Pre-Poll Solutions Listing for Championship Season Solutions
12/09/2015 2:33:22 PM
Power User
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 202
Ok, with all this "solutions" talk to the Championship season (region, sectionals, state), let's create a poll but first I want everyone who has a unique solution to post on here and then I will create the poll. I'll start: Solution A aka "Repeal and Replace Region with Super-Regionals" Host two "super-regionals" competitions in which regions 1-4 attend one and regions 5-8 attend the other. After the race, you score each region separate to determine each region's champion. The top 8 teams regardless of region advance to state, then if a region is not represented in that top 8, you allow the region champion to also attend the state meet (to satisfy the GHSA representation issue).
Ok, with all this "solutions" talk to the Championship season (region, sectionals, state), let's create a poll but first I want everyone who has a unique solution to post on here and then I will create the poll. I'll start:

Solution A aka "Repeal and Replace Region with Super-Regionals"

Host two "super-regionals" competitions in which regions 1-4 attend one and regions 5-8 attend the other. After the race, you score each region separate to determine each region's champion. The top 8 teams regardless of region advance to state, then if a region is not represented in that top 8, you allow the region champion to also attend the state meet (to satisfy the GHSA representation issue).
12/09/2015 4:08:33 PM
User
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 351
Someone at GTFXCCA needs to meet with the GHSA rep in charge of cross country, the GHSA cross country committee, and the coach at Carrollton (who apprently has loads of influence over the GHSA) to talk about what changes, if any, have a chance of passing. It is possible that 16 teams at state per class is a complete non-starter, full stop. However, it is possible that 24 teams is something that could work. If that is the case, then bringing a proposal forward with 16 teams would be a waste of time. This is politics, and in politics, you don't change opinions the day of the vote. You change opinions by schmoozing with people, stroking their egos, reaching consensus, and appearing to compromise. The reclassification committee had their appeals meeting yesterday. I'm convinced the voting members knew how they were going to vote before the day began, and nothing that happened during the meeting changed that. But some folks got to take a nice long ride to GHSA HQ.
Someone at GTFXCCA needs to meet with the GHSA rep in charge of cross country, the GHSA cross country committee, and the coach at Carrollton (who apprently has loads of influence over the GHSA) to talk about what changes, if any, have a chance of passing.

It is possible that 16 teams at state per class is a complete non-starter, full stop. However, it is possible that 24 teams is something that could work. If that is the case, then bringing a proposal forward with 16 teams would be a waste of time.

This is politics, and in politics, you don't change opinions the day of the vote. You change opinions by schmoozing with people, stroking their egos, reaching consensus, and appearing to compromise.

The reclassification committee had their appeals meeting yesterday. I'm convinced the voting members knew how they were going to vote before the day began, and nothing that happened during the meeting changed that. But some folks got to take a nice long ride to GHSA HQ.
12/09/2015 4:15:12 PM
Power User
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 202
I'm not seeing the problem, 50% of teams or more make the first round of football playoffs, in cross country 100% make the first round of the playoffs which is the region or in my case the super-regional. In football two teams make the final, in cross-country, in my scenario, 16 teams or more make the finals.
I'm not seeing the problem, 50% of teams or more make the first round of football playoffs, in cross country 100% make the first round of the playoffs which is the region or in my case the super-regional. In football two teams make the final, in cross-country, in my scenario, 16 teams or more make the finals.
12/09/2015 4:50:52 PM
Power User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 490
@8MileGoat how many individuals that are not on teams Q per "super-regional"? I completely and 100% agree with the logic... whether we go to a super-regional or some sort of sectionals to qualify..... cross country allows 100% of teams into our playoff system. We are more inclusive in the playoffs than any other sport. Probably have to have some language about the sites of the superregionals being adjusted by classification to not place extraordinary travel burden on specific schools and geographies. Interesting to note. Florida has 3 rounds of playoffs for XC. They also have a pretty large state and somehow they make it work. They also bid for the right to host the state meet versus planting it in one place forever due to "tradition". I love tradition, but Carrollton Middle School is not Van Cortlandt Park.
@8MileGoat how many individuals that are not on teams Q per "super-regional"?

I completely and 100% agree with the logic... whether we go to a super-regional or some sort of sectionals to qualify..... cross country allows 100% of teams into our playoff system. We are more inclusive in the playoffs than any other sport.

Probably have to have some language about the sites of the superregionals being adjusted by classification to not place extraordinary travel burden on specific schools and geographies.

Interesting to note. Florida has 3 rounds of playoffs for XC. They also have a pretty large state and somehow they make it work. They also bid for the right to host the state meet versus planting it in one place forever due to "tradition". I love tradition, but Carrollton Middle School is not Van Cortlandt Park.
12/09/2015 5:19:17 PM
User
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 351
@8MileGoat I don't see a problem either. I'm just saying that whatever proposal is decided upon, no matter how reasonable and logical it is, if the political skids are not properly greased, it will have zero chance of passing.
@8MileGoat

I don't see a problem either. I'm just saying that whatever proposal is decided upon, no matter how reasonable and logical it is, if the political skids are not properly greased, it will have zero chance of passing.
12/09/2015 6:07:00 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 124
@ExcelOrator I get your 100% theory but a number of coaches from the "region of dooms" are not seeing it as the first round of the playoffs.
@ExcelOrator
I get your 100% theory but a number of coaches from the "region of dooms" are not seeing it as the first round of the playoffs.
12/09/2015 6:11:00 PM
Power User
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 600
The XC committee for GATFXCCA is preparing some options to present to the GHSA for consideration. We have a board meeting Sunday where it will be discussed. Further info will be available after they meet again next week, and ultimately at the clinic in January.
The XC committee for GATFXCCA is preparing some options to present to the GHSA for consideration.

We have a board meeting Sunday where it will be discussed. Further info will be available after they meet again next week, and ultimately at the clinic in January.
12/09/2015 7:49:03 PM
User
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 152
GHSA has just gone through the process of reclassification and region alignment; why would you try to argue the point? Would a super regional not set up a Footlocker type of race where multi regions compete in the same race with a lot of similarly talented kids getting trapped in a mix of kids that want to go out too fast and then not really get the peak performance race? Ask anyone who has been there and I am sure they will tell you that kids in the championship race could have done much better in the class races. GHSA has set forth classifications and regions for us to play in; we need to suggest some simple time requirement minimums for championship racing. If they WANT more classes work with them, but ASK for minimum standards for championship racing. This will reduce the size of the field and provide an avenue for the most participation possible.
GHSA has just gone through the process of reclassification and region alignment; why would you try to argue the point? Would a super regional not set up a Footlocker type of race where multi regions compete in the same race with a lot of similarly talented kids getting trapped in a mix of kids that want to go out too fast and then not really get the peak performance race? Ask anyone who has been there and I am sure they will tell you that kids in the championship race could have done much better in the class races. GHSA has set forth classifications and regions for us to play in; we need to suggest some simple time requirement minimums for championship racing. If they WANT more classes work with them, but ASK for minimum standards for championship racing. This will reduce the size of the field and provide an avenue for the most participation possible.
12/09/2015 10:50:55 PM
Power User
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 202
@mcorley I think you misunderstood, it would be two super-regionals per classification, not two super-regionals all class.
@mcorley
I think you misunderstood, it would be two super-regionals per classification, not two super-regionals all class.
12/10/2015 8:06:06 AM
Power User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 1030
@8MileGoat What you're suggesting is similar to if Nike decided to combine the incredibly weak NXNSE region with the incredibly strong NXNSW region and make them meet in the middle and race in Oklahoma or Texas for a trip to nationals. Top 3 teams in the race get automatic bids to nationals and so does the top team to from each region(even if they finish 7th in the race). Considering how close both those meets have been in recent years(SE especially in 2014), and the fact that all 4 SW teams beat the top SE team this year, I can guarantee we would have had different teams at nationals. This idea might sound brilliant on paper in an effort to save time or moeny or whatever, but it's just not done in our sport on any level. Nor is it done in track and field. And finally, as excelerator pointed out, it's just way too much of a change to get any support from the politicians at GHSA who are old retired football coaches from south Georgia that merely tolerate the existence of cross country.
@8MileGoat

What you're suggesting is similar to if Nike decided to combine the incredibly weak NXNSE region with the incredibly strong NXNSW region and make them meet in the middle and race in Oklahoma or Texas for a trip to nationals. Top 3 teams in the race get automatic bids to nationals and so does the top team to from each region(even if they finish 7th in the race). Considering how close both those meets have been in recent years(SE especially in 2014), and the fact that all 4 SW teams beat the top SE team this year, I can guarantee we would have had different teams at nationals.

This idea might sound brilliant on paper in an effort to save time or moeny or whatever, but it's just not done in our sport on any level. Nor is it done in track and field. And finally, as excelerator pointed out, it's just way too much of a change to get any support from the politicians at GHSA who are old retired football coaches from south Georgia that merely tolerate the existence of cross country.
12/10/2015 12:57:16 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 163
[quote=8MileGoat]@mcorley I think you misunderstood, it would be two super-regionals per classification, not two super-regionals all class.[/quote] @8MileGoat This doesn't really help our overcrowding problem at all. For instance, for 6A, if you had Regions 5-8 in a "super regional", there would be 33 teams competing in it. That's even worse than the state meet.
8MileGoat wrote:
@mcorley
I think you misunderstood, it would be two super-regionals per classification, not two super-regionals all class.


@8MileGoat

This doesn't really help our overcrowding problem at all. For instance, for 6A, if you had Regions 5-8 in a "super regional", there would be 33 teams competing in it. That's even worse than the state meet.
12/10/2015 1:35:08 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 643
[quote=TFCoach16]This doesn't really help our overcrowding problem at all. For instance, for 6A, if you had Regions 5-8 in a "super regional", there would be 33 teams competing in it. That's even worse than the state meet.[/quote] While a Sectional meet might have as many or more teams than the current State meet, the venue must also be considered. Thirty-two teams at one venue might be overcrowded at one venue, while the same number of teams might be perfectly fine at another.
TFCoach16 wrote:
is doesn't really help our overcrowding problem at all. For instance, for 6A, if you had Regions 5-8 in a "super regional", there would be 33 teams competing in it. That's even worse than the state meet.


While a Sectional meet might have as many or more teams than the current State meet, the venue must also be considered. Thirty-two teams at one venue might be overcrowded at one venue, while the same number of teams might be perfectly fine at another.

You must be logged in to comment.

Click Here to Log In.