NCAA DI to go to East-West regional qualifying

[VTechVaulter]

Tennessee wuold be a great choice

alhough i still believe they need to invest some money and cover up all the random concrete thats exposed around the pit area (and some new pits with bigger front buns may not be a terrible idea)

I dont think anybody whos ever jumped there wants to go back to Icahn Stadium and the wonderful new york smell/wind/sandstorm

IUPUI wuold also be a great choice

Georgia honestly doesn't have the space to do it i dont think. it would just be a mess with 48 pole vaulters around.. and being on the infield will kill the speed of the other field events and therefore the meet

Never been to LSU so cant say anything about that.

MY number one choice though, is tennessee because there might actually be crowds too. Cool fans!!!! plus they have a nice warm up area

[tennpolevault]

Your right about Tennessee but I don't see it ever happening here. Yeah we're pole vault crazy but its a pretty tight setting for such a ginormous meet. You have too many limitations in the throwing areas without having a separate area. Jav and Disc can't run at the same time. High jump and shot put couldn't either. A 3 day meet with men and women of that magnitude would be a logistical nightmare. Imagine if the first day got rained out ! Then what would they do? The only answer I see is scaling down the fields of the super regionals to about 25. That would give the top 50 in the nation a chance to go the NCAA's. Also, you could have a final only at the super regional which you be nice for all the volunteer coaches of the world.

I wish they would go in the opposite direction and make the NCAA meet a super elite meet like it used to be. Top 15 or so go and its a final only. Shorten the meet and travel and make it exciting for the athletes and fans. These 5 to 6 day meets are a killer for everyone, especially after a long season that now has regionals. Look at the winning heights since the regional system started and you'll see what I'm talking about. Just my 2 cents.

[rainbowgirl28]

Tennessee wuold be a great choice

alhough i still believe they need to invest some money and cover up all the random concrete thats exposed around the pit area (and some new pits with bigger front buns may not be a terrible idea)

I dont think anybody whos ever jumped there wants to go back to Icahn Stadium and the wonderful new york smell/wind/sandstorm

IUPUI wuold also be a great choice

Georgia honestly doesn't have the space to do it i dont think. it would just be a mess with 48 pole vaulters around.. and being on the infield will kill the speed of the other field events and therefore the meet

Never been to LSU so cant say anything about that.

MY number one choice though, is tennessee because there might actually be crowds too. Cool fans!!!! plus they have a nice warm up area

Icahn is unlikely because it's not owned by a school, so little incentive to host it, and New York is way too expensive lodging.

IUPUI also seems somewhat unlikely unless a nearby big school like Indiana wanted to step up and put it on. Plus I think the NCAA meet is still sponsored by UCS and IUPUI is in prime Gill territory.

I agree that it would never work at Georgia.

LSU is huge and has a big spectator capacity. When I've was there it seemed like they had a ton of everything, but I wasn't paying much attention to the throws.

[Barto]

I have not seen their new facility, but doesn't Auburn have one of only 4 IAAF certified facilities in N. America? Could they hold it?

[GWU Vaulter]

Duke has parallel runways and it is def big enough, personally i dont like the runways they are pretty slow to me!!!....But i hate the new system now after thinking about it and just wish it was like Inoodrs!!

[VTechVaulter]

yeah regionals are only cool until your one of the guys just trying to "survive".

[rainbowgirl28]

So this whole thing actually sounds way lamer than I originally thought. It sounds like the 2 region meets won't be trying to declare a champion, they will just be the first round of NCAAs. So presumably for the PV you get 2 pits of ~24 people and when your 48 is reduced to 12 the competition is over.

Who would want to do that? Who would want to watch that?

But we'll see. It sounds like nothing is finalized.

[GWU Vaulter]

This is what im feeling like. You are suppose to take the best to national. ..Taking 96 people to a 2 region meet is retarded. Lets face it i dont care about the arguement about small school or big school. Its division 1 if you're good enough to make it to nationals then thats all that matters. And being anywhere between 30 to 96 on the National list obviously means you're not better than 29 or more on that list...... So why even watste time, to give them a chance and say hey its ok you're not good enough but hey maybe the better guy will have a bad day and you can make it in....

And someone might say something like well if he NH then he isnt the best or is apparently not good enough to make it to nationals..... Someone that is expected to win and make nationals has alot more to lose than someone who jumps 16 6''......That person who is the top jumper deserves to NH at nationals not at a region meet. Again with regionals it will never going to be a true national meet becuase everyone is not competing under the same conditions(east and west) unlike the Olympic trials!!! Again 96 peop;ls frickin retarded!!


Having a 24 man section is going to atleast take 3hrs..... What about people that comes in higher and is toward the end of the order...What about wind patterns depending on what time you start you might have a tailwind, but if you are towards the end of the order and a bunch of time goes by guess what you could be stuck with a head wind.

I dunno maybe im complaining, i guess i just need to vent a lil....Hopefully they do something about it!!!

[rainbowgirl28]

Having a 24 man section is going to atleast take 3hrs..... What about people that comes in higher and is toward the end of the order...What about wind patterns depending on what time you start you might have a tailwind, but if you are towards the end of the order and a bunch of time goes by guess what you could be stuck with a head wind.

Depends on where they start the bar. If it's just a qualifying round and they start the bar high enough (and the pit is run well enough and they do big enough increments) you ought to be able to get done in two hours, but who knows.

Oh yeah but this is the NCAA, home of "hey let's not run 5-alive EVER" so it probably will be over 3 hours.


You know, the NAIA is pretty awesome... I might have been to Nationals one year where there were 40 girls, but at least they ran 5-alive!!

[zipsDIGSpv]

This is a proposal that sounds better then what they are thinking. If it has to be an East-West regional, this seems like a way better way to run the meet. We may know more after the coaches convention coming up next week. I am undecided how I feel about the team scoring part of this proposal though but I sure do hope that something changes.


http://www.trackshark.com/news/updates/959/

The The 2008 U.S. Track & Field and Cross Country Coaches Association National Convention will take place from Monday, December 15th through Thursday, December 18th, 2008 at the JW Marriott Desert Ridge Resort and Spa in Phoenix, Arizona. Click here for more information.

As prepared by Akron Head Coach Dennis Mitchell

The NCAA DI Two Region Qualifying Round to the NCAA Championships

There has never been a meet or competition like this new region system that will be implemented in 2010. There are major questions over this format.
• How do you handle 48+ athletes in each event with no real final?
• Why do you have a meet that appears to have no individual winners or team score?
• Are there large inequities between each region?
• Wasn’t the region system designed to get away from a descending order list?
• Doesn’t this system add to the uncertainty of who gets in each region causing an increase in chasing marks especially for marginal athletes?
• How do we deal with the Psychology of top athletes having no real finals or being winners in an event for four weeks?
• Will there not be massive increases in cost chasing marks, the distance in travel to the region meet and the uncertainty of who is getting into the meet.
• Was there a lack of transparency in the decision making process where many coaches felt betrayed though this process?
• Would anyone want to even try to market a long, what appears to be a, prelim only meet?
• Has there ever been precedence for putting on a meet like this?

How can we turn this negative into a positive?
As many as there are that dislike this new format there is a way to turn it into a positive by using the parameters of this system to our advantage. This may be the best time to reform the team aspects of our sport. The key is to look outside the box and to not give up on the goals of having winners and team scoring while keeping the process equitable. Through discussion of a plan like this proposal, coaches as a group can participate in developing and sharing a sense of purpose of ownership of this plan.

The following proposed system combines the positives of the 64 format (proposed in 2007), the current four region format, descending order list and the current two regions program. It also adds in a much needed stronger team aspect. It will mean something to be one of the top 32 teams in the nation. It also puts a premium on competitive individual performances. The individual placing and team scores in our sport should mean more in this system by providing a reward for doing well at this qualifying level.

Here are the parameters set by the NCAA Championship Cabinet we must follow
„Ï Two regions West (107 schools) and East (195 schools)
„Ï 48 athletes in each event in each region determined by descending order list.
„Ï 3 days of competition
„Ï The top 12 placing athletes from each region advance to the national championships.
„Ï No at-large individual advancements to the NCAA Championships
„Ï This meet is a qualifying round for the NCAA
„Ï No more than two rounds in each event for this meet
„Ï Two heat type finals

Remember this is a qualifying round where there is no previous precedence in any way for putting on a meet like this. Therefore we can and should be able to design within the parameters set how we would like the meet to look.


Two Region/Four Section Plan Proposal for Team/Individual Advancement to the NCAA Championships

Proposed Plan Goals:
1. To equitably and fairly qualify the top 24 athletes to the NCAA Outdoor Championships.
2. To make each event more manageable in numbers to contest using the advantages of the descending order list.
3. To equitably and fairly have a plan to not only qualify individuals but narrow down the number of teams that can score at the NCAA Championships.
4. To create a team qualifying system that does not take away any individual opportunities to qualify or compete at the NCAA Championships.
5. To make it truly mean something to be one of the top 32 teams at the national final.
6. To provide the top individuals the best opportunity to achieve excellent marks and receive place recognition at the region round and the national meet.

Region/First Round
o Using the descending order list seed evenly in half the 48 athletes in each event into two equal sections of 24.
o The 24 in each section compete only among themselves for 6 automatic NCAA slots.
o Only athletes in the top 6 in their sections advance to the NCAA Championships
o The top six places in each section are awarded points at 10-8-6-4-2-1
o Points from all sections will combine for team scores in each region.
o The winner of each section is a region section champion
o The top 12 scoring teams in each region qualify to score at the NCAA Championships.
o An additional 8 teams are chosen from descending order list of national qualifiers from both regions and all events including the combined events to bring the total qualifying teams to 32.

Each event section of 24 may compete in the following for the top six slots:
o The 100m to the 3000 steeplechase will compete in two rounds.
o 5000 and 10,000 will compete in one round.
o The horizontal jumps and throws will have three preliminary throws and a three throws nine person final.
o Pole vault and high jump will compete in one round

NCAA Outdoor Championships
o The only scoring athletes at the NCAA Championships are those who represent the 32 qualifying teams.
o The top 8 athletes in each event representing the qualified 32 teams score in that event 10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1.
o Just as it has been done in the past the top 8 athletes in each event will be honored on the awards stand regardless of what team they represent.
o Athletes representing a scoring team have a different type of bib number.

This is similar to the cross country national championship model except the only athletes at the national championship qualified as individuals

[rainbowgirl28]

I don't like the idea of only 32 teams scoring. This isn't cross country.

[SuhrSports]

"Only athletes in the top 6 in their sections advance to the NCAA Championships"

Someone clarify this if I am wrong, but by breaking the vault up into 2 sections of 24, and declaring the top 6 in each section national qualifiers, we are essentially doing the same thing a 4 region system did. You can have a higher jump in section 1 and get bumped out of nationals because your placement in a section was not beneficial to you qualifying. If there is one meet, should all the athletes not be competing against one another for the slots?