Despite a great performance at regionals, it's become increasingly obvious that UW is vulnerable this year. Villanova's six and seven are stronger and more dependable than Washington's. If Kailey Campbell's fantastic performance this weekend proves to be a fluke, the Huskies could fall.
Definitely vulnerable.
If they run like they did at Regionals, they are unbeatable. If one runner falters, their lack of depth could make it close. If they run like they did at Pac-10's, they could easily lose.
That being said, they are still the favorite, as they could put 5 in the top 20 at Nationals.
They're not that vulnerable
I've thought the Huskies have looked beatable all season. If they make any mistakes in Terre Haute, Sheila Reid and the Wildcats will be there to pick up the pieces.
I don't think UW has to run anything exceptional to win at Nationals. By putting their best 7 out there on the course ~ they can run steady and win. If 5 of them have their best race of the year (peak just right), then it's over. Three in the top 10 & 2 more in the top 20 would be hard to beat.
The same for Stanford's mens team. Incredible up front with there 5th guy getting closer each meet. Hard to beat, although Okie St will make a run at them on the second 5k.
Can't wait until Monday!
Taking the data from the other thread they have a 5-woman team at the top with Campbell, Follett and Babcock the 'weakest' (except for Saylor, who was only listed once). Having those runners as the weak ones is a pretty good. Who, beyond Saylor, would be 6/7? :
Schaaf (UW) 16:31
Follett (UW) 16:33
Lawrence (UW) 16:36
Babcock (UW) 16:39
Saylor (UW) 17:12
Schaaf (UW) 20:29 - white
Follett (UW) 20:38 - white
Babcock (UW) 20:38 - white
Campbell (UW) 21:03 - white
Lawrence (UW) - didn't race
Schaaf (UW) 19:46
Lawrence (UW) 19:49
Babcock (UW) 19:59
Follett (UW) 20:08
Campbell (UW) 20:32
Schaaf (UW) 20:42
Lawrence (UW) 20:59
Campbell (UW) 21:00
Follett (UW) 21:03
Babcock (UW) 21:13
They've got true frosh Lindsay Flanagan and redshirt frosh Allison Linnell. Both are decent but would have to race out of their minds to beat any of the usual top 5. Saylor had a better year last year when she was 41st at nationals, only 6 seconds behind Villanova's current #2 Marino.
Allison Linnell was UW's #5 on multiple occasions this year. She did not run regionals, but she will be racing nationals, along with Saylor and the same top 5 from regionals.
That top 7 is about as deep as any team in the country could be.
Both UW and Villanova are great pack-running teams with their packs at the front of the fields.
Agree with earlier posters that runners 5-7, Villanova looks stronger that UW.
Problem for Villanova: Schaaf, Babcock, Mel, Follett are all capable -- likely? -- to finish ahead of Reid and place in the top 10-12. Would only need a decent race from their #5 (50th or so) to win.
Stan Ford Jr.
P.S. With Stanford women expected to be back at full strenghth - first time since the Stanford Invite back in September - they will have a very strong 1-5 pack that could pick off a podium spot.
why didn't alex gits race at regionals? is she injured? they definitely need her at nationals
Agreed, 'Nova will likely beat Washington. The Washington runners are pretty young, and they have shown cracks, barely beating upstart Oregon at the Pac 10 meet. I would not be surprised to see Washington try to run in a pack of 7 at the front and burn off at leat three of their runners (it is called suicide), but they are not as good as they seem to think they are. If they make that mistake, Oregon will beat them as well as Villanova.
I would have given Villa the nod after conferences, but Kailey's regionals performance was an "about face" for the huskies. She came on strong last track season, but that was for 1500m. Apparently, she is Follet-like in cross as well.
This should be a classic one.
I think that the better teams, that can afford to rest one or two individuals at Regionals do so. It is one of the places where team depth really matters. It is the peak race for one or two runners that will not do Nationals while the top runners prep instead of racing hard. Ok SU took a related strategy which was to run all their guys together, which was at a pace of a very hard run but not a race for the top 3-4 guys.
Stupid post on so many levels. "upstart Oregon'? they were second at Nationals last year and got the best HS runner in decades. UW is better than they were last year and proved it at regionals. Pac10 was an abberation this year as they have dominated every other race. UO won't be close to either UW or Nova. This is a two horse race. Should be a classic for sure.
Nova's chances improve greatly if Terre Haute isn't muddy. They're middle distance based girls will benefit from fair conditions.
If the Stanford women still had Chetelat they would be a solid team... strong frontrunner with the depth to back it up in Stephanie Marcy, Alex Gits, Alex Dunne, Kathy Kroeger, etc.
And I think Villanova definitely has a shot at the win. If Washington performs like they did last year at NCAA Nats, I think Villanova will take the win.
Washington has 5 runners that have a legitimate shot of being top 10 at NCAAs, It is very unlikely that they will all do it. But break it down. Schaff, of course she does. Mel is so solid, so consistent. Follett, if she is on, she is a top 10 type. Campbell just got 4th at west regionals! look at how many super stars she just beat. Babcock, I can't believe she is the 5th girl I am listing. Got 7th? last year at NCAAs, and doesn't seem quite as fit this year but, she has a shot at top 10.
So yeah that would be unreal if they all had a great day at nationals but the potential for each one of uw top 5 to finish top 10 at NCAAs on a good/great day. You can't say that about anybody else. and there 6 and 7 are good enough.
Babcock was 6th last year and top freshman.
Remember, Schaaf wasn't top 10 last year after a dominating season...
Unfortunately, I believe that Schaaf is pretty well spent for this year, and will repeat last year's poor performance at Nationals. Good God, look at her. She obviously has some poor nutritional habits, and with that, she cannot make it through a season without strength and energy depletion. I say Villanova is a far better team than Washington, though I agree they could have more trouble in the mud than Washington who runs in the rain and mud nearly every day of the year. Oregon is getting better, and is pretty much on par with Washington at this point, but I don't see them having a chance against the more experienced Villanova team. Just sayin'
please make Teddy stop taking seconds out of my life. Has he heard of a race called Regionals? What part of that race from three days ago indicated that Kendra is spent and Oregon is on par with Washington? Rain and mud every day of the year? Enough trolling.