A flawed qualifying system?

In late May, Penn's Sam Burley ran the third-fastest time in the world in the 800 meters, a 1:45.39, earning him a second-place finish at the NCAA Championships.

Burley's time was also the fastest run by an American this year at the time, and is now second-best in the U.S.

But, under a new NCAA plan, Burley might not have even have competed at the National Championships.

OK, that's probably being a bit melodramatic, but not by that much. The NCAA recently unveiled a plan to scrap the current qualifying system and move into a regional qualifying one.

This could have a huge effect on the elite members of the Penn men's and women's track teams.

"If [regional qualifying] comes through, there will be some changes in our world," Penn men's track coach Charlie Powell said. "But, you just take those as they come.

"There's a good possibility that it's going to go through. They voted for regional qualifying -- now they have to work it out so that it can actually be done."

In the current system, there are two qualifying standards for each event. The first is an automatic standard. For example, in the 800, the auto standard is 1:47.50. If an athlete runs this mark or faster, he or she is in the National Championship meet.

The second is a provisional qualifying standard. In the 800, this is 1:49.00. If an athlete runs this time and is in the top 16

(although this number varies) in the country, then he or she also runs in Nationals.

This system seems to make sense. The athletes who ran the best times get to compete at National Championships.

But, under the new system, it might not be the top athletes. Although no official plan has been laid out, there would be four regions, approximately along the four time zones. Athletes would compete in the Regionals ten days before Nationals, with the top five to eight athletes in each region advancing to the NCAAs.

The NCAA has not made any proposals yet for the implementation of regional qualifying. So far, they've basically just said, "Regional qualifying is coming next season."

The current system has been working fine. There seems to be no need to change it. Additionally, there are some current problems with the few proposals about regional qualifying the NCAA has made.

Under the new system, teams will not be reimbursed for regional meets. That means that these teams will have to pay entrance fees, travel costs and lodging expenses for one more meet during the year.

Forcing schools to pay more for what seems to be a useless change is unnecessary and unfair.

The season will also be lengthened, to perhaps mid-June. While this year's Champs took place from May 29-June 1, next year's Championships could extend into mid-June. That leaves only about two to three months until the start of competition for cross country.

Furthermore, there is an unfair distribution of talent across the country. Just looking at the distance talent, historically the top schools are on the East and West coasts -- Stanford, Villanova, Georgetown, among others. Most of the top runners in Burley's main event, the 800, were on the East coast this year.

"Seven out of the east are in the top-12," Powell said before NCAA Championships this year. "And they're only going to take 5 -- hello?

"You've got to be very, very careful about that."

And so the NCAA should follow Powell's advice about the implementations of the proposals for regional qualifying. While the new system could increase regional competition and force athletes to run their fastest in big meets, the drawbacks right now outweigh the advantages. The NCAA must address some of these flaws in the regional qualifying plan before pushing forward with the idea.

"Regional qualifying as a concept could be very good, but it's how it's implemented," Powell said. "There are going to be very inequitable regions -- the key is to get the best athletes to national championships to go against each other.

"You don't want to hurt anybody or particular group."

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.