I have a virtual scoring analysis of CIS vs NCAA grads for the years 2002 to 2008 prepared by Ian Reid. Here is last year's post:
"Annually for the past several years I've scored the National cross-country championships as a CIS vs NCAA meet. For the first few years, other than 1997, the CIS grads contingent thoroughly dominated. Then in 2004 the tide started turning and the NCAAers started winning several of the meets.
I usually score 6 teams:
CIS (any current and former CIS athletes)
NCAA (any current and former NCAA athletes)
CIS_alum (CIS alumni)
NCAA_alum (NCAA alumni)
CIS_current (current CIS athletes)
NCAA_current (current NCAA athletes)
This year I've dropped the last four teams as I can only find two current NCAA athletes (Sunseri and Karanja) and only three of four current CIS athletes scattered down the field (such that they don't contribute to the overall CIS team score).
Results from Saturday are a sound win for the NCAAers:
NCAA 19 (1, 2, 3, 5, 8 (9, 11))
CIS 40 (4, 6, 7, 10, 13 (15, 16))
Note: I count NAIA teams as CIS since they are kids staying in Canada and athletes who've done time in both systems usually get counted as CIS (especially when their most recent time was in Canada) eg Thorson.
Points up for possible discussion:
- What happened to current university athletes? Is this just an anomalous year or will both CIS and NCAA current participants essentially disappear from Nationals? (I seem to recall that one of the reasons for moving the date back a week in 2003 or 2004 was to encourage more NCAAers to come home for the race.)
- Is the NCAA team winning a longer term trend as well? I'd suggest one of the reasons might be a somewhat improved environment for the 2nd tier grads who don't have a full time contract waiting (ala Bairu, Sullivan or Brannen). Having a Speed River type operation available might help provide the situation for some to continue their development (Milne and Watson for example). Canadian grads at that level often are already in such a program tied in with their university team (Guelph/SR or UBC/Kajaks for Schiebler and company) so they aren't completely 'lost' upon finishing school.
Recent scorings can be found at:
2007
www.mailman.srv.ualberta.ca/mailman/private/track-canada/2007-December/005370.htmlCIS: 1, 2, 5, 7, 9, (10) = 24
NCAA: 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, (14, 19) = 33
CIS_now: 17, 22, 26, 32, 41 = 138
NCAA_now: 19, 23, 30(?), 35, ?? = ??
2006
www.mailman.srv.ualberta.ca/mailman/private/track-canada/2006-December/004841.html22 - CIS (2, 3, 4, 5, 8)
24 - CIS_grad (2, 3, 4, 5, 10)
26 - NCAA (1, 2, 4, 7, 11) (or 54 if I use (1, 7, 13, 14, 19))
26 - NCAA_grad (1, 2, 4, 7, 11) (or 54 if I use (1, 7, 13, 14, 19))
N/A - NCAA_now (I can only detect 24 as a representative currently
running down south - big drop off as they scored well last year).
2005
www.mailman.srv.ualberta.ca/mailman/private/track-canada/2005-December/003745.html19 - NCAA (1, 2, 3, 6, 7, (10))
37 - NCAA_alum (2, 6, 7, 10, 12 (14))
37 - CIS (4, 5, 8, 9, 11 (17)) (couldn't quite fudge them enough)
54 - CIS_alum (4, 5, 9, 18, 19 (21))
90 - NCAA_current (1, 3, 13, 30, 43)
94 - CIS_current (8, 11, 17, 27, 31 (32))
2004
www.mailman.srv.ualberta.ca/mailman/private/track-canada/2004-December/001707.html18 - NCAA (1, 2, 4, 5, 6, (7, 8))
27 - NCAA_alum (2, 4, 5, 7, 9 (16, 18))
49 - CIS (3, 10, 11, 12, 13, (14, 15))
49 - CIS_alum (3, 10, 11, 12, 13 (14, 15))
91 - NCAA_now (1, 6, 8, 27, 49)
131 - CIS_now (20, 21, 25, 31, 34 (39, 41))
2003
www.mailman.srv.ualberta.ca/pipermail/track-canada/2003-November/000092.htmlCIS 24 (2, 3, 4, 6, 9 (10, 15))
NCAA 31 (1, 5, 6, 8, 11 (12, 13)
CIS_Grad 37 (2, 4, 6, 10, 15)
NCAA_Grad 44 (5, 6, 8, 12, 13 (14))
CIS_Now 100 (3, 9, 25, 28, 35)
NCAA_Now 113 (1, 11, 23, 36, 42)"
Here are the results from 2002:
CAN 24 (2, 4, 5, 6, 7, (8, 9))
CIS 34 (4, 5, 6, 8, 11, (15, 16))
CAN_grad 41 (2, 7, 9, 10, 13, (17, 18))
NCAA 48 (1, 2, 12, 14, 19, (22, 23))
NCAA_grad 70 (2, 12, 14, 19, 23, (25, 26))
NCAA_current incomplete (1, 22, ??)
