Cross Country State Qualifications
06/19/2017 7:44:52 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 28
Hey Coaches, Now that Track is over, can someone tell me if we are using the same guidelines to qualify to State in CC this year? "Top 4 teams and Top 7 individuals" not on one of those teams at Regionals. I know there was a lot of talk and emails about changing it this season.
Hey Coaches,

Now that Track is over, can someone tell me if we are using the same guidelines to qualify to State in CC this year? "Top 4 teams and Top 7 individuals" not on one of those teams at Regionals. I know there was a lot of talk and emails about changing it this season.
06/20/2017 12:24:38 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 3
I found the following info from the winter board meeting of the NCHSAA--Nov. 30, 2016: "Recommended changing the method of team qualification for the State Cross Country Meet from four (4) per region to 25% of teams participating in the regional championship" (Motion by Craddock, second by Wilkins, Approved 16-0)
I found the following info from the winter board meeting of the NCHSAA--Nov. 30, 2016:
"Recommended changing the method of team qualification for the State Cross Country Meet
from four (4) per region to 25% of teams participating in the regional championship"
(Motion by Craddock, second by Wilkins, Approved 16-0)
06/21/2017 9:50:46 AM
Admin
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 168
http://nc.milesplit.com/articles/215043-xc-coaches-rejoice-nchsaa-state-championship-qualifying-changed-
http://nc.milesplit.com/articles/215043-xc-coaches-rejoice-nchsaa-state-championship-qualifying-changed-
06/21/2017 10:21:48 AM
Coach
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 32
It is still pretty ambiguous. With a 19 team regional, will 4 or 5 teams qualify? NCHSAA has not been very clear on this.
It is still pretty ambiguous.
With a 19 team regional, will 4 or 5 teams qualify?
NCHSAA has not been very clear on this.
06/27/2017 10:09:18 AM
User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 3
@JasonCreasy - Can someone please fix the boys 2A midwest link? It's broken so, nothing shows up except "file not found". Tks!
@JasonCreasy - Can someone please fix the boys 2A midwest link? It's broken so, nothing shows up except "file not found". Tks!
06/27/2017 2:52:29 PM
Admin
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 168
@toddfamily not sure why that is. I checked the link and it appeared. This is what the link opens up to. http://nc.milesplit.com/teamscores/2016/cc/hs/m/5000m?l=6501&rt=1&spt=5&rankby=score&skip=
@toddfamily not sure why that is. I checked the link and it appeared.
This is what the link opens up to. http://nc.milesplit.com/teamscores/2016/cc/hs/m/5000m?l=6501&rt=1&spt=5&rankby=score&skip=
06/27/2017 3:08:41 PM
User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 3
@JasonCreasy Works from your link but not from the regional set-up in the article which is odd. Tks.
@JasonCreasy Works from your link but not from the regional set-up in the article which is odd. Tks.
07/02/2017 12:20:53 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 52
Girls 2A East link is not working either. "File Not Found"
Girls 2A East link is not working either. "File Not Found"
07/02/2017 1:12:22 PM
Admin
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 168
@hthstrack Not sure why links aren't working for some. I just checked through all the links and they opened correctly. Here is a link to 2A Girls - > http://nc.milesplit.com/teamscores/2016/cc/hs/f/5000m?l=6499&rt=1&spt=5&rankby=score&skip= All of these links are available if you go here - > http://nc.milesplit.com/teamscores/2016/cc/hs/f/5000m and you can use the team scores feature. I guess within the last few days the Team Scores feature was removed from the Rankings tab, not sure why. Jason
@hthstrack

Not sure why links aren't working for some. I just checked through all the links and they opened correctly. Here is a link to 2A Girls - > http://nc.milesplit.com/teamscores/2016/cc/hs/f/5000m?l=6499&rt=1&spt=5&rankby=score&skip=

All of these links are available if you go here - > http://nc.milesplit.com/teamscores/2016/cc/hs/f/5000m and you can use the team scores feature. I guess within the last few days the Team Scores feature was removed from the Rankings tab, not sure why.

Jason
07/19/2017 8:08:58 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 3
At the track rules clinic in Greensboro on July, 18, Ms. Tucker addressed the new cross country state meet qualifying standards. We were told that they will advance 25% of the number of FULL scoring teams that COMPLETE the regional meet--if I understood her correctly. The fractions that will result from doing the math will be handled by rounding up to the next whole number if it is at least .5. I looked up my regional results from last year (2A West). There were 25 full boys teams in the results. If you take 25% of that, you get 6.25. That will not round up to 7, so 6 boys teams would have gone to state. We only had 17 full girls teams in the results. That works out to 4.25. We would have advanced 4 teams, the same as we always have.
At the track rules clinic in Greensboro on July, 18, Ms. Tucker addressed the new cross country state meet qualifying
standards. We were told that they will advance 25% of the number of FULL scoring teams that COMPLETE the regional meet--if I
understood her correctly. The fractions that will result from doing the math will be handled by rounding up to the next
whole number if it is at least .5. I looked up my regional results from last year (2A West). There were 25 full boys teams in
the results. If you take 25% of that, you get 6.25. That will not round up to 7, so 6 boys teams would have gone to state.
We only had 17 full girls teams in the results. That works out to 4.25. We would have advanced 4 teams, the same as we
always have.
07/19/2017 9:51:50 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 213
@ohscoach This was clarified after the rules meeting, to confirm that it will be based on 25% of teams PARTICIPATING in the regional. A team participates if at least five runners check in with the clerk at the starting line. That isn't likely to make a difference in most cases, but you can't definitively say which teams would've counted just by looking at results. More significant is that it now matters if a weak team brings a scoring lineup to regionals. We'll have to see how it works out, but my guess is that a lot of teams that had scoring lineups at their conference but not regional in the past will now make an effort to get at least five to the regional to help be sure more of their neighbors can make it to state.
@ohscoach
This was clarified after the rules meeting, to confirm that it will be based on 25% of teams PARTICIPATING in the regional. A team participates if at least five runners check in with the clerk at the starting line.
That isn't likely to make a difference in most cases, but you can't definitively say which teams would've counted just by looking at results.

More significant is that it now matters if a weak team brings a scoring lineup to regionals. We'll have to see how it works out, but my guess is that a lot of teams that had scoring lineups at their conference but not regional in the past will now make an effort to get at least five to the regional to help be sure more of their neighbors can make it to state.
07/19/2017 10:58:43 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 3
Thank you for the clarification. I did not stay after the rules clinic ended.
Thank you for the clarification. I did not stay after the rules clinic ended.
07/19/2017 2:44:28 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 25
@RocketRunning what's to stop "neighbors" from gaming this system through no-shows or showing up to plump the number of teams to help their good 'ol friends? I think the 25% rule should apply to 25% of the assigned teams.
@RocketRunning what's to stop "neighbors" from gaming this system through no-shows or showing up to plump the number of teams to help their good 'ol friends? I think the 25% rule should apply to 25% of the assigned teams.
07/19/2017 3:39:16 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 213
@joannesbitmabe I don't see how this is gaming the system. Every school in the state is entitled to run at their regional. You'd have to actually have at least five runners on your eligibility roster and enter them in the meet. I'd say it is a good thing if we reduce the number of schools that are cutting their season short by not showing up at regional, or by running less than five athletes when they have been fielding scoring lineups at meets all season. Those are invariably bad teams, but there are also regions where really, really bad teams traditionally do compete all the way through the regional. I guess someone could game the system by showing up at the regional and checking in at the starting line with athletes who don't plan to actually run the race. It's hard to imagine someone going to the trouble of doing this, especially since there's basically only a 1 in 4 chance it matters (going from 21 to 22 teams gets your region an extra state qualifying spot, but going from 20 to 21 or from 22 to 23 does not matter.) If it is going to be based on schools assigned to a region, there is no point in having the 25% rule at all. Schools are now evenly divided between regions, so there is at most a difference of one in how many each region has. Just put straight into the rules how many teams you want to have qualify. IMPORTANT UPDATE: I got a text from someone that at the cross country meeting today, Que Tucker reversed course from yesterday and said that qualifying positions would be based on ENTRIES rather than participation. This would greatly simplify things because we would know prior to the meet how many qualifiers a region will get. (It also brings the policy in line with what I understood Chiquana to have said about it previously.) It also opens up real chances to "game" the system. It is much easier to imagine a coach entering a full team when he does not plan to take them all to the meet, than it is to imagine a team checking in at the starting line with at least five runners but not actually running the race. I'm not sure that's a problem. I think if coaches that had in the past not entered, or not entered full teams, are encouraged by their conference opponents to enter the regional as a team, it increases the chances those schools will actually start showing up. That's ultimately good for the sport.
@joannesbitmabe
I don't see how this is gaming the system. Every school in the state is entitled to run at their regional. You'd have to actually have at least five runners on your eligibility roster and enter them in the meet. I'd say it is a good thing if we reduce the number of schools that are cutting their season short by not showing up at regional, or by running less than five athletes when they have been fielding scoring lineups at meets all season. Those are invariably bad teams, but there are also regions where really, really bad teams traditionally do compete all the way through the regional.
I guess someone could game the system by showing up at the regional and checking in at the starting line with athletes who don't plan to actually run the race. It's hard to imagine someone going to the trouble of doing this, especially since there's basically only a 1 in 4 chance it matters (going from 21 to 22 teams gets your region an extra state qualifying spot, but going from 20 to 21 or from 22 to 23 does not matter.)
If it is going to be based on schools assigned to a region, there is no point in having the 25% rule at all. Schools are now evenly divided between regions, so there is at most a difference of one in how many each region has. Just put straight into the rules how many teams you want to have qualify.

IMPORTANT UPDATE: I got a text from someone that at the cross country meeting today, Que Tucker reversed course from yesterday and said that qualifying positions would be based on ENTRIES rather than participation. This would greatly simplify things because we would know prior to the meet how many qualifiers a region will get. (It also brings the policy in line with what I understood Chiquana to have said about it previously.)
It also opens up real chances to "game" the system. It is much easier to imagine a coach entering a full team when he does not plan to take them all to the meet, than it is to imagine a team checking in at the starting line with at least five runners but not actually running the race. I'm not sure that's a problem. I think if coaches that had in the past not entered, or not entered full teams, are encouraged by their conference opponents to enter the regional as a team, it increases the chances those schools will actually start showing up. That's ultimately good for the sport.
07/19/2017 7:39:45 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 154
Que wasn't at the XC meeting, I handled the meeting on behalf of the NCTCCCA. I told coaches exactly what we were told after someone spoke with Que. She indicated the 25% would be decided based on how many teams "toed the line" at the Regional meets. I did say there had been questions on whether would be assigned schools, registered teams, participating teams, finishing teams and that, although we think will be based on "toes the line", we would have to wait until see the NCHSAA decision in writing. Sorry someone misunderstood me.
Que wasn't at the XC meeting, I handled the meeting on behalf of the NCTCCCA. I told coaches exactly what we were told after someone spoke with Que. She indicated the 25% would be decided based on how many teams "toed the line" at the Regional meets. I did say there had been questions on whether would be assigned schools, registered teams, participating teams, finishing teams and that, although we think will be based on "toes the line", we would have to wait until see the NCHSAA decision in writing. Sorry someone misunderstood me.
07/19/2017 11:01:33 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 13
Que did come in the cross country session at one of the breaks and stated "participating teams" count as the 25% and not "finishing teams" as was said during track rules on Tues.
Que did come in the cross country session at one of the breaks and stated "participating teams" count as the 25% and not "finishing teams" as was said during track rules on Tues.
07/20/2017 6:08:01 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 154
Thanks.
Thanks.
07/20/2017 12:50:16 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 213
@PBolton Sounds good. It would be convenient if we knew five days before regionals how many teams would qualify. But if there is any justification for this rule (correcting regional imbalances), then it should be based on teams actually showing up. If this is the final word, it's the right call. Still wish we had capped teams per region at six for the time being - even that will put 196 runners on the line in the 3A meet, and I don't think anyone can predict what impact that will have on the race.
@PBolton Sounds good.
It would be convenient if we knew five days before regionals how many teams would qualify. But if there is any justification for this rule (correcting regional imbalances), then it should be based on teams actually showing up. If this is the final word, it's the right call.
Still wish we had capped teams per region at six for the time being - even that will put 196 runners on the line in the 3A meet, and I don't think anyone can predict what impact that will have on the race.
07/25/2017 1:39:39 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Nov 2016
Posts: 1
While I do believe the changes are an effort to get the best teams at the state meet, I also believe this may work the opposite way in some regions. The 2A Midwest women only had 12 team scores last year. There is no way to know looking at scoring how many started full teams on the line. But if only 12, then only 3 teams would get out. With the shift of Lake Norman Charter and Bandys to the Midwest and with the addition of North Lincoln moving down from 3A, then Forbush, Salisbury and West Stanly still there, you could easily have one of the top six teams in the state not advancing. If the intent was not to decrease the number of teams, then a minimum should have been set at 4 or 5 just incase or as I think the new rule reads "25% of schools represented", so 25% of every school that has at least one runner finishing. Just a thought. Hey maybe it would have been easier just to set the number at five teams.
While I do believe the changes are an effort to get the best teams at the state meet, I also believe this may work the opposite way in some regions. The 2A Midwest women only had 12 team scores last year. There is no way to know looking at scoring how many started full teams on the line. But if only 12, then only 3 teams would get out. With the shift of Lake Norman Charter and Bandys to the Midwest and with the addition of North Lincoln moving down from 3A, then Forbush, Salisbury and West Stanly still there, you could easily have one of the top six teams in the state not advancing. If the intent was not to decrease the number of teams, then a minimum should have been set at 4 or 5 just incase or as I think the new rule reads "25% of schools represented", so 25% of every school that has at least one runner finishing. Just a thought. Hey maybe it would have been easier just to set the number at five teams.
07/25/2017 3:46:32 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 213
@murray55 Two points: - the short answer is, there is still a minimum of four qualifying teams per region. - the longer answer - in 2A (and 3A) don't make any assumptions at all about how many you will have at the regional based on last year. Every region is growing to 28-29 schools. Teams are moving from other classifications, and boundary lines have moved around. If you want to go through and look at every team in the new regional and see if they scored at a team at the 2016 regional, that might give a decent starting place. If you are in the middle of the state, you might have to look at a half dozen different regionals to find everyone you run against this year. There are probably very few teams that check in with at least five runners that end up not scoring, so that won't make a difference. But I do believe, with no evidence, that the dependence of qualifying on the number of teams that show up will cause more schools to show up with scoring teams.
@murray55
Two points:
* the short answer is, there is still a minimum of four qualifying teams per region.

* the longer answer - in 2A (and 3A) don't make any assumptions at all about how many you will have at the regional based on last year. Every region is growing to 28-29 schools. Teams are moving from other classifications, and boundary lines have moved around. If you want to go through and look at every team in the new regional and see if they scored at a team at the 2016 regional, that might give a decent starting place. If you are in the middle of the state, you might have to look at a half dozen different regionals to find everyone you run against this year.

There are probably very few teams that check in with at least five runners that end up not scoring, so that won't make a difference. But I do believe, with no evidence, that the dependence of qualifying on the number of teams that show up will cause more schools to show up with scoring teams.

You must be logged in to comment.

Click Here to Log In.