Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Return of the Dual Meet

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

  • Return of the Dual Meet

    It's never going to come back like it was, but it looks better for this year than in quite a while. Perusing online schedules, here's a (partial) list of the bigger dual/tri/quad meets I've found so far (may contain errors). Notable among them is the new Texas-TAMU dual.

    Jan 10 -- NC hosts a quad
    Jan 10 -- Illinois at Iowa (men only)
    Jan 16 -- Missouri at Kansas
    Jan 16 -- BG hosts a quad (women only)
    Jan 16 -- Ill State at Ind State
    Jan 17 -- Ohio State at Michigan (men only)
    Jan 18 -- Akron hosts a quad
    Jan 19 -- Fresno State hosts a quad
    Jan 23 -- Kent State at Akron
    Jan 24 -- Notre Dame hosts a quad
    Jan 24 -- Michigan hosts a quad
    Jan 24 -- Purdue hosts a quad
    Jan 24 -- Texas at Texas A&M
    Jan 30 -- Central Mich at Eastern Mich
    Jan 30 -- Ohio & Yng State at Kent State
    Jan 31 -- Oklahoma hosts duals
    Jan 31 -- Air Force hosts a quad
    Jan 31 -- Wash. State hosts a quad
    Feb 6 -- Toledo, No. Ill & BG at Central Mich (women only)
    Feb 14 -- "The Armory Duals" (not sure exactly who is showing up)
    Feb 20 -- Ball State hosts a quad
    Mar 7 -- UC Davis hosts a quad
    Mar 28 -- So Fla hosts a quad
    Apr 4 -- Virginia at Missouri
    Apr 4 -- Oregon's "Pepsi Team Challenge"
    Apr 4 -- East Carolina hosts a quad
    Apr 4 -- Eastern Mich & Western Mich at Central Mich
    Apr 11 -- Missouri hosts a quad
    Apr 11 -- Akron hosts a quad
    Apr 11 -- Michigan at Ohio State (men only, likely TV coverage)
    Apr 18 -- Cal at Stanford
    Apr 18 -- UCLA at Oregon (men only, likely TV coverage)
    Apr 18 -- Indiana hosts a quad
    Apr 18 -- Louisville hosts a quad
    Apr 18 -- Colo State at Wyoming
    May 2 -- Nebraska hosts a tri
    May 2 -- Arizona and No. Ariz at Ariz State
    May 2 -- UCLA at Southern Cal (TV coverage)

    May 2 -- Washington at Wash. State

    Looks like the Pac-10 likes duals and the SEC hates them while the Big Ten and Big XII have mixed feelings.

  • #2
    I'm not sure there's any level of track I enjoyed competing in/watching as much as the old Pac-8 dual meet setup where each of the schools had 5 meets against the rest of the conference every year. It was collegiate track with a real purpose.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by gh
      I'm not sure there's any level of track I enjoyed competing in/watching as much as the old Pac-8 dual meet setup where each of the schools had 5 meets against the rest of the conference every year. It was collegiate track with a real purpose.
      I don't think we (HS team I coach) have had a dual in the 15 years I've been here, but my fondest memories of my own HS track team was of the dual meets. I'm not sure kids today would even 'get' it anymore, because now they expect to get team points for a 6th place finish (3 pts to be precise). I may have to investigate the possibility of doing one though. Can't hurt to try (famous last words)!

      Comment


      • #4
        USC v UCLA was always a big time affair for me. USC seemed to dominate up til early 70s when Collet - Smith - Garrison rolled into town.Had a brother who ran @ USC til then. I remember Naftali Temu with some other Kenyans being ushered around the collosium for one of those Pac 8 affairs. If memory serves they ran and destroyed. Year before 68 Oly. Got to meet em. African invasion had not come full force by then.

        BUT - for sheer excitement I would have to put the CIFSS champs as #1. That was before there were 12 different divisions. One division - at night - stands bulging - and crowd knowledgable and appreciative. Virtually every event was a showcase.

        But back to topic - dual meets promoted bragging rights and oft times big showdowns. TFN always covered them quite well (IMHO)

        Comment


        • #5
          Nostalgia time....

          Back in The Day ( early 60's) in the ACC , every year, we had duals against the other 7 conference teams. Each year the sites flip-flopped. Plus trips to Florida Relays and Penn Relays, plus ACC title meet.

          It made Track a real TEAM sport... especially for walk ons to fill out an entire dual meet squad, in all events. And some of those walk ons ( example: guess who) actually then got pretty good ! It gave plenty of guys a chance to WIN !

          And I still do not understand how a non-revenue sport such as Baseball can gallivant around playing 50+ games a season but a crummy 7 or so dual meets for Track died.

          It can't be an expense factor can it ? How much does it cost to cram 5-6 to a car, strap the poles and javelins on the top of 2 of them, then drive(4-5 team members' cars, plus 2 coaches' cars) pay gas money only, then sleep four to a motel room ( or all in a big bunkroom in the visiting school's stadium) at the meets that required an overnight ? ( Back then we also got... hold your hats... $3 a day meal money on the road. )

          Team spirit, comaraderie, lots of funny things happening.

          Comment


          • #6
            good question about the day the music died. It seems like that was, as has been mentioned, the bread and butter, the foundation ... of our sport. I remember seeing a (TNFN) pic of Don Kardong leaping into the air in sheer joy, on his way to, or just after, winning 2 mile vs Cal. Cal - Stanford was a beeeeeeiiiiig deal for those guys. And so it was for rivalries all over the country.

            So, Who Killed the Black Dahlia? er - the dual meet system? How did that fade - couldn't have imploded in one - two - three years. or ...

            And what would it take to ressurect

            Comment


            • #7
              Can't count on an NCAA qualifier in a dual meet, especially outdoors. Once getting to the big dance was marks-intensive duals were on the way out. That plus a nationwide movement away from the quarters system which foreshortened the spring season. I'd say the regionals system has changed the first and made duals a bit more enticing--it just took a few years to get schedules adjsuted--but the new regionals makes me worry for the future.

              Limited rosters have an effect, too. When I was in college some 17+ years ago, we had about 70 guys on our team even with only 9 scholarships. Our outdoor opener was always a home dual against Eastern Michigan and we took great pride in being able to beat the perennial MAC champs more often than not. That, plus it was great fun to watch freshmen run their first steeplechase...

              What would it take to get them back into regularity? Some sort of enticement. A weekly cable-TV Dual Meet of the Week would theoretically have big programs fighting with each other to get on the tube. I think the OSU-UM dual on the Big Ten Network last year got some amount of attention that way. Maybe something else, such as in any dual meet between conference opponenents the event winners get auto qualifiers to the conference meet.

              Comment


              • #8
                I would love to see a system where track, for indoor perhaps, was converted to a team sport.

                Thus, there would be no individual qualifications. You go as a team or you stay home as a team. I could see a season with a series of quad meets followed by an all inclusive tournament with brackets. It would be pretty quick to reduce the teams to four with four teams in each meet along the way.

                64 teams with two participants per event per team would get to one meet with two qualifiers. There is no reason this format would not allow multiple events on one weekend since it is not likely that anyone would try a 10,000m race indoors.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I'm doing dual-meet rankings for Trackshark.

                  Only meets with four or fewer teams count, and to be ranked a team has to have beaten another D-I team in such a meet sometime during the season. While rankings are based on a combined indoor-outdoor season, outdoor meets are considered more important than indoor meets. Rankings are a function of both who a team has beaten (and lost to) and how good they are perceived to be.

                  Early on, the #1 teams are Ohio State (men) and Michigan (women). Winners at this weekend's Texas A&M-UT meets are likely to overtake the top spots.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Dave
                    I would love to see a system where track, for indoor perhaps, was converted to a team sport.

                    Thus, there would be no individual qualifications. You go as a team or you stay home as a team. I could see a season with a series of quad meets followed by an all inclusive tournament with brackets. It would be pretty quick to reduce the teams to four with four teams in each meet along the way.

                    64 teams with two participants per event per team would get to one meet with two qualifiers. There is no reason this format would not allow multiple events on one weekend since it is not likely that anyone would try a 10,000m race indoors.
                    2 things that could go wrong with this, if there are no individual qualifiers, the best schools would get better and have all the top indiduals as well.

                    another problem is that if there were an ncaa dual meet championship, one team could have all its scholarship athletes be distance runners and throwers
                    and the school they are competing against could be made up entirely of sprinters and jumpers.

                    example not ncaa teams but imagine if they had a dual meet between jamaica and kenya? at least in the running events it would be VERY predictable what would happen, jamaica would take the sprints easily and the kenyans would win the distances easily, and the meet would be TOO predictable, at least in the running events.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      A duel meet tournament may no longer be realistic but I'd love to see a quad meet tournament and treat the current national meet as the all-star meet it really is instead of a team championship.

                      Perhaps an unofficial tournament could be sponsored by a shoe company and started small: sixteen teams divided into four regional quad meets and the four winners go to a Final Four. It could be made perfect for cable television.

                      And if there is the inevitable resistance at the D-1 level, why not try it at D-2, D-3, NAIA, or Juco?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        It was sometime between 70-72 while I was stil stationed in San Diego that I went to see SDS vs Arizona in a track meet. The star of the show was that Wildcat 4x1 team, a team of Ashland Whitfield..Jackie White..Hardee Massengill..Gus Brisco. Yep still remember it. SDS had a guy named Herbie Brown who was suppose to have 9.4 jets. He got waxed that day by three of those speedy Wildcats.

                        Miss San Jose State not having a track program, Taft JC not having a track program. No more Bakersfield Classic and the Fresno meet is a tiny affair now :cry: Yes also miss the dual meet.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Halfmiler2
                          A duel meet tournament may no longer be realistic but I'd love to see a quad meet tournament and treat the current national meet as the all-star meet it really is instead of a team championship.

                          Perhaps an unofficial tournament could be sponsored by a shoe company and started small: sixteen teams divided into four regional quad meets and the four winners go to a Final Four. It could be made perfect for cable television.

                          And if there is the inevitable resistance at the D-1 level, why not try it at D-2, D-3, NAIA, or Juco?
                          Following Halfmiler2, my dream competition would be a final four competition where each region would be composed of five teams; Div1-3, NAIA and Juco. Teams voted in by something similar to BCS computer system combined with high school coach input. If a team couldn't make it then too bad, that region goes with less. Obviously there are formidable legal issues in combining disparate divisions and conferences. But the regional geographic competitive angle would be irresistible to me if I had my hands on the advertising budgets for a two day TV extravaganza. It might also fit the more humble mood of the country where corporate glitz shrinks back toward less professional olympic sports.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by doug091463
                            Originally posted by Dave
                            I would love to see a system where track, for indoor perhaps, was converted to a team sport.

                            Thus, there would be no individual qualifications. You go as a team or you stay home as a team. I could see a season with a series of quad meets followed by an all inclusive tournament with brackets. It would be pretty quick to reduce the teams to four with four teams in each meet along the way.

                            64 teams with two participants per event per team would get to one meet with two qualifiers. There is no reason this format would not allow multiple events on one weekend since it is not likely that anyone would try a 10,000m race indoors.
                            2 things that could go wrong with this, if there are no individual qualifiers, the best schools would get better and have all the top indiduals as well.

                            another problem is that if there were an ncaa dual meet championship, one team could have all its scholarship athletes be distance runners and throwers
                            and the school they are competing against could be made up entirely of sprinters and jumpers.

                            example not ncaa teams but imagine if they had a dual meet between jamaica and kenya? at least in the running events it would be VERY predictable what would happen, jamaica would take the sprints easily and the kenyans would win the distances easily, and the meet would be TOO predictable, at least in the running events.
                            My suggestion is for NCAAs or HS rather than international competition. I would think you would end up having to fill all the events in order to win. Plus, it would be extremely difficult to try to weight your team toward distance or toward sprints if you were competing against three other teams in each meet that could fill in the other events. You could completely head off the temptation to stack the team in either sprints or distance by having a 4x400 and a 4x800 relay. That way, you have to bring 4 distance guys/girls and at least 4 sprinters.

                            This system would also have the advantage of bringing the spectator back into the discussion. It would be clear that "StateU" kicked "UofState"'s butt last weekend and that next weekend, your other arch rivals would be in town. With the NCAA limitation on scholarships, this would also encourage walkon's and off season football players to compete.

                            Someone else suggested using the current individual system as an "all star" meet. That seems like a good idea provided no team scores were kept but might dilute the team concept.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Oddest combination I've seen for a Dual Meet... South Carolina vs. Denison at the Disney Wide World of Sports Complex in Florida, in early January (I assume it was an outdoor meet, I don't think they have an indoor track there)

                              http://gamecocksonline.cstv.com/sports/ ... nison.html

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X