PAC 10 XC

Giant Johnson wrote:

FYI, that's an incorrect usage of "i.e.".

FYI, you're wrong.

Fun fact: The top three ranked XC schools scored a combined 9 pts(1,6,2) at NCAA Track and Field Championships last year.

4th rank Oregon - 44 pts.*

The perspective is, some schools more heavily distribute their XC/TF scholarships towards XC.

Oregon has always tried to remain a distance (actually mid-distance if you trace the history back far enough) known school, without loading the majority of the scholarships to XC/Distance.

*Thanks to Mac Fleet for this note.

jjj wrote:

Giant Johnson wrote:

FYI, that's an incorrect usage of "i.e.".

FYI, you're wrong.

No, he's right. In that context, e.g. suits the purpose, not i.e.

$hake and B@ke wrote:

These PRs are way off.

Theroux was All-American last XC season and ran 8:49 in the steeple last spring.

Saarel has run 4:02

Moussa has run 13:57

And Murphy has a track 10k PR faster than Rosa. I doubt you have run 29:36 for 10k

Nelson is clearly the one having the breakout season, as being a good Steepler doesn't necessarily translate to being a good cross runner, ie Seddon of FSU.

Expect much faster track PRs out of Nelson this upcoming year.

Just took off their school bio pages, I guess I should haveused TFRRS huh

strunk wrote:

jjj wrote:

FYI, you're wrong.

No, he's right. In that context, e.g. suits the purpose, not i.e.

No, you're both wrong. Either of those will work in that context.

A Duck wrote:

Fun fact: The top three ranked XC schools scored a combined 9 pts(1,6,2) at NCAA Track and Field Championships last year.

4th rank Oregon - 44 pts.*

The perspective is, some schools more heavily distribute their XC/TF scholarships towards XC.

Oregon has always tried to remain a distance (actually mid-distance if you trace the history back far enough) known school, without loading the majority of the scholarships to XC/Distance.

*Thanks to Mac Fleet for this note.

Excuses excuses.

Women's Pac-12 Awards:

----------------------

Most Valuable = Aisling Cuffe (Stanford)

Most Improved = Ruby Roberts (Washington State)

Most Inspirational = Megan Goethals (WA)(Welcome back kid!)

jjj wrote:

strunk wrote:

No, he's right. In that context, e.g. suits the purpose, not i.e.

No, you're both wrong. Either of those will work in that context.

The simple test is: is it a "for example" or is it an "in other words." In this case, it's clearly a "for example", so it's an e.g., not an i.e.

Just do a google and you'll get explanations of the difference in usage. If you still don't get it, can't help you.

strunk wrote:

The simple test is: is it a "for example" or is it an "in other words." In this case, it's clearly a "for example", so it's an e.g., not an i.e.

Just do a google and you'll get explanations of the difference in usage. If you still don't get it, can't help you.

You can't help me because I don't need help. His use passes both options in that 'simple test'. Take your own advice and look for different usages of each of those and hopefully you'll get it.

Thanks for the heads up. I had no idea that Megan Goethals even ran at Pac-12's. I know she is injured and out of shape. Congrats to Goethals for taking one for the team!

A Duck wrote:

Fun fact: The top three ranked XC schools scored a combined 9 pts(1,6,2) at NCAA Track and Field Championships last year.

4th rank Oregon - 44 pts.*

The perspective is, some schools more heavily distribute their XC/TF scholarships towards XC.

Oregon has always tried to remain a distance (actually mid-distance if you trace the history back far enough) known school, without loading the majority of the scholarships to XC/Distance.

*Thanks to Mac Fleet for this note.

That's cute and all...but completely irrelevant. This is Cross Country season, not track season. Apples to Oranges.

But if you want to play that game, CU out scored Oregon in events 800 and up at PAC12s last year 47 to 37.

But like I said, Track is irrelevant right now because it's November and Cross Country season, tweeting that kind of stuff is just deflecting away from the fact that they aren't as good as the hype.

I take it that irony is beyond your ken.

coach d. wrote:

Pac12, not Pac10, genius.

But Oregon won the Pac 12 Championships again. Doesn't that give credit to A Duck's contention that it is amazing that a well-rounded program like Oregon is competitive at XC with programs like Colorado who throws all their eggs into the distance basket?

Montesquieu wrote:

Colorado men win; Cheserek first individual.

Very impressive run for Saarel, especially at 6'1" tall. I wonder if he won't be CU's top guy at the NCAA champs.

I agree. I think he's a big-time runner who will show up most when it most matters. My only concern is that NCAAs is 10,000 meters, and I wonder how he'll handle the additional distance. At the beginning of the year I thought OSU would win the team title on the men's side with little opposition. But I can see CU placing five guys within thirty seconds of each other, and if OSU does not have a very low stick, that might be enough to win.

Sagarin wrote:

Montesquieu wrote:

Colorado men win; Cheserek first individual.

Very impressive run for Saarel, especially at 6'1" tall. I wonder if he won't be CU's top guy at the NCAA champs.

I have thought of CU as the dark horse from the very beginning, though I no longer think anyone is dismissing them as possible champs. You are right about the additional distance, but Saarel seems to be adjusting just fine. If the NCAA course is mostly flat, he should be ok. CU has a knack for landing a true frosh in the top five over the years. We will see if it happens again.

Sagarin wrote:

Very impressive run for Saarel, especially at 6'1" tall. I wonder if he won't be CU's top guy at the NCAA champs.

What does his height have to do with anything?

Obviously there are outliers, but tall guys tend to be at a disadvantage in cross country, and they generally carry more weight.