Poll: How many teams should advance to state from the region meet?

Option Votes Score
4, 32 teams at state. 22 48%
3, 24 teams at state. 16 35%
2, 16 teams at state. 8 17%
46 Votes

Vote!
How many teams should advance to state from the region meet?
10/17/2013 8:20:28 AM
Power User
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 202
This is in response to the state meet size discussion, are there other options, yes, but the likelihood of those becoming reality is about 0% which leaves us with 4 teams advancing, 3, or 2 from Region.
This is in response to the state meet size discussion, are there other options, yes, but the likelihood of those becoming reality is about 0% which leaves us with 4 teams advancing, 3, or 2 from Region.
10/17/2013 9:44:20 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 163
If the only options are to cut qualifiers across all regions, I would either move it to 3 or keep it at 4. But that is just from one regions perspective. We happen to be in a region where 4 of the Top 7 in the state rankings are currently from ONE region. We also have 5 of the Top 10. If our region was only allowed to advance 2, only the teams ranked #2, #4 would advance, and #5 and #7 would be left at home. That's pretty tough. But I also realize our region is the exception.
If the only options are to cut qualifiers across all regions, I would either move it to 3 or keep it at 4. But that is just from one regions perspective.

We happen to be in a region where 4 of the Top 7 in the state rankings are currently from ONE region. We also have 5 of the Top 10.

If our region was only allowed to advance 2, only the teams ranked #2, #4 would advance, and #5 and #7 would be left at home. That's pretty tough. But I also realize our region is the exception.
10/17/2013 11:07:23 AM
Coach
Joined: Dec 1969
Posts: 93
@TFCoach16 that's the issue I have...we are in a weaker region that realistically no teams probably have a chance to contend yet alone finish top 10...sure my team has an individual that can contend, but I feel for the tougher regions. Hence why I'd say three or keep it at 4. For the weaker regions, I'm hoping the opportunity to attend states helps to build programs up and develop them into better teams.
@TFCoach16 that's the issue I have...we are in a weaker region that realistically no teams probably have a chance to contend yet alone finish top 10...sure my team has an individual that can contend, but I feel for the tougher regions. Hence why I'd say three or keep it at 4. For the weaker regions, I'm hoping the opportunity to attend states helps to build programs up and develop them into better teams.
10/17/2013 11:37:48 AM
Coach
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 100
This idea could get blown away and certainly would bring in some subjective judgment but whatever... What if not all regions got equal bids? We all know that the vast majority of the talent resides in a fairly small portion of the state, but there's still talent elsewhere, too. What if certain regions maintained their 4... 'bids'... to state, and other weaker regions got only 1 or 2 bids? Obviously, this is a complicated idea and would require some thought and research to truly get the best teams to state, but it would make the field size smaller and have more competitive teams at the state meet. If there are 8 regions, let's say four of those regions got 4 bids and the other four regions got 2 bids... you'd now have 24 teams competing at state, and (in theory) it'd be more competitive. It could even be made smaller based on the bids. This would involve an evil 'selection committee' of sorts, but the teams are ranked on a weekly basis anyway. Any subscriber who is in tune with Georgia cross-country has access to any team's performances. Would it truly be that difficult to determine which regions were the strongest and ultimately choose the top 24 teams on paper to go to state? If teams 22-25 are close and one gets left home, it's a pretty small likelihood that the #25 team ranked in their class would perform well enough to place top 10. Just food for thought. I've placed the golf ball... feel free to tee off.
This idea could get blown away and certainly would bring in some subjective judgment but whatever...

What if not all regions got equal bids? We all know that the vast majority of the talent resides in a fairly small portion of the state, but there's still talent elsewhere, too. What if certain regions maintained their 4... 'bids'... to state, and other weaker regions got only 1 or 2 bids? Obviously, this is a complicated idea and would require some thought and research to truly get the best teams to state, but it would make the field size smaller and have more competitive teams at the state meet.

If there are 8 regions, let's say four of those regions got 4 bids and the other four regions got 2 bids... you'd now have 24 teams competing at state, and (in theory) it'd be more competitive. It could even be made smaller based on the bids.

This would involve an evil 'selection committee' of sorts, but the teams are ranked on a weekly basis anyway. Any subscriber who is in tune with Georgia cross-country has access to any team's performances. Would it truly be that difficult to determine which regions were the strongest and ultimately choose the top 24 teams on paper to go to state? If teams 22-25 are close and one gets left home, it's a pretty small likelihood that the #25 team ranked in their class would perform well enough to place top 10.

Just food for thought. I've placed the golf ball... feel free to tee off.
10/17/2013 11:58:18 AM
Coach
Joined: Dec 1969
Posts: 93
[quote=Sid_Hoffman] What if not all regions got equal bids? We all know that the vast majority of the talent resides in a fairly small portion of the state, but there's still talent elsewhere, too. This would involve an evil 'selection committee' of sorts, but the teams are ranked on a weekly basis anyway. Any subscriber who is in tune with Georgia cross-country has access to any team's performances. Would it truly be that difficult to determine which regions were the strongest and ultimately choose the top 24 teams on paper to go to state? If teams 22-25 are close and one gets left home, it's a pretty small likelihood that the #25 team ranked in their class would perform well enough to place top 10. @Sid_Hoffman How do you determine this? Compare them at meets? I haven't had all my runners at any invitational yet, and I'm sure I'm not the only one like that. So theoretically if you are looking at the big meets to compare teams and hence regions, can you really even do that? Then you have the fact that yes, historically some regions have been stronger than others, but that doesn't mean the stronger regions won't change from year to year, so again, how do you determine that. My school has just started to attend invitationals (and larger invitationals) in the last few years, some smaller schools like mine can't afford to attend the bigger meets. So how do we get the exposure to see just how strong that region is. You could potentially have a stacked region that nobody knows about due to budget constraints from the teams in that region.
Sid_Hoffman wrote:
What if not all regions got equal bids? We all know that the vast majority of the talent resides in a fairly small portion of the state, but there's still talent elsewhere, too.
This would involve an evil 'selection committee' of sorts, but the teams are ranked on a weekly basis anyway. Any subscriber who is in tune with Georgia cross-country has access to any team's performances. Would it truly be that difficult to determine which regions were the strongest and ultimately choose the top 24 teams on paper to go to state? If teams 22-25 are close and one gets left home, it's a pretty small likelihood that the #25 team ranked in their class would perform well enough to place top 10.
@Sid_Hoffman

How do you determine this? Compare them at meets? I haven't had all my runners at any invitational yet, and I'm sure I'm not the only one like that. So theoretically if you are looking at the big meets to compare teams and hence regions, can you really even do that? Then you have the fact that yes, historically some regions have been stronger than others, but that doesn't mean the stronger regions won't change from year to year, so again, how do you determine that. My school has just started to attend invitationals (and larger invitationals) in the last few years, some smaller schools like mine can't afford to attend the bigger meets. So how do we get the exposure to see just how strong that region is.

You could potentially have a stacked region that nobody knows about due to budget constraints from the teams in that region.
10/17/2013 12:18:32 PM
Power User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 1024
@WayneCounty I agree with you 100% My suggestion for a location for sectionals: Perry Fairgrounds. about the same distance to travel for North and South Georgia teams, right?
@WayneCounty

I agree with you 100%

My suggestion for a location for sectionals: Perry Fairgrounds. about the same distance to travel for North and South Georgia teams, right?
10/17/2013 12:42:26 PM
User
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 469
The members who serve on the executive committee are in favor of sectionals for xc, and Gary Phillips presented the proposal at the executive board meeting last year. The proposal did not go further even though Gary Phillips presented it with a recommendation from the advisory board. We now have to wait two years to bring it back up. To come up with an alternative plan you must have a solution, and lobby for that plan by sending it to every member on the executive committee. I personally am not sure why you want to change something we fought hard to get for a long time. 4 teams from each region was a hard fought battle, and now we want to go backward. I say lets look at the way the course changes made at Carrollton will handle the number of teams. The only problem last year was the movement of class A off the course to an alternative site. The solution is not always to make radical changes.
The members who serve on the executive committee are in favor of sectionals for xc, and Gary Phillips presented the proposal at the executive board meeting last year. The proposal did not go further even though Gary Phillips presented it with a recommendation from the advisory board. We now have to wait two years to bring it back up. To come up with an alternative plan you must have a solution, and lobby for that plan by sending it to every member on the executive committee.
I personally am not sure why you want to change something we fought hard to get for a long time. 4 teams from each region was a hard fought battle, and now we want to go backward. I say lets look at the way the course changes made at Carrollton will handle the number of teams. The only problem last year was the movement of class A off the course to an alternative site. The solution is not always to make radical changes.
10/17/2013 12:50:20 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 123
@MCTFCOACH That first right hand turn at Carrollton does look better this year, but let's see how it handles that Boys' 6A start. That will be the test.
@MCTFCOACH

That first right hand turn at Carrollton does look better this year, but let's see how it handles that Boys' 6A start. That will be the test.
10/17/2013 2:17:07 PM
User
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 283
I think 3 teams from each region is a reasonable paring down, nothing drastic. I have a feeling GHSA wants to create some sort of inclusiveness of the whole state so anything that treats the North and South differently will not pass. So you either have to make sectional meets farther south or cut the number of teams from each region going evenly. Not sure how money for travel factors into the whole sectional business. I know for some teams it might be an issue if they have to spend the night for the additional sectional race.
I think 3 teams from each region is a reasonable paring down, nothing drastic. I have a feeling GHSA wants to create some sort of inclusiveness of the whole state so anything that treats the North and South differently will not pass. So you either have to make sectional meets farther south or cut the number of teams from each region going evenly.

Not sure how money for travel factors into the whole sectional business. I know for some teams it might be an issue if they have to spend the night for the additional sectional race.
10/17/2013 2:33:56 PM
Power User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 1024
@MCTFCOACH I don't think anybody is truly trying to go backwards. We understand everything that was done to get more than just two teams qualified from each region and we appreciate it! However, as was pointed out in another topic, Georgia has far and away more teams at the state meet than any other state. There are only 12 states with more than 150 total teams. There are only 4 states with more than 200 total teams. And there is only one state with more than 300 teams. Georgia has 366 teams competing at the state meet. That is absurd. You want to talk about money? Financially some of these ideas would be doing many of these teams a favor. I know this might be an insensitive way of putting it, but it seems strange to me that most of the schools that are voting down the idea of a sectional meet because they "don't want to travel/pay for a meet far away two weekends in a row" are the same schools that would get eliminated by this process in the first place. And if we want something fair, how about this: Region meets remain the same. Sectional meet is in south Georgia(perry far enough south? I don't know of any other courses down there). State meet is in North Georgia (BERRY!!!!). That way nobody has to stay overnight for both meets unless they want to. You can even flip the schedules from sectionals to state to make it fair. I personally am not a fan of sectionals removing the top 1-2 teams from region. If we're going to have a playoff system, let's make everybody compete every week. I believe that's what most states do. That's what track does too. And as for the dates, let's just extend the season by a week, give our kids that have a shot at nationals an even better shot by making state closer to those qualifying races.
@MCTFCOACH

I don't think anybody is truly trying to go backwards. We understand everything that was done to get more than just two teams qualified from each region and we appreciate it! However, as was pointed out in another topic, Georgia has far and away more teams at the state meet than any other state. There are only 12 states with more than 150 total teams. There are only 4 states with more than 200 total teams. And there is only one state with more than 300 teams. Georgia has 366 teams competing at the state meet. That is absurd. You want to talk about money? Financially some of these ideas would be doing many of these teams a favor. I know this might be an insensitive way of putting it, but it seems strange to me that most of the schools that are voting down the idea of a sectional meet because they "don't want to travel/pay for a meet far away two weekends in a row" are the same schools that would get eliminated by this process in the first place.

And if we want something fair, how about this:

Region meets remain the same. Sectional meet is in south Georgia(perry far enough south? I don't know of any other courses down there). State meet is in North Georgia (BERRY!!!!). That way nobody has to stay overnight for both meets unless they want to. You can even flip the schedules from sectionals to state to make it fair. I personally am not a fan of sectionals removing the top 1-2 teams from region. If we're going to have a playoff system, let's make everybody compete every week. I believe that's what most states do. That's what track does too.

And as for the dates, let's just extend the season by a week, give our kids that have a shot at nationals an even better shot by making state closer to those qualifying races.
10/17/2013 3:40:51 PM
User
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 469
[quote=spxcoachrm]@MCTFCOACH I don't think anybody is truly trying to go backwards. We understand everything that was done to get more than just two teams qualified from each region and we appreciate it! However, as was pointed out in another topic, Georgia has far and away more teams at the state meet than any other state. There are only 12 states with more than 150 total teams. There are only 4 states with more than 200 total teams. And there is only one state with more than 300 teams. Georgia has 366 teams competing at the state meet. That is absurd. You want to talk about money? Financially some of these ideas would be doing many of these teams a favor. I know this might be an insensitive way of putting it, but it seems strange to me that most of the schools that are voting down the idea of a sectional meet because they "don't want to travel/pay for a meet far away two weekends in a row" are the same schools that would get eliminated by this process in the first place. And if we want something fair, how about this: Region meets remain the same. Sectional meet is in south Georgia(perry far enough south? I don't know of any other courses down there). State meet is in North Georgia (BERRY!!!!). That way nobody has to stay overnight for both meets unless they want to. You can even flip the schedules from sectionals to state to make it fair. I personally am not a fan of sectionals removing the top 1-2 teams from region. If we're going to have a playoff system, let's make everybody compete every week. I believe that's what most states do. That's what track does too. And as for the dates, let's just extend the season by a week, give our kids that have a shot at nationals an even better shot by making state closer to those qualifying races.[/quote] @spxcoachrm Georgia has more teams at state, so what is it hurting your team or any other team? I fail to see your point on this. Please explain to me why having four teams from each region is unfair, or bad for our sport. If you go to sectionals you will lose a week of your season. I do not think the GHSA will push back the state meet a week. Saying that the state meet will be at (insert name here) will not make it happen. As I have said many times the GHSA is very loyal to the people who put on the state championships as they should be. Craig does a great job with the meet, and in my opinion it is his till he says no. The GHSA state xc meet has been at four places as far as I know. The Atlanta water works on one side of the road. Then moved to the other side of the road when construction closed the large loop, Al Bishop in Cobb county, and Carrollton. I respect your opinion, and hope you will just think about what you are asking for before you present your ideas to the executive committee. I am not opposed to any ideas just trying to help with advice. You are a good coach, and I thank you for your commitment to our sport as we do not have enough people who are willing to put in the time and effort to help make our sport better.
spxcoachrm wrote:
@MCTFCOACH

I don't think anybody is truly trying to go backwards. We understand everything that was done to get more than just two teams qualified from each region and we appreciate it! However, as was pointed out in another topic, Georgia has far and away more teams at the state meet than any other state. There are only 12 states with more than 150 total teams. There are only 4 states with more than 200 total teams. And there is only one state with more than 300 teams. Georgia has 366 teams competing at the state meet. That is absurd. You want to talk about money? Financially some of these ideas would be doing many of these teams a favor. I know this might be an insensitive way of putting it, but it seems strange to me that most of the schools that are voting down the idea of a sectional meet because they "don't want to travel/pay for a meet far away two weekends in a row" are the same schools that would get eliminated by this process in the first place.

And if we want something fair, how about this:

Region meets remain the same. Sectional meet is in south Georgia(perry far enough south? I don't know of any other courses down there). State meet is in North Georgia (BERRY!!!!). That way nobody has to stay overnight for both meets unless they want to. You can even flip the schedules from sectionals to state to make it fair. I personally am not a fan of sectionals removing the top 1-2 teams from region. If we're going to have a playoff system, let's make everybody compete every week. I believe that's what most states do. That's what track does too.

And as for the dates, let's just extend the season by a week, give our kids that have a shot at nationals an even better shot by making state closer to those qualifying races.


@spxcoachrm
Georgia has more teams at state, so what is it hurting your team or any other team? I fail to see your point on this. Please explain to me why having four teams from each region is unfair, or bad for our sport.
If you go to sectionals you will lose a week of your season. I do not think the GHSA will push back the state meet a week. Saying that the state meet will be at (insert name here) will not make it happen. As I have said many times the GHSA is very loyal to the people who put on the state championships as they should be. Craig does a great job with the meet, and in my opinion it is his till he says no. The GHSA state xc meet has been at four places as far as I know. The Atlanta water works on one side of the road. Then moved to the other side of the road when construction closed the large loop, Al Bishop in Cobb county, and Carrollton. I respect your opinion, and hope you will just think about what you are asking for before you present your ideas to the executive committee. I am not opposed to any ideas just trying to help with advice. You are a good coach, and I thank you for your commitment to our sport as we do not have enough people who are willing to put in the time and effort to help make our sport better.
10/17/2013 4:27:39 PM
User
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 351
[i]We had schools in both the public and private settings that experienced success last year that say those successes created an enthusiasm in their schools that they might not have had[/i] - New GHSA Executive Director Gary Phillips, October 16, 2013 So if he likes expanding from 5 to effectively 7 classes and giving more schools the opportunity to win a state championship, do you think he'll agree with reducing the field at a state championship event because some coaches of the teams that always qualify think we have too many teams there?
We had schools in both the public and private settings that experienced success last year that say those successes created an enthusiasm in their schools that they might not have had

- New GHSA Executive Director Gary Phillips, October 16, 2013

So if he likes expanding from 5 to effectively 7 classes and giving more schools the opportunity to win a state championship, do you think he'll agree with reducing the field at a state championship event because some coaches of the teams that always qualify think we have too many teams there?
10/17/2013 5:04:56 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 642
Also, as was stated earlier (in this thread or another thread), it is the region representatives that determine what passes and what doesn't. That's true for all sports. It's not Gary Phillips, the track committee, or anyone else. What that means is that, if a majority of region representatives are not in favor of a proposal, it will not pass. With the most recent XC Sectionals proposal, a majority of region representatives felt that Sectionals would exclude their region's teams from the State meet. Therefore, they voted no. Not saying these aren't all good ideas. But, it's going to be hard to get something passed that cuts teams out of the state meet.
Also, as was stated earlier (in this thread or another thread), it is the region representatives that determine what passes and what doesn't. That's true for all sports. It's not Gary Phillips, the track committee, or anyone else.

What that means is that, if a majority of region representatives are not in favor of a proposal, it will not pass. With the most recent XC Sectionals proposal, a majority of region representatives felt that Sectionals would exclude their region's teams from the State meet. Therefore, they voted no.

Not saying these aren't all good ideas. But, it's going to be hard to get something passed that cuts teams out of the state meet.
10/17/2013 5:35:45 PM
Power User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 487
At the risk of being "that guy", having more than 1/2 of all teams in cross country qualify for the state meet is exactly what is wrong with the way America has started treating our young people. In life, it takes hard work and dedication to excellence to achieve one's goals. Once we started the... "every kid gets a trophy mentally" in sports, we did our kid's no favor. Falsely building up self esteem has long term consequences. Hey.. if I just show up, I'm the greatest thing since sliced bread! Cool! We have regions where every team who can field 5 athletes make it to state. We have regions where kids who can barely run 5K without walking make it to state. The facts and numbers don't lie. Georgia has WAY more teams and individual athletes participate in our championship event than any other state. It devalues the process. It makes the achievement of qualifying for state no real achievement at all. It's the difference between the way a kid who saved up and bought his own car feels about that car and the way a kid who's parents gave him a car perceive it. Difference between the satisfaction of "I earned it" versus the feeling of "life owes me stuff". But, I guess that is the way our country is headed. No longer do we have "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" The Paradigm has changed to "give me everything, because its not fair if everyone doesn't have all the same things in life".
At the risk of being "that guy", having more than 1/2 of all teams in cross country qualify for the state meet is exactly what is wrong with the way America has started treating our young people. In life, it takes hard work and dedication to excellence to achieve one's goals. Once we started the... "every kid gets a trophy mentally" in sports, we did our kid's no favor. Falsely building up self esteem has long term consequences. Hey.. if I just show up, I'm the greatest thing since sliced bread! Cool!

We have regions where every team who can field 5 athletes make it to state. We have regions where kids who can barely run 5K without walking make it to state. The facts and numbers don't lie. Georgia has WAY more teams and individual athletes participate in our championship event than any other state. It devalues the process. It makes the achievement of qualifying for state no real achievement at all. It's the difference between the way a kid who saved up and bought his own car feels about that car and the way a kid who's parents gave him a car perceive it. Difference between the satisfaction of "I earned it" versus the feeling of "life owes me stuff". But, I guess that is the way our country is headed.

No longer do we have "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" The Paradigm has changed to "give me everything, because its not fair if everyone doesn't have all the same things in life".
10/17/2013 6:17:29 PM
User
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 351
Sectionals got voted down 47-8. Here's how the vote went: Class A - 0 for, 8 against Class AA - 0 for, 7 against (one absent) Class AAA - 1 for, 6 against (one left the mtg; yes vote from region 4) Class AAAA - 2 for, 6 against (yes votes regions 2 and 6) Class AAAAA - 1 for, 7 against (yes vote region 5) Class AAAAAA - 4 for, 4 against (yes votes regions 4, 6, 7, 8) Other votes - 0 for, 9 against It's not just south Georgia that needs to be swayed...
Sectionals got voted down 47-8. Here's how the vote went:

Class A - 0 for, 8 against
Class AA - 0 for, 7 against (one absent)
Class AAA - 1 for, 6 against (one left the mtg; yes vote from region 4)
Class AAAA - 2 for, 6 against (yes votes regions 2 and 6)
Class AAAAA - 1 for, 7 against (yes vote region 5)
Class AAAAAA - 4 for, 4 against (yes votes regions 4, 6, 7, 8)
Other votes - 0 for, 9 against

It's not just south Georgia that needs to be swayed...
10/17/2013 7:49:12 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 123
@crossfan2861 All the higher ups and supporters of the "7 class 4 from region set up" need go to the State Meet on the 9th and watch those last 2 races of the day. If we catch a hot day that afternoon they might be rethinking the whole thing.
@crossfan2861

All the higher ups and supporters of the "7 class 4 from region set up" need go to the State Meet on the 9th and watch those last 2 races of the day. If we catch a hot day that afternoon they might be rethinking the whole thing.
10/17/2013 7:55:59 PM
Coach
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 88
I agree with the 4 squads because there are the "super" regions that could realistically put 5-7 teams in the state meet and all of them be in the top 10. I coached in 6AA for several years and my teams were on the outside looking in several years yet we were easily one of the top 10 squads. Three years ago my girls squeaked in as a #4 in region, we knocked out a very good GAC and Therrell in doing so. We finished 5th in the state because one of my girls had a bad day so yes even though you may be the 4th seed in region you still have a good shot at the title and the podium. Yes, there are teams that literally walk across the line at region and qualify for state, but GHSA is about equality so you can't have one region get 6 teams in while some may have no teams in. Also many of the 4th seeded teams coming out of region improved drastically because XC is not big, popular, know, or even cared about at that school. Give those kids a shot at state in the "Big" race and you will get those kids something positive. They don't want to have all-state medals or cups for team places, but they get to say that they ran at state with the best on that day. Look at each sport, the first and 2nd rounds of state in almost all sports in GA are not close. We don't have several rounds, nor do I see it happening, to get the best of the best at one race. So let's all race at state and the cream will rise to the top. Believe there are those teams who qualify for state are super thankful for that opportunity. They go home with a sense of accomplishment for the work they did put in because they probably won't get it from their school.
I agree with the 4 squads because there are the "super" regions that could realistically put 5-7 teams in the state meet and all of them be in the top 10. I coached in 6AA for several years and my teams were on the outside looking in several years yet we were easily one of the top 10 squads. Three years ago my girls squeaked in as a #4 in region, we knocked out a very good GAC and Therrell in doing so. We finished 5th in the state because one of my girls had a bad day so yes even though you may be the 4th seed in region you still have a good shot at the title and the podium. Yes, there are teams that literally walk across the line at region and qualify for state, but GHSA is about equality so you can't have one region get 6 teams in while some may have no teams in. Also many of the 4th seeded teams coming out of region improved drastically because XC is not big, popular, know, or even cared about at that school. Give those kids a shot at state in the "Big" race and you will get those kids something positive. They don't want to have all-state medals or cups for team places, but they get to say that they ran at state with the best on that day. Look at each sport, the first and 2nd rounds of state in almost all sports in GA are not close. We don't have several rounds, nor do I see it happening, to get the best of the best at one race. So let's all race at state and the cream will rise to the top. Believe there are those teams who qualify for state are super thankful for that opportunity. They go home with a sense of accomplishment for the work they did put in because they probably won't get it from their school.
10/17/2013 8:07:09 PM
User
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 111
@ExcelOrator Seems like the competitive regions are the only ones who voted for sectionals.
@ExcelOrator Seems like the competitive regions are the only ones who voted for sectionals.
10/18/2013 12:16:54 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 39
@SpencerXCnTF Take the "evil selection" group out - make the region earn more teams/representation. Two teams from each region - PLUS the region that the State Winning Team comes from gets a third team the following year - that builds your race to 17 teams. Alternative - two teams from each region - plus the top 3 in the team title - their region gets one more team the following year. If a region places two teams in the top 3 at State - that region can have 4 teams representing that region the next year. If the top 3 the following year all come from one region - then they get another team - MAX of 4 teams from any one region - ever. State should be earned - not just because you fielded a team - or are from a certain region. Life is not fair - the sooner you learn it the better. Tough regions - you know which ones - you had best bring the "A" race to the meet - or you will be left at home. Have NO IDEA why the State changed from 2 teams qualifying and some individuals to this 4 team and some individuals method. I have not seen any improvement in the sport because of this move.
@SpencerXCnTF
Take the "evil selection" group out - make the region earn more teams/representation.

Two teams from each region - PLUS the region that the State Winning Team comes from gets a third team the following year - that builds your race to 17 teams.

Alternative - two teams from each region - plus the top 3 in the team title - their region gets one more team the following year. If a region places two teams in the top 3 at State - that region can have 4 teams representing that region the next year. If the top 3 the following year all come from one region - then they get another team - MAX of 4 teams from any one region - ever.

State should be earned - not just because you fielded a team - or are from a certain region. Life is not fair - the sooner you learn it the better. Tough regions - you know which ones - you had best bring the "A" race to the meet - or you will be left at home.

Have NO IDEA why the State changed from 2 teams qualifying and some individuals to this 4 team and some individuals method. I have not seen any improvement in the sport because of this move.
10/18/2013 7:18:32 AM
User
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 71
Getting tired of folks from non-competitive regions telling kids from very competitive regions that they just have to be better at region to make state when second place teams from other regions are inferior. As to where this comes from, obviously to make XC align with other sports who have 4 teams from each region in playoffs. Trend in all sports (including pro) is to expand playoffs to allow for worthy teams to get chance to participate. Unfortunately, method chosen in GA allows unworthy teams to get in to provide equal access from all regions. One way to have all regions treated equally is to allocate spots in state based on percentage of teams participating in the region meet with a minimum of 2 spots per region guaranteed. That way weak regions, like the ones that Pius and Marist are in, would get 2 spots. Strong regions with 8/9 teams would get 4 spots.
Getting tired of folks from non-competitive regions telling kids from very competitive regions that they just have to be better at region to make state when second place teams from other regions are inferior.

As to where this comes from, obviously to make XC align with other sports who have 4 teams from each region in playoffs. Trend in all sports (including pro) is to expand playoffs to allow for worthy teams to get chance to participate. Unfortunately, method chosen in GA allows unworthy teams to get in to provide equal access from all regions.

One way to have all regions treated equally is to allocate spots in state based on percentage of teams participating in the region meet with a minimum of 2 spots per region guaranteed. That way weak regions, like the ones that Pius and Marist are in, would get 2 spots. Strong regions with 8/9 teams would get 4 spots.

You must be logged in to comment.

Click Here to Log In.