Proposal for Class 4 and 5 XC
12/10/2019 3:03:04 PM
Power User
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2052
Proposed Amendment to the Recently Approved Cross Country Qualifying System for Class 5 & Class 4 state Championship Previously Class 4 had a district to sectional to state championship qualifying system. At each level 4 teams and 30 individuals would move on to the next level. The best four teams and top 25 individuals bringing home state trophies and all state medals individually. The advisory board asked for the same system to remain for Class Five and Class Four with 4 teams & 30 individuals qualifying on at each level. Sectionals remained. MSHSAA decided to go with their own proposal for all classes 5-1 next season. Their system was only 2 teams and 15 individuals that would qualify straight from districts to state. Our proposal is based on the desires of MSHSAA and the coaches in class 5 & 4. The plan blends the two to better match our past, present opportunities, and financial concerns of the state. The proposal: Super Districts qualifying 4 teams and 30 individuals. The rational: 1. Geographical representation. Even number of teams. 2. Four teams out of region cuts down on a trophy team being eliminated from contention at the district level if only two teams are allowed to move on. 3. Reduces the chance that an all-state athlete misses out on state by being in a highly competitive district. 4. Reduces costs for hosting 16 districts to 4 districts. 5. Eliminates issues with competitive balances as larger districts cast a wider net for teams and individuals. 6. Reduces issues of finding venues/hosts, renting parks, and maintenance of venues. 7. A super district is a similar number of competitors with about 20 teams to 16 teams. Verse half (9-10 teams) that number with the district system in the current MSHSAA proposals. 8. This more closely resembles the previous qualifying system and honors the wishes of the Cross Country MSHSAA Advisory Board. 9. The number of competitive runners in class 5 and 4 dwarfs the other class combined. This can be seen in the differences in number of overall rosters, complete teams, and athletes who completed a 5k in the upper two classes in comparison with the proposed 1-3 classes. Thus different considerations should be in place for the top divisions.
Proposed Amendment to the Recently Approved Cross Country Qualifying System for Class 5 & Class 4 state Championship

Previously Class 4 had a district to sectional to state championship qualifying system. At each level 4 teams and 30 individuals would move on to the next level. The best four teams and top 25 individuals bringing home state trophies and all state medals individually.

The advisory board asked for the same system to remain for Class Five and Class Four with 4 teams & 30 individuals qualifying on at each level. Sectionals remained.

MSHSAA decided to go with their own proposal for all classes 5-1 next season. Their system was only 2 teams and 15 individuals that would qualify straight from districts to state.

Our proposal is based on the desires of MSHSAA and the coaches in class 5 & 4. The plan blends the two to better match our past, present opportunities, and financial concerns of the state.

The proposal: Super Districts qualifying 4 teams and 30 individuals.

The rational:
1. Geographical representation. Even number of teams.

2. Four teams out of region cuts down on a trophy team being eliminated
from contention at the district level if only two teams are allowed to move on.
3. Reduces the chance that an all-state athlete misses out on state by being in a highly competitive district.

4. Reduces costs for hosting 16 districts to 4 districts.

5. Eliminates issues with competitive balances as larger districts cast a wider net for teams and individuals.

6. Reduces issues of finding venues/hosts, renting parks, and maintenance of venues.

7. A super district is a similar number of competitors with about 20 teams to 16 teams. Verse half (9-10 teams) that number with the district system in the current MSHSAA proposals.

8. This more closely resembles the previous qualifying system and honors the wishes of the Cross Country MSHSAA Advisory Board.

9. The number of competitive runners in class 5 and 4 dwarfs the other class combined. This can be seen in the differences in number of overall rosters, complete teams, and athletes who completed a 5k in the upper two classes in comparison with the proposed 1-3 classes. Thus different considerations should be in place for the top divisions.
12/10/2019 3:19:38 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 234
@bantazmo Could you please elaborate on your 7th rationale? Thanks for drafting this!
@bantazmo

Could you please elaborate on your 7th rationale?

Thanks for drafting this!
12/10/2019 3:26:37 PM
Power User
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2052
@coachterry yes that means super districts resembles state more than the new MSHSAA district proposal. 20 and 16 vs 9 and 16.
@coachterry yes that means super districts resembles state more than the new MSHSAA district proposal. 20 and 16 vs 9 and 16.
12/10/2019 7:28:26 PM
Power User
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2052
After further consideration we are extending the super district proposal to all of the classes with four teams and 30 qualifiers at each.
After further consideration we are extending the super district proposal to all of the classes with four teams and 30 qualifiers at each.
12/11/2019 9:57:08 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 140
Banta, Is the 4 teams and 30 qualifiers for all classes a done deal or needs to be voted on. Or is that you thinking out loud. See you Tomorrow at the MTCCCA.
Banta,
Is the 4 teams and 30 qualifiers for all classes a done deal or needs to be voted on. Or is that you thinking out loud.
See you Tomorrow at the MTCCCA.
12/11/2019 9:57:56 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 140
I may have jumped the gun I just saw that it is being proposed.
I may have jumped the gun I just saw that it is being proposed.
12/11/2019 12:39:07 PM
Power User
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2052
[url=https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yWqFQ-iMmVxFE3uozl91sxACqaS24GxHwkO7owIHDdI/edit?usp=drivesdk]https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yWqFQ-iMmVxFE3uozl91sxACqaS24GxHwkO7owIHDdI/edit?usp=drivesdk[/url]
12/12/2019 10:50:59 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 261
Lets start getting this petition signed, this is a good first step!
Lets start getting this petition signed, this is a good first step!
10/20/2020 9:10:23 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Aug 2018
Posts: 21
Glad that it was extended to all classes. I like the proposal, but be fair to all the classes and don't just cater to large schools. The system benefits schools of all sizes and helps ensure a more competitive state meet for each level.
Glad that it was extended to all classes. I like the proposal, but be fair to all the classes and don't just cater to large schools. The system benefits schools of all sizes and helps ensure a more competitive state meet for each level.
10/20/2020 11:14:31 AM
Coach
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 167
I would support the change, but I think a super-district with the elimination of sectionals (or a Super-Sectional with elimination of Districts, whichever way you want to roll it) would be a better proposal, especially for classes 1-3. When I came from a Class 3 school to a class 4 school I went from top 2/15 to top 4/30. It took a couple of years to adjust to the sectional set up. And then adjusting yearly to the strength/weakness of your District. If you are in a loaded district you are now asking your kids to run at peak for 3 consecutive weeks, possible yes, definitely taxing, and if/when the results suffer it will be at the state meet. If you are not in a loaded district you can take it easy, probably even run alternates at districts, reaping major training benefits through the last 3 weeks. Running sectionals in the smaller classes will allow stronger districts to get more than their allotted 15 through compared to those in weaker districts. but the low number of complete teams makes the sectional seem unnecessary. So in my opinion the Super-Districts would be a good middle. An example of a Super-District would be everyone in Class 1-District 1 and District 2 competing, top 4 teams and top 30 individuals qualify for State.
I would support the change, but I think a super-district with the elimination of sectionals (or a Super-Sectional with elimination of Districts, whichever way you want to roll it) would be a better proposal, especially for classes 1-3.

When I came from a Class 3 school to a class 4 school I went from top 2/15 to top 4/30. It took a couple of years to adjust to the sectional set up. And then adjusting yearly to the strength/weakness of your District. If you are in a loaded district you are now asking your kids to run at peak for 3 consecutive weeks, possible yes, definitely taxing, and if/when the results suffer it will be at the state meet. If you are not in a loaded district you can take it easy, probably even run alternates at districts, reaping major training benefits through the last 3 weeks.

Running sectionals in the smaller classes will allow stronger districts to get more than their allotted 15 through compared to those in weaker districts. but the low number of complete teams makes the sectional seem unnecessary.

So in my opinion the Super-Districts would be a good middle. An example of a Super-District would be everyone in Class 1-District 1 and District 2 competing, top 4 teams and top 30 individuals qualify for State.

You must be logged in to comment.

Click Here to Log In.