Tiffin Carnival

Lancermania

Lancermania

Lancers lead the way!
1322 boys ran in this meet. Is it the biggest of the year? Will any of the winning team make it to the podium come the state meet?

DI - Westerville North
D2 - Bay Village Bay
D3 - Ottawa Hills

What is D3 Minister doing winning the DI division girls race? Are they the best in Ohio regardless of division?
 
Last edited:
 
Is there a history of Tiffin winners making podium?

Bay looks legit, but Boardman is a much better measuring stick than Tiffin for D2.

I would not bet against Minster girls.
 
Lancermania said:
1322 boys ran in this meet. Is it the biggest of the year? Will any of the winning team make it to the podium come the state meet?

DI - Westerville North
D2 - Bay Village Bay
D3 - Ottawa Hills

What is D3 Minister doing winning the DI division girls race? Are they the best in Ohio regardless of division?
Click to expand...
Is Tiffin the biggest meet of the year? Probably not. Boardman had over 1800 boys compete in the HS races last year.

Will any of the winning teams make it to the podium come the state meet? Maybe.

What is D3 Minster doing winning the DI girls race? Nothing new.

Is Minster girls the best team in Ohio regardless of division? Minster was not the best girls team at Tiffin. See Lexington.
 
Mr. Slippery said:
Is Tiffin the biggest meet of the year? Probably not. Boardman had over 1800 boys compete in the HS races last year.

Will any of the winning teams make it to the podium come the state meet? Maybe.

What is D3 Minster doing winning the DI girls race? Nothing new.

Is Minster girls the best team in Ohio regardless of division? Minster was not the best girls team at Tiffin. See Lexington.
Click to expand...
I looked at Lexington and they're slightly better than Minster by one point under both my methods. IMHO it's too close to call.

1. Let's assume Minster didn't run DI but Lexington did. Lexington's times placed in the DI meet total 75 while Minster total was 76
2, Let's compare the times of both in DI. Lexington has 17 after the top three (2,5,10) and Minster 29 (7,10,12) after their first three for a twelve point lead. Then Lexington gets 58 (21,37) from the last two while Minster 47 (19,28) to cut the twelve point lead down to 1.
 
Last edited:
Lancermania said:
What is D3 Minister doing winning the DI division girls race?
Click to expand...

Just one opinion, but I think teams should only run and be permitted to run in their assigned division. Can a DI team move down? No. What if a program the size of Mason is running their 3rd or 4th JV squad? No. Can a really talented DI girls team run DIII boys? No. By not allowing larger schools trying to get their program going or running a JV team to move down is an indication that all smaller schools are inferior? It could be for other reasons as stated in this thread, but it always appears to many that a team moving up divisions is trying to show how good they are against larger divisions. Where are they during a down year (although in this case Minster doesn't really have a down year)?

As a sport, we whine about the need for more divisions on a regular basis, but allowing schools to hop around may show outsiders that we really don't care or respect divisions, nor need them?

Thoughts?
 
Lancermania said:
I looked at Lexington and they're slightly better than Minster by one point under both my methods. IMHO it's too close to call.

1. Let's assume Minster didn't run DI but Lexington did. Lexington's times placed in the DI meet total 75 while Minster total was 76
2, Let's compare the times of both in DI. Lexington has 17 after the top three (2,5,10) and Minster 29 (7,10,12) after their first three for a twelve point lead. Then Lexington gets 58 (21,37) from the last two while Minster 47 (19,28) to cut the twelve point lead down to 1.
Click to expand...
I suppose that's 1 way to do it.

If I insert Lexington's times into the DI race and rescore it, Lexington beats Minster 85-91. If I insert Minster into the DII race and rescore it, Lexington beats Minster 95-110.
 
Newton's Third said:
Just one opinion, but I think teams should only run and be permitted to run in their assigned division. Can a DI team move down? No. What if a program the size of Mason is running their 3rd or 4th JV squad? No. Can a really talented DI girls team run DIII boys? No. By not allowing larger schools trying to get their program going or running a JV team to move down is an indication that all smaller schools are inferior? It could be for other reasons as stated in this thread, but it always appears to many that a team moving up divisions is trying to show how good they are against larger divisions. Where are they during a down year (although in this case Minster doesn't really have a down year)?

As a sport, we whine about the need for more divisions on a regular basis, but allowing schools to hop around may show outsiders that we really don't care or respect divisions, nor need them?

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Where I disagree is that there are a ton of meets to choose from and teams should pick meets more wisely.

Meet management decides how teams are placed. There are meets that run all divisions together. You can run your team in the JV or open races. You choose a Tiffin meet knowing how it's done. If you don't like it, there are other meets to choose from that might be better suited for your team.

I know for a team like Woodridge, they evaluate meets for the entire program MS and HS, boys and girls. Every year, it gets looked at.


I agree that a school that is D1 but admittedly not very good at CC, should be able to move down to a lesser race. They do have their choice of meets though and could choose to go to others that would put them against appropriate competition.
 
psycho_dad said:
1- teams should pick meets more wisely.
2- Meet management decides how teams are placed
3- I agree that a school that is D1 but admittedly not very good at CC, should be able to move down to a lesser race.
4-They do have their choice of meets though and could choose to go to others that would put them against appropriate competition.
Click to expand...
1-I agree. That goes for teams looking to move up divisions as well. I don't fault them in any way, but think they should assess which races meet their needs within their division and construct their schedule accordingly.
2-Yes, some meets do not allow teams moving up. Meet management has a responsibility to the overall sport ahead of individual team wants & needs.
3-I do not feel anyone should move from their assigned division. A struggling DI can run JV or find a meet that fits their needs. A superior small school can seek out races that do not run separate divisions.
4-I agree. See point #3.
 
Newton's Third said:
1-I agree. That goes for teams looking to move up divisions as well. I don't fault them in any way, but think they should assess which races meet their needs within their division and construct their schedule accordingly.
2-Yes, some meets do not allow teams moving up. Meet management has a responsibility to the overall sport ahead of individual team wants & needs.
3-I do not feel anyone should move from their assigned division. A struggling DI can run JV or find a meet that fits their needs. A superior small school can seek out races that do not run separate divisions.
4-I agree. See point #3.
Click to expand...
All other sports allow schools to play whomever they want. Divisions only really matter for OHSAA tournament time. CC is unique in how invites are run. It's really a meet management thing and relying on coaches to make better schedules. I bet half the coaches don't put much time into it.

A concern of mine is what football has done to conferences. I spoke with some people yesterday and they are having problems with all their sports because everything is geared to football.
 
Last edited:
The reason some d3 schools jumped up to D1 was the schedule change more than anything as D1 this year ran first races of the morning. Minster was not the only one to move up, there were 11 others that did so. Top 2 teams were both d3.
There were 3900 entries for Tiffin this year compared to over 6500 the year before covid. The seneca meet has hurt their numbers but it is starting to come back up as we only had 3500 last year. They eliminated a lot of the races and made it a much shorter meet.
 
Not sure of many other than what we time and have heard from other timers.
Year - Meet - # of entries
2023 - Tiffin - 3900
2022 - Tiffin - 3500
2019 - Tiffin - 6800
2018 - Tiffin - 7100
2023 - Mason - 3000 (2 days)
2022 - Mason - 3100
2019 - Mason - 3400
2023 - Seneca - 1800??
2019 - Watkins - 2800??
2023 - Cedarville - 1775(as of now)
2019 - Cedarville - 2400
2023 - Boardman - 4489 (as of now)
2023 - Centerville Night lights - 2639 (as of now)
2023 - Troy Twilight - 2261 (as of now)
2019 - Troy - 1200
 
I would like to see a system that disregards school sizes and moves teams based on success, like they do in European soccer. Instead of realignment of divisions based upon population, they realign based on how successful a team was in the tournament the last two years. Then struggling D1 schools would be moved down to more competitive positions for them while better smaller schools would have the opportunity to race the best competition at the end of the season.
 
PatHelgerman said:
I would like to see a system that disregards school sizes and moves teams based on success, like they do in European soccer. Instead of realignment of divisions based upon population, they realign based on how successful a team was in the tournament the last two years. Then struggling D1 schools would be moved down to more competitive positions for them while better smaller schools would have the opportunity to race the best competition at the end of the season.
Click to expand...
Minster vs Mason at the state meet? Nah... I like it how it is. Teams can choose whatever invites they want for 8 or 9 weeks. They can go after the toughest teams in the state or run against similar teams. Size doesn't matter. We shouldn't punish teams for success. The OHSAA has divisions and they are based on a specific criteria. It's not subjective. Adding success to the mix is subjective IMO.
 
PatHelgerman said:
I would like to see a system that disregards school sizes and moves teams based on success, like they do in European soccer. Instead of realignment of divisions based upon population, they realign based on how successful a team was in the tournament the last two years. Then struggling D1 schools would be moved down to more competitive positions for them while better smaller schools would have the opportunity to race the best competition at the end of the season.
Click to expand...
PatHelgerman, I think this is a great idea. Why not have the best compete against the best? I think the reason there are divisions based on enrollment is that usually, not always, but usually there would be a higher probablility for a larger enrollment shcool to have a group of faster runners. But if there is a small school that happens to have really fast runners, why not have them compete against all the other schools with fast runners, large medium or small schools. Just forget about enrollment. Have all the fastest race against each other, the mediums against each other, and the slowest race against each other.

At the end of the season, the bottom teams from the Division I district race would drop to Division II for the next season, and that same number of teams at the top of Division II would move up to Division I. Same thing with the bottom of Division II and the top of Division III. After a few years the divisions would be sorted based on team performance rather than just the size of the school, which sounds great to me.

I'm curious about others thoughts on this.
 
Bookie31 said:
PatHelgerman, I think this is a great idea. Why not have the best compete against the best? I think the reason there are divisions based on enrollment is that usually, not always, but usually there would be a higher probablility for a larger enrollment shcool to have a group of faster runners. But if there is a small school that happens to have really fast runners, why not have them compete against all the other schools with fast runners, large medium or small schools. Just forget about enrollment. Have all the fastest race against each other, the mediums against each other, and the slowest race against each other.

At the end of the season, the bottom teams from the Division I district race would drop to Division II for the next season, and that same number of teams at the top of Division II would move up to Division I. Same thing with the bottom of Division II and the top of Division III. After a few years the divisions would be sorted based on team performance rather than just the size of the school, which sounds great to me.

I'm curious about others thoughts on this.
Click to expand...
I think for invites, this idea is fantastic.

For an actual OHSAA tournament... this is a horrible idea, for every sport. If you are a fan of cross country then this idea would send you into shock because it would kill the sport. On the surface this sounds like a great idea, good teams face good teams and bad teams face bad teams. Makes sense. Except for the fact these are almost all public schools. They can't control who walks through their halls or what their population is. That's the whole point for having divisions. What happens when you have a D3 school that has a really good season and wins state so they move up to D2 then the next year they get slaughtered because all the good runners graduated. The whole point of enrollment-based divisions is because you are supposed to face schools in a similar man-power based situation as yourself.

If you want the best to face the best then just scrap divisions and have just one giant division with every single school in the state in it. It's what Indiana does. But that's a horrible idea too...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top