Tuesday, August 09, 2016

Top Cross Country programs in Northern California

This was posted on July 22, 2011. What programs should be considered to the following list now that we are approaching the 2016 season?
=====================================
The following is a list of cross country programs in Northern California who have won multiple section titles and have been consistently successful in the past decade.  As with any list, it's possible I may have left deserving teams so if you feel other teams should have been listed as well, feel free to add those schools in the comment section below.  The coaches listed next to the schools are their current coach for this coming season.  The teams are listed in alphabetical order.

Aptos CCS Dan Gruber
Bellarmine CCS Patrick McCrystle
Bella Vista SJS Harold Kuphaldt (boys)/Melanie Cleland (girls)
Bret Harte SJS Keith Maurer
Campolindo NCS Chuck Woolridge
Carlmont CCS Jennifer Randazzo
Carmel CCS John Ables
Castro Valley NCS Dooney Jones
Chico NS Kevin Girt
College Park NCS Christina Pennes
Davis SJS Bill Gregg
De La Salle NCS John Pelster
Del Campo SJS Bob King
Del Oro SJS Kevin Ostenberg
Enterprise NS Jim Deaver
Granite Bay SJS Angie Pozzi (now coached by Carla Kehoe)
Gunn CCS Matt Tompkins (now coached by Patti Sue Plumer)
Half Moon Bay CCS Paul Farnsworth
Jesuit SJS Walt Lange
Los Gatos CCS Matt Snee(boys)/Margaret Hulgrave(girls)
Lowell SF Michael Prutz
Maria Carrillo NCS Greg Fogg
Monte Vista NCS Mike Davis
Mt. Shasta NS Steve Nesheim
Mt. View CCS Jim Bordoni
North Monterey County CCS Charles Pierce
Oak Ridge SJS Rob Fairley
Petaluma NCS Jim Lynch
Placer SJS Randall Fee
Pleasant Valley NS David Mosier
San Rafael NCS Jason Jacobson
San Ramon Valley NCS Tim Hunter (now coached by David Bayliss)
San Lorenzo Valley CCS Rob Collins (now coached by Jay Avenmarg)
Skyline OAK Andrew Cheng (now coached by Sean Kohles)
St. Francis (Mt. View) CCS Mandy Benham(boys)/Roberta Chisam(girls) (now coached by Phil Pompei)
St. Francis (Sacramento) SJS John DuCray
St. Ignatius CCS Nick Alvarado(boys)/Jerilynn Caskey(girls)
St. Joseph Notre Dame NCS Tony Fong
St. Mary's Berkeley NCS Jeff Rogers(boys)/Denis Mohun(girls)
University SF NCS Jim Tracy (now coached by Carin Marrs)
West Valley NS Scott Fairley
Willow Glen CCS Victor Santa Maria
Woodcreek SJS Terri McKillop

Who did I miss?  Can you narrow it down to a top 10 list?  Who are the top coaches?  What is the best combined program (boys and girls)?  Which of the above teams won at least one state championship in the past decade?

70 comments:

Anonymous said...

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think both College Park and Campolindo have one two girls state titles each in the past decade. Chuck Woolridge was the coach for 3 of the 4 teams.

Albert Caruana said...

College Park won girls' state xc titles in 2003 and 2004 and Chuck Woolridge was the coach.

Campolindo won the girls' state title in 2001 and I believe Chris Walsh was the coach then.

Campolindo won the Division III girls' title last year with Chuck coaching.

Anonymous said...

As always I think a team is only as good as the talent. While these teams and coaches are all well deserving of the traditions they have created I also think there are many coaches not on the list that have quality programs but just have not won a title. Andy Chan of Sacred Heart comes to mind. Salinas High School in the southern part of the section also comes to mind (they just happen to be in the same division as Bellarmine and Carlmont).

Anonymous said...

University SF should be on the list

Albert Caruana said...

No question about the talent factor and Sacred Heart Cathedral and Salinas are two deserving programs.

University SF is on the list already.

Anonymous said...

one might give a footnote to Urban as an up and coming team for having gone from the basement in 2007 to winning the NCS Division V boys title in 2010 and the girls team placing 4th at State with two girls in the top 10

SJS Fan said...

Coach Bob King of Del Campo is also a member of the SJS Hall of Fame and has a current XC League meet win streak of 130 -140 ish.

Albert Caruana said...

I deleted a couple of posts that were not in the spirit of the original post.

Anonymous said...

You should have a topic about some good colleges in California to run for. I know a lot of prospective college students read this website and it could open up their eyes to options across the state.

Anonymous said...

Out of all those teams here is who I would put in the top ten: Bellarmine, Campolindo, DLS, Jesuit, Mt. View, Petaluma, SRV, SI, University, and Willow Glen. Those are in no specific order, but I'd put the Bells and Mt. view in the 1-2 spots. I don't know much about the girls programs though. To me, it seems like these are the teams that are always competing for CCS Championships, and are basically a lock for a state bid.

Anonymous said...

Multiple CCS Boys Titles since 2000:

6 - Carlmont
4 - Los Gatos, St. Ignatius
3 - NMC, Carmel, St. Francis, King City, VC- Dublin
2 - Bellarmine, SHP, Gunn, Serra, Aptos, Mountain View, Stevenson, York

Interestingly, Mountain View never placed higher than third in CCS until they won in 2008. Since the start of CCS, Bellarmine has won 15 CCS titles (including 8 in a row from 1993 to 2000).

Anonymous said...

While their past couple of years have been underwhelming, I don't know how you can leave out Carondalet. They had NCS titles in 06 and 07, as well as a couple more in the late 90s if you want to go back that far.

Not to mention individual successes such as Heather Cerney and Nicole Hood, who both run in the Pac-10 (12?) currently I believe.

Anonymous said...

As a SVR dad, it pains me to say it, but you have to include Amador on the list. In the tough EBAL, they are always near the top.

Anonymous said...

I too think it would be great to have a whole separate post on college programs. I would love to read what high school runners/parents/coaches who are somewhat "in the know" think about different college programs and the coaches. I can look up the stats online - but what does everyone actually know from experience and word on the street? I know there will be a lot of strong, conflicting opinions in a post like this, but it would still be interesting to read. Maybe start it each year with a list of CCS seniors and where they are running in college (which is also interesting to know) and then ask people to post information they know about senior runners missing from the list as well as the strength, culture, and coaches of the college programs. Or is this just opening up a can of worms?

Anonymous said...

I know that Skyline and Lowell have technically won a lot of titles, but seriously....

Albert Caruana said...

I will see what I can do about the college programs.

In regards to Skyline and Lowell, I just wanted to make sure all sections are covered.

Albert Caruana said...

To follow up on Del Campo coach Bob King. Since 1987, his boys have won 12 section titles (including 7 in a row from 88-94) and finished second 7 times, all in three separate divisions. They have had 7 top five finishes at the state meet including a state championship in Division I in 1995 (I remember his team carrying him off on their shoulders after the team scores were announced).

Anonymous said...

"Or is this just opening up a can of worms?"

Not really. The problem is that one college program may be great for a particular kid but terrible for someone else.

Anonymous said...

Bishop O'dowd Girls team could be added. while being coached under steve brown

Anonymous said...

We're talking about XC programs, not who's won how many titles, right?

Albert Caruana said...

I think it's both. There are plenty of good cross country programs who have not won any section titles.

Anonymous said...

Yeah I think the ammount of titles won is irrelevant in alot of cases because the level of competition a program faces is different in every league, section, and division. For example, there isn't a team in D1 NCS that has completely dominated the field for a number of years in a row. However, that doesnt mean there is a lack of outstanding programs. That isnt a hit against any teams that HAVE dominated the field in any given division, i.e. Campolindo, which completely deserve to be on the top of this list.

Anonymous said...

What happened to Coach Puppione at SI? He knows everything.

Mo Money Mo problems said...

He may know everything but anonymous posters know it all!

Except this I guess...moved up to Washington, he will be missed. A good guy who loved the sport!

Anonymous said...

Since Bret Harte is on the list, you have to include Ripon the SJS D4 champs.

Anonymous said...

Having a son who runs for Jesuit and having run against them when I was in high school, I am familiar with their history and Coach Lange's successful run, which is impressive: 41 League Championships, 25 Section Championships, 9 State Championships and two time National Championship qualifiers. This in a league where Davis has had power house squads over the years.
Additionally, I think Bella Vista should be added to the list, their squad has gotten stronger and stronger over the past couple of years under the guidance of Harold Kuphaldt and Melanie Cleland. Boy's D2 section championship last year and 4 straight section championships for the girls, including 2 state runner up finishes.

Courtney said...

Quick update for you on Monte Vista (NCS), former head coach Mike Davis retired after the 2015 season (see story about his earning the Boys Cross Country Coach of the Year award and his retirement here: http://www.eteamz.com/mvxc/news/index.cfm?id=5983357&cat=0&fb=ml ).

For the 2016 season, the NCS champion Mustangs will be led by head coach Mandee Starn who has coached alongside Coach Davis for the past four years. Coach Starn has announced that she will be retiring herself after this season. Monte Vista athletic director, Andy Popper, is actively seeking a head coach who can take over this wonderful program in 2017. The program is also still seeking assistant coaches for the current season. Contact Andy at apopper@srvusd.net

Anonymous said...

Looks like the comment section is back up and running. Did we miss anything?

Anonymous said...

Here's my opinion on CCS Schools where they've ended up from 2011. I'll give an up or a down since the tumbs up emoji doesn't work here. I don't know the other section well enough to comment. Anyways, my 2 cents:

Aptos - up
Bellarmine - up
Carlmont - down
Carmel - down
Gunn - up and then down
HMB - Consistently good but had some ups and downs
Los Gatos - up then down
Mt. View - down
NMC - down
SLV - up
St. Francis - up
SI - Consistently good
Willow Glen - Consistently good

Needs to be added:
Crystal Springs Uplands - dominated D5 the last 5 years
Mitty (girls) - Good battles over the years between them and SF


Not winning championships but good dark horse programs always in the mix:
Homestead
King City
Los Altos
Palo Alto
Sacred Heart Cathedral
Salinas
Scotts Valley
Valley Christian

Anonymous said...

Yes to the college discussion. Many student-athletes and parents would find it helpful.

Anonymous said...

SJND should be added to the list. D5 powerhouse over the last several years.

Anonymous said...

Piedmont NCS

Anonymous said...

SJND????

Anonymous said...

Think with Albany, El Cerrito HS, and Berkeley having functional teams and the cost of private school, SMB seems to be on the decline.

Anonymous said...

This list should be split into public and private as well. Huge coaching difference between the two types of institutions. Public you get what you get.

Anonymous said...

I don't know about the split lists but I do agree that every coach in the WCAL is top notch. I don't know all the other coaches in the area but there are some exceptional coaches out there in the public schools too. "You get who you get" is true for whatever school you go to, even private.

Anonymous said...

Seems strange to want to split the lists especially this year when 2 of the top 4, and many other public schools are in the CCS top 10. While there is some truth in the coaching point you raised about a league like WCAL, the issue is consistency across that league and not quality of coaching at any given school. Ask many of the WBAL kids about the quality of coaching they get - CSU and Menlo excepted, of course. There are some very good coaches in our public schools. So the list can be split if you want but you have to find a different metric - parent/teacher coaches vs. professionals? But is that really useful?

Albert Caruana said...

I think it's silly to split the teams into public and private. There are plenty of public schools in California that field great cross country teams. I know they don't throw pity parties for themselves because they have to compete against private schools. I have coached at both public and private schools and you can be successful at both.

Anonymous said...

How about we come up with different lists based on school size? Someone could come up with like 4 or 5 categories or divisions based on enrollment so things are fair. I have been told that one of the main contributors to XC team success is the number of kids a school can draw from.

Anonymous said...

Id like to see enrollment just go away. Your school size means nothing. A top runner can come from a small school or a large one. Look at track some small schools are beating out this 3 times larger. I'd like to see no divisions in XC. One race with the best 32 schools. Everyone else is JV.

Anonymous said...

Not going to happen. XC is a team sport and enrollment is a major determinant of success. You can have one of two good runners, but small schools will never be able to compete with the larger publics. Smaller privates (D2 vs. D1, etc.) can compete with slightly larger publics because of the self-selecting nature of some private schools, but wiping out divisions will not happen and would not be good for the sport.

Anonymous said...

The CIF is moving toward competitive equity. We will have an open division in a couple years.
Having the best race the best is NOT bad for the sport. It is BETTER for the sport. The best need to race the best and while you may not like it, it is reality and is happening.

Anonymous said...

Who in CCS is opting to move into an open division?

Anonymous said...

Will the open division be voluntary like other sports?

Anonymous said...

Think an open division is a great idea! Prepares kids for what they will face in college and beyond in life.

Rob Collins said...

Hello Albert, Hope everything is going well. Just a FYI: Jay Avenmarg is taking over from me at SLV as the new Head XC/Track Coach! Best of luck to you and the rest of you this fall!

Anonymous said...

Coach Pup was at Cardinal Newman last year after a year at Healdsburg.

Nor sure what his current situation is though.

Anonymous said...

My source in the state office (who I will not mention as it is not public yet) told me the open division will allow teams to opt in but top teams in a power merge at the section level will be required to compete in the open division. Of course the other option is to decline your state spot.

This will help with the private school hate, most top teams from WCAL would be open like in football, basketball, baseball, etc.

Every team sport has an open division. The hold up is that cross country is considered an individual sport. The argument is if it is an individual sport there should not be divisions (swimming, track, wrestling, golf, etc.). If it is a team sport it should have an open division like every other team sport.

If they follow other team sports league champions and additional qualifiers from A+ leagues will compete in the open division.

Another issue being discussed is that XC may follow football in that teams may be selected for state open division from division races at the section level. Or do they have an open division at sections and place teams not in top 3 in division races.

Still a lot to iron out but this is happening. The best need to race the best. XC is a team sport and every team sport has an open division. This is happening so get ready.

Anonymous said...

We are ready. What teams in WCAL other than Bell would want this? None!

Anonymous said...

All the other sports opt up for open division. Why wouldn't XC?

Anonymous said...

I love the idea of an open race.

Top 20 teams from the league merge should automatically go top open division. Then qualify to state from there. Top 3 go D1. Places 4-6 go D2, 7-9 in D3, 10-12 in D4. Top 3 teams 600 enrollment or less go D5.

All league champs should be forced to do open. Other than that you can opt out but not advance to state. Other divisions can win their title but can't go to state.

We need the best racing the best!

Anonymous said...

If it's voluntary, only the top team would do it at the section level. Why would any team jeopardize their ability to go to state by going open instead of division? Seems nuts otherwise. Or are we saying teams will be forced to do it. If so, I am dead set against and will use every option including lawsuit to stop it.

Anonymous said...

Yes teams will be forced into it.

In football 4 WCAL teams and league champions move to the open. In all other team sports, I.e. baseball, soccer, softball it's points earned through wins and strength of schedule.

Albert Caruana said...

From my understanding, two sections have proposed having an open division in cross country. The problem was neither had a process which to follow to determine who, why and how teams compete in that division. The other question is would top individuals also compete in that race?

For me, the main reason to have an open division is to determine the NXN qualifiers. With an open division, all the top teams would be able to compete against each other in the same race at the same time. Right now, you have the potential of teams competing against each other with some teams getting the advantage of racing in the morning.

I am certain at some point, there will be an open division in Cross Country in CA but it's not going to be in the near future unless somebody really has a plan and initiates the plan from their own section level.

Anonymous said...

Will the CIF do there work on this proposal in secret like the CCS does, or will they reach out to the coaches, leagues, and teams to understand the impacts and do what is best for the sport? My guess is that the kids come last with the CIF and that changes will just be shoved down our throats.

Albert Caruana said...

Most, if not all CIF proposals, are coach initiated and need to follow a process/protocol. The same goes at the section level. From there it goes to the next level until it is either passed or denied.

Anonymous said...

The CCS changed the track qualifying procedure a few years ago without a league initiative and without much discussion. They recently tabled a proposal to return it back to what it was because the meeting date was changed to accommodate the CIF. Thus the entire section missed its once a year chance to undo something the CCS board did outside the normal protocol. The question remains if the CIF will do something as underhanded to change the XC qualifying/division process with very little input. My guess is it depends on who is pushing it. If it's the SS or Rich Gonzalez, look for the change to be announced later in the season when we are getting ready for state. The amount of input will be based on who benefits.

Anonymous said...

I like the idea of an open division for NXN qualifiers, but anybody who thinks enrollment has no impact on success hasn't taken a moment to look at results from the state meet or any other big meets. If you did a power merge of top enrollments, it would look pretty similar to the regular power merge of fastest teams at the state meet. This is less prevalent on the girls side, but still holds true.

Anonymous said...

Why is NXN all of a sudden more important than CIF? Is this anything other than a recruitment tool for Nike to get their clutches on young athletes? So will all divisions at State be on a rotating time schedule, but the open race will get the same time every year? This seems like a whole lot of trouble when we're already sending the best teams. Is there that much of an uproar over teams being able to race at different times in November in Fresno at CIF? If it's so much more important to cater to the 6-8 teams who can afford it and have the time to train to even be in this conversation then why doesn't Nike just have their own Western Region meet on the same day as CIF? They can invite the top 10 teams and individuals, pay for expenses, shower them in schwag, and see who shows up.

Anonymous said...

Why do top teams want to race each other? The best should compete against the best. That is what this sport is all about.

Anonymous said...

The open division is a fine idea if it is voluntary and meant as a benefit or reward for the top teams, and not as a punishment for programs or leagues because of a perceived advantage.

Anonymous said...

The top teams are forced into the open division in EVERY team sport. If XC is a "team" sport why would this be any different? You think enrollment doesn't effect basketball, baseball, soccer, softball, etc?

Its ok as long as you get to be the big fish in the small pond right?

Coach Tim said...

@8:10 am - The CCS Board changed the track procedure because it wasn't fair - it made different standards for some events than others (b/c lane races can only take 8 to finals). Regarding divisions in XC, what's been reported to us is that there isn't any noise at the state level to change anything in XC, and that it's the only sport that isn't working on something.

Anonymous said...

In my opinion, the CIF should do absolutely nothing to accommodate NXN. It is a for-profit venture of a corporate entity (one which many people oppose on ethical grounds). If Nike wants a better qualifying process, they can come up with one themselves and implement at their own expense.

Anonymous said...

It's not about NXN. It's about having a true state champion. Every team sport has an open division. Every individual sport has no divisions. Which do you prefer? Open or no divisions?

Albert Caruana said...

I think an open division accomplishes several things. #1 is that you can have the top teams racing each other in the same race to determine the auto qualifiers to NXN as well as the potential at-large teams. It will also determine the true California champion. I think they can also have an open division and then divide the rest of the divisions by numbers that are consistent throughout the state. That would mean fair competition in every division including the open.

Anonymous said...

@2:55 fair or not, the CCS did not follow the required procedure, and that is the point. They did what they did behind closed doors and without comment from the coaches or the leagues. Then, when there was a league proposal to unwind their deed, they moved the meeting date at the last minute so as not to take it up. Is that fair?

Anonymous said...

Albert,
But how would that work at the section level? Would there be an open division in each section? What about individuals? Don't get me wrong, I think an opt-in open division is a great idea, but it could easily lead to more "unfairness" than the current system. With that in mind, I would structure it something like this:

- Each section continues to hold championships in their current five divisions (and can qualify teams and individuals to their section meet the same way as they do now)
- Teams and individuals who wish to qualify to the state open division must do the following:
1. Declare before their section championships that they wish to try for the open division
2. Qualify for state in their respective division in their section meet
- If a team/individual qualifies for state and has declared for the open division, then the first non-qualifying team/individual takes the vacated spot in the regular division
- In the case where too many teams/individuals opt in to the open division (now, I can't see this happening, but you have to have a plan for it), spots in the open division are prioritized by placing in the section meets. That is, section champions get in first, runner-ups next, etc.

This way, teams and individuals will pretty much always know right away if they qualified for state. Also, there are no complications of having to have an open division at the section meets. This also insures that all the top teams/individuals actually do get to go to state. If you have an open division at the section meets (and it is filled with the "best" teams in the section), then the first team not to qualify would almost assuredly have qualified in their regular division. In that case, very few teams would risk missing out on state entirely by going for the open division. In addition, you don't have to add any races to the section meets (in fact, the section meets don't have to change at all).

Anonymous said...

I don't know why we are discussing this here. You have no say. The CIF is going to do what it wants. They will not ask us, nor will they do what is right for the sport. They will do what the most powerful influence wants, just like the CCS. There is little doubt that things are always changed, sometimes small incremental changes like the unannounced track qualifying change a few years ago, to benefit the most powerful. If the open division benefits the SS or certain coaches or officials, it will be changed without much discussion. The only way to respond is to fire the board members that vote for changes that hurt the sport.

Albert Caruana said...

The idea of an open division was proposed by the SJS and LA sections (if I remember correctly). The problem was that they didn't have a plan on how to make the it work in terms of qualifying from section, how many compete in state etc.

I know I have said this before but any bylaw changes are initiated by coaches who have to start from their own league first. Once a bylaw change is approved by a league and their ADs, it then moves forward to the section level and beyond if it involves state meet competition. It's a step by step process.

If you as a coach want to change something about the sport (whatever it is), you have to first explain your change and have a plan that makes sense and justify the change from the current format. If you can't do that, then your proposal will not make it very far.

Popular Posts