Last-ditch lifeline to NCAAs for Princeton and Gonzaga ? Remember, NC State failed to record a team score at Nuttycombe

The new NCAA rules that went into place this season state that if five or more runners start a race then that team is considered to have competed even if less than five finish.

Athletes that start the race are required by meet directors to be included as a DNF and the team placed in last. That's why there has been more stringent declaration processes prior to racing.

How that gets interpreted for wins/losses... no idea.

---

LetsRun.com wrote:

So the NCAA fields will officially be announced later in the day and we're veyr confident they'lll end up like the how we predicted on the front page.

That being said, there is one thing that has added a little spice into the at-large debate. Some have remembered that the NC State men didn't record a team score at Wisconsin. So we had Bo Waggoner give everyone in Nuttycombe a victory over NC State and re-run his computer program. If you give all of the teams in that race a victory over NC State, it changes who gets in at-large to NCAAs.

The at-large teams would end up being:

19 Oregon
20 BYU
21 Michigan
22 Indiana
23 Wisconsin
24 NC State
25 Utah St
26 Furman
27 Princeton
28 Washington
29 Boise St
30 Gonzaga
31 Iona

instead of the current:

19 Oregon
20 BYU
21 Michigan
22 Indiana
23 Wisconsin
24 NC State
25 Utah St
26 Washington
27 Boise St
28 Furman
29 Iona
30 Alabama
31 Florida St

So the difference ends up being, Princeton (27) and Gonzaga (30) get in instead of Alabama (30) and Florida State (31).

Now the rule book says "During the at-large selection process, institutions can only accumulate wins against any opponent’s “A” team. An “A” team is considered to have competed if four or more of those individuals who compete at the regional qualifying meet finished the regular-season race. "

4 of NC State's regional runners did start at Nuttycombe - gaynor, bason, kawalec, shanklin - but only 3 of them finished (Shanklin DNFd). The rule as written - seems pretty clear - Princeton and Gonzaga have nothing to stand on, but then again, any long-time fan knows not all rules are followed religiously.

And moving forward, does the rule make sense? Should it really matter if a guy DNFs versus walks it in last place? Should the A/B/ rule be based on the # of regional runners that start the race instead of finish it?

---

It will actually be really interesting to see how this shakes out. I'm torn on what should happen - it some ways it seems like Princeton and Gonzaga should get credit for this, but on the other hand they just defaulted to "beating" NC State along with every other team.

After thinking about it for ~2 minutes my opinion is that they shouldn't get in since they didn't truly beat them, but am curious to hear both sides of that argument.

Oh hey, fellow track/xc coaches, maybe we should make this as confusing as possible. The last thing we want is for potential fans to have any clue what's going on.

Let's see, we beat NC State but, wait! They ran 4 of their "real" runners and only 3 of them finished. Looks like they didn't beat them after all! It was just an IlLuSiOn...

In ANY OTHER SPORT if you beat the other team then you beat the other team. NCAA coaches are literally the dumbest people in the world. It's truly a scene to behold.

Now, to address the actual question. A DNF should now count according to the new rule and therefore this should count as a win against NC State. Let's go Tigers and Dawgs.

NCAA should give both arguments the benefit of the doubt, this should not be an arbitrary decision. Best choice is to allow 2 extra teams for the lack of clarity in the new rules.

Go Zags!

It's done. FSU is in. Along with Bama.

https://seminoles.com/mens-cross-country-celebrates-at-large-ncaa-berth/

---

LetsRun.com wrote:

Now the rule book says "During the at-large selection process, institutions can only accumulate wins against any opponent’s “A” team. An “A” team is considered to have competed if four or more of those individuals who compete at the regional qualifying meet finished the regular-season race. "

---

It really doesn't matter. It's not like any of the bubble teams are going to be competing for a podium position. There are better teams in the Mountain and Great Lakes regions that are staying home anyhow.

Selection Show:
https://www.ncaa.com/video/cross-country-women/2019-11-16/di-cross-country-2019-selection-show

Please explain this argument?? The last time Alabama was in the meet 2017, where they were the last At-large team in the meet .... yes #31. They finished 14th, beating teams from the Mountain, Great Lakes and West Regions. Who your better teams obviously lost to at regionals and thus didn't make the meet. The system is not perfect but teams that show up on the day and perform should be rewarded, just as much as teams that run fast on Oct 4th. NCAA Championships are in late November and being good on the day is what matters. As Butler (Basketball) Boise State (Football) and countless others have taught us.

Have attached the 2017 results so you can see for yourself.

https://xc.tfrrs.org/results/xc/13423.html

Roll Tide

I’m surprised this thread doesn’t have more traction. Would this fly in any other sport? Take the Alabama-Minnesota basketball game a few years ago when Collin Sexton and Alabama had to play 3 on 5 after losing two players to injury/fouls. Did that win not count for Minnesota?

I am guessing that the difference is that, with basketball, you can continue to score with less than 5 players. In cross country, you are unable to score once you have less than 5. One possible solution, in a case like this, may be to award them the last scoring spots. The problem is that then a partial team beats other schools which would not seem fair since the other schools actually had 5 finishers. If there were 5 runners that started, you score the 3-4 that finished and you award the 247th and 248th places (or whatever they are) to their team score and see where they finish. Otherwise, it is the equivalent of a "forfeit" as opposed to a win-loss-tie. A forfeit would be as if the team never showed up in the first place. They would have scored around 674 or so.

Interesting scenario, however. We talked about situations like this years ago with international (Canadian or Mexican) universities entering the race. If you take them out (since they do not follow the same eligibility standards that we follow), it can flip-flop scored teams and impact the NCAAs.

Anyway, congrats to all that made it. Making it as a team is not easy. This is about the best system there is to make it and it keeps evolving.

~Kevin

---

RollTide wrote:

Please explain this argument?? The last time Alabama was in the meet 2017, where they were the last At-large team in the meet .... yes #31. They finished 14th, beating teams from the Mountain, Great Lakes and West Regions. Who your better teams obviously lost to at regionals and thus didn't make the meet. The system is not perfect but teams that show up on the day and perform should be rewarded, just as much as teams that run fast on Oct 4th. NCAA Championships are in late November and being good on the day is what matters. As Butler (Basketball) Boise State (Football) and countless others have taught us.

Have attached the 2017 results so you can see for yourself.

https://xc.tfrrs.org/results/xc/13423.html

Roll Tide

---

A Team that would lose to Alabama?? Every position matters and yeah Alabama had a super strong top 3 and then a group of hard working athletes behind them that yes placed further back. That doesn't impact how well there team did or if the 7th place team in the Mountain would beat them. You can build a team any way you choose, all 7 guys don't have to be super stars for a great team. 1-3 is just as important to Team Score as 4-7 actually some would say more important.

And Alabama did run well when it mattered, 2nd at SECs beating Automatic qualifier Arkansas and 3rd at South Region beating FSU who had 5-6 points off the teams who qualified. Your argument is flawed.

---

joedirt wrote:

It really doesn't matter. It's not like any of the bubble teams are going to be competing for a podium position. There are better teams in the Mountain and Great Lakes regions that are staying home anyhow.

---