding fathers came up with that logic. I asked that question 40 years ago!

American Fork would have preferred to score it by total places. LOL

American Fork 242 Pts on total field

Bozeman 260 Pts

They're separated at the NCAA meet, that's the way XC works. Yet I too would like to see them counted.

CWRP wrote:

In the girls race at NXN the 2nd team point was 20th place. 5th team point was 35th… Individuals should have their own division and should be separate from the team race.

When going for a team title every runner should be a point. I'd rather see less individuals and more teams. It messes up the team races having them in the race.

How does this show individuals shouldn't be at a team race? If you exclude 18 of the top 20 runners you have a race which is so weak it need not even be held.

To the guy who said that it is that way because it's the way NCAA does it and it's the way XC is: that's the problem.

If the best college basketball player's team doesn't make the final four, that doesn't make those game uninteresting to me.

I would rather watch an 8-team race with NAU, Stanford, Colorado, Wisconsin, Oregon, BYU, Washington, and whoever else than the current format.

Lenny leonard wrote:

To the guy who said that it is that way because it's the way NCAA does it and it's the way XC is: that's the problem.

If the best college basketball player's team doesn't make the final four, that doesn't make those game uninteresting to me.

I would rather watch an 8-team race with NAU, Stanford, Colorado, Wisconsin, Oregon, BYU, Washington, and whoever else than the current format.

Watching a race without the best you'd be in the minority that's for sure. People pay to see the Rock Stars usually not the opening act!

I'd just change the scoring to include the individuals. But that does open Pandora's box because there are some top 100 NCAA XC athletes not making it to Nats finishing beyond the 5th Individual.

Agreed. Cross Country should be a team sport. I would be 100% in favor of this being established at all levels and no longer having individuals at championships.[/quote]

Says the one who has never won a race

I agree: trophies, safety pins, ice cream, popsicles, and play time for everyone! But what do we do when one team wins and others lose? My idea is that they should all be tied for number 1! Everyone is the best!

I never understood the rationale of excluding individual runners, beyond the "we've always done it that way" mantra.

Your finish place should be your finish place, IMO. Either count everybody, or make it head-to-head dual meet scoring.

A few years ago, when CBA (New Jersey) won the boys race, the team that finished 2nd had exactly the same average time, and a tighter spread 1-5. The finish order was determined by the random accident of which intermixed runners were team runners, and which weren't. Had nothing to do with the relative merit of either team.

Why don't we score meets by average time? AF would have destroyed everyone if scored on average time. I've never seen a team lose to another with such a significantly better average time.

They should all count wrote:

I never understood the rationale of excluding individual runners, beyond the "we've always done it that way" mantra.

Fewer than 10 years ago at the state meet in Iowa all runners were part of the scoring.

Timezzz wrote:

Why don't we score meets by average time? AF would have destroyed everyone if scored on average time. I've never seen a team lose to another with such a significantly better average time.

So if we go by average score OR include individual runners in calculating team score, AF wins? Time for riots. #notmynationalchampions.

Joking aside, it would be interesting be interesting to see how tactics would've changed.

With results being automated, I would like to see every meet scored as parallel dual meets. The team with the best overall record wins. There's already too much emphasis on time.

Team A : 25 - 0

Team B: 24 - 1

Team C: 23 - 2

...

It puts the emphasis back on racing man-for-man.

Have an individual race. Have a team race.

In the NBA if the MVP's team doesn't make the finals he doesn't get to compete as an individual.

I know running is different. You either need to:

1) All runners count.

2) Put individuals in their own race.

Either way ever runner should count!

2nd team point in 20th is why this needs to happen!