Saturday, November 26, 2016

California State Cross Country Meet

The moment we have all been waiting for is here.

You can get live results from today's meet at the link below. You can also get live updates on your phone. Directions on same page.
http://www.rtspt.com/events/cif/xc2016/

If you have any updates that you would like to post, feel free to do it in the comment section below. Following the meet, I will post my usual data with the top NorCal teams and individuals as well as all the podium finishers. 

Best of luck to all competing schools today.

36 comments:

Anonymous said...

Is there a live stream for the meet?

Anonymous said...

AWESOME Duo: SJND's Cooper Teare and Kiera Marshall - D5 Individual State CHAMPS!!
First time in SJND's school history. Congratulations to both and to the rest of the
teams.

Anonymous said...

Congrats to the Aptos girls,Davis Girls and Campolindo boys, only medal winning teams north of Fresno

Gregorio Denny said...

Luis wins the day. Congrats to him, his family, Armijo, his coaches and dimples. WTG Armijo!

Anonymous said...

Where is Luis going to college?

Albert Caruana said...

I may have missed another team but Nueva (San Mateo) from CCS finished in 3rd place in the girls Division V race, 1 point ahead of Lick-Wilmerding.

I will post all the NorCal individuals that finished in the top 10. I am sure others noticed that the top 3 males in the Division I race were all from NorCal. I am certain that has never happened before.

Feel free to add other notable achievements below.

Anonymous said...

Even though she's a SoCal runner, I just want to acknowledge that Claudia Lane's time of 16:45 is AMAZING! Only Julia Stamps and Sarah Baxter have EVER run faster at Woodward Park.

Are Olivia and Fiona O'Keeffe the only pair of sisters (or siblings) who have each won a CA cross-country individual state championship?

Albert Caruana said...

Two excellent points.

That is correct on Claudia Lane's time. Amazing.

The sibling victories is an interesting one. I will have to go back and check. It's possible but there can't be too many that have achieved. Either way, that is fantastic and very unexpected for Olivia.

Anonymous said...

I'm going with Ryan Hall and Chad Hall on this one. In case people forgot they are brothers from Big Bear High School, State CC champs.

Hank said...

Some fun stats... Here is the best Coed Scoring (3M+2F and then 2M+3F)

http://lynbrooksports.prepcaltrack.com/ATHLETICS/XC/2016/statcoed.htm

Then here is the scoring using only NorCal teams:

http://lynbrooksports.prepcaltrack.com/ATHLETICS/XC/2016/statncal.htm

more to come...

hank

Hank said...

And here are the CCS only results:

http://lynbrooksports.prepcaltrack.com/ATHLETICS/XC/2016/statccs.htm

and the NCS only results:

http://lynbrooksports.prepcaltrack.com/ATHLETICS/XC/2016/statncs.htm

let me know if there are any other types of results you'd like to see.

hank

Jackson8or said...

Congratulations Pilots, especially Cooper and Kiera. I would have loved to have been there, but what's important is these fantastic achievements.

"Don't go around saying the world owes you a living. The world owes you nothing. It was here first."
-Mark Twain

Anonymous said...

Can someone make the case that the CCS underperformed overall because they have 2 weeks between section and state, where most other sections only have 1 week between?

Albert Caruana said...

I think you can make a case for lots of NorCal teams that under performed at the meet and not just CCS teams. Some had a two week cushion and some had one. Bottom line is we have to run better at state.

Hank said...

More "stuff"...

SoCal only results:

http://lynbrooksports.prepcaltrack.com/ATHLETICS/XC/2016/statscal.htm

and then I took out all Seniors and re-ran for 2017 State results with 2016 9-11:

http://lynbrooksports.prepcaltrack.com/ATHLETICS/XC/2016/stat2017.htm

hank

Anonymous said...

Any chance they'd ever move it up a week? The vacation and Black Friday traffic make the whole thing an almost unbearable ordeal. If the weather is bad like yesterday, forget it. I just think an hours long car ride in some of the worst holiday traffic is a really poor way to end the season. I can't even imagine what it's must be like to have to drive back to SD.

Albert Caruana said...

The CA state XC meet has always been on Thanksgiving weekend. I don't think the date will ever change since students do not have to miss any school for the meet. It's a great event and the few negatives that you mentioned due to the date do not outweigh the many positives.

Anonymous said...

Albert, do you see any Sections/Divisions gaining/losing slots for next year?

Albert Caruana said...

Good question and I don't know. Last year, there were absolutely no changes for the first time ever. Perhaps the divisions have reached that point where there is no movement possible. I know the SS is capped at 7 teams per divisions which means they can't take any more spots. That leaves the other sections fighting for the other extra spots outside of their two automatic bids they receive.

I will see if I can find out from the CIF office.

pmccrystle said...

Just a quick perusal would suggest that CCS would lose it's 3rd spot in DIII, and perhaps San Diego or North Coast might pick up a 4th spot...SI was in the top 10 2 years ago, and in that time San Diego has had 5 top ten spots, and NCS has had 5; I believe the rubric for figuring out extra State Meet berths has to do with top 10 finishes over a 3 year period...right?

Albert Caruana said...

Patrick, you are correct on the top 10 finishes the past 3 years. I think it's just a matter of time when CCS loses another spot at state especially in Division III. I looked at the divisions in CCS and every school in Division II would be in Division III in SS and every school but 5 in Division III would be Division IV schools in SS. It's a very unfair competition at state but I don't see CCS changing the divisions anytime soon (like NCS did last year). The bottom line is that we are going to have to get better at the state meet if we are going to at the very least keep the auto bids we have.

Whenever the divisional changes have been brought up at the CCS meeting, the reply is usually that we have equal competition over 5 divisions at our section level. The problem is our state meet performances effects us at the section level significantly.

Anonymous said...

"It's a very unfair competition at state but I don't see CCS changing the divisions anytime soon (like NCS did last year). "

Only slightly. If all the schools ran in the southern section divisions, CCS would probably be able to keep 3 spots, but would be hard pressed to ever get more as the other "smaller" sections would be more competitive in fighting for the extra spots as well. Even this year Willow Glen still wouldn't be top 10 and St. Francis maybe squeaking in at 10th (vs. 12th in DII).

Note that pretty much all of the "small" DI teams this year would have placed worse in DII. For example, Jesuit was 8th in DI and would have been 13th or 14th in DII. And all three division (DI, DII, and DIII) had pretty similar top 10 teams. The real fall off in boys teams is in DIV.

Oh, by the way, it's number of top 10 finishes in the past 4 years.

Albert Caruana said...

I believe it's over last 3 years but will confirm shortly.

In regards to the results for this year's state meet, I think you can ask many coaches from Northern California and they will tell you that their teams did not run well. When that happens, it doesn't really matter your division.

I don't believe the divisions are going to change dramatically for the Northern California sections so we have to compete better at the state meet in our respective divisions.

Albert Caruana said...

4 it is.

"Past 4 years. Or, more precisely, for next year, 2017, the years in the calculation are 2016, 2015, 2014, and 2013."

Ernie Lee, former Gunn HS coach.

Anonymous said...

Should we move the CCS final to the week before the state meet so the kids are in race shape and not "over rested" like they seemed to be this year?

Albert Caruana said...

This has been brought up at the CCS meeting before. For one, the next weekend has had rain often including this year. The NCS uses that date and you can go back to see how many times it has rained on them. I personally think that two weeks is an advantage for CCS. You have an opportunity to run hard at CCS and then regroup for state. You have time to overcame any sickness or injuries. If you look at colleges, they don't race that much and that seems to work for them. If you move the meet back one week later, you then have a two week break before CCS and then are the kids going to be "over rested" for the meet that takes you to the state meet?

Anonymous said...

12.49pm you used a small sample size and example but following that....I think Jesuit would win the state title last year in DII (just based on my memory of the merge). I would take a state title over losing a few places the next year in DII. If the goal is success at the state level...and just looking at Jesuit...seems like it is clear. I know the other factors but this thread is on the state meet.

Anonymous said...

You are right I sort of cherry picked the Jesuit example. My point is that if we go back to fixed enrollment divisions for the entire state (remember, it was like that for many years and the reason it was changed was that there were so many complaints about it), it will certainly have significant implications at the section level, but also will have very distorted effects at the state level as long as the baseline entries for each section remain the same and the cap at 7 teams per section in any division stays the same.

In other words, if you want to make the state meet "fair for all" by having everyone compete in the same enrollment divisions, you really have to drop the baseline for some sections in DI to one and have the max increased if not eliminated. Otherwise you will get into the situation where spots go "un-earned". Also, you may get into the situation where there is only one school in a section in a particular division (this could easily happen in the Northern section).

In reality, the easiest way to solve this is to reduce the number of divisions. That way, the section meets can still have competitive equity. Would make for a great state meet as well.

Anonymous said...

CCS Should move a week back. The majority of teams have to peak for CCS just to try and make it to State. Unless you are the 1% the 2 week break is too much and you go flat.

As for the enrollment issue I thought the coaches and league reps get to decide what to do? Look at football, they now have 13 divisions at the State level. Additionally in volleyball teams that compete in the open at CCS compete can move to divisional competition after the CCS tournament.

Why does CCS not hold an open division in cross country then pick the teams from there? If we have 12 qualifiers D1 thru 4 the top 12 teams make it. Then you are placed in your division based on your enrollment. Two biggest schools in top 12 go D1. Next 3 go D2, etc. Top 20 teams from their league meets advance to the Open. Teams can opt down for a CCS division title but can't make State. Teams that want open can opt up.

Time for a change. I know the CCS office and some of the older coaches don't like change but it is time. Time for the best to race the best. If the top 20 teams race at CCS it will prepare you better for a State meet like race.

Anonymous said...

"Why does CCS not hold an open division in cross country then pick the teams from there? If we have 12 qualifiers D1 thru 4 the top 12 teams make it. Then you are placed in your division based on your enrollment. Two biggest schools in top 12 go D1. Next 3 go D2, etc"

That won't help CCS at the state meet as it will still force "smaller" schools to compete up at the state meet as the two largest CCS schools in the top 12 are almost never both true DI sized. The way an open division would work is if the qualifying teams are placed directly into their enrollment divisions. Thus, CCS might only get 1 to state in DI, but maybe 6 in DIII. Sort of how if a smaller San Francisco team makes the state meet it is placed in it's enrollment division, not always DI.

If we want to keep 5 divisions, I would suggest keeping DIV and DV strictly enrollment based (and here we could go to statewide numbers). Combining 4 divisions probably creates too large of a race. Then for the rest of the schools, they can choose to go into the "state division" or the "non-state" division. The top 9 teams in the "state" division qualify for the state meet and then are placed in whatever division their enrollment gives. The "non-state" division still gets a CCS champion, but no state qualifiers. It does reduce the number of races at CCS, but it creates a much more competitive race.

Anonymous said...

You have 5 races:
Open D1-D2-D3. (Top 2 teams in each league finals plus those who opt up). Top 9 teams qualify for State based on Division allotment.

D1-D2 (non qualifying divisions, similar to how non-open teams in football do not qualify to move beyond CCS)

D4 (0-1500*) Qualifies teams determined by CIF.
D5 (0-600). Qualifies teams determined by CIF.

*Approximate number based on SS and NCS

Though I still think D4 should be up un the open too. Those teams in D4 are always in the top 15 at the end of the year.

Anonymous said...

This has been one of the more interesting comment threads in awhile. This needs its own post at the top.

Anonymous said...

What about top individuals on bad teams? Do they race in the OPEN race and the team races in the "consolation" race?

Anonymous said...

Good question... obviously something that needs to be worked out. Ideas?

Anonymous said...

no ideas yet.

Albert Caruana said...

It's easy complaining and pointing out a flaw in the system. The hard part is figuring out a new system that will improve on the current format. Until you can figure out the new format, no changes will be made.

Popular Posts