Poll: How Many Classes Should XC and Track have in Georgia

Option Votes Score
1- Leave it alone, reward mediocrity 10 14%
2- Go No Classes, have Q' standards at Sectionals. 2 3%
3- Go to 4 Classes: combine 7A & 6A, combine 5A & 4A, combine 3A and 2A, combine A PRV and A PUB 32 45%
4- 7A, 6A, 5A Stay put, combine 3A & 4A, Private schools have own Class, combine 2A and A Public schools. 13 18%
5- 5 Classes: 7A and 6A stay put, combine 4A &5A Public, Private schools become 1 Class, combine 2A & 3A Public, A Public stays 13 18%
1 1%
71 Votes

Vote!
How Many Classes Should XC and Track have in Georgia
11/27/2017 2:28:50 AM
Admin
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 2881
11/27/2017 11:54:15 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 150
Nothing like having a poll with answers that discourage the selection of them. When Germany forced Austria to hold a vote to see if they would be annexed the ballot was Yes in very large letters and no in very small letters. It was obvious the way that one was supposed to vote in that case. The wording of the question leads the respondent to the answers that are desired.
Nothing like having a poll with answers that discourage the selection of them.

When Germany forced Austria to hold a vote to see if they would be annexed the ballot was Yes in very large letters and no in very small letters. It was obvious the way that one was supposed to vote in that case. The wording of the question leads the respondent to the answers that are desired.
11/27/2017 2:34:30 PM
Power User
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 202
Where's the option for 3 classes, Class A 750 and below Class B 751-1500 Class C 1501 and above At the end of the day it's 7 varsity runners, 5 of which score, not a football team of 20+ Varsity players.
Where's the option for 3 classes,

Class A 750 and below
Class B 751-1500
Class C 1501 and above

At the end of the day it's 7 varsity runners, 5 of which score, not a football team of 20+ Varsity players.
11/27/2017 7:06:14 PM
User
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 128
I would like to see a reduction to four classes: 1) Combine 6A and 7A 2) Combine 3A, 4A, 5A 3) Combine 1A and 2A 4) All private schools I would also like to see these changes: *Each sport could / should have a different number of classes. I.e. Cross country does not need as many as football. * Minimum time standards for qualifying for region, sectional and state meets. These could be done by class where, for example, the largest class standard would be faster than the smallest class standard.
I would like to see a reduction to four classes:
1) Combine 6A and 7A
2) Combine 3A, 4A, 5A
3) Combine 1A and 2A
4) All private schools

I would also like to see these changes:
*Each sport could / should have a different number of classes. I.e. Cross country does not need as many as football.
* Minimum time standards for qualifying for region, sectional and state meets. These could be done by class where, for example, the largest class standard would be faster than the smallest class standard.
11/28/2017 8:26:20 AM
Coach
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 146
@Buckwheat191 Would the qualifying times need to be run on a track?
@Buckwheat191
Would the qualifying times need to be run on a track?
11/28/2017 8:52:56 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 123
@Buckwheat191 Qualifying times would be hard to settle on for XC given course difficulties, inaccuracies and weather. Standards shouldn't be watered down for smaller schools. This is XC not football and basketball where school size might limit participation numbers. The demographics often affect participation rates at schools more than size of the school population. Some 7A schools will never have the participation rate of some 3A and 4a schools. The smaller schools more than hold their own at the Championship races at many invitationals year after year. 3 -4 classes at most.
@Buckwheat191

Qualifying times would be hard to settle on for XC given course difficulties, inaccuracies and weather.

Standards shouldn't be watered down for smaller schools. This is XC not football and basketball where school size might limit participation numbers. The demographics often affect participation rates at schools more than size of the school population. Some 7A schools will never have the participation rate of some 3A and 4a schools. The smaller schools more than hold their own at the Championship races at many invitationals year after year. 3 -4 classes at most.
11/28/2017 9:52:13 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 178
Okay so here goes: I would be for having less classes (maybe 5) AND going to a qualifying system similar to NCAA. NCAA accounts for geography and then fielding a competitive field. For me it would look something like: 1. Automatic qualifiers based off of geography (this could be Regions or Areas) - not sure how many auto Qs there would be - this would depend on how big a field was desired at the State Meet (which would be something that is determined up front once the classes are made. The desired # of teams could be something voted on by coaches or a number GHSA wants). 2. Fill out the remaining team qualifiers based off head to head competition and how many wins teams have against teams that auto qualified. (I realize this would take more work, something I would be willing to help with). 3. Individual qualifiers could be determined based off of their finish at the Region/Area Meet. I know that this is a long shot but just thought I would throw it out there. Some benefits I could see would be: 1. Very competitive race 2. Geography taken in to account which we know GHSA cares about 3. Would make a coach be very strategic in making their race schedule 4. Eliminates the need for a time standard as it is all based off head to head competition
Okay so here goes:

I would be for having less classes (maybe 5) AND going to a qualifying system similar to NCAA. NCAA accounts for geography and then fielding a competitive field. For me it would look something like:

1. Automatic qualifiers based off of geography (this could be Regions or Areas) - not sure how many auto Qs there would be - this would depend on how big a field was desired at the State Meet (which would be something that is determined up front once the classes are made. The desired # of teams could be something voted on by coaches or a number GHSA wants).

2. Fill out the remaining team qualifiers based off head to head competition and how many wins teams have against teams that auto qualified. (I realize this would take more work, something I would be willing to help with).

3. Individual qualifiers could be determined based off of their finish at the Region/Area Meet.

I know that this is a long shot but just thought I would throw it out there.

Some benefits I could see would be:
1. Very competitive race
2. Geography taken in to account which we know GHSA cares about
3. Would make a coach be very strategic in making their race schedule
4. Eliminates the need for a time standard as it is all based off head to head competition
11/28/2017 10:21:53 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 639
One of the things the GHSA considers when determining classes for each sport is participation. Cross Country (and track) are high-participation sports. So, in my opinion, it is highly unlikely that classes would be consolidated in XC and/or track were that to be proposed. Just my opinion, though. There is a simpler solution: Sectionals in XC. Again, just my opinion.
One of the things the GHSA considers when determining classes for each sport is participation. Cross Country (and track) are high-participation sports. So, in my opinion, it is highly unlikely that classes would be consolidated in XC and/or track were that to be proposed. Just my opinion, though.

There is a simpler solution: Sectionals in XC. Again, just my opinion.
11/28/2017 11:06:51 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 178
[quote=GACARTER]There is a simpler solution: Sectionals in XC. Again, just my opinion.[/quote] @GACARTER I think we have seen Sectionals in Track result in higher quality races at State so I would think Sectionals in XC would have a similar effect! But the question remains, what is the main goal? To get a more competitive State Meet with the best teams? OR To have fewer classification for fewer State Champions so it does not seem like everyone is getting a trophy? OR Have more classifications so we can give out more trophies? OR Just to get more teams to State to increase money raised through admission and other revenue streams?
GACARTER wrote:
here is a simpler solution: Sectionals in XC. Again, just my opinion.


@GACARTER I think we have seen Sectionals in Track result in higher quality races at State so I would think Sectionals in XC would have a similar effect!

But the question remains, what is the main goal?
To get a more competitive State Meet with the best teams?
OR
To have fewer classification for fewer State Champions so it does not seem like everyone is getting a trophy?
OR
Have more classifications so we can give out more trophies?
OR
Just to get more teams to State to increase money raised through admission and other revenue streams?
11/28/2017 12:37:08 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 123
@runtad I like the 1st 2: More Comp and Less Trophies. And the money may be good for someone but not the schools or parents. The large number of classes have killed transportation budgets for schools with regions being spread out so much.
@runtad

I like the 1st 2: More Comp and Less Trophies.

And the money may be good for someone but not the schools or parents. The large number of classes have killed transportation budgets for schools with regions being spread out so much.
11/28/2017 3:41:52 PM
Power User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 484
Seems like most coaches of competitive programs would like to see fewer classes and a more competitive one day state meet. GHSA must have a good reason for wanting to go to so many classes, but in terms of cross country around the US, we are way out of line with how nearly every other states runs their state championships. Georgia has more than twice as many teams making it to state versus every other state in the country including California, New York, Texas, Illinois and Florida. So population and participation levels don't seem to be a legitimate reason. I think the only state who takes as high a % of schools to state as Georgia is South Carolina. This year they had 90 teams at state out of 213 high schools. On average, based upon the research I did a couple years ago, the average state takes about 17% of their schools to the state meet and the more competitive XC states only take 13%. Even if we rounded up to 25% in Georgia, we'd have half as many teams at state. I believe there are 460 member schools. 25% = 115. We have 216 boy's teams at state. Football takes 1/2 of the schools to the playoffs. Every single school in XC gets to run in the region and/or sectional meet so we have 100% participation in the "playoff" for our sport so we are already far more democratic in our process. Every school has a chance to make it to state but we take way to many to our final. A 4 class state meet would be more in line. 24 teams / meet. 96 total teams.
Seems like most coaches of competitive programs would like to see fewer classes and a more competitive one day state meet.

GHSA must have a good reason for wanting to go to so many classes, but in terms of cross country around the US, we are way out of line with how nearly every other states runs their state championships. Georgia has more than twice as many teams making it to state versus every other state in the country including California, New York, Texas, Illinois and Florida. So population and participation levels don't seem to be a legitimate reason.

I think the only state who takes as high a % of schools to state as Georgia is South Carolina. This year they had 90 teams at state out of 213 high schools. On average, based upon the research I did a couple years ago, the average state takes about 17% of their schools to the state meet and the more competitive XC states only take 13%. Even if we rounded up to 25% in Georgia, we'd have half as many teams at state. I believe there are 460 member schools. 25% = 115. We have 216 boy's teams at state.

Football takes 1/2 of the schools to the playoffs. Every single school in XC gets to run in the region and/or sectional meet so we have 100% participation in the "playoff" for our sport so we are already far more democratic in our process. Every school has a chance to make it to state but we take way to many to our final. A 4 class state meet would be more in line. 24 teams / meet. 96 total teams.
11/28/2017 6:32:32 PM
User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 6
Parent perspective here. Something is broken with the current system of qualifying for state if a 7th place girl with a sub-20 time at Area cannot advance out of her area, but there are more than 1200 girls that went to state with times over 20 minutes. And yes, I know Carrolton course is about a minute slower. There are still over 1000 girls that got to run at state with times over 21 minutes. My solution? Let everyone run at their region/area but have some time standards for state. It should be the best runners in the state and an achievement to qualify. Let them all race against each other on the same day and time and have 1 state champ instead of 8.
Parent perspective here. Something is broken with the current system of qualifying for state if a 7th place girl with a sub-20 time at Area cannot advance out of her area, but there are more than 1200 girls that went to state with times over 20 minutes. And yes, I know Carrolton course is about a minute slower. There are still over 1000 girls that got to run at state with times over 21 minutes. My solution? Let everyone run at their region/area but have some time standards for state. It should be the best runners in the state and an achievement to qualify. Let them all race against each other on the same day and time and have 1 state champ instead of 8.
11/28/2017 7:12:00 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 123
@blakelyh Let's not forget the reason for state, which is to crown a champion and not see who is top 10. There will always be someone "who deserves to be at state" left out. I understand the frustration of people making state who probably shouldn't be racing there. When we left the state meet last year, close to 25 runners were walking the slope heading to the 2nd mile on the course. We yelled out the bus windows at them to know avail.
@blakelyh

Let's not forget the reason for state, which is to crown a champion and not see who is top 10. There will always be someone "who deserves to be at state" left out. I understand the frustration of people making state who probably shouldn't be racing there. When we left the state meet last year, close to 25 runners were walking the slope heading to the 2nd mile on the course. We yelled out the bus windows at them to know avail.
11/29/2017 9:28:18 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 178
[quote=blakelyh]Parent perspective here. Something is broken with the current system of qualifying for state if a 7th place girl with a sub-20 time at Area cannot advance out of her area, but there are more than 1200 girls that went to state with times over 20 minutes.[/quote] @blakelyh I am guessing this is for a A Area as 7A Areas qualify the top 12 individuals to State.
blakelyh wrote:
Parent perspective here. Something is broken with the current system of qualifying for state if a 7th place girl with a sub-20 time at Area cannot advance out of her area, but there are more than 1200 girls that went to state with times over 20 minutes.


@blakelyh I am guessing this is for a A Area as 7A Areas qualify the top 12 individuals to State.
11/29/2017 9:30:49 AM
Power User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Jun 2014
Posts: 98
My opinion on this topic has changed since I started coaching 8 years ago. I used to be of the same mindset - best of the best get to State, and leave everyone else home. It's definitely adjusted and matured since then, and the bottom line is (to Coach Coleman's point) that we're trying to crown a State champion - both individual and team - but we also want representation from each part of the state. It's not a true state championship if we only have Atlanta-area schools and a few more. I say this as a coach whose girls' team didn't qualify but would have qualified in a "weaker" Area. And you know what? I'm good with that! I of course wanted my girls to compete, but it forces my program to up the bar. We weren't going to contend for the win, so our absence from the state championship ultimately didn't impact the State Championship.
My opinion on this topic has changed since I started coaching 8 years ago. I used to be of the same mindset - best of the best get to State, and leave everyone else home. It's definitely adjusted and matured since then, and the bottom line is (to Coach Coleman's point) that we're trying to crown a State champion - both individual and team - but we also want representation from each part of the state. It's not a true state championship if we only have Atlanta-area schools and a few more.

I say this as a coach whose girls' team didn't qualify but would have qualified in a "weaker" Area. And you know what? I'm good with that! I of course wanted my girls to compete, but it forces my program to up the bar. We weren't going to contend for the win, so our absence from the state championship ultimately didn't impact the State Championship.
11/29/2017 9:33:55 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 178
[quote=crossfan2861]Seems like most coaches of competitive programs would like to see fewer classes and a more competitive one day state meet.[/quote] @crossfan2861 I think this can be said about the coaches that post on the discussion board, which is only a few coaches in the entire State. When the Coaches Association did a survey a couple years ago only 7A had a majority vote to go to Areas for XC and reduce the # of teams qualifying for State. Stronger Regions in 7A can now qualify more than 4 teams to State making the field at State more competitive. Every other classification did not have a majority vote to go to Sectionals but rather stay in Regions. I cannot speak as to why the vote went that way as I am a 7A coach that voted for Sectionals. I imagine there are different reasons that coaches in the lower classification did not vote in favor of Areas but based off of conversations I have had I have a feeling that one of the reasons is coaches did not want to make it harder for their team to qualify for State.
crossfan2861 wrote:
Seems like most coaches of competitive programs would like to see fewer classes and a more competitive one day state meet.


@crossfan2861 I think this can be said about the coaches that post on the discussion board, which is only a few coaches in the entire State. When the Coaches Association did a survey a couple years ago only 7A had a majority vote to go to Areas for XC and reduce the # of teams qualifying for State. Stronger Regions in 7A can now qualify more than 4 teams to State making the field at State more competitive.

Every other classification did not have a majority vote to go to Sectionals but rather stay in Regions. I cannot speak as to why the vote went that way as I am a 7A coach that voted for Sectionals. I imagine there are different reasons that coaches in the lower classification did not vote in favor of Areas but based off of conversations I have had I have a feeling that one of the reasons is coaches did not want to make it harder for their team to qualify for State.
11/29/2017 9:43:19 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 178
[quote=ParkviewCoachDXC] I say this as a coach whose girls' team didn't qualify but would have qualified in a "weaker" Area. And you know what? I'm good with that! I of course wanted my girls to compete, but it forces my program to up the bar. We weren't going to contend for the win, so our absence from the state championship ultimately didn't impact the State Championship.[/quote] @ParkviewCoachDXC I am in my 4th year coaching and in my 1st year, our boys were 6th out of 6 teams at Region and our girls were 5th out of 6 teams at Region. As you said, our absence from the State meet had no impact on the results. But what it did do was raise the bar for our program. I saw my kids upset because they did not qualify but then over the next few years I have seen them work very hard in order to make sure that they did not have that same feeling. As hard as it was at the time, being left home from the State Meet was one of the best things that happened to us as a program!
ParkviewCoachDXC wrote:

I say this as a coach whose girls' team didn't qualify but would have qualified in a "weaker" Area. And you know what? I'm good with that! I of course wanted my girls to compete, but it forces my program to up the bar. We weren't going to contend for the win, so our absence from the state championship ultimately didn't impact the State Championship.


@ParkviewCoachDXC I am in my 4th year coaching and in my 1st year, our boys were 6th out of 6 teams at Region and our girls were 5th out of 6 teams at Region. As you said, our absence from the State meet had no impact on the results. But what it did do was raise the bar for our program. I saw my kids upset because they did not qualify but then over the next few years I have seen them work very hard in order to make sure that they did not have that same feeling. As hard as it was at the time, being left home from the State Meet was one of the best things that happened to us as a program!
11/29/2017 5:05:34 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 705
Better competition definitely raises your bar. When we were 4A,we were in some close races at Region every year. Now we are in 6A and are still competing for Region and State trophies. It has moved us so far ahead of all the area schools around us that are still 4A that races aren't even close. We love competing against the best of the best and it makes you better in the end..would it be possible to have every class do Areas like 7A does?
Better competition definitely raises your bar. When we were 4A,we were in some close races at Region every year. Now we are in 6A and are still competing for Region and State trophies. It has moved us so far ahead of all the area schools around us that are still 4A that races aren't even close. We love competing against the best of the best and it makes you better in the end..would it be possible to have every class do Areas like 7A does?
11/29/2017 8:01:10 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 178
[quote=trailcat]...would it be possible to have every class do Areas like 7A does?[/quote] @trailcat when the Coaches Association surveyed the coaches a couple years ago 7A was the only classification where a majority of coaches voted for the Area format. Every other classification had a majority to keep it as it was with Regions.
railcat wrote:
...would it be possible to have every class do Areas like 7A does?


@trailcat when the Coaches Association surveyed the coaches a couple years ago 7A was the only classification where a majority of coaches voted for the Area format. Every other classification had a majority to keep it as it was with Regions.
11/30/2017 11:13:21 AM
Power User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 796
Yes, when we did the survey, some of the responses were that people did not want to go to Areas because it would be more difficult for their team to get to State. I do remember one coach in particular from a lower classification who wished that their team had not qualified under the Region system, cause they felt their team did not deserve to go to State. They were in favor of the Area system because it would raise the bar instead of their team getting an easy path to State each year. If we can get others to see that a tougher path to State is a good thing overall, then I think we can continue to raise the bar for our level of competition.
Yes, when we did the survey, some of the responses were that people did not want to go to Areas because it would be more difficult for their team to get to State. I do remember one coach in particular from a lower classification who wished that their team had not qualified under the Region system, cause they felt their team did not deserve to go to State. They were in favor of the Area system because it would raise the bar instead of their team getting an easy path to State each year.

If we can get others to see that a tougher path to State is a good thing overall, then I think we can continue to raise the bar for our level of competition.

You must be logged in to comment.

Click Here to Log In.