Minutes of SCVAL Coaches meeting
Proposed 2002 Track Schedule(s) REVISED from meeting
Next years Spring Breaks are:
FUHSD 4/15 - 4/19
Milpitas 4/15 - 4/19
MtVw/LA 4/15 - 4/19
PAHSD 4/15 - 4/19
LG/S'toga 4/15 - 4/19
St F 3/28 - 4/5
Attendees
All schools in the SCVAL had a coach at the meeting except Milpitas and Mt.View. Lee Volta, the athletic director in charge of track for the SCVAL, was unable to make the meeting.
DeAnza & El Camino League Finals Evaluations
It was noted that Paul Jones did an excellent job of directing the DeAnza finals and received excellent hope from his fellow coaches.
Santa Clara directed the El Camino league finals on the new Santa Clara track in place of Homestead managing the meet. The El Camino coaches wanted to make sure that Steve Filios of St.Francis was thanked for lending them the St.Francis timing system at the last moment.
CCS North Meet/Semifinals/Finals
Thanks to Gunn, Cupertino, St.Francis, Wilcox, Santa Clara, Mt.View, Milpitas, Palo alto, Lynbrook, Los Altos, Saratoga, and Monta Vista for helping out with these meets.
Elimination of the North and South Meets
It was noted that the CCS office may eliminate these meets next year and start with the semifinals. The league coaches were split on whether or not they liked this idea. Thus, the league representatives - Hank Lawson and Walt Van Zant - were directed to split their vote regarding this item at the CCS meeting on 6/6/01.
We then discussed what procedures we wanted to follow if the North and South meets were eliminated.
The coaches voted 12-1 that no wind machine requirement be included in determining what marks would qualify for the CCS semifinals.
The coaches voted that only invitational and league finals marks would count in determining qualifying marks for the CCS semifinals.
The coaches voted that all league winners should also qualify for the CCS semifinals.
The coaches voted that marks do not have to be FAT in order to qualify for the CCS finals. 0.24 seconds should be added to all hand times.
Re-Alignment of Schools
We voted that we desired to have the leagues permanently re-aligned with the FUHSD schools and Saratoga and Los Gatos in one league and the remaining teams in the other league. Hal Daner noted that since the athletic directors had already had their final meeting of the year and the SCVAL Board of Managers will not act on anything without the prior approval of the athletic directors that it was unlikely that this re-alignment would be approved.
In any event, we felt that a memo should be given to the SCVAL Board of Managers explaining why the coaches favored their re-alignment proposal. This memo would include the following reasons:
1) It is extremely difficult to determine the standard upon which to place teams in the strong or weak league.
a) A school could have a strong boys team but a weak girls team. Should we allow the girls to get butchered while the boys are competitive?
b) In determining who should be placed in the strong division, what is more important - dual meet results or league meet results? Some teams with a few good athletes can do very well at the league finals but do poorly in the dual meet competition.
c) Should more weight be given to the results for more than one year in determining who should be in the strong league?
2) It is difficult to prepare a dual meet schedule when there are several different school districts. We have seven different districts.
3) The FUHSD and Los Gatos-Saratoga districts do not have buses. Travel expense would be a lot less if they could compete against schools in their geographic area. In addition, we are requiring young drivers to drive more and more distances, which increases the possibility of them being involved in accidents.
4) Time out of class is an additional issue when traveling 30 minutes or more to a meet site.
If the SCVAL Board of Managers does not follow our primary re-alignment proposal, then we will re-align in accordance with our by-laws. That means that Saratoga will move to the El Camino division and Santa Clara will move to the DeAnza division.
It was proposed that our by-laws be changed so that re-alignment be done every two years rather than every year, beginning after next year, when St.Francis leaves the league. The coaches voted not to make this change at this time.
We discussed whether the by-laws should be changed to give more weight to the varsity teams when determining whether a team should be moved up or down. The coaches voted overwhelmingly to keep the by-laws as they are -- that is, all four divisions will be considered equally when determining team records for purposes of moving up or down.
The coaches voted to change the by-laws so that dual meet and league finals records will be considered equally when determining team records for purposes of moving up or down. The present by-laws use only the league finals results for purposes of determining re-alignment.
By-Law Changes
It has been our practice to allow all schools at least one entrant in each event. However, our by-laws do not reflect this practice. Therefore, we voted to add the following by-law:
“Every team is guaranteed one entrant per event regardless of whether the school has an athlete that meets the standard for the event.”
There is nothing in our by-laws regarding a requirement that a school first enter a varsity girl in an event before they enter a JV girl in the same event. We discussed what are policy should be regarding JV girl entrants and decided to adopt the following by-law:
“If a school has any girls participating in the league finals that have met the qualifying standard for an event, the girl with the best mark must be entered in the event for which the standard has been met before a girl may be entered in the same event for JV girls.”
We discussed whether we should add a requirement to our by-laws that an athlete must compete in at least one meet prior to the league finals in order to be allowed to compete in the league finals. The coaches decided that we would add a requirement that the athlete must compete in at least one SCVAL meet in order to compete in the league finals. We also voted to allow an exception in rare cases if the majority of the coaches approved the entry.
We discussed whether we should add a by-law that unofficial runners could not compete in the league finals. We decided that this by-law would not be necessary as general SCVAL or CIF by-laws forbade this practice.
We discussed whether coaches when preparing their entry marks for the league finals be required to note the date of the mark and the event. This proposal was rejected by the coaches.
We discussed whether we should allow more than three entrants per school in each event at the league finals and decided that a school would be allowed more than three entrants in an event if all of their entrants were in the top 8 of the athletes entered in the event. This applies to varsity, frosh-soph boys, and JV girl competition.
Private Coaches
We discussed this subject for awhile and decided that Hank Lawson would write a memo to the SCVAL Board of Managers that would apprise them of the situation. Here is a copy of Hank’s memo.
BOARD OF MANAGERS proposal
League Event Standards
We agreed to study the league event standards. Ernie Lee, Roberta Chisam, Paul Jones, and Julie Widstrand will get together during the summer and recommend revised standards to us.
Track Honor Coaches
We nominated Willie Harmatz (girls) and Chuck Kappen (boys) to be our CCS honor coach candidates.
League Chairmen
Inasmuch as all other coaches at the meeting declined to be chairmen for the next two years, Walt Van Zant (DeAnza) and Hank Lawson (El Camino) will continue as the league chairmen for the next two years.
Miscellaneous Items
We voted to get approval from our athletic directors to give medals to the first six finishers in each event at the league finals.
We voted to have a perpetual trophy for each division that would be given to the top school each year -- varsity boys, varsity girls, frosh-soph boys, and JV girls.
Agenda For 6/4/01 Post Season Track Meeting
I. Division Meet Evaluations
- What was good about the management of the meet?
b) What wasn’t so good?
II. CCS Trials/Semi-Finals/Finals
- Thanks to the schools that helped with these meets
Elimination of North & South Meets
Board of Managers will probably eliminate the subsection meets.
Qualification to semifinals will be based upon FAT times at any time during the season.
Suggestions
- Should there be a requirement of a wind machine for sprint/LJ/TJ marks?
Should we just count Invita-tional and league finals marks?
Should FAT requirement be just for sprints and LJ/TJ?
Should the winner of each heat in the semifinals automatically qualify for the CCS finals or should we just take the 8 fastest times?
Any other suggestions or comments.
III. Re-alignment of Schools
- As per the By-Laws, who goes up and who goes down is based solely upon performances at the league finals.
Based upon this standard, Saratoga goes down and Santa Clara goes up?
Do we want to change the re-alignment rules for years after 2002 so that re-alignment will be for 2 years
If so, should the movement be based upon a 2-year record?
When determining team records for purposes of the re-alignment, should more weight be given to the varsity team records?
Should the dual meet and league finals be given equal weight when determining the league record? As of now, the dual meet record is not a consideration.
Should we try to re-align again under our first option of last year. That is, the Fremont Union High School district teams and Los Gatos and Saratoga will join together to form one league and the remaining schools will be in another league.
IV League Finals By-Laws
- Should we add a by-law that each school will be allowed at least one entrant in each event. Presently, our by-laws are silent on this subject.
There is nothing in our by-laws regarding whether a team must first enter a varsity girl in an event before being allowed to enter a JV girl in that event. Do we want to put such a requirement in our by-laws. There follows a suggested by-law by Ernie Lee.
Every team is guaranteed one entrant per event regardless of mark.
You must enter your TOP girl in varsity before you can enter anyone in the JV UNLESS you have no one making the varsity standard. In that case, you just have to enter one girl in varsity.
Are there any other suggestions regarding the JV girl entry rule?
One coach has suggested that we add a by-law that an athlete must compete in at least one meet in order to be allowed to run in the league finals. What do the coaches think of this suggestion.
One coach has suggestged that we add a by-law that no unofficial runners be allowed to run in the league finals. Is this a necessary addition to the by-laws?
Inasmuch as the DeAnza league has a standard set for each event, should we add a requirement in the by-laws that the coach note on the entry the date of the mark and the name of the meet? As an example for a mile entrant – "4:35 in dual meet against Gunn."
V Should We Allow Schools More Than Three Entrants Per Event at the League Finals?
Will this allow some schools to dominate the meet?
This will allow the best athletes to compete at the varsity level.
c) If yes, what should be the standard?
- Average of the 6th place finish for the last 3 years?
Could we just use the CCS at-large standard or, if the rules are changed, the standard necessary to get into the CCS semifinals?
iii) Should marks be only those recorded at
invitationals?
iv) Should sprint times be required to be FAT at invitationals?
v) If we go to standards as a requirement to get into the CCS semifinals, a team could be limited to three entrants at the league finals but still get more than three entrants at the league finals.
vi) Other suggestions.
VI Should the league have a policy regarding private coaches?
VII Honor Coaches Nominations
VIII By-Law Change Suggestions Other Than Re-Alignment and League Finals By-Laws
IX CCS Evaluations Meeting
- It will be held at the CCS office on 6/5/01
b) Any suggestions for this meeting?
X Other
Reasons For Getting Rid of Strong/Weak League For Track
It is extremely difficult to determine the standard upon which to place teams
in the strong or weak league.
A school could have a strong boys team but a weak girls team. Sould we allow
the girls to get butchered while the boys are competitive?
b) In determining who should be placed in the strong division, what is more
important - dual meet results or league meet results? Some teams with a few
good athletes can do very well at the league finals but do poorly in the dual
meet competition.
Should more weight be given to the varsity results rather than to
the overall results when determing who should be placed in the stong league?
Should more weight be given to the results for more than one year in
determining who should be in the strong league?
It is difficult to prepare a dual meet schedule when there are several
different school districts. We have seven different districts -- the
FUHSD, the SCUHSD, the Los Gatos/Saratoga district, the Milpitas district,
the Mt.View-Los Altos district the Palo Alto district, and St. Francis.
It is nice to have long-time rivalries. This is difficult to have when
schools keep changing leagues.
It is nice that the weak schools can compete against each other and one
can say that it is the champion of the league. But, how about the feelings of
the good team in the strong league that goes winless. Their morale gets destroyed.
The FUHSD and Los Gatos-Saratoge districts do not have buses. Travel expense
would be a lot less if they could compete against schools in their geogrphic area.