It 100% is not short. Actually it was 80m long for the UW Oshkosh Open. I know because I was someone who had to remeasure it lol. This is a brand new facility that is built for speed.
Please share your methodology, very curious
Probably a wheel. I'm a WIAC alumni and the school I went to also wheeled it over 8,000 meters. From what I heard, it is literally flatter than a pancake.
Last year's DIII Champion transferred to North Carolina (6th in the ACC, I believe) and was not in the varsity for the conference meet. I don't know if he was injured.
Chasen Hunt who finished 14th in D3 at last year's natties is running for UNC. I think he was around there 5th to 7th placed runners when he last finished a race. He might be hurt now though, DNF'd Nuttycombe and hasn't races since
Last year's DIII Champion transferred to North Carolina (6th in the ACC, I believe) and was not in the varsity for the conference meet. I don't know if he was injured.
Chasen Hunt who finished 14th in D3 at last year's natties is running for UNC. I think he was around there 5th to 7th placed runners when he last finished a race. He might be hurt now though, DNF'd Nuttycombe and hasn't races since
Apologies.
Yes. NOT the cross country champion. The 5,000 meter champion at NCAA record holder (13:41) went to UNC and was not in the varsity for the ACC.
Probably a wheel. I'm a WIAC alumni and the school I went to also wheeled it over 8,000 meters. From what I heard, it is literally flatter than a pancake.
I think the biggest hidden factor in XC course speed is hardness of the ground. From my experience in Minnesota the drier the course the faster it is, so the less rain means faster times. To take it a step further, the few XC races I have run on frost are extremely fast presumably because the ground is rock solid. Looking at weather data Oshkosh has gotten very little rain in the last month so it's no surprise a historically fast course was even faster.
This topic comes up all the time. The top D3 school would probably be a respectable d1 team. I don't think they'd win any major conferences, but I would bet they'd be mid-pack in those conferences and up front on some of the mid-level ones, all without scholarships and mostly made up of kids from the state.
I think it's more interesting that most of the kids running in the WIAC are from Wisconsin. In terms of development, it's pretty impressive considering there's less than 6 million people.
Wisconsin has 4 Div 1 programs... UW, UW GB, Marquette, and UW Milwaukee - other than Madison, I don't think any of those other programs would ever win the WIAC.
Doing the scoring math, factors aside. UW LaX would’ve taken fourth or fifth at B1G Ten XC based off their performances from WIAC
No they wouldn't. They would be 11th. The teams they would beat this year would be Indiana, Rutgers, Illinois, Nebraska, and Iowa. Note that Northwestern, USC, and Maryland don't have men's teams.
Doing the scoring math, factors aside. UW LaX would’ve taken fourth or fifth at B1G Ten XC based off their performances from WIAC
No they wouldn't. They would be 11th. The teams they would beat this year would be Indiana, Rutgers, Illinois, Nebraska, and Iowa. Note that Northwestern, USC, and Maryland don't have men's teams.
Times on the track are close to a 100% correlation for XC. They have one guy at sub 14:00 and two more under 14:10.
Probably a wheel. I'm a WIAC alumni and the school I went to also wheeled it over 8,000 meters. From what I heard, it is literally flatter than a pancake.
Hi sir, I chime in as ch-ch-ch-chinese restaurant owner next to one campus. We have some customer run so I watch race very close.
Compare Wisconsin to a state like Ohio or Pennsylvania. All of the equivalent schools in those states are D2. There is absolutely no reason for UW-L to be D3 other than they like to beat up on smaller, less resourced schools.
Smaller, less resourced schools? You clearly don't know the WIAC.
There are reasons the WIAC schools are D3 and not D2. Mostly around money.
Moving to D2 puts a lot more monetary constraints on an athletic program and school, and the WIAC schools don't want to do it. So be it.
And UW-L doesn't beat up on smaller, lesser resourced schools. Check the history of D3 champs in men's and women's XC. They don't do bad, but they don't dominate.
And check the history of WIAC champs. Again, they don't do bad, but they don't dominate.
La Crosse constantly gets recruits that are fringe D1 guys. They get distance runners that are in the 9:00-9:10 range for 3200m and under 4:20 for the 1600m. They would be a mid-tier big 10 team. They lost to Purdue by 26 points at the Joe Piana invite. They are on the level of a team like Minnesota, Penn state or UCLA. Their first runner Grant Matthai who will likely win cross country would be a contributing 4th or 5th runner on a trophy team. The rest of the top 5 could be power 4 D1 if they really wanted. Not like they'd be running for Oklahoma state but they could be on a solid team. Or they could go into some bum conference like the Summit League or Horizon league and compete at the top of that conference.
Also D3 runners have bumped up to D1 before and shown that they can hang. Alex Phillip just a couple years ago went from D3 cross country champion to 17th at cross nationals for D1.
Compare Wisconsin to a state like Ohio or Pennsylvania. All of the equivalent schools in those states are D2. There is absolutely no reason for UW-L to be D3 other than they like to beat up on smaller, less resourced schools.
Smaller, less resourced schools? You clearly don't know the WIAC.
There are reasons the WIAC schools are D3 and not D2. Mostly around money.
Moving to D2 puts a lot more monetary constraints on an athletic program and school, and the WIAC schools don't want to do it. So be it.
And UW-L doesn't beat up on smaller, lesser resourced schools. Check the history of D3 champs in men's and women's XC. They don't do bad, but they don't dominate.
And check the history of WIAC champs. Again, they don't do bad, but they don't dominate.
I was going to mention something similar.
I believe that there is more involved that the athletic prowess of a school in determining the division that they play in. Most of Grand Valley State's teams in use about all sports would be competitive with just about all mid-major DI conferences like the MAC, Missouri Valley, Ohio Valley, etc. Moving up to DI, though, would bring a lot of expenses that they may not want or have the resources for.
My niece played soccer for DIII U of Chicago in the UAA conference. Many of those teams in women's soccer could beat many of the teams in mid-major D1 conferences. Those teams are not going to move to D2 because that is a conference with schools that are academic powerhouses. The focus at those schools is academics. I don't know much about the schools in the WIAC but on the whole, D3 schools are superior to D2 schools when academics are considered.
In high school D1 schools argue they are better than D4,5,6,8 (depending on state) because they are bigger with more resources, kids, etc. But many states then do a meet of champions with all divisions together. Small schools don't usually win, but an individual might do well, etc. College could do the same thing (or basically do at invites like Lehigh, etc)
The better question is why are D1, D2, D3 national championships all at separate venues? They should be at the same location every year and if you can't fit on one day, then D1 on Friday, D2 Saturday, D3 Sunday kind of thing.
Would help elevate the sport with energy, save infrastructure setup for TV, and allow all to race on the same course.
most of the NCAA d3 winning teams would fare well against the top half of the d1 NCAA teams. If I recall in college we won d3 in the 2000s and beat 4-5 teams who made d1 ncaas and placed in the teens or 20s .
Compare Wisconsin to a state like Ohio or Pennsylvania. All of the equivalent schools in those states are D2. There is absolutely no reason for UW-L to be D3 other than they like to beat up on smaller, less resourced schools.
Smaller, less resourced schools? You clearly don't know the WIAC.
There are reasons the WIAC schools are D3 and not D2. Mostly around money.
Moving to D2 puts a lot more monetary constraints on an athletic program and school, and the WIAC schools don't want to do it. So be it.
And UW-L doesn't beat up on smaller, lesser resourced schools. Check the history of D3 champs in men's and women's XC. They don't do bad, but they don't dominate.
And check the history of WIAC champs. Again, they don't do bad, but they don't dominate.
Bullsht. Absolute bullsht.
Wisconsin is closest in population to Maryland, Missouri, Colorado, and Minnesota. Let's do a little counting!
You have to be blind if you don't recognize the outcome. How do you think UW-L gets like 10 kids who can run a sub-22 200? Is it because Wisconsin just breeds elite sprinters? No, it's because they go D3 at UW-L whereas a lot of them would go low-D1 or D2 in other states.
And I hear you, it's not that simple; there are economic reasons why someone might want to go to a in-state school, and obviously it is also true that UW-L does a great job of developing talent. But come on, to pretend like they're not getting kids, year after year, that are D1/D2 talent is just the ultimate bullsht. And further, they absolutely are competing against schools with less resources -- they have almost 10,000 undergrads! That is four times the size of the both the median and the mean D3 school.
Just be honest. It's OK. Having all these huge advantages doesn't just walk a title to their door. But it absolutely, 100% helps.
LAX would get nuked at any big time d1 race. Probably score 1000 goddamn points.
almost 300 guys broke 14 minutes in d1 counting indoors and outdoors last year. That doesn’t even count all the steeple/1500 guys that didn’t run one who would pounce lax. I’ve seen the BEST guys/girls in d3 go d1 and with a couple exceptions, just become another face in the crowd. I love d3 running - way more than d1. But the level d1 is at isn’t even one tier up, it’s another stratosphere