Coaches meeting – changes you may care about
-
- March
- 20
The all-star and preview deadlines inch closer, but let’s not forget about the spring season. Amazingly the first meets are right around the corner – next week I believe.
I’m trying to think now – Wednesday night? I believe that was the day of the spring track coaches meeting. There were some rule changes discussed, some fairly minor things in terms of the pole vault and shot put, but that doesn’t mean the meeting was devoid of anything you may care about.
- An athlete or a team (apparently it depends on the AD) can compete in no more than 16 contests, which is down from 18 in previous years. That’s because of budgets cuts. Most teams will be playing less games this spring across the board.
- There will most likely be a central site for state meets. That means track state meets will be held in either Section 3 or Section 4, around Syracuse and Cicero-North. Unfortunately my great dream of having the meet at White Plains High School seems all but dead. It really is a great facility and I could jog there from my office.
- There is talk of eliminating divisions in all individual sports and that includes track, beginning next year. So, there will be no more Division I, Division II. The purpose of having divisions is to allow athletes from smaller schools a chance to compete at the state meet. There is always confusion about this, but an athlete that goes from Division II does not take away a spot from a Division I athlete. I think it would be a mistake to eliminate the divisions, especially with this next point for this season:
- Because the state feels as though D-II athletes have not been fairly represented at states they altered who can qualify for states. The D-I winner and D-II winner both can qualify. Then each division can send an additional athlete if they hit the standard. Last year a section could only send one athlete between the two divisions. Now it’s one per division. The same is true with the relays. It’s funny that this season the state wants more D-II athletes competing and then next year could eliminate the two divisions.
- The state qualifying standards (Which will be posted later) are now tougher for a D-I athlete to hit and easier for a D-II athlete to hit.
Let me know your thoughts on any of this or anything else you know that I don’t.
This entry was posted
on Friday, March 20th, 2009 at 10:58 am by Dan Marra. 
Print This Post
| 
Email This Post
Advertisement
Dan Marra began working for the Journal News this past September. He graduated from Manhattan College in 2004 and from John F. Kennedy High School in 2000. While at Kennedy, he ran cross-country and track. He is excited to be covering the sport that he participated in throughout his four years in high school. Dan loves all sports, but has, what some may say, an unhealthy obsession with the New York Giants.
Matthew Ng has been with Varsity Central and The Journal News sports department for the past two years handling high school beats such as skiing, bowling, girls soccer and tennis. Ng is a 2004 graduate of Syracuse University's S.I. Newhouse School with his major in broadcast journalism.
Casey Tolfree spent her high school career playing Section 1 sports at Dobbs Ferry and is excited to have the opportunity to cover them for the Journal News. After graduating from St. John's University, Casey joined the Journal News staff in December 2007 and has covered a variety of sports including basketball, softball, and volleyball.
so you’re saying that a athlete can only go to 16 meets
or does it mean the school can only pay for 16. what if an athlete pays their own way or goes unattached?
the whole school size thing is completely irrelevant in track. it should be the top 3 or 4 runners in the section should go for every event. whether or not they are a big or small school doesn’t matter.
I don’t think there should be divisions because first of all yes the purpose is for smaller schools to send athletes to states but there are an uneven amount of schools in D1 and D2. The smaller schools have less schools to compete against(at least they do in section 1). Then what’s really the difference between a team like byram hills or rye who are barely in D1(i think they are the smallest schools in D1) and a team that is barely in D2. Just because there are a couple more kids completely unrelated to track in a school now one team has the easier path to go to states that seems unfair. Then small schools like Bronxville who have strong track programs now get to walk their kids into states especially with the decreased standards while every team in D1 will have a tough time meeting the standards. The only way i see divisions making sense is in relays but for all individual events there shouldn’t be any divisions they create a lot of unfair advantages and disadvantages for athletes even though they are supposed to solve them.
“divisions” you seem to believe that because a team has a strong track program they get to “walk” their kids into states???? Last I checked, Bronxville girls didn’t walk when they won the fed. title indoors in the 4×800. It’s obvious you are from a small Div. I school. Watch at the end of the season, there will probably be as many DI extra kids hitting their standard as there are extra DII kids. The standards in DII are not going to be “walk” for anybody. 4:27 in 1600 for a DII kid is tough, only Saliani is near that now and if he wins, the next kid very well may not be anywhere near 4:27. Maybe you would prefer abolishing the 5 class XC standard as well and have all compete against each other, would that make it easier or harder for your team??????
Section 1 is one of 11 sections in NYS, and many are dominated by small schools, so they have the reverse effect, they have to compete against so many others to get in, as our DI kids have here.
It is unfortunate that we don’t go by class like in years past, but at least with 2 divisions it makes the playing field a little bit more fair for many kids than they have indoor. You think it fair that a kid from a school graduating about 100 kids should go against a school graduating over 1000? Yes, good runners should be good no matter the size of the school but when you take out 30 for Lacrosse, 20 for Baseball and 20 for Tennis, it doesn’t leave as many at a C school for a track team as it does a AA or A or even a B…...
rollingthunder- with the new standards Bronxville’s 4×8 can “walk” to states, to win it no they can’t walk, but they don’t even need to use their best girls to qualify. As to the 1600 argument there is nobody besides Saliani close to 4:27 because there are so many fewer runners in that event in D2 compared to D1 in section 1. As to the other sections that are mainly D2 schools then the D1 schools there won’t have to battle as many people for the one automatic qualifying spot and they won’t be able to have a 2nd kid hit the D1 standard sort of 4:17 just like our D2 won’t be able to hit the standard. States is not a team scoring sport like cross country, its individuals vs individuals or relay teams vs relay teams. The divisions system has many flaws it should probably be more like the indoor system with say 2 or 3 people automatically go from each section and then maybe another based on a standard. Or even like the xc system which has a more even playing field with 5 classes than just 2 divisions.
when will the standards be put up
EVENTBOYS 1BOYS 2GIRLS 1GIRLS 2
10010.7 11.212.212.6
20022.3 22.825.126.5
40049.5 50.058.058.9
800 1:57.0 1:58.0 2:14.0 2:19.0
16/1500 4:17.0 4:27.0 4:42.0 4:48.0
32/3000 9:23.0 9:28.0 10:10.0 10:40.0
STPL 9:45.0 10:14.07:13.07:29.0
HI HUR14.8 15.5 15.5 16.0
INT HUR56.0 57.81:04.71:06.8
LJ 22’0 20’6 17’0 16’7
TJ 45’0 43’0 36’6 34’6
SP 51’0 48’0 38’6 34’0
DT 148’0 146’0 117’6 108’0
HJ 6’5” 5’9 5’3 5’1
PV13’6”12’6” 10’3 9’3
PENT30152830 2750 2540
4X142.844.5 48.9 50.5
4X4 3:23.0 3:30.0 3:59.0 4:07.0
4X8 8:01.0 8:14.0 9:23.0 9:52.0
Mr./Mrs./Miss Divisions: when has Bronxville ever “walked” an individual or qualifier to states? Over the last 30 years, the Bronxville 4×800m has won 8 federation titles and 7 more Class C or Division II titles. I think that is about 50%. So don’t talk about what you have no knowledge of.
didnt they have a kid go to states a few years ago in the mile who ran like 4:40
do u not agree with me that in section 1 D2 the bronxville girls don’t have much competition so they can “walk” as in easily QUALIFY not win states but to simple QUALIFY. The Bronxville girls 4×8 may not be a good example they are good and deserve to go and I didn’t specifically bring their 4×8 team into this somebody else mentioned them but in other some events section 1 sends some D2 athletes who probably don’t deserve to go to states.
Is it far that a kid who runs 22.8 gets to go to states while a kid who runs 22.4 has to stay at home. Sometimes Section 1 is good that a kid who runs that 22 flat has to stay at home because he can not finish in the top 2 in division 1 but he still has a chance to medal at the state meet. In even worse case that 22.0 is home and because the talent in Division 2 is down a 23.0 runner goes to states. The divisions are unfair if you are not crowning a team stat champ. If you want to have a team state champ do what cross country have the class meet one week. Then have the meet of champions the next week.
Divisions—-you should check the results from last year’s state meet and you will see that they do indeed keep a team score…....
Let’s take a look at last year in section 1 and see how many people were under this year’s standards for both divisions and see if it would have made a big difference.
I will tell you that for 19 events Division 1 boys had 29 kids under the standards. Division II boys had 15 under their standards. Div. I girls had 30 girls under the DI standards, and DII girls had 19 under their standards. It looks like there are more DI kids that will miss out on going even with “tougher” standards, relax the standards more in DI and you get closer to 40 boys and 35 girls missing out.
Event by Event look:
100: DI had 2 boys under 10.7, DII had 1 under 11.2, DI girls had 2 under 12.2 and DII had 2 under 12.6 (seems fair representation so far)
200: DI boys had 4 under the 22.3 (so many are saying 22.3 is TOO HARD, yet 4 under it last year), DII had 2 under 22.8, DI girls had 2 under 25.1, DII had 1 under 26.5 (no extra girl from DII “walking” into states in this one)
400: DI boys had 2 under 49.5, DII had ZERO under 50.0, DI girls had 2 under 58 and DII had 1 under 58.9. Doesn’t look like DII has an advantage in this one either.
800: DI boys had 2 under 1:57, DII had ZERO under 1:58, DI girls had 0 under 2:14 and DII had 1 under 2:19 (again no advantage to DII)
1500/1600: DI boys had 1 under 4:17, DII had 0 under 4:27, DI girls had 1 under 4:42, DII had 0 under 4:48 (no advantage again to DII, with Gamboli running 4:34 indoor I’m guessing this event will have 2 for DI girls outdoor)
3000/3200: DI boys had 0 under 9:23, DII had 1 under 9:28 (DelBene), DI girls had 0 under 10:10, DII had 4 under 10:40 (I agree 10:40 is not great, but based on NYS meet at DII over the years it has not been a strong event, but will drop fast now with more kids getting in)
Steeplechase: DI boys had 0 under 9:45, DII had 0 under 10:14, DI girls had 3 under 7:13, DII had 1 under 7:29 (no advantage to DII)
400H: D1 had 2 under 56, DII had 0 under 57.8, DI girls had 1 under 64.7, DII had 1 under 66.8
110H/100H: DI boys had 3 under 14.8, DII had 0 under 15.5, DI girls had 2 under 15.5, DII had 0 under 16
LJ: DI boys had 0 over 22’, DII had 0 over 20’6, DI girls had 2 over 17’ and DII girls had 1 over 16’7”
TJ: DI Boys had 3 over 45’, DII had 0 over 43’, DI girls had 4 over 36’6, and DII had 0 over 34’6
SP: DI boys had 1 over 51, DII had 0 over 48’, DI girls had 0 over 38’6 and DII had 1 over 34 (nobody had an unfair advantage in this one.
Discus: DI boys had 1 over 148’, DII had 0 over 146’, DI girls had 1 over 117’6 and DII had 0 over 108
HJ: DI boys had 2 over 6’5, DII had 4 over 5’9 (this one is a weak event in DII, expect to see this standard make a marked improvement for next year if the economy allows 2 div. next year), DI girls had 1 over 5’3 and DII had 1 over 5’1
Pole Vault: DI boys had 0 over 13’6, DII had 1 over 12’6, DI girls had 1 over 10’3 and DII girls had 1 over 9’3”
Pentathlon, DI boys had 2 over 3015 pts., DII had 2 over 2830 PTs, DI girls had 3 over 2750pts and DII had 1 over 2540
4×100 relay: DI boys had 1 under 42.8, DII had 1 under 44.5, DI girls had 1 under 48.9, DII had 1 under 50.5
4X4 relay: DI boys had 2 under 3:23, DII had 0 under 3:30, DI girls had 2 under 3:59, DII had 1 under 4:07 (This is where the standards will help, as now the 2nd place team in each div. will go with a time, so in DI it is an advantage for them, not DII)
4×800: DI boys had 2 under 8:01 (2nd would go this year), DII had 2 under 8:14 (2nd would go), DI girls had 2 under 9:23 and DII had 1 under 9:52 (Would benefit BVIlle if you let them run their B team as well to get in, otherwise it only benefits one other team that can find a sub 9:52 team in DII)
I think you will see that it is not like the DII standards will have such an impact as to have a bus full of extra kids going to state meet. Take out the winner in each event in boys DII and only 3 extra and 1 more relay VS. in boys DI: 9 extra and 2 more relays, seems fair to me. On the girls side in DII it means: 2 extra kids, in DI girls there would be 8 extra and 2 more relay teams, seems like DI will do O.K. with the new standars as well…..lay off of the division debate and celebrate the fact that more kids will get an opportunity to compete.
DI doesn’t benefit from the new standards at all because they were already sending 2 athletes or relays in basically each event. Now it is harder for them to do so. That doesn’t mean it will be impossible for a second person to meet the standard but a couple strong athletes now may get left out.
If there are divisions, then there should be two completely separate state championships at two different sites. Then, do as our neighbors in Jersey and have the meet of champions (we can call it Federations) in which the top 16 overall competitors in each event state wide qualify.
It will never happen, however, because travel is a major issue when talking about the eastern edge of long island and buffalo. In Jersey, travel is a completely different story.
DI NEVER sent more than 1 relay in an event, only 1 relay was allowed by the other standards, now with the new standards 2 relays from EACH div. can go, so it does benefit DI (could benefit DII also if they could find another team to hit standards) if they run like last year…
if i’m not mistaking DI boys sent 2 4×4 teams and 2 4×8 teams last year and DI girls sent 2 4×1 teams, 2 4×4 teams and 2 4×8 teams.
you are mistaken.
just look at the state results from last year ramapo and mount vernon in the 4×4 then scarsdale and fox lane 4×8 then for the girls suffern and new ro went for the 4×1 ursuline and mount vernon for the 4×4 and suffern and ursuline for the 4×8 there is more than 1 DI relay in these events.
FL is right – you have been allowed to send up to three relays in the past in the spring. One from each division and a third one if it meets the standard.
It seems perfectly reasonable to have two sets of standards; there are a variety of reasons that make it easier for larger schools. Some are hard to see unless you are willing to step back from the situation though. However, it’s not entirely clear why the DI standards had to be made tougher. Seems like they could have remained the same and the D2 standards be added based on the formula that the state used.
good find FL, Gallino, you are right, the standards for DI should not have been touched, however, this all may not matter in a year with the fiscal crisis we are in because the state is talking of eliminating divisions for outdoor in a cost saving attempt, even though in team sports you will still see very large teams of football, lax, etc. making trips to state tournaments that get there due to being in a weak section for their class, no talk of eliminating that—
And also, why don’t we start with the 5 class system for cross country instead of taking away a 2 division system for track. Eliminating cross country classes wouldn’t have as much of an impact compared to if we got rid of the divisions, and it would probably be about the same overall.
5 classes for XC state meet and a federation meet for cross country while there is only one outdoor track championship and no divisions would be seem unfair, but thats just me.
We should combine C/D B/bottom half of A and top half of A with AA, it would have a lot less kids and save two whole classes
What would the purpose of that be?
To save money
wouldn’t combining of the classes make a significant impact?
when are the all county teams going to be in the paper?
Save who money? Want to save money? Put the football teams on some field in Buffalo and out of the dome. That would save money.