Is the NCAA Qualifying System Flawed?

I have a problem with the way the NCAA qualifies its athletes, particularly in the sprints, to the next rounds. They decided to take the top 3 in each heat and advance the next 6 times to the semifinals at the 2008 NCAA Track & Field Championships. This rule has been around for the longest, and I've continually despised the NCAA for implementing it. Think about it, what if all 3 of those athletes in one heat aren't faster than 1 athlete who placed 4th in his heat? What happens when athletes with faster times than those who place 1st-3rd in their respective heats don't qualify? It takes a toll on the morale of the athletes and the quality of the competition. The old fashioned "let everybody run and take the fastest _ times overall" was the best method introduced, but they stick to one with gaping flaws. I just don't understand why they feel this the best way to run the meets, especially the major ones where the more quality the competition the better the athletes perform. It isn't fair to the athletes who make it, and definitely unfair to those who should have made it. Let me know what you think.

~TrkFeen