Originally posted by DAHILL
Cant agree with you in track either... Grissom High in Huntsville is a prime example.... They have about 100 people on their track team. They put 4 people in every event. Wont win NOTHING, but still win state every year.
Actually, I'm more adamant about it in track.
A small school can have one stellar athlete who wins his event at state...but that's the only points his team gets, and it's all good. Hell...that's kinda like in the Olympics!
Well...my school was a track POWERHOUSE in the MIDWEST (not just in Indiana). Gary Roosevelt High School won state from 1980 to 1989...and one year, they won state with only
FOUR people!!!
No it wasn't a low scoring meet...it's just they kicked azz in the sprints, hurdles and relays. With There were times when our boys AND girls won state....against those HUGE schools in Indianapolis.
When our boys streak faded, another Gary school picked up where they left off...for a minute.
But with track being more of an individual sport, more of the focus is placed on excelling in your specific events.
Illinois was kickin' butt too, but I noticed that they had 2 classes: Class A and Class AA. It was kinda weird to see the Class A champ in the 100M run a 10.97, but seeing the
5TH place sprinter in AA run a
10.8. :lol:
It's almost not fair for someone to not be nearly as fast as you be declared "champion", but you better that person and STILL not placing. That aspect is what bothers me about classes
But I do feel you on the Grissom thing. Valparaiso High School was KNOWN for having a million people on their team and placing high at state. It's all about the points, so I can't fault them for that. But aye...you don't say nothing when the US squads have a lot of people in every event, do you?
High school track is a perfect example of my point.