Page: 1 / 1
Joined: Feb 2009
I love the idea of sectionals and getting the best athletes to state. Is it just me or do the sectionals seem a little unbalanced?
Joined: Nov 2005
@Bwill912 Every year some sectionals are more balanced than others. Some events are more balanced than others. I agree it is not perfect, but I do prefer this to just top 2 in each region move to state. For our section, we are easier to qualify out of in the jumps and relays, but tougher in the distance events. Some are big differences some are not, again not perfect but better than top 2 from region to state!
Joined: Mar 2012
Since it came up.....haha Some coaches and I were discussing this just last week. The sectionals system is successful, much improved over the days of only allowing 2 to move on from regions, and does a much better job of getting a more deserving 16 to the state meet. With that said, I wonder if, in time, we can take a step back and review and revise the process again. Take note of how some other large states handle qualifying because there are still regions of doom out there, and yes, even sectionals of doom in certain events. Some thoughts that came up in discussion: 1. Why still limit teams to only 2 athletes per event? Examples all over the place of schools with 3-4 deserving athletes. Just from my region(and classification)... Westminster's distance kids, Towers' jumpers, Cedar Grove's sprinters... these are these teams' strengths and they should be able to flex them and exploit them towards a team title. 2. In conjunction with the point above, why limit the sectional meet... perhaps Region can be used as an auto qualifier for a certain # and then sectionals can be the "B" route to state. One example could be to make region champs auto qualify for state(so we get the representation from all regions) and the next... 4? 5? go on to sectionals. Would running 20 or 24 be that much more difficult on sectional schedules? I am aware that my region is a serious outlier in the system as a whole, but it's still difficult to leave a 4:28 1600m kid at home in AAA... even crazier when a team has a 4:27 and 4:30 guy that doesn't even get to run the race and get their shot.
Joined: Oct 2013
@CoachMayer I like these thoughts and I have often thought about how we could change the qualifying procedure to deepen the quality of the field at State. I like the idea of using Sectionals similar to the NCAA Regional meets using qualifying times for athletes to be eligible to run at Sectionals. I think using Region Champ as an auto qualifier is a good way to get equal representation of Regions. I know when this discussion has come up in the past, that some people will argue that in the end we are not leaving the State Champ at home so in the end the system works.
Joined: May 2014
I'm on board with expanding qualifying into Sectionals. I think that we should have a time standard as well as automatic qualifier bids from region championships.
Joined: Jul 2009
I agree that it would be appropriate to revisit what works well and what doesn't. I have never been, and will never be, a supporter of a time standard qualifying you to the state meet. However, I am in favor of a time standard qualifying you to sectionals where you can have a chance to place top 8 and earn your right to state even though you may have only finished 5th at region. I personally like the idea of top 2 at region getting auto bids to sectionals (getting preferred lanes still) and the rest have to qualify on time. We have plenty of time in the sectional meets to do 3,4,5 or even 6 heats at sectionals of each event (except 16 and 32). And it doesn't have to be the same for each event. Like one sectional could have 4 heats of the 800 but only 2 of the 100, and vice versa in other sectionals depending on what is the strength of the sectional. I also believe that teams shouldn't be limited to 2 entries per event at sectionals if they have more than two who hit the time standard. I think that team should be able to take advantage of their strengths, but I do worry what that would do to team scoring at state. Currently it seems like our team champions are usually pretty balanced and full teams. Maybe this would balance it even more, but maybe not. I don't know exactly but I like the idea of our team champions being true team champions with as many kids contributing as possible.
Joined: May 2014
@spxcoachrm Completely agree and love your format for qualifying. I do think that we can make Sectionals a bigger meet by allowing time standards and having the 2 top region finishers qualify. Then let them race to see who the Top 8 will be going to State.
Joined: Apr 2014
@AHSBucs California takes the heat winner and then the next fastest times. I also agree let each school enter 4 athletes. I saw where I think it was Wyoming where a school had kids finish 1,2,3 in the state finals. Better yet set a standard where a kid can be a automatic qualifier for state. Average the times in each event over the last 5 or 10 years and set a standard in each classification. In field for example 6’6” automatic qualifier for 5A and up. I know that’s a lot but just a thought.
Page: 1 / 1