|
|
Post by ccaddict on Oct 28, 2007 17:23:50 GMT -5
Was anyone else at "state meet #1" Saturday? It was truly amazing watching 16 top ranked boys and 16 top ranked girls teams battle for 5 spots. The pace was so fast at the start that many boys bumped and fell and others lost shoes because of the tightness and speed. The quotes from the boys in the papers were great, calling it the best race they were ever in and the most stressful. I think the stress of not making it to the state meet could be more stressful than actaully competing in the state meet. The times were about a minute faster than last years' Schaumburg sectional.
Of course it was very depressing to see the sadness of seeing so many great teams and individual runners not qualifying for the state meet after all the hard work they put in. I can only hope that the boys and girls remember all the invitationals and medals they won and not the bitterness of seeing so many teams that they beat all year going to the state meet instead of them. Where a runner lives should not determine whether you are are good or not.
The "Marty Hickman/Ron McGraw" Sectional did not disappoint this fan. It was this years' state meet.
|
|
|
|
Post by xxcrunner on Oct 28, 2007 17:38:21 GMT -5
It was an amazing atmosphere.
I am attending State but cannot imagine it being more intense than this meet.
A false start, the fall, the squeeze thru the first turn, and three tight loops with the pack bumping and pushing for at least the whole first mile.
Many deserving seniors failed to qualify which is a shame and should be taken seriously by the IHSA politicians as human beings and educators. For some it was their last and only chance to go to the big event in a sport that takes incredible dedication to compete.
Three weak Sectionals where the only two real title contendors waltzed thru versus a loaded Sectional.
If the loading was only due to chance (the Western Suburbs would be a geographically loaded sectional of chance ) versus the contrived and politically biased method used to force the elimination of many suburban schools, it would be difficult to challenge the results.
Underclassmen that have the privilege of competing at State this year should cherish it and make the most of it; no runner should assume they will qualify next year since no one can assume how assignments will be made next year.
|
|
|
|
Post by xcrunnerforhehs on Oct 28, 2007 19:08:37 GMT -5
the schaumburg sectional was a bullnuts sectional
i run for hoffman estates high school
and we didn't make it out, conat highschool didnt either , schaumburg high didnt either, all three teams beat barrington highschool before, and barrington highschool made it to state because they were in the palatine sectional which was a easy sectional to make it out of off.
to me thats bullnuts
it pisses me off!
|
|
|
|
Post by historian on Oct 28, 2007 20:41:19 GMT -5
I know this seems to be going against all the "conventional wisdom" , but why are many people convinced Schaumberg was so much better than the other Sectionals ? After reviewing the times and relative performanaces, it just doesn't seem that it was....
The Palatine sectional times are way out of wack with any other 3 mile course, so comparing times is really tough. East Peoria, though measured at 2.95, year in and year out runs even slower than a typical full three mile course. The data from past sectionals held there against the times the next week at Detweiler bear that out. Schaumberg did not seem to be a great time course, either.
So...let's look at the last individual qualifier from each sectional. Niles - 15th, Palatine 16th, Normal West (East Peoria) 17th, and Schaumberg 21st. Looking at Schaumberg in particular, that means the top 21 runners all qualified to run next week. Realistically, it is likely a fair of these 21 (as with the top 15,16,17 from the other sectionals) will not be in the "All State top 25" next week. Are some good, even exceptional, runners not going to state - sure. But the state meet will not be missing any "all state" level competitors.
Looking at the time gap from the sectional 5th place finisher back to the last individual qualifier (using #5 takes the "superstars" out of the equations), the gap from Palatine, Niles West, and Schaumberg were all within one second - 25 or 26 seconds. Normal West Sectional gap was a bit larger - 38 seconds.
It will be interesting to see where the "All State" runners come from next week. My guess - Normal will have 6-7 and Palatine 5-6. Hardly fair to call th eSchaumberg Sectional "State Meet #1.....
|
|
|
|
Post by naperunner on Oct 29, 2007 9:04:44 GMT -5
Quit your complaining!!
Yes the Schaumburg Sectional was a good one THIS YEAR based on someone's opinion of the top 20 rankings. Those rankings are an opinion and if you compare times throughout the year, in my opinion four or five of those teams were over rated.
Based on the following criteria the Schaumburg sectional ranks as the 2nd or 3rd out of 4 sectionals.
1. Fastest runner, Schaumburg ranks 4th
2. 5th place runner, Schaumburg ranks 4th
3. 20th runner, Schaumburg ranks 2nd
4. 5th runner on the 3rd place team, Schaumburg ties for 2nd
5. 5th runner on the 5th place team, Schaumburg ranks 2nd
If you look at the facts, the Schaumburg sectional falls in the middle of the 4 sectionals as far as strength. Every year the strength of the sectionals change. Quit complaining. Congratulations to all the runners who ran in any of the four sectionals. Congratulations and the best of luck for those teams that advanced to the STATE MEET. It's supposed to be 55 Degrees and sunny. The race for 1st may be the best in state history... See you all there.
|
|
|
|
Post by runningfandad on Oct 29, 2007 9:53:31 GMT -5
Congrats runners!
Please take some advice and let the complaining of coaches and parents about the tough sectional go. It's no different than schools complaining about other schools winning too much (Catholic schools in Football) and then penalizing the minority. If you thought you were treated unfairly, ask the kids from smaller private schools forced to run against schools 5-10 times their size because the IHSA implemented a multiplier. What's important is that every athlete gives their best. Every year the IHSA system becomes more bureaucratic - and it won't be changed to please a local region.
Perhaps that's as much a life lesson as the hard work you put in to run great times.
|
|
|
|
Post by addicted2speed on Oct 29, 2007 19:33:25 GMT -5
runningfandad your name says a lot to me....it tells me that your a dad, you didnt train your a,ss off for the last 5 months to get to the point where you know you don't have a lick of a chance. it sucks to have a great season, and still not make it to state even though you were ranked in the top 25 and felt you had a good chance at getting there. yes in a way we were treated unfairly, but im also not denying that teams could have run better to give themselves a better chance to get down but don't give me the bullspit about leaving the complaining to the parents because apparently it didnt work, and since some of us feel an injustice its our duty to say something not let our parents do it for us.
xcrunnerforhehs i read you loud and clear, i run for a team who beat Andrew handly a couple of times this year....guess where they are right now? training for the state meet.
oh and naperunner...if you couldnt tell the times at schaumburg were slow, im very sorry, because if next week achtien runs a 15:03 ill be pretty f-in surprised
|
|
|
|
Post by coolrunner4 on Oct 29, 2007 19:53:30 GMT -5
addicted2speed is a genius. to all of those who are saying to stop complaining, you have absolutely no idea what youre talking about. If you say that its only about "giving it your best" then you completely undermine cross country as a great sport. CC is a great sport that ought to be treated like any other sport. that means, the good teams go down state. Guess what, there were about 12 teams in the Schaumburg Sectional that were good enough to go down state in the 2 A system. One of them, Benet Academy, WAS bumped up because of the bogus multiplier. They would have a legit chance to win 2 A State this year, therefore, if the best teams ARE coming from one sectional, its the IHSA's job to make sure that the BEST teams go down to state. If they all come from the same region, then so be it, it is not right to discriminate just because one region is more rich in talent then other regions.
PS naperunner, back in September I had the priveledge of seeing Tom Achtein(winner of the Schaumburg Sectional) run around 14 32 at the state meet. At the Schaumburg Sectional 4 weeks later, he runs 30 seconds slower...does York usually peek on Sept 30? i guess this means at state next week he will run around a 15 30...interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by runningfandad on Oct 29, 2007 20:19:53 GMT -5
I think you misread what I said. You're right, I have two sons who feel just like you. My point is that you need to ignore the complainers and take pride in the hard work that you had to do to complete the season - no matter where your team finished.
It's your forum. My intent was to congratulate.
|
|
lwcxc
All-Conference
Posts: 57
|
Post by lwcxc on Oct 30, 2007 5:32:24 GMT -5
xcrunnerforhehs i read you loud and clear, i run for a team who beat Andrew handly a couple of times this year....guess where they are right now? training for the state meet. While I have no doubt you run for an excellent team, the Andrew girls aren't the best example to use. They really only started running well at their Conference meet--their #2-6 had all been over 19:45 prior to that. I'm sure a lot of teams that beat them handily earlier in the year would be surprised if they ran against them now because their #2-6 runners are doing a great job of supporting Kuzmuk (who should be top 5 in the State). |
|
|
|
Post by addicted2speed on Oct 30, 2007 16:37:49 GMT -5
xcrunnerforhehs i read you loud and clear, i run for a team who beat Andrew handly a couple of times this year....guess where they are right now? training for the state meet. While I have no doubt you run for an excellent team, the Andrew girls aren't the best example to use. They really only started running well at their Conference meet--their #2-6 had all been over 19:45 prior to that. I'm sure a lot of teams that beat them handily earlier in the year would be surprised if they ran against them now because their #2-6 runners are doing a great job of supporting Kuzmuk (who should be top 5 in the State). sorry dude i had misread the results and it made me really pissed when i thought that the guys had made it, which they did not, i feel like a retard for not checking my facts even though when we didnt make it, checking to see what other teams made it really wasnt my top priority still the point is the same because as xcrunnerforhehs sed we had also beaten barrington this year (even tho we don't run for the same team.) |
|
|
|
Post by xxcrunner on Oct 30, 2007 18:19:18 GMT -5
Quit your complaining!! Yes the Schaumburg Sectional was a good one THIS YEAR based on someone's opinion of the top 20 rankings. Those rankings are an opinion and if you compare times throughout the year, in my opinion four or five of those teams were over rated. Based on the following criteria the Schaumburg sectional ranks as the 2nd or 3rd out of 4 sectionals. 1. Fastest runner, Schaumburg ranks 4th 2. 5th place runner, Schaumburg ranks 4th 3. 20th runner, Schaumburg ranks 2nd 4. 5th runner on the 3rd place team, Schaumburg ties for 2nd 5. 5th runner on the 5th place team, Schaumburg ranks 2nd If you look at the facts, the Schaumburg sectional falls in the middle of the 4 sectionals as far as strength. Every year the strength of the sectionals change. Quit complaining. Congratulations to all the runners who ran in any of the four sectionals. Congratulations and the best of luck for those teams that advanced to the STATE MEET. It's supposed to be 55 Degrees and sunny. The race for 1st may be the best in state history... See you all there. This is either the most biased (I assume a runner from one of the very easy sectionals) or extremely naive. It is impossible to compare the times across four CC courses and say one sectional is faster or slower than another - but you know that. |
|
|
|
Post by 800man on Oct 31, 2007 12:23:49 GMT -5
Quit your complaining!! Yes the Schaumburg Sectional was a good one THIS YEAR based on someone's opinion of the top 20 rankings. Those rankings are an opinion and if you compare times throughout the year, in my opinion four or five of those teams were over rated. Based on the following criteria the Schaumburg sectional ranks as the 2nd or 3rd out of 4 sectionals. 1. Fastest runner, Schaumburg ranks 4th 2. 5th place runner, Schaumburg ranks 4th 3. 20th runner, Schaumburg ranks 2nd 4. 5th runner on the 3rd place team, Schaumburg ties for 2nd 5. 5th runner on the 5th place team, Schaumburg ranks 2nd If you look at the facts, the Schaumburg sectional falls in the middle of the 4 sectionals as far as strength. Every year the strength of the sectionals change. Quit complaining. Congratulations to all the runners who ran in any of the four sectionals. Congratulations and the best of luck for those teams that advanced to the STATE MEET. It's supposed to be 55 Degrees and sunny. The race for 1st may be the best in state history... See you all there. Nice try. Aside from Neuqua, and Palatine,the Schaumburg sectional will most likely take 5 out of the top 7 spots at the state meet. The team that just missed ( Geneva ) would have finished 8th at worst and there sitting at home this week. The next five teams at Schaumburg would have battled for the 10-13th spots. It doesn't matter now, it's over but you are very naive and misinformed if you think the other sectionals were anywhere near the quality of Schamburg. |
|
|
|
Post by 800man on Oct 31, 2007 12:30:30 GMT -5
Congrats runners! Please take some advice and let the complaining of coaches and parents about the tough sectional go. It's no different than schools complaining about other schools winning too much (Catholic schools in Football) and then penalizing the minority. If you thought you were treated unfairly, ask the kids from smaller private schools forced to run against schools 5-10 times their size because the IHSA implemented a multiplier. What's important is that every athlete gives their best. Every year the IHSA system becomes more bureaucratic - and it won't be changed to please a local region. Perhaps that's as much a life lesson as the hard work you put in to run great times. Sorry to call you out on this but can you give an example of a private school being forced to run against a school 10 times it's size? or even 5 times. It looks like schools like Benet and Marmion are doing just fine. If you don't understand the reason for the multiplier, then I understand, but truly very few private schools are hurt that much by the multiplier |
|
bacon
All-Conference
Posts: 55
|
Post by bacon on Oct 31, 2007 15:19:04 GMT -5
Sorry to call you out on this but can you give an example of a private school being forced to run against a school 10 times it's size? or even 5 times. It looks like schools like Benet and Marmion are doing just fine. If you don't understand the reason for the multiplier, then I understand, but truly very few private schools are hurt that much by the multiplier Largest school in IL: Berwyn-Cicero (Morton) leveled population 8025 (that is a couple schools combined), clearly run in AAA. Smallest school in AAA with the M: Chicago King Adjusted Enrollment (with M) 1522.95 Leveled enrollment: 923 So that is a factor of about 8.7, however, it appears King did not field an XC team this year. Next team effected by the M in XC: River Forrest (Trinity) Leveled enrollment: 968 (all girls school, so that is twice the students) Adjusted enrollment: 1597.2 Factor to Morton is about 8.3. Trinity and Morton actually were in the same XC regional. Or, we could go small school, class A Largest Class A school: Hampshire Leveled Enrollment 603 Smallest school with M in Class A: Elgin Fox Valley Leveled enrollment: 19 Adjusted: 31.35 Factor (leveled enrollments): 31 Smallest school with M that runs XC: Keith Leveled Enrollment:112 Adjusted: 184.8 Factor (leveled enrollments): 5.38 I am not going to do AA, because with no outliers on the population (either large or small), they are not going to be very big numbers. The class A numbers mean nothing, you have to compete against someone and there is no smaller class. The class AAA numbers don't even mean that much, as there are only 8 schools with leveled populations over 4000. Two of them are combined schools (morton and joilet). Mother McAuley and Chicago Curie both go over 4000 for adjusted enrollments. My opinion: the multiplier needs to be there. You could probably convince me that 1.65 is not the right number. Though, i don't think the levelers for 1, 2, 3 schools are the right numbers either. However, this discussion should be moved to a thread for the multiplier. |
|
|
|
Post by runningfandad on Oct 31, 2007 16:02:33 GMT -5
Don't forget Fenwick. Enrollment under 1200. They are used to the multiplier and are competitive in sports. Guess they would be AA without multiplier.
Niles Sectional. Compare size of schools. Fenwick finished 2nd with a 18 second split between 1-5 runners.
Pl School
1 Sandburg
2 Fenwick
3 New Trier
4 Evanston
5 Stagg
6 OPRF
7 Glenbrook South
8 Brother Rice
9 Loyola
10 Shepard
11 Leyden
12 St. Ignatius
Yes Benet, Marmion, Fenwick, and Ignatius are doing just fine but would have to have a miracle season to challenge for #1 team in AAA. There is no comparison to the team size (or available runners) of the larger schools.
|
|
|
|
Post by coolrunner4 on Oct 31, 2007 21:45:42 GMT -5
Runningfandad is right. To have a school like a Benet or Marmion run against a school 4 times bigger then it and expect to be consistently competitive and give them a chance to make it to state is complete discrimination towards catholic schools. THERE IS NO BASIS FOR A CATHOLIC SCHOOL MULTIPLIER IN CC. catholic schools have not done well enough so that they would need a multiplier. Yes,Football needs it, but its complete garbage that cross country gets dragged down by the big money sports politics and behaviors. Guess how many Catholic school teams have trophied since the IHSA's existence...8. Guess how many have won state...0. It's not fair that the Catholic schools get penalized for being accused of something that they obviously dont do.
|
|
|
|
Post by 800man on Nov 1, 2007 8:17:14 GMT -5
Sorry to call you out on this but can you give an example of a private school being forced to run against a school 10 times it's size? or even 5 times. It looks like schools like Benet and Marmion are doing just fine. If you don't understand the reason for the multiplier, then I understand, but truly very few private schools are hurt that much by the multiplier Largest school in IL: Berwyn-Cicero (Morton) leveled population 8025 (that is a couple schools combined), clearly run in AAA. Smallest school in AAA with the M: Chicago King Adjusted Enrollment (with M) 1522.95 Leveled enrollment: 923 So that is a factor of about 8.7, however, it appears King did not field an XC team this year. Next team effected by the M in XC: River Forrest (Trinity) Leveled enrollment: 968 (all girls school, so that is twice the students) Adjusted enrollment: 1597.2 Factor to Morton is about 8.3. Trinity and Morton actually were in the same XC regional. Or, we could go small school, class A Largest Class A school: Hampshire Leveled Enrollment 603 Smallest school with M in Class A: Elgin Fox Valley Leveled enrollment: 19 Adjusted: 31.35 Factor (leveled enrollments): 31 Smallest school with M that runs XC: Keith Leveled Enrollment:112 Adjusted: 184.8 Factor (leveled enrollments): 5.38 I am not going to do AA, because with no outliers on the population (either large or small), they are not going to be very big numbers. The class A numbers mean nothing, you have to compete against someone and there is no smaller class. The class AAA numbers don't even mean that much, as there are only 8 schools with leveled populations over 4000. Two of them are combined schools (morton and joilet). Mother McAuley and Chicago Curie both go over 4000 for adjusted enrollments. My opinion: the multiplier needs to be there. You could probably convince me that 1.65 is not the right number. Though, i don't think the levelers for 1, 2, 3 schools are the right numbers either. However, this discussion should be moved to a thread for the multiplier. Now you've hit on it. There was an earlier thread where this was discussed. There absolutely needs to be a multiplier. What a fair one is for X-C is another matter. The problem for the IHSA is how do you apply differetn multipliers for different sports? But going by the examples here I don't see a good enough reason to change it. Remember the last school other than York to win the old "AA" title was a school with only 1400 students ( Glenbard South ) so the size argument gets a little old. Yes it's true it's much easier to be competitive with more kids to pull from and a larger team ( York 175+ runners, Neuqua Valley 100+ runners ) can fill in more gaps, but smaller teams can have success. I would also submit that of those school with over 4000 kids, there are very few if any state titles in X-C. There is probably more or similar success with those large schools and the private schools that are multiplied into that class. Now if you want to dip into the new "AA" it looks like so far the private schools that are in that class now are doing quite well, more than 25% of the field for Saturday are private schools. I don't believe of all the teams in AA, 25% are private so there is an over representation there and if you moved say Fenwick, Benet, Marmion, etc in to class AA with no multiplier they would probably take at least two trophies this year. |
|
|
|
Post by 800man on Nov 1, 2007 8:48:54 GMT -5
Don't forget Fenwick. Enrollment under 1200. They are used to the multiplier and are competitive in sports. Guess they would be AA without multiplier. Niles Sectional. Compare size of schools. Fenwick finished 2nd with a 18 second split between 1-5 runners. Pl School 1 Sandburg 2 Fenwick 3 New Trier 4 Evanston 5 Stagg 6 OPRF 7 Glenbrook South 8 Brother Rice 9 Loyola 10 Shepard 11 Leyden 12 St. Ignatius Yes Benet, Marmion, Fenwick, and Ignatius are doing just fine but would have to have a miracle season to challenge for #1 team in AAA. There is no comparison to the team size (or available runners) of the larger schools. You just proved my point. Fenwick with only 1200 is competing and beating schools 4 times there size ( New Trier ). Then again, for the past 40 years a school with a little over 2000 has dominated X-C. By your theory Morton, Joliet, New Trier, Stevenson, ( any others over 4000 ) would be dominating X-C but they are not. How many trophies inthe last 30 years for those schools 1 or 2. The Private schools are doing just as well as the largest schools, if not better. |
|
|
|
Post by 800man on Nov 1, 2007 9:03:57 GMT -5
Runningfandad is right. To have a school like a Benet or Marmion run against a school 4 times bigger then it and expect to be consistently competitive and give them a chance to make it to state is complete discrimination towards catholic schools. THERE IS NO BASIS FOR A CATHOLIC SCHOOL MULTIPLIER IN CC. catholic schools have not done well enough so that they would need a multiplier. Yes,Football needs it, but its complete garbage that cross country gets dragged down by the big money sports politics and behaviors. Guess how many Catholic school teams have trophied since the IHSA's existence...8. Guess how many have won state...0. It's not fair that the Catholic schools get penalized for being accused of something that they obviously dont do. Well now I am not going to single out the CATHOLIC school slike you. I am saying all private schools that have a multplier. There are also a few public schools that have unrestricted boundaries ( like the private schools ). Those school salso have a multiplier applied. I'm not sure where you got the 8 from but looking at the IHSA site a total of 22 trophies have been awarded to Multplier schools. The total number of Multiplied schools is 146 but a fair percentage of those schools don't field X-C teams. It is more like 90-100, so about 13% of all schools have a multiplier applied in X-C. Interestingly enough, those 22 trophies account for about 12% of the trophies awarded over the last 30 years. The true problem again is how to apply a fair multiplier for all sports. In my opinion the 1.65 is too low for football/ basketball/baseball/wrestling but is too high for most other sports, but it is not that far off. Aside from 1 or 2 programs, X-C is a sport of ebb and flow. York is the one constant team and again they have a little over 2000 students. There are only 8 other teams that have more than 5 trophies and 3 of those are the old class "A" or small schools( Winnebago, Elmwood, and Eureka ). The "large" schools you seem to have a problem with that have more than 5 total trophies are Schaumburg with 9 ( mostly in the 80's ) , Lyons Township with 7 ( dating back to dominance in the 50's ), Evanston with 9 ( also in the 50's and 60's ) and Maine East with 6 ( late 70's and early 80's ). SO wher eis all the dominance from these schools that are 5-10 times larger than Benet, Fenwick, Marmion, Loyola, St. Ignatius, Lane, Marist... |
|
bacon
All-Conference
Posts: 55
|
Post by bacon on Nov 1, 2007 10:51:49 GMT -5
There is no Catholic School multiplier. It is a non-boundried school multiplier. It applies to some public schools as well.
Two points i would like to throw out:
1. I have said this before, but I think it would be a lot fairer to divide the classes by sport. It is supposed to be 50% class A, 25% AA, 25% AAA. However, in boys XC, it is very close to 33% per class (156 in A, 153 in AA, 170 in AAA). And I would wager that there more individual runners in the lower classes, which would skew the numbers more. I would support something like 40/30/30 applied to each sport individually. This would a lot simpler then trying to figure out a different multiplier for each sport.
2. Lot's of people mention Marmion as an example of a team getting "screwed". 10 years ago, Marmion wouldn't even have made it out of a class A sectional. They were a bad program. It is very unfair to Marmion to claim that they have reached their limit when they have shown vast improvement over the past 5 years. They are a much better program now and it shows. I think they will continue to improve.
|
|
|
|
Post by 800man on Nov 1, 2007 12:31:33 GMT -5
There is no Catholic School multiplier. It is a non-boundried school multiplier. It applies to some public schools as well. Two points i would like to throw out: 1. I have said this before, but I think it would be a lot fairer to divide the classes by sport. It is supposed to be 50% class A, 25% AA, 25% AAA. However, in boys XC, it is very close to 33% per class (156 in A, 153 in AA, 170 in AAA). And I would wager that there more individual runners in the lower classes, which would skew the numbers more. I would support something like 40/30/30 applied to each sport individually. This would a lot simpler then trying to figure out a different multiplier for each sport. 2. Lot's of people mention Marmion as an example of a team getting "screwed". 10 years ago, Marmion wouldn't even have made it out of a class A sectional. They were a bad program. It is very unfair to Marmion to claim that they have reached their limit when they have shown vast improvement over the past 5 years. They are a much better program now and it shows. I think they will continue to improve. Both good points. Looking at this years X-C finals they have 20 teams in each division. It would have made a lot more sense to have 25 in AAA, 20 in AA and 15 in A. That's still the same number of total teams and probably a more competitive final. Lets face it, there are more than 20 quality AAA teams and adding 5 more would have included some of those teams that got whacked at Schaumburg. SOme of those teams are top ten material. In AA there are 8-10 real good teams ( 1 team - Sycamore would probably be top15 in AAA ). then a few more decent teams then some fill ins. In A there are 4-6 good teams then another 5 decent teams. So all things being equal, the classes aren't and shouldn't be. |
|
|
|
Post by coolrunner4 on Nov 1, 2007 23:01:21 GMT -5
Forgive me for not making my facts completly clear. The 8 trophies stats i got was for schools taht WOULD be in 2 A if there was not a multiplier. This takes Marist out of the picture. For they are the Catholic school with the best CC history. Schools like Benet, Fenwick, Loyola and Marmion are doing "well" yes. But it shouldnt matter how well they are doing now. The point is is taht these teams dont dominate. The point of the multiplier is to keep schools from dominating, they would not and do not, they compete. All schools have good programs, they are not GREAT programs like JCA or Mount Carmel in football. ...another stat, there has only been one individual in the past ten years that has placed in the top ten at state from a Catholic school...David Grange from Marmion in 2006.
|
|
|
|
Post by runningfool on Nov 3, 2007 21:26:59 GMT -5
Schaumburg Sectional qualifying teams at the state meet today
2. York
4. Waubonsie Valley
5. Naperville North
6. St Charles North
7. Wheaton North
2+4+5+6+7 = "The Sectional of Death"
NUFF said.
|
|
|
|
Post by ccaddict on Nov 4, 2007 0:23:15 GMT -5
Great discussion everyone. Special thanks to 800man and runningfoot for explaining the difference between short courses(Palatine) and long courses(Schaumburg). The seasonal rankings were very consistent with how the teams performed during the season at Peoria. Everyone knows the best schools except for Neuqua Valley and Palatine were at the Schaumburg Sectional and the state meet proved it. Maybe next year Neuqua Valley and Palatine can run with the other teams from their own conference at Schaumburg and we be done with this mess. The Niles West Sectional schools finished #12, 15, 16,17, & 18th. The Normal Sectional schools finished #1, 9, 11, 19, 20. What happened in the 3A state meet this year was a joke and the scores reflected it. Most everyone knew this would happen, nobody did anything about it, and the IHSA has indicated that they don't plan on changing it. So I guess we all need to get used to it, and runners that live anywhere near Schaumburg need to know that they must be in the top 25-30 runners in the state to make it out of that sectional.
|
|
|
|
Post by 800man on Nov 4, 2007 9:32:27 GMT -5
Great discussion everyone. Special thanks to 800man and runningfoot for explaining the difference between short courses(Palatine) and long courses(Schaumburg). The seasonal rankings were very consistent with how the teams performed during the season at Peoria. Everyone knows the best schools except for Neuqua Valley and Palatine were at the Schaumburg Sectional and the state meet proved it. Maybe next year Neuqua Valley and Palatine can run with the other teams from their own conference at Schaumburg and we be done with this mess. The Niles West Sectional schools finished #12, 15, 16,17, & 18th. The Normal Sectional schools finished #1, 9, 11, 19, 20. What happened in the 3A state meet this year was a joke and the scores reflected it. Most everyone knew this would happen, nobody did anything about it, and the IHSA has indicated that they don't plan on changing it. So I guess we all need to get used to it, and runners that live anywhere near Schaumburg need to know that they must be in the top 25-30 runners in the state to make it out of that sectional. It was amazing to me how close 3 through 7th was. I knew it would be but only 34 points seperated Palatine through WheatonNorth. Then you had the gaps of 20 points to Hersey, another 30 points to LWE then almost another 100 to DC. There would have been a bunch of the Schaumburg teams in there ( in that 20-80 point gap behind WN ) and who knows, it may have affected the 3rd place trophy by pushing Palatines 4th and 5th man back. Oh well, it's over. Now we can focus on track. ( of course after FLN and NTN ) Go Illinois teams. |
|
|
|
Post by neverstoprunning on Nov 4, 2007 12:02:59 GMT -5
What teams and individuals are doing NTN and footlocker?
|
|
bacon
All-Conference
Posts: 55
|
Post by bacon on Nov 4, 2007 12:26:50 GMT -5
Schools like Benet, Fenwick, Loyola and Marmion are doing "well" yes. But it shouldnt matter how well they are doing now. The point is is taht these teams dont dominate. The point of the multiplier is to keep schools from dominating, they would not and do not, they compete. Do you have any support for this? I was under the impression that the multiplier's purpose was to keep the playing field level. "Domination" is not required for an unlevel playing field. |
|
bacon
All-Conference
Posts: 55
|
Post by bacon on Nov 4, 2007 12:29:47 GMT -5
What teams and individuals are doing NTN and footlocker? NTN: dyestat.com//?pg=us2007NTNMidwestEntriesOct30IL should do well. Though, with Riddle and the injuries to the Yorkies, how well is debatable. Without Riddle, NV is a qualifier. With him, they are a contender. York could make a lot of noise if they have Talbot or Rizzo healthy. Geneva should be interesting. They got a week off and are probably not happy about that. |
|
|
|
Post by runningfool on Nov 4, 2007 16:58:39 GMT -5
Another caveat to those that think this secional was not the toughest. Geneva (eliminated at the sectional in 6th place) beat Sycamore in the conference meet. The same Sycamore that WON the 2A State title.
|
|
