Interesting stat

[Impossible Is Nothing]

In the past ten years, there have been 80 state titles awarded in cross country (4 classes x 2 genders x 10 years). Of those 80 championships, over 40% of them have been collected by a group of seven schools:

WDM Dowling - 7 (4A; 5 girls, 2 boys)
Dubuque Wahlert - 6 (3A; 3 girls, 3 boys)
IC Regina - 5 (1A/2A; all boys)
CR Xavier - 4 (3A; 2 girls, 2 boys)
Tipton - 4 (2A; all girls)
Pleasant Valley - 4 (4A; 1 girls, 3 boys)
Union - 4 (2A; all girls)

I'm not sure what these numbers tell us, if anything. The way cross country is structured (where freshmen can excel right away) allows for the opportunity for schools to ride a strong class or two to multiple team titles. Also notice that the top four schools listed here are all private--I know that debate gets a lot of attention on other sports' boards. Many of these schools have strong XC traditions--but on the other hand, Tipton (for example) barely has a girls XC team anymore.

Thoughts?

 

[On Wings of Eagles]

Decorah.

Nuff said.

 

[cc coach]

My guess is that in any given 10 year period, a big chunk (40%ish) of the state titles are won by a relatively small number of schools. Picking the past 10 years happened to capture those schools. Do the 10 years before that and Iowa City High and IC west would have a bunch. Pick another 10 years and waukon was winning them left and right. Cascade...... Dubuque Senior...... Clinton.....etc, etc, etc. Pella and charles city and monticello boys have had an impressive decade+ as well.

Many/most of the winningest programs in CC are not private schools.

On a side note, I don't think a few state titles in a window of time is the best mark of accomplishment. A handful of great runners can put together an impressive run. To me, maybe one of the most impressive things in HS cross country, is IC Regina's run over the past 20-25 years or so. I am not sure the exact numbers, but they have qualified for state every year for..... well, about forever it seems. And, more impressive, they have a stupid amount of top-4 finishes in those appearances. Their string is the mark of dozens and dozens of runners - not 4 studs that happened to show up all at once. That is no easy task.

 

[On Wings of Eagles]

That's exactly what I was referring to. In particular, the boys.

Most State Titles:

Decorah 15 I think you would find more team efforts than outstanding individuals over the years.
Marion 2nd at 10

Now for the interesting point picking up where you left off with Regina:

Iowa City, City High 9
Iowa City, University High 8 (Blue Hawks no longer in existence)
Iowa City Regina 8
Iowa City West 1 (Open since 1968)

for a total of 26 titles out of Iowa City alone.

Combined Team Titles and Runner-Up finishes:

Decorah 18
Iowa City, City High 14
Des Moines East 13
Marshalltown 13
Waukon 12
Ames, Des Moines Tech, Marion, Sioux City Central, Iowa City University High all at 11
Then Regina at 10 tied with Cedar Falls.


Your point on Regina always being in contention is well taken. Like Decorah, that takes a lot of kids over a long period of time. It's in the culture. However, Regina has floated back and forth across the Class 2A/1A boundary on several occasions which does help keep them hang out in the top 5 of either class even in years they might not have been as strong as others. One thing I know for a fact that really helps them is that they don't shy away from running against 4-A schools. I'm pretty sure that helps them keep a healthy perspective on what needs to be done if they want to remain competitive in the smaller classes. Now in more recent times, their football program has really taken off on a long streak of success. I'm wondering if that has an effect on getting some of the better athletes out for cross country.

 

[XCmom]

The private school stat part of it will always be there...we have an amazing 8th grader at our school currently, and of course he's already been contacted by a private school about attending there in high school. And I wouldn't blame him if he goes, we are a small school just trying to field a full team and he could go to a private school with a great XC tradition.
I would like to see this stat linked to what coach was in charge of the program, and how long the coach was there, because I think any school can build a successful XC program if they get a great coach who is able to get big numbers out for the program and knows how to develop their talent. Pella is a great example of this right now, they pull up to XC meets with 3 busses of kids. If you can get 140 kids out for XC and then train them correctly, you are going to have a great team, you are bound to find some natural talent in those large numbers that can be developed.

 

[Impossible Is Nothing]

Originally posted by cc coach:
My guess is that in any given 10 year period, a big chunk (40%ish) of the state titles are won by a relatively small number of schools. Picking the past 10 years happened to capture those schools. Do the 10 years before that and Iowa City High and IC west would have a bunch. Pick another 10 years and waukon was winning them left and right. Cascade...... Dubuque Senior...... Clinton.....etc, etc, etc. Pella and charles city and monticello boys have had an impressive decade+ as well.

Here's the data for the two preceding ten-year periods (keeping in mind, as you suggest, that the start and end points for the sets are arbitrary):

1993-2002
60 total team championships
IC High, 3A - 10 (6 boys, 4 girls)
Waukon, 2A - 8 (7 boys, 1 girls)
Bennett-Durant, 1A/2A - 5 (4 girls, 1 boys)
IC West, 3A - 4 (all girls)
IC Regina, 1A - 3 (all boys)
Benton, 2A - 3 (all girls)

Six schools won 55% of all state titles.

1983-1992
60 total team championships
Cascade, 2A - 10 (7 girls, 3 boys)
IC High, 3A - 6 (4 girls, 2 boys)
Unity Christian, 1A/2A - 4 (3 girls, 1 boys)
Woodbine, 1A - 3 (2 boys, 1 girls)
Shenandoah, 2A - 3 (all boys)

Five schools won 43.3% of all state titles.

So, it seems like your assertion is correct: during any given ten-year period, there are a small number of schools that seem to dominate the sport, and that these schools tend to change over time. This still doesn't really get at the question of "why" this occurs, though.

Many/most of the winningest programs in CC are not private schools.

True, but this makes their recent dominance that much more interesting--is it an anomaly, or a growing trend? In the preceding two periods, there were two private schools among the dominant groups: Regina in 1993-2002, and Unity Christian in 1983-1992. Now, in the most recent ten-year sample, there are four private schools in the dominant group, and they've won over 1/4 of all the state titles.

On a side note, I don't think a few state titles in a window of time is the best mark of accomplishment. A handful of great runners can put together an impressive run. To me, maybe one of the most impressive things in HS cross country, is IC Regina's run over the past 20-25 years or so. I am not sure the exact numbers, but they have qualified for state every year for..... well, about forever it seems. And, more impressive, they have a stupid amount of top-4 finishes in those appearances. Their string is the mark of dozens and dozens of runners - not 4 studs that happened to show up all at once. That is no easy task.

A good point, especially in the context of school sport, where the focus should not necessarily be on winning state titles at the expense of having a positive sport experience. And you're right, there are programs that cultivate this sort of environment and have sustained success--success that can perhaps be more accurately measured by your metric than simply by state championships won.

Cross country is a sport that lends itself to short-term dominance by a particular school or schools--this much is borne out by the data. This is probably due to the fact that having one or two very talented athletes (or more generally, a very strong class) can be exploited over more than a single season. Two questions I think remain open for discussion:

1) Is the recent dominance by private schools a blip, or a trend? In other words, are private schools just getting "lucky" in terms of having elite talent come through their halls, or is this a sign of a more systemic change?
2) To cc coach's last point: does it matter? I agree that state titles aren't the only or best metric for measuring the success of a program. However, it still matters at least a little bit I think.

 

[cc coach]

Originally posted by Impossible Is Nothing:
1) Is the recent dominance by private schools a blip, or a trend? In other words, are private schools just getting "lucky" in terms of having elite talent come through their halls, or is this a sign of a more systemic change?
2) To cc coach's last point: does it matter? I agree that state titles aren't the only or best metric for measuring the success of a program. However, it still matters at least a little bit I think.

Thanks for the statistical work - that is actually really kind of interesting to see. I think you bring up a number of accurate and interesting points.

As to #1 above - only time will really tell. If the trend bares out for a couple decades, it will appear that it could indeed be the case that private schools are outperforming what statistics say they should. If not . . . well, it was just like some of the others.

One thing that I do notice (and was pointed out previously) if you look at those teams that have had some really sustained success - you are also looking at programs with long-time, knowledgeable, positive, motivational coaches, assistants and programs - (private or public):

City high, City west, regina, cascade, decorah, unity, waukon, benton , monticello, north linn, Dubuque senior, eagle grove . . . . . etc, etc. those teams have/had some really fine coaches and programs over the years. There are many others as well besides those. But, I think that is really significant. Iowa City Regina and their 25 year run is the result of truly great coaches and program - regardless of private or public. A private school that chalks up 3 wins among 20 years of no top 10 finishes is less impressive to me.

In regard to #2 - state titles do matter. It is like anything else - If you want to start talking about "great" programs you better have some titles to talk about in there. But, there are programs like North Linn that have a couple titles, but have 10 runner up titles. Teams like Cascade, Waukon, IC Regina, Decorah (and others) were banking 2nd and 3rd place finishes the years they were not winning. I think it is a bit of each. You need some wins to go with a lot of consistency to be called great.

One factor that I wonder about (mainly for small schools) is boy/girl ratio...... We had a decade of qualifying for state on the boys side, and a 4 year run of 2 titles, and 2 runners up. A statistical anomaly in there that no one ever probably sees or notices is this - we had 3 grades in a row that were 60%+ Boys and 40%- girls...... In essence we were a 3A boys school and a 1A girls school during our most successful years. We also struggled immensely in girls athletics during that same time.... I bet that happens more often than you think at small schools where class size is small enough that you can get some real disparities in the # of boys/girls in the school.

 

[Impossible Is Nothing]

Good point about the fluctuations in demographics, because it gets to a perhaps more fundamental issue about the levelness of the playing field.

As you've pointed out, we'd like to believe that sustained success is a function of a culture, usually created by a coach and sustained by that coach and, to some extent, parents/community/fans. These things (as well access to quality facilities, I guess) are things that we think of as being under a school's control--good coaches can be found and retained, interest and dedication to supporting the sport can be fostered, etc.

By the same token, the variability in success is tied to changes in demographics. Like you said, some years you will have a huge class full of talented, dedicated kids, and some years you will have small classes with maybe only a few kids interested in running. A strong XC tradition/culture can help sustain a program through those thin times, and maybe even "do more with less"--which is why consistency is seen as the mark of a truly elite program.

What I think is at the heart of the private/public debate, not just in XC but in all Iowa high school sports--a debate that seems to be gaining steam--is that private schools are alleged to be messing with this variability. As I wrote above, we'd like to think that success (defined as consistency over time) is tied to factors we can control--coaches, fan support, etc.--and that everyone has to deal with the inherent variability of student demographics. But, what if the other path to success was to simply reduce the variability in talent? Instead of building a strong XC culture over time, what if a school took steps to ensure that it could simply maintain a consistently high level of talent, regardless of other aspects of the program? Again, this is a broader point applicable, at least to some degree, to all high school sports. But I think this is what has so many people up in arms and increasingly wary of private schools' success--the ability (through recruitment, etc.) to work around the inherent "luck of the draw" aspect of high school sports.

I'd be interested in your response, cc coach. First, I guess, whether you thought this "gaming of the system" was happening (in XC or other sports) and second, how you feel about it--do (or would) you accept it as a fact of life, or is it a problem that needs to be addressed through the governing bodies?

I'll leave you with this analogy: the purported advantages enjoyed by private schools (in addition to better funding, the ability to recruit athletes from other school districts, and so forth) are similar to doping. The reason doping is so reviled is that it offends our sense of the level playing field. We recognize that there are certain things athletes can control (their training, diet, commitment, etc.) and certain things they cannot control (genetically-predetermined body chemistry, height, weight, etc.). People think doping is wrong because it messes with those things that everyone thinks are naturally variable--instead of finding success through things we traditionally think of as under our control, dopers try to reduce their "natural" or "inherent" disadvantages. (This is a bit overly simplistic, but I think you get the idea).

 

[XCmom]

Interesting that you added the gender factor in there too...at our own school we've had some very successful boys teams that placed in the top 3 at state, but it's been 16 years since our school has even had an individual girl qualify, and we've never had a team of girls qualify. It would be interesting to look at what schools have both boys and girls success, are they under the same coach? Do they work out together?

As for the private school debate, I think the Iowa governing board should consider doing what Illinois does....private schools are automatically bumped up one class. If you look at sports besides XC and the statistics, private schools are way outperforming public schools at the state championship levels.

 

[se xc1]

Here we go, at least I am glad this has reached the track/xc board and not just basketball/football. I am ok with the multiplier system, as long as it is applied to ALL who have an advantage to being located near a metropolitan area. Gilbert, Solon, North Polk, etc all have the same advantage. Look at Manson Northwest Webster. They actually buy advertisement signs in Fort Dodge. Is this not recruiting? Sure it is. There is certainly a trend out there, however, I don't believe it is being properly labeled. Kids/parents are sending their kids to schools that have successful athletic programs for athletic reasons. This happens in BOTH public and private schools. If you look at the present 3A wrestling landscape, there isn't a private school to be seen in terms of success. Where are the studs moving to? The successful public schools. Schools are a business. They need either the state aid or tuition to financially function. They will recruit to get that $. Trust me, we will take anyone willing to pay whether they can play a sport, perform musically, or not be involved in extra-curricular activities.

 

[oguard_run]

I have a question I need to be educated on when it comes to the private school vs. public school issue? Are there guidelines for students who transfer from a public school to a private school have to follow similar to the open enrollment guidelines if a student is open enrolling from one public school to another? Such as not being able to play varsity sports for 90 days (a semester)? Or is there any limitation put on where students have to be enrolled previously before transferring to a private school, for example, can a student from Perry with a Perrry address decide to drive and attend Des Moines Christian and play sports there? What are some of the rules governing students who go from attending a public school to a private school?

 

[Dancing With the Stars]

The transfer rules are the same for private and public schools. No varsity for 90 school days unless your family physically moved from one town to another, and for a reason other than sports. For instance, Dad got transferred from Ottumwa to Mason City, so the family moved, and the kid can play varsity right away at Newman. However that same kid, if he had tried to switch from Mason City High to Newman just to play baseball at Newman would not be allowed to play varsity for 90 school days.

 

[cc coach]

Originally posted by Impossible Is Nothing:



I'd be interested in your response, cc coach. First, I guess, whether you thought this "gaming of the system" was happening (in XC or other sports) and second, how you feel about it--do (or would) you accept it as a fact of life, or is it a problem that needs to be addressed through the governing bodies?

I'll leave you with this analogy: the purported advantages enjoyed by private schools (in addition to better funding, the ability to recruit athletes from other school districts, and so forth) are similar to doping. The reason doping is so reviled is that it offends our sense of the level playing field. We recognize that there are certain things athletes can control (their training, diet, commitment, etc.) and certain things they cannot control (genetically-predetermined body chemistry, height, weight, etc.). People think doping is wrong because it messes with those things that everyone thinks are naturally variable--instead of finding success through things we traditionally think of as under our control, dopers try to reduce their "natural" or "inherent" disadvantages. (This is a bit overly simplistic, but I think you get the idea).
Personally, I don't get too wrapped up in the public/private debate. As a track and CC coach at a small school...... I just don't think I really see any evidence to suggest that private schools are "gaming the system" in the sports I work with.

I don't know - I am sure it happens, and probably happens more in other sports. But, most people don't care enough about track and cross country to run some sort of "recruiting scheme" to lure talented runners from far and wide so that their private school can be a well-known powerhouse in cross country.

Even if it is happening - it is beyond my control, so, just concentrate on the things I can control, etc.

I don't see a "special class" as even a reasonable option in Iowa. Sure, there are places that do that - but, in general, you are talking about more densely populated areas, more private schools, closer together, closer in size, etc. I just don't see it. Also, even if there are private schools that do "recruit", it is fairly evident that there are also private schools that don't recruit. If the purpose is to punish "recruiting" - then it is probably worth acknowledging that some of the most questionable "transfers" have actually been in public school settings, with multiple athletes from all over the state transferring to the same school for a sport in the same season......

Further - as to "inherent" advantage...... Again, that is not solely a "private school" issue. There are public schools that have sort of an inherent advantage because of the demographics of their populations as well. Decorah is a great town, highly educated, Luther College, Hospitals, Courthouse, tourism, tremendous involvement, lots of youth opportunities, supportive, it is a bigger 3A school, 60+ years of running history, a successful college CC team, tons of outdoor recreational opportunities and infrastructure....... Their whole community has created an atmosphere of excellence. They have an "advantage" over other schools - do they get placed in a special class too?

I think it just gets really murky in a hurry if you start looking into it. I think people look for what they want to see. I am sure you can find private schools "recruiting" in sports. However, you can also find public schools doing it as well. You can find private schools that don't recruit for sports. You can find private schools that have created an atmosphere of success, achievement and expectation - you can find that in public schools too. But, what you won't find is "all private schools are this" or "all public schools are that."

And, you have to ask - what criteria are we using to separate schools out, or to apply a multiplier to them? Is it because they recruit? Is it because they inherently have some demographic advantages that other school districts do not have? Is it because they are toward the big end of their classification? What is it that should cause a school to have special conditions placed on them? And, the problem becomes pretty obvious, pretty fast - you end up with both public and private schools fitting your criteria. . . . . . . Unless your criteria is simply "all private schools should be sanctioned for what some private schools do."

This post was edited on 9/26 1:37 PM by cc coach

 

[On Wings of Eagles]

Well put coach. I think a lot of sports and schools across Iowa has seen a gain in a programs' performance with a move-in or transfer at some point. I don't think you give track/CC enough credit with being popular enough to sway a parent now and then to move/transfer with sport as the intent though. It does happen.

However, I see one sport in particular that seems to get a higher number of transfers more than any other by far and wonder how much "recruiting" is done in the summer months at tournaments where the athletes represent Iowa (and are coached by the same people year after year during those months) rather than their home school. To be honest, I think it's the parents seeking out greater opportunities for their kids and are willing to do whatever it takes within the rules to get what they want. A few programs seem to benefit the most year in and year out due to proven success and proximity to post-secondary programs. I guess the problem I have personally with this behavior is that it seems a bit unfair to the taxpaying parents of kids that have been in that community for thier entire school experience only to have superstars move in and continually take opportunities away from local students. As long as the IHSAA doesn't have a problem with this "intent" it will continue. They have a way of creating loopholes in their wording of policy that turns a blind eye when they know exactly what's going on.