Friday, August 03, 2007

1996 vs 2007 CA Cross Country State Meets

Once I was in the midst of the previous post and comparing the 1987 (first) state meet to last year's meet, it was quickly evident that it's not a very good comparison. The divisions did not line up at all. I think a better comparison would be the 1996 meet (first year with five divisions) to last year's meet. I only go down to 6 places but it's very clear that the depth of the current meet is incredible. Times that won plaques in the past now might not place a team in the top 10. What some feared to be the watering down of the meet with the addition of two divisions has not been the case at all. It's a credit to the hard work being put forth by the current runners during the summer and season as well as the constant search of a better season plan by many coaches.

BOYS
Division I (1996)...................Division I (2006)
1) Peninsula............81:44...........1) Trabuco Hills........77:55
2) Poway.................82:26...........2) Royal....................78:12
3) Nevada Union.....82:32...........3) Davis Sr.................79:09
4) Poly-Long Beach.82:34...........4) El Toro..................79:42
5) Mt. Carmel..........82:37...........5) Upland..................79:50
6) Del Campo...........82:39..........6) Madera.................80:10
Division II (1996)..................Division II (2006)
1) De La Salle...........81:03..........1) Jesuit......................79:11
2) Santa Margarita...82:05..........2) Ventura..................80:29
3) Santa Ana.............82:01..........3) St. John Bosco........81:09
4) Jesuit....................82:15..........4) Clovis.....................80:38
5) Hemet...................82:15..........5) Petaluma................82:17
6) Huntington Beach.82:39..........6) Oak Ridge..............82:24
Division III (1996)..................Division III (2006)
1) St. Ignatius..........82:47............1) Barstow.................80:32
2) Tustin..................82:50...........2) Del Campo............82:13
3) Katella.................83:09...........3) Margarita.............82:10
4) St. Francis MV.....84:09...........4) Palos Verdes.........82:12
5) Bosco Tech..........84:32............5) Campolindo..........82:54
6) Barstow...............84:15............6) St. Ignatius...........82:51
Division IV (1996)...................Division IV (2006)
1) Corona del Mar..84:07..............1) Big Bear.................80:40
2) Granada.............84:08.............2) Laguna Beach........83:00
3) Nordhoff............83:39.............3) Avenal....................84:11
4) Half Moon Bay....84:29............4) McFarland..............84:36
5) Costa Mesa.........84:43.............5) St. Mary's Col..........84:30
6) West Valley.........85:03............6) Piedmont.................84:53
Division V(1996)....................Division V (2006)
1) McFarland...........81:46............1) Woodcrest Christian.82:36
2) Holtville...............85:55...........2) College Prep.............84:35
3) St. Bonaventure....86:04..........3) Flintridge Prep..........85:54
4) Oak Park..............86:10..........4) SF University.............85:58
5) Maranatha............86:29..........5) Mt. Shasta................86:48
6) St. Mary's Berk......87:27..........6) Chadwick.................87:07

GIRLS
Division I (1996)...................Division I (2006)
1) Clovis...................95:48.........1) Saugus....................93:06
2) Ayala....................96:10.........2) Torrey Pines............94:42
3) Clovis West...........96:49.........3) Buchanan................94:59
4) Fallbrook..............96:54.........4) Cresenta Valley.......95:14
5) Esperenza.............97:11...........5) Fountain Valley......95:07
6) Irvine....................97:48.........6) Davis Sr..................95:57
Division II (1996)..................Division II (2006)
1) Yucaipa.................94:13.........1) Carondelet...............94:18
2) Clayton Valley.......96:08........2) Newport Harbor.......95:01
3) Dana Hills.............96:46.......3) Ayala........................95:10
4) Ventura................97:29........4) Clovis......................95:44
5) Valhalla................97:44........5) University City.........95:52
6) Amador Valley......98:30........6) Los Gatos................96:26
Division III (1996)................Division III (2006)
1) Carondelet...........95:52..........1) CDM........................93:24
2) El Modena.............98:08.......2) Oak Park.................96:04
3) Placer....................98:27.......3) Maria Carrillo..........97:41
4) Santana................98:33........4) Del Oro...................98:08
5) St. Lucy's..............98:56........5) Placer......................98:46
6) San Gorgonio........99:15........6) Rim of the World.....99:02
Division IV (1996)...............Division IV (2006)
1) Norhoff................95:59.......1) Marlborough............96:53
2) La Canada............96:06......2) Carmel.....................99:32
3) Campolindo.........98:40......3) Bret Harte................100:47
4) Central Valley.....102:29......4) Maranatha...............101:01
5) Cathedral City.....103:16......5) Piedmont.................102:21
6) Corona del Mar....103:52.....6) Colfax......................101:33
Division V (1996)................Division V (2006)
1) SF University.......97:28........1) Mt. Shasta.................97:43
2) Orange Lutheran..102:27......2) Chadwick.................100:01
3) McFarland............102:56.....3) Woodcrest Christian..100:30
4) St. Joseph............104:41......4) CSU..........................100:58
5) La Salle...............106:30.......5) SF University.............102:33
6) Piedmont............106:34.......6) Flintridge Prep..........103:23

2 comments:

Adam said...

Albert,

Your comparisons are enjoyable to look at, especially since I am particularly familiar with the 1996 meet. However, I would caution against reading too much into any comparisons between the 96 meet and the 2006 meet. The meet looked very different back then, especially in the smaller divisions. Once the fields were enlarged in 2000, it fundamentally changed the nature of the meet.

The most direct result was that more teams statewide had a legitimate shot at qualifying for the state meet and running for a medal. Another consequence was that there were more teams with state-meet experience before sling-shooting to the top of the podium. The races themselves didn't have the 15-second gaps between top runners that prior races were often notorious for. I will be very interested to see what kind of trends we see going forward relative to the 2000 meet, the first time CIF attempted to cram the starting line full in every race. Regardless, I appreciate the trip down memory lane!

All the best,

ahall

Albert Caruana said...

Adam,

Thank you for the input. I remember your work on the NCS rankings in the late 90s.

That is a valid point about the size of the fields and in the future I will see about comparing the 2000 meet with last year's meet.

I made sure that '96 was not a wet state championship (like '94 and '01) as that would have contributed to the results.

I am not sure if there could ever be a true comparison between two different years but as you said, it's fun looking back at past meets.

Thanks again for chiming in.