Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Coach slams new NCAA Regionals format

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    But this sorta makes it sound like officiating has long been a province of the emerging senior citizen, which, of course, just isn't true; no way to check it, but it's my impression that average age of an official has gone up by 20-odd years (at least) in the last 40.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by gh
      But this sorta makes it sound like officiating has long been a province of the emerging senior citizen, which, of course, just isn't true; no way to check it, but it's my impression that average age of an official has gone up by 20-odd years (at least) in the last 40.
      I guess I'm on the low end of that 20-odd years variable since I'm still not eligible for my AARP card for at least another 10 years.

      Comment


      • #48
        division 1 coaches will never agree, someone will always complain "it isn't fair to me."

        Here's my solution.

        1. Get out of your office and recruit.
        2. Get out of your office and coach.

        The overwhelming majority of the best kids will make it to nationals regardless of how you structure it. And the overwhelming majority of good coaches will find a way to "get it done" regardless of how you structure it.

        Fair does not mean equal. If you still don't like it, then leave your school for a school that you think has some magical advantage. Any "advantage" of success was earned by establishing a great program that continues to attract great athletes. (of course you have to be good enough for them to want you.)

        In our sport every kid on your team has a lane or a flight every weekend. That can't be said for the 10th man on a basketball team. So the very nature of our sport provides ample opportunity for anyone worthy of making it to NCAAs to show it.

        I just get SO tired of all the back and forth. Paint lines down main street at the North Pole and I bet the LSUs and the Texas A&Ms will find a way to have the best kids on that day.

        STOP CRYING AND WORK HARDER

        Comment


        • #49
          I agree.....but

          4hurdles:

          While I agree that DI coaches have a hard time agreeing on things you might want to recall that they voted something like 290-18 for a revised regional plan. It was turned down by the NCAA Cabinet. I also agree that LSU would rise to the top whether we ran on a grass track. But I think a point is missing here. What we are really speakin about is a huge meet management issue. Just one example. There will be 4 flights of 12 discus throwers. That event will take 5 hours to run. Have you ever been to a track where the conditions changed as the day goes on. Lets say that the first flight has a great quartering wind, ideal for long throwing. Then the second flight has no wind as it dies down. The last flight has a headwind as the afternoon weather changes. That is not an equal playing field. In a normal setting which is shorter in duration the chance of huge changes in conditions is minimized. In a lengthy competition the changes increase. At my home track the Pole Vault, which will last 4 hours in the new system would go from a headwind to a tailwind. That directly impacts the competition.

          Comment


          • #50
            4Hurdles
            The only think that I see will happen with Texas A&M, Florida, LSU and others such school is that the will have more dual meet like they did b4 to qualify more of their athletes to get them to the big dance. When people start chasing time the others start giving them away.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: I agree.....but

              Originally posted by HigherEd
              4hurdles:

              While I agree that DI coaches have a hard time agreeing on things you might want to recall that they voted something like 290-18 for a revised regional plan. It was turned down by the NCAA Cabinet. I also agree that LSU would rise to the top whether we ran on a grass track. But I think a point is missing here. What we are really speakin about is a huge meet management issue. Just one example. There will be 4 flights of 12 discus throwers. That event will take 5 hours to run. Have you ever been to a track where the conditions changed as the day goes on. Lets say that the first flight has a great quartering wind, ideal for long throwing. Then the second flight has no wind as it dies down. The last flight has a headwind as the afternoon weather changes. That is not an equal playing field. In a normal setting which is shorter in duration the chance of huge changes in conditions is minimized. In a lengthy competition the changes increase. At my home track the Pole Vault, which will last 4 hours in the new system would go from a headwind to a tailwind. That directly impacts the competition.
              I agree.

              What is the problem that the 2-division Regionals will address?

              I realize that it is impossible to have every event in every region to be identical. This seems to be addressed by the four "wild cards."

              I realize that in theory a potential scorer (eight places now score) could be eliminated. In fact, who is the most egregious example of a potential scorer who was eliminated in the regionals? I don't count false starts & DNFs.

              Although I've lived in California since 1960, I concede that the West Region is generally the weakest. My solution is to move West Virginia to the Mideast Region, move Missouri to the Midwest Region & move Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico and the portion of Texas that is south of New Mexico to the West Region.

              IF this is done, fairness dictates that at least half of the West Regional meets be held in states that aren't in the Pacific Time Zone. This seems to be a good idea if change is needed.
              none

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: I agree.....but

                Originally posted by HigherEd
                4hurdles:

                While I agree that DI coaches have a hard time agreeing on things you might want to recall that they voted something like 290-18 for a revised regional plan. It was turned down by the NCAA Cabinet. I also agree that LSU would rise to the top whether we ran on a grass track. But I think a point is missing here. What we are really speakin about is a huge meet management issue. Just one example. There will be 4 flights of 12 discus throwers. That event will take 5 hours to run. Have you ever been to a track where the conditions changed as the day goes on. Lets say that the first flight has a great quartering wind, ideal for long throwing. Then the second flight has no wind as it dies down. The last flight has a headwind as the afternoon weather changes. That is not an equal playing field. In a normal setting which is shorter in duration the chance of huge changes in conditions is minimized. In a lengthy competition the changes increase. At my home track the Pole Vault, which will last 4 hours in the new system would go from a headwind to a tailwind. That directly impacts the competition.
                I agree.

                What is the problem that the 2-division Regionals will address?

                I realize that it is impossible to have every event in every region to be identical. This seems to be addressed by the four "wild cards."

                I realize that in theory a potential scorer (eight places now score) could be eliminated. In fact, who is the most egregious example of a potential scorer who was eliminated in the regionals? I don't count false starts & DNFs.

                Although I've lived in California since 1960, I concede that the West Region is generally the weakest. My solution is to move West Virginia to the Mideast Region, move Missouri to the Midwest Region & move Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico and the portion of Texas that is south of New Mexico to the West Region.

                IF this is done, fairness dictates that at least half of the West Regional meets be held in states that aren't in the Pacific Time Zone. This seems to be a good idea if change is needed.
                none

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: I agree.....but

                  Originally posted by HigherEd
                  4hurdles:

                  While I agree that DI coaches have a hard time agreeing on things you might want to recall that they voted something like 290-18 for a revised regional plan. It was turned down by the NCAA Cabinet. I also agree that LSU would rise to the top whether we ran on a grass track. But I think a point is missing here. What we are really speakin about is a huge meet management issue. Just one example. There will be 4 flights of 12 discus throwers. That event will take 5 hours to run. Have you ever been to a track where the conditions changed as the day goes on. Lets say that the first flight has a great quartering wind, ideal for long throwing. Then the second flight has no wind as it dies down. The last flight has a headwind as the afternoon weather changes. That is not an equal playing field. In a normal setting which is shorter in duration the chance of huge changes in conditions is minimized. In a lengthy competition the changes increase. At my home track the Pole Vault, which will last 4 hours in the new system would go from a headwind to a tailwind. That directly impacts the competition.
                  I agree.

                  What is the problem that the 2-division Regionals will address?

                  I realize that it is impossible to have every event in every region to be identical. This seems to be addressed by the four "wild cards."

                  I realize that in theory a potential scorer (eight places now score) could be eliminated. In fact, who is the most egregious example of a potential scorer who was eliminated in the regionals? I don't count false starts & DNFs.

                  Although I've lived in California since 1960, I concede that the West Region is generally the weakest. My solution is to move West Virginia to the Mideast Region, move Missouri to the Midwest Region & move Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico and the portion of Texas that is south of New Mexico to the West Region.

                  IF this is done, fairness dictates that at least half of the West Regional meets be held in states that aren't in the Pacific Time Zone. This seems to be a good idea if change is needed.
                  none

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    For those who don't subscribe to the magazine (turkeys! :P ), a PDF of Part 1 of our Regional discussion in the magazine (from the November/December issue) is now posted to the front page

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X