2017 NXN At-Large Bids Controversy?

Chmiel seems to have crashed and burned after too many weeks of chasing Katlyn.

MArunner4 wrote:

Also, I am surprised Desert Vista is the controversial pick when there was an at large bid given to the Southeast. That region has repeatedly filled the last couple of spots at NXN while the southwest is almost always one of the highest regions? Seems like the 5th place team from the Southwest would have places higher than the third place team at Southeast regional.

In many other years this would be true but this was an especially good year in the SE, probably the most competitive its been in NXN history. Bolles had an exceptional race to upset the form chart but the other 4 teams from the SE in the top 5 have been consistently rated in the top 25 in the country throughout the season - including Green Hope (which has been top 20 the entire year and I don't think anyone has ever accused milesplit of having a SE bias) . Green Hope also beat automatic qualifiers from other regions at both GA and up at Van Cortland. Speaking of VC, its very difficult to compete well the first time you run there - so there is a definite familiarity advantage and they still did well.

So look for LV to be top 5 and maybe Bolles can pull off another great race but I give Green Hope a better then 50% chance of beating them and looking at a top 15 finish.

I find this extremely offensive. My son worked harder for all of his accomplishments than your son possibly could've. I was an Iron man finisher and I KNOW FOR A FACT that my son deserves to go to the Nike Footlocker National meet. He DNF'd in the Cool Breeze Invitational last year, and he isn't qualified after that?!?

Is this really the most competitive that the SE has been? Keep in mind, teams are getting faster every year across the entire nation.

IMO, that is just hype.

Some years where the SE might have been at least as competitive:

2012 had Chantilly (with their #1 opting for Footlocker South instead) end up third on a tie breaker. This was the first year that the SE was competitive at the national level, with St. Xavier KY finishing 10th (257) and Blacksburg VA finishing 14th (322). The battle beyond the AQ teams was pretty fierce as well, with Brentwood TN only 13 points back in fourth and Belen Jesuit FL another 23 points back in fifth.

2013 had Brentwood TN as the first podium team from the region finishing 3rd (174), and Severna Park MD had a good finish as well coming in 13th (303). The region was a little further behind, but still pretty competitive.

2014 was another strong year for the region as Severna Park repeated their 13th place finish (299), and was joined by Daniel Boone TN just behind them in 14th (302). Lake Braddock VA was only one point behind at NXR, and even Brentwood TN was another point back in fourth. Four teams virtually even, with two finishing #13 and #14 at nationals.

2015 was a regression to the region's average at NXN with Marietta GA finishing 15th and Trinity Prep FL 22nd. Not as competitive that year, and the times at NXR showed it.

2016 was back to being a competitive region again, with Brentwood TN back on the podium in third (163) and St. Xavier KY finishing 13th (332). Loudoun Valley had a very similar team time and score to this year's Green Hope team, though the #4 team that year (Trinity Prep FL) was further back.

The #3 and #4 teams at NXR Southeast were faster in 2013 and 2014, and virtually the same in 2012, back when there was less competition nationally. The 2012 teams were closer in both time and points to the AQ teams, as were the 2014 teams. 2013 and 2016 teams were just as close in time, but further back in score.

If I had to pick a year or two to say "the SE was more competitive this year than they've ever been!", I'd probably say 2012 was that year. Or 2014. Or maybe 2013. I would put them all ahead of the 2017 field, when compared to their national peers, although I do agree that the SE isn't as weak as it once was (2015, and 2004-2011).

On the other hand, the Southwest has been and continues to be one of the best regions by a significant margin, so the other poster had a good point there. Also, that SW #5 team (American Fork UT) was pretty good: not as good as they've been in the last few years (but have been possibly the best program at NXN in the last decade, so that's not to be expected), but they won the Utah 6A State Championship and edged SW#2 Springville at the BYU Classic in mid September. I'm not sure that American Fork would beat Green Hope, but I do think it would be a great race. We will probably get a transitive idea of that at NXN, since Desert Vista was barely ahead of AF at NXR.

One Bias could have been the big story line that the Southeast had never had a bid. Not saying that it was the reason they got the bid, but it was probably an added draw.

Also: Not sure why people think Bolles was a big upset. I think going in they were in very comparable spots, especially given the unpredictability of an NXN meet. I think Bolles overall need to run 3 seconds faster per runner to match Green Hope at each of their state meets. Its very easy for one team to lose 2 sec and the other to gain 2 sec on one particular day.

1 Charles Hicks 11 Bolles 15:16.78 188.41 188

9 Chase Rivera 11 Bolles 15:57.63 174.79 175

12 Benjamin Foltz 11 Bolles 16:00.38 173.87 174

14 Alexander Hastings 11 Bolles 16:11.51 170.16 170

15 John Bowers 12 Bolles 16:17.19 168.27 168

2 Finn McBride 12 Green Hope 15:46.39 181.54 182

6 Peyton Barish 12 Green Hope 15:58.95 177.35 177

7 Ryan Kemper 12 Green Hope 16:00.16 176.95 177

11 Daniel Vo 12 Green Hope 16:08.26 174.25 174

19 Reed Blackman 11 Green Hope 16:19.42 170.53 171

I do think Green Hope was in a solid position for one, but I don't think their run at VCP was what set them up for it considering Corning did not run at full strength, Bolles clearly was peaking later on in the season, and they also barely beat Niskayuna who finished in 6th at NXN NY.

The main thing that Green Hope has going for them is that they are consistent. They will not run a crazy race to move up a lot and finish top 10, but they could get into the 15-18 range just because other schools will probably not run their best races. I think that the only Wildcard team that has a reasonable chance to get into the top 10 is St. Francis, who should be a favorite to do so. I wish the committee would pick teams that has a chance to finish up towards the top of the NXN field and not just solid teams who will mix it up towards the back.

I agree with you. Bolles souldn't have been a shock to anyone (aside from Milesplit apparently), Green Hope wasn't just their Manhattan race (mixed bag there), and Green Hope could certainly finish in the 15-18 range because they have been consistent and there will always be some teams that don't run well at NXN.

I would hope that the committee is trying to pick teams that look like they can finish at the top - what teams do you think they should have taken/not taken in order to do so? I would think the first criteria for looking at that aspect is to look at whether they beat an AQ team during the season (Timpanogos UT and El Paso Eastwood TX on the boys side; Claremont CA and Lewisville Hebron TX on the girls side), and beyond that look at how competitive they were with the top teams particularly at NXR (list gets long here, but includes Timpanogos UT and Desert Vista AZ, Crater OR and St. Francis CA and Green Hope NC and Dana Hills CA, El Paso Eastwood TX and The Woodlands TX, and at NXR Lyons Township IL as well).

I agree. I think the fact that Desert Vista beat AF at regionals gave some credibility to getting fourth? I will be very interested to see how the southeast teams perform.

Interesting. To compare that, Dana Hills looks better. Although Desert Vista only ran 1 three mile race and it was there first race of the year. If they let them race another 3 mile race in California type weather at the end of the season, since most of those Dana Hills PR's are from recent races, they would probably drop anywhere from 5-10 seconds each?

RunnermomIronWoman wrote:

I find this extremely offensive. My son worked harder for all of his accomplishments than your son possibly could've. I was an Iron man finisher and I KNOW FOR A FACT that my son deserves to go to the Nike Footlocker National meet. He DNF'd in the Cool Breeze Invitational last year, and he isn't qualified after that?!?

What does you finishing the Ironman have anything to do with your son choking and not qualifying for the "Nike Footlocker Finals? (I thought those were two different meets by the way). How about qualifying as an individual like "Real" runner and not relying on At- Large bids???

Sorry....Your son SUCKS!!!!

We do not need a national championship for high school kids. Your post proves that.

What we need to do in this country is to develop kids not use them!!!

I would hope that the committee is trying to pick teams that look like they can finish at the top - what teams do you think they should have taken/not taken in order to do so? I would think the first criteria for looking at that aspect is to look at whether they beat an AQ team during the season (Timpanogos UT and El Paso Eastwood TX on the boys side; Claremont CA and Lewisville Hebron TX on the girls side), and beyond that look at how competitive they were with the top teams particularly at NXR (list gets long here, but includes Timpanogos UT and Desert Vista AZ, Crater OR and St. Francis CA and Green Hope NC and Dana Hills CA, El Paso Eastwood TX and The Woodlands TX, and at NXR Lyons Township IL as well).

I think that beating an AQ team is great, but it is one race. If they really performed and that team that was beaten is and was at the time a top-10 team then I think that is a good top 10 indication. When Timpanogos beat their auto teams they didn't run a particularly impressive race, the other teams just ran even less impressively. As for Desert Vista, they were even further back from the Southwest top 2 and are not likely to contend at the top of NXN. Giving that spot to a deep CA team I think would fare better. Faring even better I think would be to give the bid to Burnt Hills who I think would compete well in the race given the course. Burnt Hills also had two very proven low-stick, which bodes well at a National meet, and then has 2 other runners who are less consistent but have run within 15 seconds of their 1-2, and the a more consistent 5th man. My thought is that I would rather take this Burnt Hills team who I think has relatively equal chance of being 3rd-8th as being in the last four, as opposed to a team that will most likely be around 15th or so. I think it makes the race more interesting.

If I were to have done the bids, they would have gone: St. Francis (CA) Burnt Hills (NY) Green Hope (SE) and then a toss-up between Lyons Township (MW) and Timpanogos(SW). Timpanogos over LT just because they did have those wins, but LT over Timp because they were closer to the 2nd place at their regional.

Was Loyola ahead of Dana Hills at their state meet?

Cubbies1 wrote:

Was Loyola ahead of Dana Hills at their state meet?

Well, Dana Hills beat Loyola in D1s, but in the merge more runners displaced Dana Hills' 4+5 then their top 3 made up, so Loyola was the fourth overall team in the merge. This could be a potential reason CA did not get 2 bids, because of the controversy on how both teams beat the other.

You know what. Finish in the top two or face the music. It's really that simple.

I was going to reply with a longer post stating my POV and backing up my points, but... it was going to be pretty long, so I'll keep it short and say:

I definitely disagree about Timpanogos.

I definitely disagree about Desert Vista.

I disagree about Burnt Hills.

I would argue Lyons has just as many flaws when looking at them as do any of the other potential At-Large teams.

I would certainly go for a team that raced and has been competitive with, or even, beat regional champions than merely didn't race any and then wasn't close when they did.

That's a plus for Timpanogos, El Paso Eastwood, The Woodlands, Desert Vista, St. Francis, Green Hope, Crater, Lyons Township, Loyola and Dowling Catholic. Desert Vista beating El Paso Eastwood provides another point to consider. None of the other potential At-Large teams faced off, so it's more difficult to gauge how good they are, aside from how they look on courses we should all have a decent feel for by now - in which case, (a shorter list of) those same teams rise to the top once more.

Cubbies1 wrote:

Was Loyola ahead of Dana Hills at their state meet?

Good point. I doubt that they can take Loyola ahead of Dana Hills then... maybe Dana Hills was considered the #4 CA team?

big man wrote:

You know what. Finish in the top two or face the music. It's really that simple.

Amen. If you want an NXN spot bad enough, you'll earn it on regionals day. Finish in the top two or face the music, and accept (like Lyons has had to, and I know it's tough losing by one) that by not being one of the two best you're putting your fate in the hands of the NXN organizers.

Shane Bissel Loyola's #1 runner and Southern Section D1 champ sprained his ankle in the first mile, ran 16:28. For 98th place and Loyola's #7 Tough break. If he run's like last week Loyola takes third easy, but would not have caught Roosevelt for second. But stuff happens and that's why you run the race and add up the score.

MArunner4 wrote:

How can you argue that when Desert Vista got second at Woodbridge? I feel like that is more of a problem with the Cali NXN qualification system

Well #1, Woodbridge doesn't mean a damn thing since that's not a real race. #2, it matters what you do in November, not in September.