What changes should be made to NXN and NXR to make it even better

From the Northwest? wrote:

Oh? wrote:

In an ideal world, you do a significant realignment to not only combine NY with the Northeast but rebalance the entire eastern US (at minimum) while keeping the same number of regions, meaning you also make adjustments to the Heartland, Midwest border, Southeast, in addition to a new Mid-Atlantic region.

For all the geniuses who want to throw NY back into the NE region... that creates a region that would be about half again as large as California and over four times as large as the Northwest, on a population basis. And oh yeah, would also have almost 60% of the team titles awarded to-date. I know there are geographic concerns, but c'mon... that's nowhere near "ideal".

... perhaps reread what I wrote before declaring it 'nowhere near "ideal"'. Nevertheless, I'll respond to all of your points...

Population: Currently, the largest region by population is the Southeast with over 80 million, followed by the Midwest at 46.6 million, the South at 42.9 million, California with 39.5 million and the Northeast with 36.6 million. With the 9-region realignment I would propose, the population of the regions would be much more similar: 62.7 million for the Southeast, 51.4 million for the Mid-Atlantic region you are overlooking, no change for the South or California, 34.9 million for the Midwest and 34.6 million for the new Northeast. Not only would it not create a massively oversized region (by population), it would go a long way towards fixing the population balance issues.

Team titles: Yes, New York has won just about every girls title. No one is disputing that. However, that is one very small sample size because only one team (per gender) wins in any given year. Any region including New York would, by that definition, be too strong -- even New York by itself. Hell, you could say that a region consisting solely of Fayetteville-Manlius NY would be 'too strong'. It's a bad argument. A better argument would be how many teams end up on the podium, but that is still extremely lacking. An even better argument would be how many teams end up in the Top 10, or top half of the field, or score under X points (270, 300, 330, 380, whatever), but that still isn't perfect because some regions have had more teams involved (At-Large invites) and the field isn't identically strong from year to year.

# of teams who qualified for NXN that would 'miss out' due to realignment: This is the big question. If realignment were to occur, who would be left out and who would go in their place? I think that if you look back at it, the fields would remain similarly competitive when all was said and done, but with more accessible and balanced regional meets it would be an overall improvement to the system.

Oh? wrote:

... perhaps reread what I wrote before declaring it 'nowhere near "ideal"'. Nevertheless, I'll respond to all of your points...

Population: Currently, the largest region by population is the Southeast with over 80 million, followed by the Midwest at 46.6 million, the South at 42.9 million, California with 39.5 million and the Northeast with 36.6 million. With the 9-region realignment I would propose, the population of the regions would be much more similar: 62.7 million for the Southeast, 51.4 million for the Mid-Atlantic region you are overlooking, no change for the South or California, 34.9 million for the Midwest and 34.6 million for the new Northeast. Not only would it not create a massively oversized region (by population), it would go a long way towards fixing the population balance issues.

Just between us girls, it's disingenuous as hell to post all those population numbers without including the Northwest. What is that, a whopping 13 million? Yeah, that's completely fair. SMH.

From a watchers standpoint at NXN, I would love to see NIKE put the teams and individuals in DIFFERENT jerseys. The teams kids need to stand out from the individuals. It is virtually impossible to watch (on the course for coaches also I am sure) and gauge where a team stands. The individuals look no different. Something as simple as striping on the shoulders to differentiate would be perfect. Just my two cents.

1. Most years people wouldn't make the trip from some of the NE states.

2. The regions are fine- it's tough unless they make more regions

3. How? It's a tough process- unless they go with just using speed ratings

4. That is up to Footlocker. Nike is the superior race and the real championship.

5.Everyone would have to wait for NY- we have two levels of championships and we have our regional on Thanksgiving weekend- no time off school to travel. That Regional is huge with many races.

They are in different jerseys. The colors can sometimes be very close- they could make multi color jerseys to differentiate but, for example from NY- there are the two (three) teams with their own jerseys and the individuals have their own that says NY.

I'd like to see the race locations rotate around a bit, at least, at the national level. This is much the same criticism leveled at the Oly Trials of late, that they are in the same place and the sport risks being isolated and marginalized.

NXN should really be an ambassador to the sport and as such, the host location should move from year to year. There are so many wonderful courses out there, it's a shame to limit it to one place. Hold it at Van Cortlandt Park, or Rimrock Farm, to name a few.

Boys team results for NE and NY from NXN in recent years. both regions have been successful as a whole:

2018

NE: 4, 18

NY: 5, 14

2017

NE: 7, 18

NY: 2, 12

2016

NE: 7, 22

NY: 9, 19

2015

NE: 17, 20

NY: 10, 21

2014

NE: 11, 18

NY: 1,4 ,8

2013

NE: 2, 12

NY: 4, 11, 20

2012

NE: 4, 5,

NY: 12, 16

2011

NE: 1, 18, 22

NY: 12, 16

2010

NE: 5, 19

NY: 2, 13

maybe your kids should just run on a track

no reason to rotate nxn location, a big part of the experience is being at Nike's headquarters and I couldn't imagine the trip without that. they have improved the course from portland meadows and just sound like they need a few tweaks but by in large it is mostly a rain problem which can happen anywhere.

uniforms; i think when they first added individuals they put them in white uniforms with different color team names and shorts for the regions and teams were a solid color that would be an easy move to go back to that as it is fairly simple to pick out white jerseys vs color jerseys when you are determining how the team race is going.

combining the regions doesn't make sense, northeast has had some success and there are many weaker regions to pick on. new york girls have been dominant (the middle school debate is another one to have, but nike has its rules in place and i feel like it would be tough to tell a kid 'hey you ran varsity all year but can't go to nationals now') and as it is deserve two bids every year

How about

Northeast Region:

New England & New York

Mid-Atlantic Region:

NJ, PA, MD (from Southeast), DE (from Southeast)

Did you tell your girls that Vista Murrieta were better "mudders" after the race?

Spot on. Doug just wants to complain because California xc is essentially track racing. Cross country is ALL about the mud. Have you watched any world xc racing? Or Great Edinburgh cross race? The conditions are what makes cross excellent. If you want to know who is the *fastest* go ahead and focus on Hoka Postal Nationals.

let's not get carried away, cross country should be grass and hills and what not but don't forget this is a national championship. if you want to go through a mudpit go do a spartan race or tough mudder, it should be a fair course that allows for a true competition. nothing pancake flat or a road race but don't go to the other extreme

justmythoughts wrote:

let's not get carried away, cross country should be grass and hills and what not but don't forget this is a national championship. if you want to go through a mudpit go do a spartan race or tough mudder, it should be a fair course that allows for a true competition. nothing pancake flat or a road race but don't go to the other extreme

Comparing the NXN course to a spartan race is ridiculous. It is not extreme by any stretch of the imagination. At least not for anyone that has experienced real cross country. It rewards strong cross teams, not track teams. Just the way XC should be.

I'm on the fence regarding NY (and other states) and 8th graders. As someone else posted, those kids, right or wrong, participated for their HS team all season and the original motivation for NXN was to determine the best HS team without rankings (and provide a FL-like experience for the best teams). I have more of an issue of a guy not being eligible to run on his varsity team all year, but suddenly being eligible for his team at NXN. I think he should have been allowed to enter as an individual, but should not have been part of his team's chances. But maybe I'm not looking at that fairly either. Can someone convince me otherwise? Likewise, my gut tells me the SE team a few years ago that qualified with boys that didn't compete during the fall for their HS team, shouldn't be a team/club at NXN. Again, maybe I'm off base.

Regarding Coach Soles wanting an even playing field, that is never going to be the case. Is a school with 3000 kids playing on the same field as a school with 1000 students? What about schools with open enrollment vs. those that transfers have to sit out an entire year? We could all come up with discrepancies in fairness. It's what it is. It's an imperfect system, just as the NCAA is as well.

You are comparing advantages some schools have (better coaches, larger teams, bigger schools) to actual rules that are in place for some, but not for others. Name any other national championship event where certain teams get different rules than others.

Honestly ask yourself this: If California changed their rules so that 10 varsity athletes compete in all meets, including State, would NXN allow California 10 athletes to everybody else's 7? Of course the answer is no. Why? Because that would give us an unfair rule advantage. Does the middle school rule give those teams an unfair advantage? The results say it heavily changed this season's order for those teams.

The areas that have this advantage want to keep it, I get that. The coaches in the area that don't have it should be the ones speaking up to Nike that it isn't realistic to give certain states that type of an advantage in the rules. Until that happens I'm sure it will stay the same.

Doug

So if a 7th or 8th grader is eligible in their state and they compete all season as a varsiy runner you are now saying that even though the entire season they were eligible - now they arent. I dont agree.

You also arguing its a rules thing not other advantages that some might want to neutralize. Well how about having the rule be “ if you are eligible according to state rules as varsity eligible then you can run”

If you are arguing rules i am guessing each state has different transfer eligibilty rules and i dont see you trying to level that issue.

If your argument was that running middle schoolersis a too much too soon argument i would agree they shouldnt run. I think we are tilting towards unhealty pressure and issues for young athletes including elite ms runners.

I disagree with your suggestion because it is contrived to manipulate the “winners”

I see more concern about winning than i do about what is healthy, patient, and what is in the best interest of the kids. I am not a fan of the obsession with winning in youth sports. Yes kids should be challenged and tested and learn how to compete. However there is way too mich emphasis on winning in your suggestion.

Middle school kids should never count towards HS varsity because.................. they aren't in HS. Of course this isn't really an issue on the boys side, more of something that affects the girls race.

I think it is just one of many differences that exist between states. States have different upper age limits. States allow junior high kids to compete. States have open enrollment. States have mega schools. States have earlier start dates for the season. States allow transfers to compete immediately.

NXN can't equalize everything so there is no good reason to equalize the 4 years of competition. If a school wins NXN with 5 7th graders but the high school only has 500 students enrolled, there was no advantage over the 2nd place team which had 3000 students enrolled.