whoops, i meant colorado college beat rhodes.
whoops, i meant colorado college beat rhodes.
Actually, Hagedorn got 13th in 04, as did Gates (UMW) in 96. Arguably, the region had more firepower in the late 90s when Frostburg State was in the region and top runner Michael Taye placed 16th in 98 cross, and was a 3 time national champion in the 5 and 10K, as well as a 10 time all-american. And it pushed emory to get better in the early 2000s, and hopefully the same thing will happen with the addition of UT Tyler.
So what is your point? Like the other guy said, no one is arguing that the south is a strong region. Good teams in other regions don't go to nationals because their region has better teams. That doesn't mean the 2 top teams in the south don't deserve to be at nationals.
scac historian wrote:
Actually, Hagedorn got 13th in 04
Actually, Hagedorn was not there in '04.
I believe Hagerdorn's top 15 finish came when it was at Hanover, which was '03
Hagedorn's best place was '03.
13 9 Phil Hagedorn, Sr 25:34.6 Emory University
So does anyone else want to post an infomercial about their team? Tell us about all of the obstacles you've overcome, and how great you are? Maybe just take a transcript from a motivational team meeting and post it verbatim?
And then maybe we can vote on who goes to Nationals based on the strength of their pitch. I'm waiting, UT Tyler, Emory's got the lead on you right now.
Actually that post was likely not someone from Emory considering it was copy pasted directly a blog Michael Rothbart writes on Emory's website.
I have no problem with 1,2, or 5 teams making it from the south. My point was addressed to the character who says that it's fair as long as south teams don't place last, which I disagree with. Even if they finish last, that's fine, the south should still get teams to qualify. I'm just stating that there are teams who don't go to nationals that are better than teams going to nationals (not necessarily just the south region).
DePauw gets screwed quite often, that's true, but Colorado College probably didn't deserve to go as a team last year. Sure they beat Rhodes at a relatively small meet (SCAC) where their weak 4 and 5 didn't hurt them as badly, but National bids are based on Regional performances in large part. Rematch those two last year and Rhodes 4 and 5 probably would have swung it in their favor.
But look now, and Colorado definitely deserves to go with a much improved overall team.
By far one of the weakest conferences in all of division3, but it still managed to send two teams last year that didn't even win their conference meet. pretty bad
Tyler sucks a big D
Maybe Centre and Rhodes didn't beat DePauw last year, or finish in the top 10 nationally, but you can't just single out SCAC or the south region as the ones who don't deserve to be at Nats. I hope you're complaining about Muhlenberg, Occidental, Trinity (Ct), and Ohio Northern, all of whom lost to Centre, in addition to several others that lost to Rhodes. Maybe those schools had good regionals races and bad nationals races. Maybe they didn't do well at conference and just came up big at regions. I don't know. But to claim that the south is so much worse than everyone else is just inaccurate.
But yes, DePauw should have gone the last couple of years.
Maybe Centre and Rhodes didn't beat DePauw last year, or finish in the top 10 nationally, but you can't just single out SCAC or the south region as the ones who don't deserve to be at Nats. I hope you're complaining about Muhlenberg, Occidental, Trinity (Ct), and Ohio Northern, all of whom lost to Centre, in addition to several others that lost to Rhodes. Maybe those schools had good regionals races and bad nationals races. Maybe they didn't do well at conference and just came up big at regions. I don't know. But to claim that the south is so much worse than everyone else is just inaccurate.
But yes, DePauw should have gone the last couple of years.
look, we all know SCAC isn't WIAC, NESCAC, OAC, or UAA...but one of the weakest conferences? give me a break.
21st & 28th places teams at nats...
3rd, 42, 44, 49, 75, 87, and 99th place finishers at the ncaa.
i can think of an awful lot of conferences that are way worse...have a look:
http://www.d3running.com/News/Men_Conferences_102807.htm
additionally - had colorado college run at the national meet and you insert where their 3 runners who actually ran in the meet would have finished in team scoring: 3, 31, 33, (3, 42, 44 they were overall) and then had their 4, 5 finished last in and 2nd to last in the meet - 278, 279 (222, 223, in team scoring) - they would've scored 512 points - that would've been 21st place.
i dont think anyone on here has claimed the scac to be a national powerhouse - but your hyperbole is what's ridiculous.
Be realistic and don't assume a team from the SCAC or South deserve to be there just because you belong to that conference or region. It's good to see you have passion and pride for your school, but the only reason two SCAC teams made it to nats last year is because of the new system. Centre and Rhodes beat teams they wouldn't have if the course had been dry. Same as other teams who placed in the top 10. Is the SCAC the worst conference in the DIII, no. Is it in the top 15 of the 30+ listed on the link, no. It's a very average conference. I bet the conference hasn't produced double digit appearances by teams at a national xc meet on the men's side. I know last year was the first appearance for Rhodes. Anyway, you have no argument for the SCAC or South. Colorado College will make the SCAC look good this year, but once Boggs & Co. graduate that will change. And if DePauw should have been there the last few years then they should have run better at their region meet. Other than Calvin, who has had a good showing at a national meet from that region in the past two or three years? Any top 15 teams?
Look closer wrote:
Centre and Rhodes beat teams they wouldn't have if the course had been dry.
First of all I'm not sure I agree with that. Second of all, so what? It's cross country, not track. At nationals, some teams run better than expected, others worse, and there will always be people looking for excuses (too wet, too hot, too hard a course). Nut up and deal with it.
Is it in the top 15 of the 30+ listed on the link, no. It's a very average conference.
I'd probably put them around #8-10, but that's just my opinion (btw I did not run in the SCAC). You're free to have yours.
I bet the conference hasn't produced double digit appearances by teams at a national xc meet on the men's side. I know last year was the first appearance for Rhodes.
I don't know if that's the case or not, but I don't know why you'd care what conferences were like 10 or 20 years ago. SCAC has 5 or 6 team appearances in the past few years which seems all right.
The Patriots will leave UT Tyler at 7 a.m. this morning for Dallas where they will catch a flight to Virginia. After a short layover in Atlanta, wheels down is set for 5 p.m. in Newport News, Va. Looking for a perfect 15 on Saturday.
unless you cloned donnan you're going to be looking for a while
DePauw did finish 13th three years ago at the national meet. I think a redraw of the regions is in order with the new system. Shifting a few teams around could help even out the regions. For example if CC and DePauw were shifted to the south region, all of a sudden that region would have 5 or so decent teams without drastically hurting the regions they currently belong to.