Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 27

Thread: NXN Qualifiers

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Riverside, Ca
    Posts
    11

    NXN Qualifiers

    Is it just me or is anyone else disappointed that California won't be represented at NXN by our best teams. Great Oak turned in dominating performances on some big stages, yet somehow got passed up as an at large. Then Brea Olinda decides they are running without Tamagno. I intend no disrespect, but Brea Olinda is not a dominant team without Tamagno running. I am personally disappointed that they are taking a spot that is now more deserved by many others. As a fan and a coach in California cross country I want to be represented by our best at NXN, and quite simply that is not happening. At this point it should be Ventura, Jurupa Hills, and Great Oak. Just my humble opinion.

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by wcsxc View Post
    Is it just me or is anyone else disappointed that California won't be represented at NXN by our best teams. Great Oak turned in dominating performances on some big stages, yet somehow got passed up as an at large. Then Brea Olinda decides they are running without Tamagno. I intend no disrespect, but Brea Olinda is not a dominant team without Tamagno running. I am personally disappointed that they are taking a spot that is now more deserved by many others. As a fan and a coach in California cross country I want to be represented by our best at NXN, and quite simply that is not happening. At this point it should be Ventura, Jurupa Hills, and Great Oak. Just my humble opinion.
    agree and disagree: california is not going to be represented by our best teams, but our best team is going to be there with ventura.

    agree and disagree: brea is not AS dominant team without tamagno (not really going out on a limb here), but they're still pretty good.

    big, big, big disagree: great oak had their chance to qualify. they didn't. with all due respect to an incredible program, they were the fourth best team on the day they needed to be better (although they were good enough to still win a state title!). not sure i'm going to cry about our inability to send our 4th best team, regardless of what's going on with the 3 best teams before them. nor would i want to penalize the 6 brea kids (plus their top alternate) who worked their butts off all season, and did what they were supposed to do at state. i'm not sure what went into tamagno's decision to do footlocker, nor do i care--if he (or any other of their top 7) got sick, or got injured, or had to go to grandma's 100th birthday party, would you really expect the other 6 guys and the coaches to give up their spot to the fourth best team in the state? no. you would expect them to run one of their alternates, which is why you have alternates in the first place, and because good teams run more than 7 deep and should be rewarded for that. if destiny collins got hurt, do you think great oak would even consider stepping aside to let the 4th best team run? no, nor should they.

    best of luck to the teams who earned their trip to nxn, and congrats to those who ran valiantly enough to even be considered. that's my story and i'm sticking to it...

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Riverside, Ca
    Posts
    11
    I definitely see the validity in each point you make cush. I certainly wish the best to each team and individual headed to NXN, and absolutely give credit to all of them for having amazing years and being at the top of the Cross Country sport in California. I guess for me the at large spot allows NXN an opportunity to look at the body of work, and I think that possibly gives a team that has to run in not as optimal conditions a second life at qualifying. That said, all the California teams heading to Portland are fantastic programs, and yes I would have much rather seen Brea head to NXN with Tamagno.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    91
    On a side note, I wish NXN would go back to being a team only competition instead of watering down the Footlocker meet. A runner like Tomagno could run with his team at NXN and then perhaps meet a qualifying standard to still compete at the Footlocker National meet (I believe this has been done before). Unfortunately, we now have a standoff between Nike and Footlocker with both sides unwilling to work together for two better meets.
    Albert Caruana
    Crystal Springs Uplands School

  5. #5
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Riverside, Ca
    Posts
    11
    The perfect side note Albert!

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by wcsxc View Post
    The perfect side note Albert!
    i think in 2006 footlocker accepted the top individual west regional runner(s?) from nxn--cybulski from royal ran both, don't know if there were others...

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    231
    When NXN was initiated, Footlocker wanted to get some of the top individuals who ran in Portland. That plan lasted only a couple of years and I'm sure came apart when NXN started accepting individual entrants.

  8. #8
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by cush View Post
    big, big, big disagree: great oak had their chance to qualify. they didn't. with all due respect to an incredible program, they were the fourth best team on the day they needed to be better (although they were good enough to still win a state title!).
    Except for the minor detail of the races not being on a level playing field. D2 and D3 boys ran when it was about 50 and the wind was calm. D1 boys ran when it was 65 and the wind was reported to be 5.8 mph. Enough of a difference to alter the merged results? Possibly.

    Of course, there's not much to be done, and teams rotate through the time slots over the years - but to state unequivocally that Great Oak wasn't good enough isn't really fair.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Greg Beal View Post
    Except for the minor detail of the races not being on a level playing field. D2 and D3 boys ran when it was about 50 and the wind was calm. D1 boys ran when it was 65 and the wind was reported to be 5.8 mph. Enough of a difference to alter the merged results? Possibly.

    Of course, there's not much to be done, and teams rotate through the time slots over the years - but to state unequivocally that Great Oak wasn't good enough isn't really fair.
    agree and disagree: i didn't mean for my statement to sound unequivocal--you are absolutely right: the best way to judge the best would of course be a head to head matchup of the the best teams on the same course with the same conditions. however, they weren't good enough based on the conditions set.

    years ago, didn't they devise some complicated point system for nxn? i'm not advocating that, because there are politics and faults with most of those kinds of systems as well. on one hand, it seems fair to reward a team for their season of work; on the other hand, you'd hate to punish a team like ventura for peaking well...

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    91
    One more reason for two sweepstakes races that pits the best teams against each other in California. Top teams can advance to NXN without all the politics and subjectivity that takes place now following the CA state meet.
    Albert Caruana
    Crystal Springs Uplands School

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •