4x8 & Single-A Sectionals Proposals
10/01/2018 7:43:14 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 568
I know many are curious as to the details of both proposals. Let's hold off on speculating & asking/answering questions via the message board until we know more. I'll know more when I hear from my A.D. today and will update the message board then. Anyone with specific questions can contact me directly. Chris Carter chris_carter@gwinnett.k12.ga.us
I know many are curious as to the details of both proposals. Let's hold off on speculating & asking/answering questions via the message board until we know more. I'll know more when I hear from my A.D. today and will update the message board then.

Anyone with specific questions can contact me directly.
Chris Carter
chris_carter@gwinnett.k12.ga.us
10/01/2018 9:49:32 AM
Power User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 653
@GACARTER The proposal for the 4 x 800m relay was not approved by the Executive Committee of the GHSA. It lost 43-21. Thanks Coach Carter and all those who worked so hard on this.
@GACARTER
The proposal for the 4 x 800m relay was not approved by the Executive Committee of the GHSA. It lost 43-21. Thanks Coach Carter and all those who worked so hard on this.
10/01/2018 10:21:15 AM
Power User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 681
How does it get approved 7-3 by a group and then denied 43-21 by another? It makes no sense that it is that different.
How does it get approved 7-3 by a group and then denied 43-21 by another? It makes no sense that it is that different.
10/01/2018 10:49:18 AM
Power User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 448
With significant support from the track coaches across the state & board of trustees approval it is curious that the vote for 4X800M not only didn't pass but lost badly by a 2:1 margin. Begs the question.... where did this go wrong? Is the fatal flaw a lack of a strategy to influence the only people who matter, which is the executive committee members who vote? Feels like future proposals need a strategy to mobilize supporting coaches and individual school ADs to do their own lobbying efforts with the executive committee members from their region. People have to work the key individuals at the top and sounds like we did a great job at that, but closing the loop and gaining support with the 74 individuals who vote is an opportunity for improvement and a big learning from this. Bummed this didn't work out. Sorry all the hard work didn't pay off.
With significant support from the track coaches across the state & board of trustees approval it is curious that the vote for 4X800M not only didn't pass but lost badly by a 2:1 margin. Begs the question.... where did this go wrong?
Is the fatal flaw a lack of a strategy to influence the only people who matter, which is the executive committee members who vote? Feels like future proposals need a strategy to mobilize supporting coaches and individual school ADs to do their own lobbying efforts with the executive committee members from their region. People have to work the key individuals at the top and sounds like we did a great job at that, but closing the loop and gaining support with the 74 individuals who vote is an opportunity for improvement and a big learning from this. Bummed this didn't work out. Sorry all the hard work didn't pay off.
10/01/2018 11:43:49 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 568
It's not over, yet. I have one or two other options that I am exploring, including contacting the Georgia Legislature's Joint High School Athletics Overview Committee. Below is how each region's representative should have voted, had they voted in accordance with the school's in their respective region's votes. As you can see, the Executive Committee region reps did not represent the wishes of the schools in their region. Class 7A Region 1-No; Regions 2,3,4,5,6,7,8-Yes Class 6A Regions 1,5-No; Regions 2,3,4,6,7,8-Yes Class 5A Region 1-No; Regions 2,4,5,6,7,8-Yes; Region 3 (50/50 Yes/No) Class 4A Regions 1,3,4,5,6,7-Yes; Regions 2 & 8-(50/50 Yes/No) Class 3A Regions 2,4,6-No; Regions 3,5,7,8-Yes; Region 1-(50/50 Yes/No) Class 2A Regions 1,2,4,5,8-No; Regions 3,6,7-Yes Class A Regions 5,6,8-No; Regions 1,2,3,4,7-Yes
It's not over, yet. I have one or two other options that I am exploring, including contacting the Georgia Legislature's Joint High School Athletics Overview Committee. Below is how each region's representative should have voted, had they voted in accordance with the school's in their respective region's votes. As you can see, the Executive Committee region reps did not represent the wishes of the schools in their region.

Class 7A
Region 1-No; Regions 2,3,4,5,6,7,8-Yes
Class 6A
Regions 1,5-No; Regions 2,3,4,6,7,8-Yes
Class 5A
Region 1-No; Regions 2,4,5,6,7,8-Yes; Region 3 (50/50 Yes/No)
Class 4A
Regions 1,3,4,5,6,7-Yes; Regions 2 & 8-(50/50 Yes/No)
Class 3A
Regions 2,4,6-No; Regions 3,5,7,8-Yes; Region 1-(50/50 Yes/No)
Class 2A
Regions 1,2,4,5,8-No; Regions 3,6,7-Yes
Class A
Regions 5,6,8-No; Regions 1,2,3,4,7-Yes
10/01/2018 1:00:25 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 51
@GACARTER Let us know how we can help!
@GACARTER Let us know how we can help!
10/01/2018 1:02:26 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 568
@derrick123 Contact your region rep. Ask them how they voted. If they voted differently than what is indicated above, ask them why and then let them know that someone will be contacting the Georgia Legislature (as well as local news organizations and NHFS) to look into why region reps are not representing the schools in their region.
@derrick123 Contact your region rep. Ask them how they voted. If they voted differently than what is indicated above, ask them why and then let them know that someone will be contacting the Georgia Legislature (as well as local news organizations and NHFS) to look into why region reps are not representing the schools in their region.
10/01/2018 1:03:34 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 51
@GACARTER Will do!
@GACARTER Will do!
10/01/2018 1:04:12 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 12
What disheartens me more than anything is we aren't asking for anything unheard of in regards to a track event. We aren't asking for the javelin to be added. (Although the Javelin is a field event but I've always assumed the lack of facilities and safety concern keep it out of our High School Events) We are asking for an event that is practically ran in every State in the Union outside of ours. It is no mere coincidence that the rules for the event are included in the National Federation Rules. Where is the disconnect for the people voting?
What disheartens me more than anything is we aren't asking for anything unheard of in regards to a track event. We aren't asking for the javelin to be added. (Although the Javelin is a field event but I've always assumed the lack of facilities and safety concern keep it out of our High School Events) We are asking for an event that is practically ran in every State in the Union outside of ours. It is no mere coincidence that the rules for the event are included in the National Federation Rules. Where is the disconnect for the people voting?
10/01/2018 1:20:01 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 568
My understanding is that Johnny Seabrooks was a very vocal opponent of the 4x8 in the Executive Committee meeting this morning, as he was the last time this was proposed. My apologies to him, if that is not the case. If that is the case, however, then that does not even represent the schools in Albany. Westover - voted yes Monroe - voted no Dougherty - did not vote The current state meet director in Albany was very supportive of the 4x8. So, if it is true that Coach Seabrooks spoke against the 4x8 then, ironically, he was not representing the votes of the schools in Albany.
My understanding is that Johnny Seabrooks was a very vocal opponent of the 4x8 in the Executive Committee meeting this morning, as he was the last time this was proposed. My apologies to him, if that is not the case. If that is the case, however, then that does not even represent the schools in Albany.

Westover - voted yes
Monroe - voted no
Dougherty - did not vote
The current state meet director in Albany was very supportive of the 4x8.

So, if it is true that Coach Seabrooks spoke against the 4x8 then, ironically, he was not representing the votes of the schools in Albany.
10/01/2018 2:30:03 PM
User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 122
I was very surprised when I moved to GA to find that the 4 x 800 was not an official event. Please help me understand what the harm or point of contention is for adding this as an official event. Is it that smaller schools may not have the depth to field another relay team or that schools that are strong in sprints do not want another distance event pulling points away or that meets will take too long or ?? What arguments are those that are opposed to the 4 x 800 using? I just don't get it.
I was very surprised when I moved to GA to find that the 4 x 800 was not an official event. Please help me understand what the harm or point of contention is for adding this as an official event.

Is it that smaller schools may not have the depth to field another relay team or that schools that are strong in sprints do not want another distance event pulling points away or that meets will take too long or ??

What arguments are those that are opposed to the 4 x 800 using? I just don't get it.
10/01/2018 3:05:58 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 568
Coaches, I have requested through my A.D. to speak with the GHSA about today's vote. I very much respect Dr. Hines, having had several conversations with him in the past. I am sure he will get in contact with me. Below is a letter I will be sending to region reps across the State, along with the data showing how the schools in their region voted. Feel free to copy/paste & edit what's below and send it to your region rep. If you would like to include data as to how each school in your region voted, e-mail me (chris_carter@gwinnett.k12.ga.us) and I will send it to you. Here is the e-mail: My name is Chris Carter. I am the coach who proposed adding the 4x800 relay to the state track meet series. As I’m sure you saw in the proposal, nearly 85% of the states in the U.S. contest the 4x800 in their state meet. In addition, it is a traditional event according to the NFHS. It is my understanding that the proposal was voted down 43-21 after being approved by the Board of Trustees 7-3. In addition, the State Track Meet Directors at each of the 3 State Track Meet sites said that the 4x800 could be worked into the State Meet schedule. According to my survey, which included responses from approximately 300 GHSA schools, including at least one school from every region in every classification, coaches were in favor of adding the 4x800 by a 2-to-1 margin. Below are the votes from the schools in your region. If your vote in the Executive Committee meeting did not match up with what the majority of coaches in your region wanted, I am curious as to why it didn’t. I have the utmost respect for the GHSA, and I do not intend this to come across in any way disrespectfully. I am simply curious as to how something 60% of the state’s coaches & 70% of the GHSA Board of Trustees want could get voted down by nearly 70% of the Region Representatives. Respectfully, Chris Carter
Coaches,
I have requested through my A.D. to speak with the GHSA about today's vote. I very much respect Dr. Hines, having had several conversations with him in the past. I am sure he will get in contact with me.

Below is a letter I will be sending to region reps across the State, along with the data showing how the schools in their region voted. Feel free to copy/paste & edit what's below and send it to your region rep. If you would like to include data as to how each school in your region voted, e-mail me (chris_carter@gwinnett.k12.ga.us) and I will send it to you.

Here is the e-mail:
My name is Chris Carter. I am the coach who proposed adding the 4x800 relay to the state track meet series. As I'm sure you saw in the proposal, nearly 85% of the states in the U.S. contest the 4x800 in their state meet. In addition, it is a traditional event according to the NFHS. It is my understanding that the proposal was voted down 43-21 after being approved by the Board of Trustees 7-3. In addition, the State Track Meet Directors at each of the 3 State Track Meet sites said that the 4x800 could be worked into the State Meet schedule.

According to my survey, which included responses from approximately 300 GHSA schools, including at least one school from every region in every classification, coaches were in favor of adding the 4x800 by a 2-to-1 margin. Below are the votes from the schools in your region. If your vote in the Executive Committee meeting did not match up with what the majority of coaches in your region wanted, I am curious as to why it didn't.

I have the utmost respect for the GHSA, and I do not intend this to come across in any way disrespectfully. I am simply curious as to how something 60% of the state's coaches & 70% of the GHSA Board of Trustees want could get voted down by nearly 70% of the Region Representatives.

Respectfully,
Chris Carter
10/01/2018 3:49:01 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 109
I emailed our Region rep and got this response: “Declined-did not pass- many concerns about: 1. Length it would add to track meets- 2. Many schools would not choose to enter 2 teams 3. Advantage to schools with stronger distance programs 4. State Track meet directors not in favor” I am from a 7A Region that voted in favor of adding but it looks like our region rep voted against it. I always hate the argument about schools with stronger distance programs because right now the only events distance kids run is the 800,1600 and 3200 with some potentially running a 4x400. To argue this would give stronger distance programs an advantage makes no sense with the number of events for sprints. Most of your good jumpers are sprinters so that adds to the number. I bet if you go back and look at State Championship team results you will find a trend: a team can win a state title without distance runners but they can’t win a state title without sprinters.
I emailed our Region rep and got this response:

"Declined-did not pass- many concerns about:

1. Length it would add to track meets-
2. Many schools would not choose to enter 2 teams
3. Advantage to schools with stronger distance programs
4. State Track meet directors not in favor"

I am from a 7A Region that voted in favor of adding but it looks like our region rep voted against it.

I always hate the argument about schools with stronger distance programs because right now the only events distance kids run is the 800,1600 and 3200 with some potentially running a 4x400. To argue this would give stronger distance programs an advantage makes no sense with the number of events for sprints. Most of your good jumpers are sprinters so that adds to the number.

I bet if you go back and look at State Championship team results you will find a trend: a team can win a state title without distance runners but they can't win a state title without sprinters.
10/01/2018 3:51:01 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 51
@buckwheat191 Is it that smaller schools may not have the depth to field another relay team or that schools that are strong in sprints do not want another distance event pulling points away or that meets will take too long or?? I believe you are exactly right. The sprint heavy schools, like Albany, don't want to add another distance event. Traditionally distance events = 1600m, 3200m, and 800m. Traditionally sprint events = 100, 200, 300h, 110h, 400m, and all the jumps. How is that fair??? It's very hard for schools heavy in distance to content for a state championships unless your distance runners finish 1st and 2nd in their events! Sad!
@buckwheat191 Is it that smaller schools may not have the depth to field another relay team or that schools that are strong in sprints do not want another distance event pulling points away or that meets will take too long or??

I believe you are exactly right. The sprint heavy schools, like Albany, don't want to add another distance event. Traditionally distance events = 1600m, 3200m, and 800m. Traditionally sprint events = 100, 200, 300h, 110h, 400m, and all the jumps. How is that fair???

It's very hard for schools heavy in distance to content for a state championships unless your distance runners finish 1st and 2nd in their events!
Sad!
10/01/2018 4:06:44 PM
Power User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 448
@runtad sounds like old school football coach mentally. shocker!
@runtad sounds like old school football coach mentally. shocker!
10/01/2018 4:21:24 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 568
[quote=runtad]I emailed our Region rep and got this response: “Declined-did not pass- many concerns about: 1. Length it would add to track meets- 2. Many schools would not choose to enter 2 teams 3. Advantage to schools with stronger distance programs 4. State Track meet directors not in favor” I am from a 7A Region that voted in favor of adding but it looks like our region rep voted against it. [/quote] In response to the above: 1. Would add :45 to 1:00 total to a 3-day meet (according to my schedule & state meet schedules in other states that contest the 4x8). State Meet Directors all talked to me directly and said that this was not a problem. 2. Included in my survey was the idea of going to 1 relay per team in all relays. 51% of coaches were for this; 49% were against it 3. The 800 is not a distance event. And, as previously mentioned, even if it is, 4 out of 17 events being "distance" events is not an advantage. 4. This is simply false. I have the e-mails to prove it.
runtad wrote:
I emailed our Region rep and got this response:

"Declined-did not pass- many concerns about:

1. Length it would add to track meets-
2. Many schools would not choose to enter 2 teams
3. Advantage to schools with stronger distance programs
4. State Track meet directors not in favor"

I am from a 7A Region that voted in favor of adding but it looks like our region rep voted against it.


In response to the above:
1. Would add :45 to 1:00 total to a 3-day meet (according to my schedule & state meet schedules in other states that contest the 4x8). State Meet Directors all talked to me directly and said that this was not a problem.

2. Included in my survey was the idea of going to 1 relay per team in all relays. 51% of coaches were for this; 49% were against it

3. The 800 is not a distance event. And, as previously mentioned, even if it is, 4 out of 17 events being "distance" events is not an advantage.

4. This is simply false. I have the e-mails to prove it.
10/01/2018 5:06:46 PM
Power User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 710
I hope we can continue to shift things so that people are in favor of things that might not benefit them personally but advance the sport/benefit the state overall.
I hope we can continue to shift things so that people are in favor of things that might not benefit them personally but advance the sport/benefit the state overall.
10/01/2018 5:57:42 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 12
What does the statement really mean that teams/programs strong in distance would have an advantage to score better or even win a State Track Team Title? I can tell you that physiologically speaking based on the breakdown of muscle fibers alone, there is only one event in the High School Track that allows slow-twitch aerobic based distance runners to have a distinct advantage and that is the 3200. The only way to believe that type of mentality that it isn't means those individuals have not taken any type of sports exercise science class or physiology class and actually paid attention. They should only be concerned if we added the 3000 meter steeplechase or the 5000 meters to increase any "distance" advantage. Adding the 4 X 800 would allow 16 out 17 events in the High School track world to relate to explosive fast twitch fibers...period! Yes it is true, all events require an aerobic component...but based on the energy demand of fast-twitch to slow-twitch...aerobic vs. anaerobic...the 3200 is the only event that should be labeled a distance event. The rest of track and field demands an anaerobic...explosive fast-twitch to be overwhelming energy component. The statement alone is sheer ignorance of understanding the true nature of track and its events.
What does the statement really mean that teams/programs strong in distance would have an advantage to score better or even win a State Track Team Title? I can tell you that physiologically speaking based on the breakdown of muscle fibers alone, there is only one event in the High School Track that allows slow-twitch aerobic based distance runners to have a distinct advantage and that is the 3200. The only way to believe that type of mentality that it isn't means those individuals have not taken any type of sports exercise science class or physiology class and actually paid attention. They should only be concerned if we added the 3000 meter steeplechase or the 5000 meters to increase any "distance" advantage. Adding the 4 X 800 would allow 16 out 17 events in the High School track world to relate to explosive fast twitch fibers...period!

Yes it is true, all events require an aerobic component...but based on the energy demand of fast-twitch to slow-twitch...aerobic vs. anaerobic...the 3200 is the only event that should be labeled a distance event. The rest of track and field demands an anaerobic...explosive fast-twitch to be overwhelming energy component.

The statement alone is sheer ignorance of understanding the true nature of track and its events.
10/01/2018 6:06:42 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 197
FYI when ran and coached in Florida the 4x800 was run during the field events. It does not add time to a meet. Futher more our team struggled against the really good sprint teams that had an abundance of 400/300h. Whether you want to admit it or not they are the teams most likely to benefit at a state meet from that. Not the deep distance teams. We will have 70 kids out for distance at our school on any given year and only have 6 distance spots for them to fill at Region. I don’t buy the balance between distance/sprint argument.
FYI when ran and coached in Florida the 4x800 was run during the field events. It does not add time to a meet. Futher more our team struggled against the really good sprint teams that had an abundance of 400/300h. Whether you want to admit it or not they are the teams most likely to benefit at a state meet from that. Not the deep distance teams. We will have 70 kids out for distance at our school on any given year and only have 6 distance spots for them to fill at Region. I don't buy the balance between distance/sprint argument.
10/01/2018 6:20:21 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 568
I have heard back from a few Region Secretaries. Apparently, someone at the Executive Committee said that one of the stadiums that host state does not have lights, therefore time is an issue. According to my recollection and pictures that anyone can find on the internet, all 3 stadiums have lights. So, if what is above is true, someone was giving false information to the Executive Committee.
I have heard back from a few Region Secretaries. Apparently, someone at the Executive Committee said that one of the stadiums that host state does not have lights, therefore time is an issue. According to my recollection and pictures that anyone can find on the internet, all 3 stadiums have lights. So, if what is above is true, someone was giving false information to the Executive Committee.

You must be logged in to comment.

Click Here to Log In.