one time blocker rule and the ned to run a seeded race at pre-nats

The whole points system is flawed and takes away from the idea of beating peole when it counts. Thank God the new system goes into effect next year and will eliminate the stupid one currently in existence. It sounds bad to say, but this season hasn't even started and I can't wait for the next one to get underway. It isn't a perfect system, but at least it will even the "playing field" more.

What new system?

I am talking cross country not track.

top X in region go to super region. top Y in each of the four(?) super regions go to NCAAs

Two round NCAA Qualifying Tournament

1st Round - NCAA Regional

NCAA Regional Championships will be run four weeks prior to the current Regional Championship date (corresponding to the current Pre-NCAA Meet date). Regions will remain as they are ? nine Regions

The top 11 teams from each Regional Championship qualify for one of three Super-Regional Championships to be held four weeks after the Regional meets. This date corresponds with our current Regional Championship date (2nd weekend in November).

The top three individuals not on qualifying teams from each Region advance to the Super-Regional.

Any team that wins it?s Conference Championship, but does not place in the top 11 teams in the Regional would advance to the Super-Regional.

The top ten finishers from a Conference Championship would advance individually to the Super-Regional (if not on qualifying team).

2nd Round - NCAA Super-Regional

Three Super-Regions are created by combining groups of the three current Regions.

Super-Regions would be:

1)West ? Mountain - South Central

2)Midwest - Great Lakes - South

3)Northeast ? Mid-Atlantic ? Southeast

The top 10 teams from each Super-Regional advance to the NCAA Championships for a total of 30 teams.

An impartial committee will select the top three non-qualifying teams from any of the three Super-Regionals to advance to the NCAA Championship for a total of 33 teams.

The top eight individuals not on qualifying teams from each Super-Region advance to the NCAA Championships.

Competition distance for the Super-Regional = 10k men, 6k women.

The Rationale

Answers to why this proposal is the best solution to the ?qualifying problem?

This plan meets the NCAA?s criteria for regional representation.

By advancing 11 teams from the Regional and 10 teams from the Super-Regional meets ? the plan very nearly insures the best teams will advance to the next round.

The need to travel for at-large points is eliminated.

Head to head competition determines which teams qualify.

The number of teams that can claim to have qualified for the NCAA ?tournament? will increase from 31 to at least 99.

Teams will not be locked in to the Griak and Pre-NCAA meets. They are free to schedule any way they would like.

Answers to objections to this proposal

(Q) What about the teams that don?t qualify for Super-Regionals? Their season will be over after the Conference meet.

(A) Every team can qualify for the Super-Regional by winning their Conference meet. Teams that cannot finish in the top 11 of their Region nor win their conference, would not qualify under any plan including the current system. Those schools would be free to start competition earlier in the fall.

It could also be argued that not only do we provide ample opportunities for distance runners to compete ? we provide too many opportunities between cross country, indoors and outdoors.

(Q) The West-Mountain-SouthCentral Super-Region looks very tough. Isn?t this proposal unfair to those teams?

(A) Under the current system, there has never been a year when both the Mountain and the West have qualified six teams. There has never been a year when the West-Mountain-SouthCentral have collectively qualified more than 13 teams - the maximum allowed under this proposal.

The average NCAA finish for a 6th place regional team is 24.7.

The average NCAA finish for a 6th place Mountain/West regional team is 24.3

The average NCAA finish for a 5th place regional team is 24.9.

The average NCAA finish for a 5th place Mountain/West regional team is 25.0.

With 10 teams (and a possibility of 13) qualifying out of each Regional, the likely -hood of a team being both a top 20 team, yet not being in the top 10 in the Super-Region is very slim.

(Q) With one weekend of competition eliminated for those teams not advancing to the Super-Region - some teams might not have enough weekends to schedule 6 competitions (the NCAA minimum) - is it possible to reduce the minimum number of competitions to 5?

(A) This is a queston the NCAA Track and Field Rules committee would be asked to consider if the proposal is passed.

(Q) You have added one more mandatory meet to my schedule. Doesn?t this proposal limit my scheduling opportunities and my planning as a coach?

(A) If you consider your team to be a serious contender for an at-large berth - you already must compete at either the Griak or Pre-NCAA or both. It is true that if you do not consider yourself a contender for an at-large - you have more freedom in scheduling now. But clearly the goal for every team should be to make the ?tournament?. This proposal greatly increases every team?s chances.

That does not sound like a better system than the one we have now.

Is it a sure thing or is it just being considered?

Next year there will be a new system and word on the street is that it is going to be the new system, they might even allow for a few more individuals out of the super regional because adding a few more won't hurt the balance and will help in participation numbers, which is a new, big agenda item for the NCAA. Adding a couple more also makes it a little more proportional, this system is weighted a little more towards the team aspect, which is a good thing, as long as the individuals are not forgotten about.

Robert,

Just interested in what you don't like about it. Most coaches agree that it helps take the at-large subjectivity out of the equation. 18 teams were earning automatic berths and 12 were getting bids based on if they could afford to fly across the country to compete in a big meet against competition. This was a system that really hurt the lesser funded programs, and which made the season not so much about training, peaking, and racing, but about fundraising and budgeting.

The unaccounted for factor is disparity of competitive strength among the three super regions. But expect an "at large" adjustment factor to be introduced to offset the disparity of strength after a year or two. Maybe an underperforming super region will have to forfeit a spot to the best performing super region. Time will tell.

Why fix what seems to work fairly well? There are some problems like the blockers, fixed this year. the non seeded races at pre-nats. and a few others. Don't try to tell me that the at-large system is subjective. IT is not!! BUt teams must know how to " Play the Game".

In reality there are only about 50 teams each year that even have close to a legitimate shot at going to nationals.

These teams try to meet each other to "get points". The two meets that the most points are scored are Griak and Pre-nats. One race is at the beginning of the season and one is at the middle.

The most important thing is how the teams do at Regionals.

The one time blocker rule allows for poor meet selection and for peaking at the right time.

If the NCAA wants to add 2 teams there is no reason why they can't do it under the currant system. Duh?

In reply to perspective and robert I would say that there is already an at-large factor in the new system. Three teams will get to go on the at-large bid idea. Thirty teams will make it automaticaly and three will get bids. It is possible that a strong region will get all the bids making it a 13, 10 , 10 distribution, or what ever it may end up being that year. "Playing the game in the current system means if you have money, you get to play, if not, tough luck. You said fifty teams have a realistic chance every year, but only thirty will go, that leaves 20 teams with the grand opportunity to get shafted every year if they don't "play the game." That's just too many. The key is that you can get an A.D. to budget you the money for a mandatory meet like the super regional, but they always seem to see it differently when it comes to a meet all the way across the country. The current points system is a forced-to-play situation, the new one is just simply a system that everyone can follow and participate in equally, without regard to budget constraints.

I like the proposed new system better than the old one, but does anybody foresee a problem with good teams sandbagging regionals knowing they've only got to be top 10? Why kill yourself in mid-October when you've got a conference meet, a super-regional and nationals?

That is a question that will best be answered by each particular coach. If a team wants to sandbag it, that is a gamble they will take, maybe some team will come up and push them back with a big effort, will it be out of the top ten, who knows?

I don't have a problem with this idea or that of track regional qualifying. But the implementation is kind of cockeyed. Why are they adding extra high-stakes meets to the season instead of just utilizing conference meets as regionals for track and the first round for cross?

Sure, some conferences are weaker than others. But it would be much better to work with meets already in place (and ones that ADs really care about--much better to get 3rd in conference than 9th at regionals) instead of making a long season longer.

Yes, that's true. AD's do look at a 3rd in a weaker conference as better than a 9th in a regional. Of course with a 9th place you advance on to the next meet. Remember though, the NCAA has gotten this new bug up their collective butt about regional representation being THE ONLY way that teams compete in the post-season. Hence, the new track system. Of couse the coaches fought it, so the compromise is still slanted toward what the NCAA wants. In CC 30 teams will make it based on super-regional results and then 3 will get the consolation bids. In track, the individuals will earn their way based on regional results also, with 20 automatic slots(4 regions x 5 slots each), then the top 8 individuals who did not automaticaly qualify will get to go based on their regular season mark. Once again this satisfies the NCAA's need for regional results being the key factor that determines post-season participation.

Jeez, this new system sucks. It will not effect the top schools, but it will effect the second tier. You're talking about making a meet in the middle of October important enough that you will have to run well just to qualify for the stupid SUPER-REGIONAL. This almost guarantees that the team with less depth will be struggling by the end of cross, more than they would with an intelligent coach in the current system. Because now you HAVE to back off mileage at the end of Sept to be ready for a meet mid-oct.

This will have no effect on the good teams who can just train through. The old system worked fine. Sure, every year somebody good gets left behind. That's why they race. If you don't qualify, sorry, get ready for next year. Are NCAA coaches the dumbest around? Our sport is not like baseball, quit trying to make it out to be.

Of course the additional representation will allow more sorry coaches keep their jobs because they can say "we qualified for ncaa's" or "we qualified for the super-reg." so expect to see dirtbags like rothoff or whatever his name is around for the long-haul.

This system IS MUCH BETTER than the old system. Currently you MUST race well at Griak and/or Pre-NCAAs to have a prayer at making it to Nationals. Now the only difference is that you have to finish in the top-11 at a regional meet the same weekend as the current Pre-NCAA meet. Then you get to race yourself into nationals at the super-regional rather than going home and praying that the other regions "went your way" and you made it as a bubble team.

In the current system better teams get left out of the national meet because they didn't get in the right race at Pre-Nats or had a guy sick at Griak. That is much less likely to happen now. If you can't finish in the top-11 at your regional you don't have a prayer at making it to nationals anyway. The only teams that should be concerned are the decent, but not great teams in really strong, deep regions (West and Great Lakes). Some of them will have their seasons end two weeks early. However, those teams probably wouldn't make it to nationals anyway.

Man, any sport that has to have a "one-time blocker rule," can't be all good.

Jr,

Just so you know, racing well at Griak, and or Pre-Nats are also meets that would have to be peaked for...hmmm? So at least in the new system, the meet means something, i.e. you will know the value of your effort at the end of that day. As it stands now, you have wait, count your points, count everyone elses points, pray other do badly at their regional meets etc, etc. Now, it simpler and cleaner.

It is not simpler nor cleaner. There are still at-large teams... So that has not changed. how will those three at-large teams be picked... See the problem.

The currant system is fine IF THEY RAN A SEEDED RACE AT PRE-NATS. Then all the legit teams meet and face eaqch other. IF a team does not "play the game" or fails miserably at PRe-nats and peaks at the right time. There is now the one time blocker rule to clean things up.

The system this year is being screwed by not HAVING A SEEDED meet at PRE-NATS.

Coaches I implore you to solve this problem this year!!!

Run a seeded race at pre nats!!!!