Kevin Hadsell wrote:
The problem with cross country coaches is that we want to be treated like other sports but are unwilling to operate like other sports.
Hear, hear!
Nail. Head.
Kevin Hadsell wrote:
The problem with cross country coaches is that we want to be treated like other sports but are unwilling to operate like other sports.
Hear, hear!
Nail. Head.
lease wrote:
Kevin Hadsell wrote:
The problem with cross country coaches is that we want to be treated like other sports but are unwilling to operate like other sports.
Hear, hear!
Nail. Head.
Except that's wrong. Cross country coaches do a DAMN good job. We don't want computers and selection committees picking teams. We want to line up and let the athletes and teams race for it.
There's no way for cross country to generate revenue like football or basketball, and that's fine. Instead we get to maintain our integrity as coaches and our integrity as a sport.
Kolas system already picks a bunch of the teams to go nationals.
This proposed system will make for exciting conference meets because teams will have to race and win in order to get to regionals. Sounds like a system that you should endorse.
fact checker 642572498 wrote:
lease wrote:
Hear, hear!
Nail. Head.
Except that's wrong. Cross country coaches do a DAMN good job. We don't want computers and selection committees picking teams. We want to line up and let the athletes and teams race for it.
There's no way for cross country to generate revenue like football or basketball, and that's fine. Instead we get to maintain our integrity as coaches and our integrity as a sport.
If you were to read through the procedure, it maintains that integrity. It uses the same exact formula we already have. It has one small tweak to it but it works exactly the same way to determine the atlarges. The goal was to create a system that maintains that dedication to head-to-head.
lease wrote:
Kevin Hadsell wrote:
The problem with cross country coaches is that we want to be treated like other sports but are unwilling to operate like other sports.
Hear, hear!
Nail. Head.
What other NCAA sport that has an NCAA Championship has no sport specific athletic scholarships?
XC can not operate like other sports until XC has it's own athletic scholarships like other sports do.
Sure they can. That is like saying that D3 football playoffs should include every team because there are no scholarships.
red and sad wrote:
Sure they can. That is like saying that D3 football playoffs should include every team because there are no scholarships.
No one in D3 football has scholarships. They start on an even playing field.
D1 XC is not that way. Each school does not have the same amount of athletic scholarships dedicated to XC.
XC is the only D1 sport with an NCAA championship that does not have sport specific athletic scholarships.
In my mind if the NCAA wants to treat XC like all other D1 sports they need to have sport specific scholarships like all other sports. If that change is made then I am all for limiting regionals to the top 80 teams.
Again, you are free to disagree. It's very clear that you and I do not have the same point of view on this subject.
I see your point but think the disparity would grow even more between the P5 schools and the others if they had 3 or 4 XC scholarships because the P5s would fund them and 150 schools would not.
fast dad wrote:
I see your point but think the disparity would grow even more between the P5 schools and the others if they had 3 or 4 XC scholarships because the P5s would fund them and 150 schools would not.
Certainly this is all hypothetical so we don't know how they would decide to do this but my guess is that track scholarships would be reduced by an amount equal to the number awarded to XC. This way it is not costing schools more money to fund the XC athletic scholarships.
In fact, as long as there is a limit like 5 men/6 women and you cant supersize with track scholarships it would encourage parity.
Now even schools that can't fund a full track team could fully fund xc.
And no longer does a school get looked at as "good" when they have 10+ scholarships in distance runners for 5 scorers and beat teams that responsibly fund the other events of track and field.
red and sad wrote:
Kolas system already picks a bunch of the teams to go nationals.
This proposed system will make for exciting conference meets because teams will have to race and win in order to get to regionals. Sounds like a system that you should endorse.
Conference meets are already exciting because you are racing for a CHAMPIONSHIP. The athletes on the team are going to be much happier about winning the championship than they will be for qualifying for the regional.
Kevin Hadsell wrote:
fact checker 642572498 wrote:
Except that's wrong. Cross country coaches do a DAMN good job. We don't want computers and selection committees picking teams. We want to line up and let the athletes and teams race for it.
There's no way for cross country to generate revenue like football or basketball, and that's fine. Instead we get to maintain our integrity as coaches and our integrity as a sport.
If you were to read through the procedure, it maintains that integrity. It uses the same exact formula we already have. It has one small tweak to it but it works exactly the same way to determine the atlarges. The goal was to create a system that maintains that dedication to head-to-head.
Current coaches and conferences have many concerns about the NCAA plan. Your proposal literally doesn't fix ANY of those concerns. Give it up man, stop harassing coaches and sending them emails with your bad ideas.
A. You haven’t seen it so you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about.
B. I haven’t emailed it to a single coach that hasn’t asked me to send it to them.
Grow up. Stop posting under 2-3 different anonymous names. Be a part of the solution and not the problem. Grow a pair and leave your name if you want anyone to take your point of view seriously.
Kevin Hadsell wrote:
A. You haven’t seen it so you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about.
B. I haven’t emailed it to a single coach that hasn’t asked me to send it to them.
Grow up. Stop posting under 2-3 different anonymous names. Be a part of the solution and not the problem. Grow a pair and leave your name if you want anyone to take your point of view seriously.
Explain to us exactly how it would be cheaper. Let's start with that.
You are saying that we should draw up the regions based on the results of the conference championships. So teams will have to book plane tickets and hotel rooms on a moments notice, about a week before having to travel. Prices will be astronomical.
Since we can't determine regional hosts in advance, teams wouldn't know they are hosting regionals after conference championships. That gives them less than 13 days to arrange a meet. You clearly have never hosted a high level meet before. And do you know how much help the NCAA gives host institutions - financially or otherwise? Almost ZERO.
Please tell me you don’t coach.
Regional sites are predetermined. Just like Golf.
I have hosted the NCAA Regional Championships at Toledo in 2011. They do invest money.
Let’s start with 270 teams not needing to spend a penny because they aren’t invited.
If you saw the proposal (you haven’t) the travel is addressed.
Astronomical? Are you 12?
I’m not even sure you’re a coach. Scratch that.....I pray you aren’t a coach.
Do you think those 270 teams being denied an opportunity are going to celebrate because they are saving money? If you do, you are a bigger ass than I thought.
Much less than half of the costs of hosting a region site are covered by the NCAA. This is a FACT.
Factoring in geography, when possible, to assign teams to regions does not address the travel costs going up. Fewer regions = more travel. Costs will still go up astronomically.
If you are so confident in it, try it in the court of public opinion right here. Or create your own thread with your proposal.
If you want to see it just email me. This isn’t my idea. It’s not my desire. I have zero to do with it. If you have a problem then send it to the NCAA. I didn’t invent all this and I don’t give a phuck one way or the other. Doesn’t have a single thing to do with my life.
All I’m doing is following through on something I was asked to do 10 years ago. I have no stake in it. I have no pony in the race. I am not obligated to put any time into it. If you don’t want it to happen then talk to the NCAA.
3/4 of the teams will not qualify for nationals so of course there are savings. Saying that teams could choose not to go today is true but it is also true that they would now be excluded so they will save money.
This is actually hilarious. You’re THE guy that is still talked about in the Toledo area ever since the Toledo women’s program went down hill? You are seriously “praying” that someone else isn’t a coach because their opinion goes against yours? What, because your opinion of what a coach should be is just so picture perfect? The way you’re acting on these message boards is ridiculous. People are allowed to have their own opinions (even if they go against yours). Oh and their even allowed to post under an anonymous name if they want!(it’s why the website makes it an option). Internet is forever you know. Things posted on here can quite possibly effect your professional career.
Yup! Enjoy.