Right now, it's taking 4:29 and 9:47 to get into Drake, and that's with another week of qualifying. While the times up front aren't the fastest I've seen, the state just seems to get deeper and deeper every year. I think it took 4:30 and 9:49 to qualify last year. This year, it could feasibly take 4:27 and 9:43, depending on what happens over the next week (it'll probably more likely be 4:28 and 9:45). I don't think the state has ever been this deep, as the times at the state cross country meet (which I don't always trust to be accurate) were rather indicative of. Ten years ago, if you ran 4:35 and 10:00, you had a relatively decent shot at getting in. Not anymore.
Fastest 3200 and 1600 qualifying that I can remember
- Thread starter leonardsmith
- Start date
From Drake website...
2011 9:43 4:29
2010 9:50 4:30
2009 9:50 4:32
2008 9:59 4:34
I agree the depth is terrific. Cross country really shows that. Another factor this year is the weather. I can't remember ever having this warm of weather, and the number of relatively calm meet nights
2011 9:43 4:29
2010 9:50 4:30
2009 9:50 4:32
2008 9:59 4:34
I agree the depth is terrific. Cross country really shows that. Another factor this year is the weather. I can't remember ever having this warm of weather, and the number of relatively calm meet nights
It will be interesting to see if the weather makes early season results better but they flatten out or if this is going to be like last year at state where place winners were consistently faster than in previous years.
I agree that it will take at least 4:27 & 9:42-43. Just looking at the number of athletes behind the cut-offs and how close they are, anything can and will happen in the last week of "chasing performances".
In addition, there are some performances that just haven't been entered by the coaches as of yet since some schools are notorious (and rather annoying) for holding out until the last second.
I also agree that the depth of quality has steadily increased in recent years as evidenced by CC results & consistent dropping of Drake Cut-offs regardless of weather. I say regardless of weather because it appears that the level of expectation by more athletes of themselves has increased and they are accepting the challenge of preparing in the off-season. This puts them in position to have a chance to perform well under any condition but especially in favorable conditions. This would be consistent of what is happening in other sports. Look at what kids are willing to do year-round in terms of time spent on improving performance to be competitive.
In addition, there are some performances that just haven't been entered by the coaches as of yet since some schools are notorious (and rather annoying) for holding out until the last second.
I also agree that the depth of quality has steadily increased in recent years as evidenced by CC results & consistent dropping of Drake Cut-offs regardless of weather. I say regardless of weather because it appears that the level of expectation by more athletes of themselves has increased and they are accepting the challenge of preparing in the off-season. This puts them in position to have a chance to perform well under any condition but especially in favorable conditions. This would be consistent of what is happening in other sports. Look at what kids are willing to do year-round in terms of time spent on improving performance to be competitive.
It is definitely an exciting thing to see the depth improving throughout Iowa, and that a 10:00 is no longer a top 24 time for Drake. Not that it is a bad time, but it's nice seeing so many kids surpassing it now.
I definitely think over the last 10 years, and especially the last 6-7, that the internet and social media sites have greatly affected what kids are out doing. Between seeing national results when they occur, having access to more elite training and also being able to talk to competitors from other schools so easily encourages kids to do more.
I definitely think over the last 10 years, and especially the last 6-7, that the internet and social media sites have greatly affected what kids are out doing. Between seeing national results when they occur, having access to more elite training and also being able to talk to competitors from other schools so easily encourages kids to do more.
I noticed one other thing on quikstats: Dowling has 5 runners at 4:28 and under. 4:20, 4:20, 4:25, 4:27, and 4:28...then they have another kid who has ran "only" 4:38. When I was a senior in high school, 4:27 placed sixth in 4A...now we have a single school that could, somewhat feasibly, have 6 kids at or under that mark by the end of the year? Crazy stuff.
That's the price of taking a chance on running for a private school with a deep program. They chose to attend that school/program. Doesn't hurt in Cross Country as much as track with tighter entry constraints.
However, Pleasant Valley had some deep lists in track in recent years to go along with their CC run of state titles. Usually the top programs over the years have had pretty good depth when they were at the top. That's what makes them good. Dowling is in the middle of great times. They've had some pretty good individuals in the past but not at the team level on the boy's side. Obviously, the girls started their run several years ago. Dubuque Sr., City High, Marshalltown, DM Roosevelt boys have had good depth when they made their runs too. Most of the time, a lot of the kids from deep programs don't all go out for track though because of the 2 entry limitation and just don't want to run JV and never get a taste of Drake or State in track but that's been changing too thus pushing the top guys even harder on a daily basis to better performances.
I agree with the amount of available information, camps etc.. for the kids but also for the coaches. Grinnel College hosted the National Distance Summit a couple times recently with several of the top distance coaches and authorities in attendance to help educate our states coaches.
In addition, does anyone think that having USATF, NCAA National track and field meets along with NCAA Regional track & field meets hurts the interest of Iowa athletes/coaches? The stands are pretty empty for those meets but if high school kids could foot the bill, they would be exposed to some great competition that exceeds the Drake Relays. CC regional meets and NCAA Championship meets have been held in Iowa less frequently but most kids won't get out of school on a Monday to witness the championship race which is too bad. Getting to see Wisconsin, Arkansas, Stanford, Oregon etc... was pretty cool for me. In addition, schools like Northern Arizona made an impression on me back in the 80's through to today so high school kids can get a good look at other schools outside the Major Conferences and how they compete really well against the "Big Boys".
However, Pleasant Valley had some deep lists in track in recent years to go along with their CC run of state titles. Usually the top programs over the years have had pretty good depth when they were at the top. That's what makes them good. Dowling is in the middle of great times. They've had some pretty good individuals in the past but not at the team level on the boy's side. Obviously, the girls started their run several years ago. Dubuque Sr., City High, Marshalltown, DM Roosevelt boys have had good depth when they made their runs too. Most of the time, a lot of the kids from deep programs don't all go out for track though because of the 2 entry limitation and just don't want to run JV and never get a taste of Drake or State in track but that's been changing too thus pushing the top guys even harder on a daily basis to better performances.
I agree with the amount of available information, camps etc.. for the kids but also for the coaches. Grinnel College hosted the National Distance Summit a couple times recently with several of the top distance coaches and authorities in attendance to help educate our states coaches.
In addition, does anyone think that having USATF, NCAA National track and field meets along with NCAA Regional track & field meets hurts the interest of Iowa athletes/coaches? The stands are pretty empty for those meets but if high school kids could foot the bill, they would be exposed to some great competition that exceeds the Drake Relays. CC regional meets and NCAA Championship meets have been held in Iowa less frequently but most kids won't get out of school on a Monday to witness the championship race which is too bad. Getting to see Wisconsin, Arkansas, Stanford, Oregon etc... was pretty cool for me. In addition, schools like Northern Arizona made an impression on me back in the 80's through to today so high school kids can get a good look at other schools outside the Major Conferences and how they compete really well against the "Big Boys".
I think it's sort of silly that there is a limit for the number of kids per school who can qualify for state. I view distance running as an individual sport for the most part, to be honest, and penalizing a kid for running at a good program is a bit of a joke. And don't bring up the "choice of school" argument because there have been public schools this has affected in the past, too. I think the way we do Drake qualification should also be how we do state qualification. Get the best kids to state, period. I know this is a debate that gets brought up every year, but other than money, I don't really see the merits of the district system.
As usual, I agree Lenny. For the most part I have not been a fan of districts for track due to many reasons. But, I have come around a bit and am not as opposed as I used to be. I wouldn't have a problem still doing a district qualifying but also having auto marks for state. And if you have kids that have made the auto standard they don't need to run districts and/or if you have 2+ kids hit that standard the 2 person limit is waived. Something along those lines.
I say let me place 24 athletes wherever I like within the 4 event rule and no more than 6 in an event to allow others to have a chance at some points. If I have 5 x 53 foot shot putters, then that's one of our "team strengths"; It's who we are this year. We might not have any good hurdlers so we make up for it where we are strong etc... with our best 24 guys. It's difficult to field a strong "team" in an individual and relay meet when some schools put all of their eggs in one basket. Bring on a True Team state meet for the top 8 power ranked teams the week after the state meet and let's see who has the best team right down the line.
I'm all for a true team title...
Whether it be the 8 district champs, or using the power rankings to qualify, I'd love to see that 8-team meet happen.
The problem with using district champs is that teams aren't sending out their best line-up at districts, they're running what they need to for state. So some of the best teams may not even win the district title.
The problem I see with the power rankings is that it's pretty arbitrary how they set up points per event. I realize it's the same for everyone, but some of the scores I see assigned for some performances don't make any sense.
Whether it be the 8 district champs, or using the power rankings to qualify, I'd love to see that 8-team meet happen.
The problem with using district champs is that teams aren't sending out their best line-up at districts, they're running what they need to for state. So some of the best teams may not even win the district title.
The problem I see with the power rankings is that it's pretty arbitrary how they set up points per event. I realize it's the same for everyone, but some of the scores I see assigned for some performances don't make any sense.
The school I teach at had their invite last night, and Pella ran at it. Zach Buchheit ran the 1600. He went out in 2:05 (yes, I'm certain of this because I was timing). I had forgotten that this kid ran 15:09 at the state meet, so I was kind of laughing, thinking he'd blow up bad...and he did, but he still ran 4:28. He's definitely in 4:20 shape right now, I'd say, because, in addition to the poor pacing, it was windy, too. But the thing is, he's 23rd on the qualifying list right now and likely won't qualify for the Relays (I think qualifying ends on Thursday. Maybe he'll have another meet on Thursday?). Too bad he didn't pace himself a bit better because I think that kid would have a chance at winning at Drake, if he were to hit the qualifying mark (which now stands at 4:27).
Part of the problem is a school can only enter 2 in the individual events. In other states 3 may be entered. The other states have fewer relays. Iowa has the 1600 med and shuttle. For the girls there's also the Sprint med. I ike our system but it would be good to have up to 3 entries per individual event. I also like Minn.'s team championship where each entry scores so depth really counts.
Ok, I thought you were having problems with the points awarded for event performances as comparables. That can be explained if you really want to know. I think you would be surprised at the amount of thought that went into that part of the power rankings.
As far as the number of entries go, the system is set up for Iowa's entry limitations for most standard invitational meets of 2 individuals and 1 relay per team. The Power Rankings System matches what is being done in most meets in Iowa. I suppose other systems could be designed for other states and their situations if someone had the energy and interest in doing it.
In addition, the national power rankings are similar but depending on what state you are in, you can choose to not enter performances in all events (2 less than all?) and not have those count against your team score. Iowa would not be able to enter atheltes in the triple jump or pole vault. Their SHR, 400LH, 4 x 200 & Medley Relays are useless since most states don't participate in those events.
The score you get for your national power rankings based on the events you choose to submit performances for may actually earn your team a spot in the National True Team Championship Meet.
I don't think we want to take events away from our kids here in Iowa but I'm dissapointed that we don't pole vault or triple jump. The only solution to filling out a lineup either way is to Recruit, Recruit, Recruit!!!
As far as the number of entries go, the system is set up for Iowa's entry limitations for most standard invitational meets of 2 individuals and 1 relay per team. The Power Rankings System matches what is being done in most meets in Iowa. I suppose other systems could be designed for other states and their situations if someone had the energy and interest in doing it.
In addition, the national power rankings are similar but depending on what state you are in, you can choose to not enter performances in all events (2 less than all?) and not have those count against your team score. Iowa would not be able to enter atheltes in the triple jump or pole vault. Their SHR, 400LH, 4 x 200 & Medley Relays are useless since most states don't participate in those events.
The score you get for your national power rankings based on the events you choose to submit performances for may actually earn your team a spot in the National True Team Championship Meet.
I don't think we want to take events away from our kids here in Iowa but I'm dissapointed that we don't pole vault or triple jump. The only solution to filling out a lineup either way is to Recruit, Recruit, Recruit!!!
Honestly, I think you'd have better performances, all-around, if you just took out the team scoring system completely. Instead of filling events to see how many points you can score as a team, you put the kids out there to run the events they can perform the best in as individuals. You'd stop seeing kids doubling and tripling as often, too, which would lead to faster times. If I were to ever coach track (which I would only want to do at a bigger school, as small schools typically have one or two coaches for a whole team which is a joke in track), the last thing I would worry about is the team score. I'd rather have two or three events win state than to have no champions and win the state team title.
This post was edited on 4/20 9:06 AM by leonardsmith
This post was edited on 4/20 9:06 AM by leonardsmith
Those kids who place 5th and 6th in a lot of meets, especially as freshman and sophomores, and knowing they are helping the team is what keeps them motivated and coming back out and working harder and you never know which ones will get triggered by those small success to work better and become your state champion. It's not a matter of doing away with team scores, but how coaches approach team scores. Our coaches emphasize that there are meets in which team scores are important and they are going to win the meets and others were the coaches are focusing on individual and relay times and team points aren't going to be important and give others a chance to run as well. I would like to see a meet with the eight district champions and crown a true team champion and see how much variation there is to the current meet champion where I've seen a couple runners from a school win the team title.
leonardsmith- I agree with you on having indivdual champions versus a team title. The team titles always seem to be about the coaches. I believe in training each athlete to perform at a top level in their event. It would also allow more athletes chances to perform. A coach's focus should always be about doing what is right for EACH indivdual athlete and helping them to do the best they can.
My philosophy with cross country is different. I think a state team title in cross country means something...but a team title in track, when one athlete has more or less won it for their team in the past, is pretty irrelevant to me. And a "true team" championship is stupid to me, too, because it still would just lead athletes to running four different events and under performing in each. The quadrupling that typically happens with many top athletes at state is stupid to me. I see kids quadrupling in podunk invitationals all the time, too, which is completely asinine to me.
This post was edited on 4/20 1:16 PM by leonardsmith
This post was edited on 4/20 1:16 PM by leonardsmith
Leonard, it can be done the right way in very different sized schools if the coach has the right attitude about helping kids. In that, you are correct. In larger schools the talent pool is larger therefore better performances are more likely to be consistent over the years vs. a smaller school population. Yes some coaches do overload their athletes. That is obvious in schools of all sizes as well. Again, you are right in that the person in charge of running a successful program plays the major role in a programs' success or failure. However, in the public eye, the athletes can make the coach look like a genius or idiot depending on the coaches experience, discipline, control and relationships with the atheletes they coach. As a matter of fact, even bad coaches can win a lot with good performances just because they have the numbers behind them. Next man in and who cares about you if you aren't making me look good attitudes that make kids feel like losers if they aren't strong enough to figure it out and quit to move on to something else.
In my opinion, what you should look for is consistency of the program over the long haul. Those coaches do know how to do a good job of both bringing back kids from year to year, show steady improvement in those athletes, make the sport fun for most all kids involved, many kids continuing to participate at various levels beyond high school, how many athletes continue on to become teachers & coaches winning kids with running and not winning running with kids etc...
There is no denying that track and field is a team sport as long as they are scoring meets regardles of the system used, it might not be what we all agree on but nevertheless, they still give trophies. Most coaches with experience that think they have a real shot usually err on the side of caution and don't overload or allow the athlete/parent to dictate what they will do. Yes, there are many factors in the planning and delivery of a training program that will help the athlete be successful but there are a lot of variables that can't be controlled. You have to have some luck with both the individual and the team situation as there are many things that can't be controlled or events that occur that you aren't even involved in that effect the team score. All you can do is prepare your best to have a chance when it counts. There are no gaurantees.
There is nothing wrong with atheltes competing at the state meet in 3 or 4 events over 3 days at the state meet but it has to be well thought out for the individual and those teammates that are connected. There really can be only one champion in each event and again, someone who thinks their athelte has a chance will make sure they get that chance if they know what they are doing. Going by your logic, I think there must be a lot of good coaches around since there are a lot of state champions every year in track and field in individual events, relays and as teams. They are't all winning because they were the last ones standing.
Even in cross country, it's still a team sport as you eluded to but it's based on the culmination of individual efforts. Many coaches just tell their kids to run over the summer and don't regulate their training closely allowing better athletes with high aspriations to overtrain and dissapear by the 2nd half of October. Some of their kids won't run a step on their own either but that's their choice and you weren't talking about them. Other coaches will coach the kids every day in the summer to make sure the proper team atmosphere and training philosophy is understood by the athletes to make sure they have a chance to be good when it counts. The kids and parents that buy into that approach are typically satisfied with the consistent level of performances that is enhanced by an occasional spike that can net a state team trophy.
Some coaches will shy away from a more complex sport that has many more variables that make winning very difficult starting with getting off of your duff and recruiting the heck out of your hallways to make it happen. Athletes don't just show up for a minor sport even at the big schools. Comparing development of a successful track and field program to a successful cross country program is "asinine". IF you can do one, you can do both. Otherwise, you just aren't that interested. It's not as easy as some think. There are a lot of great coaches that never win a state title. There are some real jerks that win a lot.
In my opinion, what you should look for is consistency of the program over the long haul. Those coaches do know how to do a good job of both bringing back kids from year to year, show steady improvement in those athletes, make the sport fun for most all kids involved, many kids continuing to participate at various levels beyond high school, how many athletes continue on to become teachers & coaches winning kids with running and not winning running with kids etc...
There is no denying that track and field is a team sport as long as they are scoring meets regardles of the system used, it might not be what we all agree on but nevertheless, they still give trophies. Most coaches with experience that think they have a real shot usually err on the side of caution and don't overload or allow the athlete/parent to dictate what they will do. Yes, there are many factors in the planning and delivery of a training program that will help the athlete be successful but there are a lot of variables that can't be controlled. You have to have some luck with both the individual and the team situation as there are many things that can't be controlled or events that occur that you aren't even involved in that effect the team score. All you can do is prepare your best to have a chance when it counts. There are no gaurantees.
There is nothing wrong with atheltes competing at the state meet in 3 or 4 events over 3 days at the state meet but it has to be well thought out for the individual and those teammates that are connected. There really can be only one champion in each event and again, someone who thinks their athelte has a chance will make sure they get that chance if they know what they are doing. Going by your logic, I think there must be a lot of good coaches around since there are a lot of state champions every year in track and field in individual events, relays and as teams. They are't all winning because they were the last ones standing.
Even in cross country, it's still a team sport as you eluded to but it's based on the culmination of individual efforts. Many coaches just tell their kids to run over the summer and don't regulate their training closely allowing better athletes with high aspriations to overtrain and dissapear by the 2nd half of October. Some of their kids won't run a step on their own either but that's their choice and you weren't talking about them. Other coaches will coach the kids every day in the summer to make sure the proper team atmosphere and training philosophy is understood by the athletes to make sure they have a chance to be good when it counts. The kids and parents that buy into that approach are typically satisfied with the consistent level of performances that is enhanced by an occasional spike that can net a state team trophy.
Some coaches will shy away from a more complex sport that has many more variables that make winning very difficult starting with getting off of your duff and recruiting the heck out of your hallways to make it happen. Athletes don't just show up for a minor sport even at the big schools. Comparing development of a successful track and field program to a successful cross country program is "asinine". IF you can do one, you can do both. Otherwise, you just aren't that interested. It's not as easy as some think. There are a lot of great coaches that never win a state title. There are some real jerks that win a lot.
I'm not saying small schools are the only ones who triple and quadruple up their athletes...but it's more of a problem at smaller schools, I've noticed. Also, I don't think you really understood what I was getting at when I was talking about smaller schools. I mentioned not wanting to coach track at a small school because one coach cannot effectively coach a track team. It is impossible. There are too many athletes and too many events for one coach to handle on his/her own. The school I teach at is 1A and they have one track coach, with no paid assistants. I help out here and there, but, being a fifth year teacher, I'm not willing to work on a daily basis for free at this point. Kids are left to their own devices many times, at no real fault of the head coach here, who is very competent, and most of the smaller schools in our area operate similarly.
Also, I disagree with you that triple and quadrupling your distance athletes is OK, even at state. Look at the states who are more successful than Iowa. Very, very rarely do you see athletes doing that. However, it is very common in Iowa. Part of the problem is it's relatively easy to qualify for state in Iowa, compared to many other states. A big reason we don't see any national level performances on the distance side of things is because, when tripling and quadrupling, we don't have kids really going for it. They are saving something for the next race. And why are they running the three or four races? For the team. Running for the team in this manner, in my mind, sells the individual short. The goal of a coach, I feel, should be to have his/her athletes perform at their optimum abilities. They cannot do this with tripling and quadrupling in distance events. And while I can somewhat forgive the tripling and quadrupling at state, even though I'm not a fan of it, I think it is downright ridiculous to have distance athletes doing it on a typical basis at unimportant invites throughout the season which happens far too commonly at all levels, 1A through 4A. And, again, this only happens to pad team scores because it surely isn't helping the athlete progress.
This post was edited on 4/20 11:22 PM by leonardsmith
Also, I disagree with you that triple and quadrupling your distance athletes is OK, even at state. Look at the states who are more successful than Iowa. Very, very rarely do you see athletes doing that. However, it is very common in Iowa. Part of the problem is it's relatively easy to qualify for state in Iowa, compared to many other states. A big reason we don't see any national level performances on the distance side of things is because, when tripling and quadrupling, we don't have kids really going for it. They are saving something for the next race. And why are they running the three or four races? For the team. Running for the team in this manner, in my mind, sells the individual short. The goal of a coach, I feel, should be to have his/her athletes perform at their optimum abilities. They cannot do this with tripling and quadrupling in distance events. And while I can somewhat forgive the tripling and quadrupling at state, even though I'm not a fan of it, I think it is downright ridiculous to have distance athletes doing it on a typical basis at unimportant invites throughout the season which happens far too commonly at all levels, 1A through 4A. And, again, this only happens to pad team scores because it surely isn't helping the athlete progress.
This post was edited on 4/20 11:22 PM by leonardsmith
Similar threads
