IndianaRunner

[usixc2013]

i know this has been brought up before, but its for my speech class.. what do you guys think?



Cross country in most states is run by class when it comes to the state tournament. The size of the school will determine its class. States usually classify teams in divisions or class. For example divisions go like 1, 2, 3, and classes are 1A, 2A, 3A, and so on. 48 of the 50 states have class or divisions, Hawaii and Indiana are the only two states that do not do this. Why this is I don’t know.
Indiana had its first high school state cross country meet in 1946, in which 42 teams competed. This was the only state meet in which there were two races. From 1947 to the present date, the Indiana state meet has been run as one race. Many times the topic of the IHSAA switching to a class system has been brought up, but I don’t think that it will ever happen. Most people are really just fantasizing about having a class system here in Indiana. Now I am going to talked to you about whether Indiana should have a classed state meet. For times’ sake I am going to use boys cross country as an example.
This past weekend I was in Terre Haute for the IHSAA state cross country championships. One thing that stuck out in my mind was the teams that were there. 24 teams qualify for state each year in Indiana, which is not very much compared to other states. Out of those 24 teams there were 19 large schools (4A, 5A), 4 medium schools (3A), and one small school (1A, 2A). So basically there is no chance of any small school winning the state meet in Indiana, which Perry Central, the only small school that qualified for state this year, finished 22nd.
The pros of a classed state tournament in Indiana would give a lot more schools a chance to compete in the state meet. In Indiana the state tournament is run in sectional, regional, semi-state, and state meets. Sectional through semi-state is run by regions regardless of school sizes. I will use a school close to my high school that is very good but gets no chance of qualifying for state. Barr-Reeve has always had a good cross country team and has won their sectional the last 4 years, including a regional title a couple years ago. But when comes to advancing out of semi-state, that is just unheard of. This being said I have always said that it isn’t fair for a 1A team to run against teams that are triple to quadruple its size for shot at making it to state, the same thing goes for 2A-3A schools. Larger schools usually have better athletes because they have more kids to choose from. A class system wouldn’t really affect the larger schools in the state, in my opinion.
There are only 2 cons I can think of with having a classed state tournament. One, would be the rearrangement of the whole tournament system. IHSAA chairmen would have to make a new plan for the state tournament. Instead of having sectional, regional, semi-state, they would probably have to have a district meet, then a region meet to see who would advance to state. This would be a big hassle because the IHSAA would have to classify all of the teams, sort them into regions, and then lease all new host sites for the district and region meets. It would be a very time consuming effort. Secondly, having a classed state tournament would not allow the best runners in the state to run at state in the same race. Nobody would ever know who the best runner in the state was.

[3Nil]

I think it would be interesting to see the best of all the small schools in Indiana go at it. I would like to see it in only two classes though. Class 2A for all of the schools with an enrollment of 1000+. And Class A for all of the schools with an enrollment of 999 and under. Three classes would make the state tournament dull, too common for the Nation (Indiana is one of the few to all do it in one class) and the trip to state a cakewalk for some schools.

But for real, I am fine with how the class tournament is now. Some small schools can take on the big boys at state. I know for sure that there will be a time down the road that a school with less than 1000 kids will beat out Indiana's powerhouses for a state championship. I am sure we are all waiting for one to happen.

[seawasp]

I don't believe in any classes but if it were to be classed, then the cutoff should be somewhere below 500 students. The Westfield girls were State Champs in 98 with an enrollment of 816. New Prairie boys, runner-up in 94, enrollment 706. Silver Creek boys, runner-up in 90, enrollment 588.

[Trembo3578]

One major problem with the class system is the HUGE difference in school size in Indiana. Schools in the 1600s are considered 5-A. Carmel has 4000+ and is also 5-A. If you don't think that a school of 500 should have to compete with a school of 1250 (roughly same ratio between Carmel and smaller 5A schools), they why would it be any better to make the 5A schools with such huge differences compete with eachother in the same class?

I say leave it how it is. It's a lot more beneficial to individuals to get to compete in the same tournament and It allows for equal recognition. I don't think anyone on here would disagree that the message board focuses much more on the male side of the sport. If there were classes, I think that the smaller schools, like the girls, would hardly even get discussed by the majority of the people. Smallers schools probably get more recognition for making top 15 at the state meet now than they would if they won the 1A state title in a class system.

[RegionCrossFan]

One major problem with the class system is the HUGE difference in school size in Indiana. .

Agreed. We just don't have enough of the super big school to create a super class. Other states do, but here, there a ton of disparity in 5A alone.

Ben Davis is almost 1300 students larger than the #5 school in 5A.
Carmel is 1683 students larger than the #10 school in 5A.
Ben Davis is 2350 students larger than the #20 5A school.

As stated, there just (in my opinion) is not enough "super" schools...at this point.

1 Ben Davis 4500
2 Carmel 4170
3 Warren Central 3820
4 Penn 3431
5 North Central (Indianapolis) 3240
6 Lake Central 3141
7 Pike 2902
8 Portage 2618
9 Lawrence North 2612
10 Lawrence Central 2487
11 Franklin Central 2453
12 Avon 2438
13 Crown Point 2426
14 Lafayette Jefferson 2406
15 Noblesville 2344
16 Center Grove 2294
17 Merrillville 2241
18 Hamilton Southeastern 2228
19 Ft. Wayne Northrop 2191
20 Brownsburg 2150

[CrocODile1]

No No No NO NO end of story.

[drew]

After we had this debate back in August I watched the school size issue throughout the year. I'm still against it but here are some interesting things I noticed during the year.

1. What is a small school. In Indiana we have a lot of schools that have never been consolidated like most. So we literally have schools of 200-4000+. So if you did a small school / large school divided at 1000 (good average of the state) then you would still have schools of 200 hundred students vs schools of 1000 students which is no difference than a TH North 1750 vs a Carmel. So then do you, like an earlier person said have a small school division of just those UNDER 500. Because then you have 2 state meets, 1 that is 85% of the schools in Indiana and 1 that is likely less that 15%. Which seems highly unfair to a North Harrison that STILL has to face Carmel sized school to compete when they ARE MUCH closer to the small schools. It is a difficult call to make in a state that has such a wide range in school sizes.

2. That we only put value on the top spots at the state finals. When did it become meaningless to win a sectional? When did qualifying to advance to Regional or Semi-State become such a failure. I came from a VERY weak High school program. In my 4 years we never even advanced out of the Sectional as a team. This becomes interesting by this standard when you consider school SIZES... compair the South Semi-State (considered the least deep Semi-state) to the other more difficult semi-states. You will find that the south is made up mostly of smaller schools. While the MEGA schools complain that the good teams should be divided up so that the "best" teams can make the state finals (Instead of facing off in an Indy Semi-State), the southen part of the state is ruled by the SMALL SCHOOL, which seemingly makes the South Semi-State a "weaker" Semi -State. I had never paid much attention to that fact until I watched this more closely this season. It is however true that the "weaker" Semi-states seem to be made up of more smaller schools, while the 2 "Tougher" semi-stats have more of the larger schools. Take what you want from that fact, but it does seem in a way the playing field has been leveled for the small schools to MAKE the state finals based simply on the allignment of the current Semi-States (Unless your Batesville who gets SCREWED...LOL)

3. There is no way to seperate the individual aspect from the team aspect of cross country. People who are for Class sizes will argue this point but it simple is not true. You can't have 2 different races for a team and a individual title. This isn't wrestling or Tennis, it's JUST NOT the same. We can't forget that this sport is NOT just teams. I went to 2 state meets (from the Indy Semi-State) and as quoted before... had NO help from my team. So I would always be against not allowing the individuals at a small school the chance to race.

I hope for the purposes of your speech I have found some points of interest points here. I am still not in favor if Class Sizes in cross country but there are some interesting angles to consider on this issue.

[jtcorbin]

While some might find this "math" a bit too simplistic or speculative, I've found through my years of coaching and involvement with multiple sports that it really makes sense or proves to be true over periods of time. It also explains why size-based class systems are justified or effective in some cases.

The hypothesis is that approx 1 out of every 100 boys (or girls) is either a naturally gifted long distance runner or possesses the potential to train to become an upper-echelon quality runner. That being presumed, along with the presumptions that schools possess suitable coaching and resources, a reasonable emphasis on the sport, and don't lose an inordinate amount of their 1/100 athletes to other sports, the following sized-schools should result as follows:

-- 3500+ enrollment schools (Carmel, Warren, NC) - 1800-2200 boys = 18-22 gifted runners - they will always have strong, deep teams because it would take a near mathematical miracle not to have 7 quality runners from that enrollment in any given year. However on the flipside they cannot fully take advantage of their size because, by rule, only 7 of their runners will run varsity at the big meets, leaving so many of their quality athletes/depth on the sideline.
-- 1500-1700 student schools (TH's, LaP, Columbus's, Bloomington's, Zionsville, Carroll) - 700-900 boys = 7-9 gifted runners - will have enough to field a top-caliber team most years, and to survive an injury, illness, or off day to a runner or 2. Running 7 guys per tournament race is a neutralizer with the mega-schools in that the 7 from these tier2 sized-schools can be every bit as good as the 7 from the tier1 sized-schools even though the next 15 runners from the tier 1 sized-schools are likely much stronger.
-- 700-1000 student schools (West Noble, North Harrison, Batesville, West Lafayette, etc) - 400-500 boys = 4-5 gifted runners - since just 5 scores are counted, this group is on the cusp of being there with the first two tiers above and some years when they may find 6 quality runners, they could do quite well. Most years they could not survive an injury or losing one of their top 4. Their deep-tourney success likely depends on how far down their #5 guy is or if they have a #6 who's anywhere close if 1-5 fails on a given day. If their #1 runner happens to be a state-best talent like Byrne who scores very very low, they can get make some real noise. However the many Indiana schools in this size category who don't have a "program" and solid coaching and sport-emphasis over the years, inevitably end up with 2-3 stronger performers but 4th-7th guys in the middle to back that prevents deep advancement.
-- 200-400 student schools - 100-200 boys = 1-2 gifted runners - virtually no mathematical chance 5 upper-echelon runners would end up at the same of this type school within the same year. This type school (i.e. Perry Central or Tri-County) can certainly develop 5-7 "above-average runners" and depending on their semistate difficulty, finish near the top at semistate and/or perhaps top 15 state, but the seemingly only hope that a school of this size would be state top 5 is if they had 2 runners finish top 10 and hope the other 3 could finish 60/70/80 and that around 230-ish points would be good enough. They can't have a #5 guy finish #145 or worse or a #4 finish #100 or worse and hope to accumulate less than 230 points total.

When you consider the scoring methodology and roster/contributor sizes of other sports, it makes sense as to whether classes are needed or where the breakpoints should be. For baseball/softball one upper-echelon pitcher can take a team a long way. Tennis, golf, maybe even basketball a team can succeed with 3-4 upper-echelon performers, volleyball or wrestling a minimum is probably 5, and football probably requires minimum 10 and that's if most of them play both ways. Certainly the coaches who excel at recruitment, retention, and athlete development stretch the math at their schools, but eventually the # of jimmy's and joes carry more weight than the x's and o's.

[WarriorXC09]

I go to a 2A school if you are basing it on State Preview. With around 750-800 people at our school I would have to call it a meduim-small sized school. I have always wondered y Indiana has not changed to a class system. This is an interesting debate. I think that this would be beneficial to runners at my school and other schools like us. We just do not have the depth to advance out of the brutal Carmel Semi-State. This would help smaller schools that could possibly win state with 5 runners i the 17s. This could also help individuals like myself to advance out of a smaller sectional, regional, and semi-state by myself. If Indiana were to change I would suggest a 1A, 2A, 3A approach. I enjoy the state preview doing it this way and I think Indiana could make it work. However, I do not see this happening in Indiana anytime soon. People are just too used to the way its been done here for 50 years or so. I would love to see maybe a trial year were Indiana does this, and then evalute how the year went and decide if they want to permanantly change it. Some runners and teams could take offense to this though. Ex. If you are a 15:30 5k runner at a small school, you would not have the oportunity to run agaisnt the runners from the larger schools. Same thing for smaller teams. I can see how this can be an argument for both sides. Interesting topic. thanks for posting this I am interested to see how our runners and coaches on Indianarunner feel about this.

[truclown]

I ran for West Noble back in the mid 90's and to even think about a class system makes me sick. We finished 5th in back to back years. Both times I think it was a little unexpected. The first year people didn't figure us to be that high, and the second year "we" didn't figure to be that low. For much of that 2nd season it was Northfield and West Noble 1 and 2 in the rankings. We ran pretty poor at State and ended up 5th, Northfield went on to finish 3rd that year. I think if you ask any runners from those teams if they would have rather finished 1st and 2nd in a small school class or where they finished in the "BIG" race the answers would be the same. I will proudly take my 5th place medal and be able to say we were the 5th best team that day, not we finished 2nd but we will have to compare results from the other race to see where we would have ended up.

[CoachG]

I agree with the West Noble example/comments from truclown. Since I help coach at Perry Central, I know our boys (and girls when we make it to the state meet) would rather finish in the top 10 or higher in the a one class system, rather than claiming to be the 1A, or 2A, or whatever class champion if we won the specific class. Class sports downgrades the achievement somewhat. I mean, we have won 4 sectional titles in a row, something that has never been down at our school within a one-class system. That is something to hang your hat on no matter what size you are or where you run. We do not need to hand a trophy out for everyone that competed. Look at it from a road race perspective: Say I finish 1st in the 26-30 age group. Wow great job, you just beat all the runners in that field, how does it feel to be the best. uh.... I am not the best, I finished 6th overall and did not get a trophey for that, but I did get one for winning my age group. All right! Now granted it is a nice gesture to reward runners with finishing at the top of their age groups, because that encourages people to keep coming back, I am more pleased with the 6th place overall finish. I might have been the 6th best out of 200 runners, thats better then being the best in a small age group, especially if there were only a handfull of runners in that group.
If there was a class system, would it be nice to win it. Sure! If it was the case and we won, then Perry would be extremely happy, but we would always wonder what could we have done in the big dog meet. Keep the system the same, its unique and special.
Also, hopefully someday when I am in my 60's and 70's I hope to still be running. If I kick all the other old farts but in my age group (if there is any in a specific race) whoop-de-de-do! But if I beat a lot of young whipper snappers, then that is something more special.

[XCspectator]

I feel obligated to post this every time the class system comes up as I now live in a state with a 7 class XC tournament.
Arizona is about the same size as Indiana, although most of the population is concentrated in Phoenix and Tucson.

There are some large meets during the season, but even then not much competition as it seems the good schools don't seek them out
The 7 championships so dilute the running that there is some cry, especially during the track season, for the High School Assosciation to bend the rules to allow an after graduation super meet.

The biggest reason to not support a class system may only be evident if you come from a state like Indiana. There is little or no statewide interest in XC!
The equivlalent of IR gets a couple posts day. And runners themselves hardly ever post. I've tried to follow the local HS XC/track scene since moving here but there is nothing to follow. It is more fun to follow my previous allegiance from afar.

Do not consider a class system! Don't like all the posts about Indy? Don't think your runner gets enough press? Don't like arguments about Northern courses or Southern courses being tougher? Ok, then. Go to a class system. All that competitive spirit you have will fade away and you will be left with no arguments, lots of trophy's but also an empty feeling.

[XCspectator]

I thought I would post the link to the Arizona HS website just so those of you interested can see for yourself

http://www.arizonatrack.com/arizona/

Looks nice but......
See the T&F Forum? Click on it. Oops, you have to register to even view it. It does only take a minute, so you try it.

The state meet is today. How many threads this week? 5 or 6. Impressive.

[jm_cooklj]

I liked jtcorbin's post. I am an assistant track and cross country coach at a small school and I teach math at that same school. I have been fortunate to coach 3 all state track athletes in the last few years, without a class system. Being from a small school, I can say that individuals can compete with anyone from the state, no matter school size. Finding a team that can do the same is much more difficult, the math is simply against us. I would like something that probably will never be done, a single tournament race that is scored as classes, but with individuals against each other, no matter what school size. The software is there to score the meet, it's just an organizational nightmare with sectional and regionals having the correct number of schools from each class.

[CC4life]

In my opinion I would love to have a class system. I go to a very small school that got to semi-state for the first time in 30 years this season. It is somewhat fun knowing that we can compete against schools that have a much higher enrollment than ours, but if I had the chance I would take competing against schools our size any day. Leave the regular season for runners to duke it out against schools three times their size. The post-season should be the one true test of how a school stacks up against other schools of their size. I waited four years just to make it out of secionals, I guess I should be grateful since at our school hardly anyone ever makes it out of sectionals in any sport. However it hurts knowing that my greatest achievement, making it to semi-state, is something that is taken for granted by coaches and athletes throughout the state just because they have more athletes to choose from.

[regionrunner21]

Class System is definitely up for debate, there are pros and cons for both sides of the argument. Found this today....

This is in South Carolina which has a class system. (4 classes) Looks like could be a State Record with High Tops.

1150062.jpg (39.95 KB) Viewed 573 times

Riverside High School - SC HY-TEK's Meet Manager
2009 South Carolina - 11/7/2009
State Cross Country Championships
Sandhills Research Park - Columbia, SC
Last Completed Event

Event 1 Boys 5k Run CC 1A Boys
==================================================================================
Name Year School Avg Mile Finals Points
==================================================================================
1 #850 Chad Hampton 11 North Central 5:28.6 17:00.90 1
2 #839 Brandon McKellar 11 Ninety Six 5:28.8 17:01.28 2
3 #351 James Quattlebaum 8 Christ Church 5:29.9 17:04.71 3

The debate rages on about this at:
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=3292963&page=0

They bring up good points worth the read.

[CoachG]

Regionrunner21...I went to the thread and the article is awful evidence for classes in cross. Yeah the kid is happy he won his class, congrats to him, I bet that is a big accomplishment for him. However, an 8th grader was 3rd in the meet. To me you are trying to show that small schools just can't compete with the big boys. I that is true for a lot of programs, but there are some small school programs that in any given year can be better than big schools. Perry Central is proof of that. So to say that thread provides the perfect reason for class sports you are wrong. South Carolina had 5 classes for cross! How many schools does that leave for competition? I bet not many, especially if 8th graders are finishing 3rd overall. Come on. The world is a competitive place and Indiana and the IHSAA has done something right by keeping Cross one class. Any cross runner, good or bad, will tell you that our sport best prepares individuals for the struggles someone can face in life. You develop a mental toughness and a desire to work at giving your best. A one class system provides kids with the realities of the world and allows them to cheer for themselves when they achieve; and that achievement may be that a small school makes it to semi-state. Case in point, our Perry Central girls team knew they could make it to semi-state but thought they had a shot at state. We were really disappointed with a 10th place finish at semi-state. Now, four years ago we did not even have enough girls for a team, and hear we are disappointed with a 10th place finish racing with the best. Just goes to show how good competition makes kids work for their best.

[WarriorXC09]

Are those basketball shoes on that North Central kid?.....if they are, maybe I should get some

[regionrunner21]

Class System is definitely up for debate, there are pros and cons for both sides of the argument

First off, this is what my first sentence was...so not sure I took a side to begin with.

Secondly, I thought that it was a funny, amusing article that I found on letsrun.com because c'mon the kid wore AIR JORDAN'S and won!!

The arguments on said thread were funny as well. Just wanted to add a little humor to the class sports debate.

Being as I graduated from a 3A school enrollment of around 700 (which made the State Finals in cross in 2005, big ups!), I currently coach at a 2A school enrollment of around 550 and had a runner that placed 6th at the Indiana State Finals in cross last year and moved to Ohio and won her divisions state title last weekend, I'm definitely mixed on both sides. Granted I was one of the many people that heard the gym erupt when Tri-County got the final spot in the NP Semi-State (we sat next to them) and congratulated them on their great accomplishment. So please do not make assumptions of what you think I was trying to say or not trying to say. The post was once again just a thought provoking humorous attempt at a hotly debated issue.

[spartanxc456]

check out the results from that south carolina state meet, there are 7th and 8th grade atheletes running.