Class 4: Disparity Observation Between District 1 and 2
10/18/2020 8:54:03 PM
Coach
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 95
GIRLS There is 6 teams (up to 42 individual entries) in District 2 as compared to 10 teams (up to 77 individual entries) in District 1. With the top 15 individual finishers advancing to the State Meet, District 2 will have 35% of the athletes advance as compared to 19% in District 1. At the team level, 33% of teams in District 2 will advance to the State Meet as compared to 20% of teams in District 1. District 1 has 40% more schools represented in the District Meet. How this equitable and representative? It's not but we can hope for better in 2021. BOYS There is 7 teams (up to 49 individual entries) in District 2 as compared to 10 teams (up to 77 individual entries) in District 1. With the top 15 individual finishers advancing to the State Meet, District 2 will have 30.5% of the athletes advance as compared to 19% in District 1. At the team level, 28.5% of teams in District 2 will advance to the State Meet as compared to 20% of teams in District 1.
GIRLS
There is 6 teams (up to 42 individual entries) in District 2 as compared to 10 teams (up to 77 individual entries) in District 1. With the top 15 individual finishers advancing to the State Meet, District 2 will have 35% of the athletes advance as compared to 19% in District 1.

At the team level, 33% of teams in District 2 will advance to the State Meet as compared to 20% of teams in District 1. District 1 has 40% more schools represented in the District Meet.

How this equitable and representative? It's not but we can hope for better in 2021.

BOYS
There is 7 teams (up to 49 individual entries) in District 2 as compared to 10 teams (up to 77 individual entries) in District 1. With the top 15 individual finishers advancing to the State Meet, District 2 will have 30.5% of the athletes advance as compared to 19% in District 1.

At the team level, 28.5% of teams in District 2 will advance to the State Meet as compared to 20% of teams in District 1.
10/18/2020 10:33:46 PM
Admin
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 139
@mcehlen There are eight girls teams in District 2 not six
@mcehlen There are eight girls teams in District 2 not six
10/19/2020 9:06:31 AM
User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Sep 2018
Posts: 20
District 2 Boys only have 6 runners who have been sub 18 this season, and 2 sub 17, whereas District 1 has has 19 runners sub 18, and 11 sub 17.
District 2 Boys only have 6 runners who have been sub 18 this season, and 2 sub 17, whereas District 1 has has 19 runners sub 18, and 11 sub 17.
10/19/2020 11:53:45 PM
Coach
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 95
@R-Taylor Thanks for clarifying and the reminder of checking my facts. I guess I was only looking at the boys side.
@R-Taylor Thanks for clarifying and the reminder of checking my facts. I guess I was only looking at the boys side.
10/20/2020 1:47:03 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2053
Its almost like we need a proposal to get this changed where we have three qualifying teams to state in each district and 30 individuals instead of 2 and 15...... hmmmm I wonder if someone suggested that in the recent past. Due to Covid a sponsor of a similar bill put it on hold. Hopefully, we will have this get put on the ballot in the near future to help elevate some of the pressure and in my opinion unfair eliminations happening in a couple of weeks.
Its almost like we need a proposal to get this changed where we have three qualifying teams to state in each district and 30 individuals instead of 2 and 15...... hmmmm I wonder if someone suggested that in the recent past. Due to Covid a sponsor of a similar bill put it on hold. Hopefully, we will have this get put on the ballot in the near future to help elevate some of the pressure and in my opinion unfair eliminations happening in a couple of weeks.
10/21/2020 8:06:03 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 37
@bantazmo I stood next to Don at Gans Creek. Advancing 3 teams to the state meet came up. He seemed like he was in favor and the words 'we have room' were used. I think a solid proposal would include 3 district teams and advancing the top 10 individuals who are not part of a top 3 team. This opens the door for teams that are building programs in tough districts. As we all know, these loaded districts are not a new thing. Our area has consistently been tough. Often 10-12 of the individual qualifying positions are taken by runners from the top 2 teams. Coach Armbruster
@bantazmo I stood next to Don at Gans Creek. Advancing 3 teams to the state meet came up. He seemed like he was in favor and the words 'we have room' were used.

I think a solid proposal would include 3 district teams and advancing the top 10 individuals who are not part of a top 3 team. This opens the door for teams that are building programs in tough districts.

As we all know, these loaded districts are not a new thing. Our area has consistently been tough. Often 10-12 of the individual qualifying positions are taken by runners from the top 2 teams.

Coach Armbruster
10/21/2020 8:18:51 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 166
[quote=FestusGirlsTF]@bantazmo I stood next to Don at Gans Creek. Advancing 3 teams to the state meet came up. He seemed like he was in favor and the words 'we have room' were used. I think a solid proposal would include 3 district teams and advancing the top 10 individuals who are not part of a top 3 team. This opens the door for teams that are building programs in tough districts. As we all know, these loaded districts are not a new thing. Our area has consistently been tough. Often 10-12 of the individual qualifying positions are taken by runners from the top 2 teams. Coach Armbruster[/quote] Well stated Wes. I'm with you.
FestusGirlsTF wrote:
@bantazmo I stood next to Don at Gans Creek. Advancing 3 teams to the state meet came up. He seemed like he was in favor and the words 'we have room' were used.

I think a solid proposal would include 3 district teams and advancing the top 10 individuals who are not part of a top 3 team. This opens the door for teams that are building programs in tough districts.

As we all know, these loaded districts are not a new thing. Our area has consistently been tough. Often 10-12 of the individual qualifying positions are taken by runners from the top 2 teams.

Coach Armbruster


Well stated Wes. I'm with you.
10/21/2020 1:28:33 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2053
@jstone we are going to need 60 signatures to get it on the ballot. Are there coaches on here willing to take on the charge to get this done?
@jstone we are going to need 60 signatures to get it on the ballot. Are there coaches on here willing to take on the charge to get this done?
10/21/2020 2:05:37 PM
Admin
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 139
@bantazmo tell me where to sign! Seems like a no brainer to me
@bantazmo tell me where to sign! Seems like a no brainer to me
10/21/2020 2:58:50 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Aug 2018
Posts: 21
I’ll gladly sign
I'll gladly sign
10/21/2020 3:38:10 PM
Coach
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 8
@bantazmo I will sign for sure.
@bantazmo

I will sign for sure.
10/21/2020 8:32:07 PM
Coach
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 95
I will sign.
I will sign.
10/22/2020 8:24:01 AM
Coach
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 22
I'll sign for sure.
I'll sign for sure.
10/22/2020 8:54:48 AM
Coach
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 171
I will sign regardless...However... I think that moving to a Super-District would be a better answer than adding Sectionals. I came from a Class 3 school to a Class 4 school (4 class system). It took me a couple of years to adjust. The thing that most coaches will learn that I have learned by having districts-sectional-state is that you are now trying to get kids to max perform 3 weeks in a row. It is possible, however, if there is a breakdown or a point that kids suffer it will more than likely be at the state meet. While many see this Top 4/30 as an opportunity to get a kid or a team through to the state meet, as an opportunity to make up for a poor performance.....it has also worked against me; example is: One extra race on a stress reaction. Another point is that for a loaded team that has depth it can be a greater advantage. It can be a week off while they run alternates, while the rest of us have to grind it out for 3 consecutive weeks...Before you jump me about that, I am jealous I have never had that luxury, and many many kudos to the coaches that have developed that within their program. I think that a Super-District would make more sense for the smaller classes as well. One of the reasons given that the smaller classes have districts only has always been a lower number of competitors and teams. This will also alleviate the issue of loaded districts, by still allowing 4 teams from what would have been that particular two districts/sectional. My definition of a Super-District (or Super-Sectional as some have called it) for example would be: Class 1 District 1 AND Class 1 District 2 would have one race together to qualify for the State meet. Top 30 and Top 4 teams qualify.
I will sign regardless...However...

I think that moving to a Super-District would be a better answer than adding Sectionals. I came from a Class 3 school to a Class 4 school (4 class system). It took me a couple of years to adjust. The thing that most coaches will learn that I have learned by having districts-sectional-state is that you are now trying to get kids to max perform 3 weeks in a row. It is possible, however, if there is a breakdown or a point that kids suffer it will more than likely be at the state meet. While many see this Top 4/30 as an opportunity to get a kid or a team through to the state meet, as an opportunity to make up for a poor performance.....it has also worked against me; example is: One extra race on a stress reaction. Another point is that for a loaded team that has depth it can be a greater advantage. It can be a week off while they run alternates, while the rest of us have to grind it out for 3 consecutive weeks...Before you jump me about that, I am jealous I have never had that luxury, and many many kudos to the coaches that have developed that within their program. I think that a Super-District would make more sense for the smaller classes as well. One of the reasons given that the smaller classes have districts only has always been a lower number of competitors and teams. This will also alleviate the issue of loaded districts, by still allowing 4 teams from what would have been that particular two districts/sectional.

My definition of a Super-District (or Super-Sectional as some have called it) for example would be: Class 1 District 1 AND Class 1 District 2 would have one race together to qualify for the State meet. Top 30 and Top 4 teams qualify.
10/22/2020 9:18:58 AM
Coach
Joined: Aug 2019
Posts: 3
@bantazmo I will sign.
@bantazmo
I will sign.
10/22/2020 9:24:54 AM
Coach
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 39
I also like the Super-District idea better. One less week of qualifying, and a greater chance of getting the best kids and best teams to the State Meet. It is also cheaper for MSHSAA to administer half the number of meets than they normally would. Economics seems to be a oft-cited reason for many of their decisions; wouldn't this save them a lot of money? While getting a third team out of Districts would be better than what we currently have, does sending 24 teams to State devalue what it means to get to State? Class 5 only has about 68 teams in it currently, and we would send 24 of those to State?
I also like the Super-District idea better. One less week of qualifying, and a greater chance of getting the best kids and best teams to the State Meet.

It is also cheaper for MSHSAA to administer half the number of meets than they normally would. Economics seems to be a oft-cited reason for many of their decisions; wouldn't this save them a lot of money?

While getting a third team out of Districts would be better than what we currently have, does sending 24 teams to State devalue what it means to get to State? Class 5 only has about 68 teams in it currently, and we would send 24 of those to State?
10/22/2020 12:58:38 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Jun 2020
Posts: 1
I love the 3 teams + 10 individual non-team qualifiers idea. Sign me up!
I love the 3 teams + 10 individual non-team qualifiers idea. Sign me up!
10/22/2020 1:50:08 PM
Coach
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 171
[quote=coachebert]I also like the Super-District idea better. One less week of qualifying, and a greater chance of getting the best kids and best teams to the State Meet. It is also cheaper for MSHSAA to administer half the number of meets than they normally would. Economics seems to be a oft-cited reason for many of their decisions; wouldn't this save them a lot of money? While getting a third team out of Districts would be better than what we currently have, does sending 24 teams to State devalue what it means to get to State? Class 5 only has about 68 teams in it currently, and we would send 24 of those to State?[/quote] The money part is a great point, and makes a lot of sense. I am with you on the number of teams qualifying. 16 a good representation for State Championships
coachebert wrote:
I also like the Super-District idea better. One less week of qualifying, and a greater chance of getting the best kids and best teams to the State Meet.

It is also cheaper for MSHSAA to administer half the number of meets than they normally would. Economics seems to be a oft-cited reason for many of their decisions; wouldn't this save them a lot of money?

While getting a third team out of Districts would be better than what we currently have, does sending 24 teams to State devalue what it means to get to State? Class 5 only has about 68 teams in it currently, and we would send 24 of those to State?


The money part is a great point, and makes a lot of sense.

I am with you on the number of teams qualifying. 16 a good representation for State Championships
10/22/2020 3:51:49 PM
User
Joined: Apr 2020
Posts: 20
My 2 cents. I’m more on board with just keeping districts and advance 3 teams and 10 non qualifying individuals. I really don’t like the idea of super districts. I feel Super Districts attempts and can succeed at erasing regional representation. I know I’m in the minority around here but I think regional representation is extremely important to grow the sport, super districts doesn’t support growing this sport across the State. Right now in class 5, if the district 1 and 2 girls race is combined there would only be one individual from district 1 at the state meet. Doesn’t always happen, but can happen. I’m not on board with excluding whole regions of the state from our sport. Additionally, I think there are plenty of other factors tied to certain regions which is a large part of why athletes and teams that reside in certain regions are highly successful or struggle from year to year. So teams in certain regions should have to compete against teams from their same region. I bet if some of these coaches took their coaching philosophy and up and moved it to an entirely different region they would be faced with a whole new set of challenges they didn’t know existed, because they never experienced it in their own region. Having regional representation balances that out. At the end of the day though it does suck when good athletes or good teams stay home. We don’t want to see that, especially in a championship. I think the districts as is but 3 teams and 10 individuals on non qualifying teams is the best way to balance that. Keeps your regional representation in tact, makes sure the top 3 teams in the state are always there, if it’s an absolutely loaded district I bet several individuals on that 4th place team still make it. Regional representation and the best teams makes it to the championship, what’s not to like?
My 2 cents. I'm more on board with just keeping districts and advance 3 teams and 10 non qualifying individuals.

I really don't like the idea of super districts. I feel Super Districts attempts and can succeed at erasing regional representation. I know I'm in the minority around here but I think regional representation is extremely important to grow the sport, super districts doesn't support growing this sport across the State. Right now in class 5, if the district 1 and 2 girls race is combined there would only be one individual from district 1 at the state meet. Doesn't always happen, but can happen. I'm not on board with excluding whole regions of the state from our sport.

Additionally, I think there are plenty of other factors tied to certain regions which is a large part of why athletes and teams that reside in certain regions are highly successful or struggle from year to year. So teams in certain regions should have to compete against teams from their same region. I bet if some of these coaches took their coaching philosophy and up and moved it to an entirely different region they would be faced with a whole new set of challenges they didn't know existed, because they never experienced it in their own region. Having regional representation balances that out.

At the end of the day though it does suck when good athletes or good teams stay home. We don't want to see that, especially in a championship. I think the districts as is but 3 teams and 10 individuals on non qualifying teams is the best way to balance that. Keeps your regional representation in tact, makes sure the top 3 teams in the state are always there, if it's an absolutely loaded district I bet several individuals on that 4th place team still make it. Regional representation and the best teams makes it to the championship, what's not to like?
10/22/2020 3:58:08 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 9
I like the three team + 10 idea as well. There are teams that could build their programs even more with this plan. There is plenty of room at the State Course to add the eight additional teams. I will sign up for this.
I like the three team + 10 idea as well. There are teams that could build their programs even more with this plan. There is plenty of room at the State Course to add the eight additional teams. I will sign up for this.

You must be logged in to comment.

Click Here to Log In.