GLIAC XC

Franky Sloots wrote:

Down year for mens GLIAC. A decent GV team walks away easily. A few good, but not great individuals. Expect the whole conference to underperform at nationals when compared to the norm.

You can't be serious?

You realize the GLIAC last week held the #1, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10 spots in the midwest region and the number 1 ranked team IN THE NATION along with the #22..also ngandu and panning are going to be big time players at nationals in the individual race. The GLIAC is deeper than it has probably ever been in history the past couple years.

How is it deeper? No Baum or Hall. No Peterson or Trusty or Mirth.

Last years scores: 33, 67, 68 and Malone and Ashland ended up 9th and 10th at nationals. Not exactly great, and this year is worse.

Ranked 1st and 22nd huh? Pretty impressive.

RMAC

3,4,10,17, 23

And that's probably going to get better after this weekend.

CCAA

2, 8, 25

Still better than the GLIAC

GNAC

5, 12, 21

Still better than the gliac.

GLVC

6, 15

Debatable whether that's better than 1 and 21.

So let's be generous and say the GLIAC is the 4th best conference. If you would like to go off rankings. Which don't mean much but I'm just playing by your rules sir.

The ridiculous statement is that GV is only decent. I quick look at their performances and times run this season easily disproves that nonsense. You have a 24:10 guy followed by a pack of 24:25-24:40 guys and will have to sit a few sub 25:00 guys at regionals/nationals. This current GV team may very well be the best team in GLIAC history. Also, Bradley started slowly last year and and peaked at Nationals. He looks to be on the same trajectory this season. While I agree the overall depth of the conference is down, GV would have dominated regardless. They dominated USI earlier this season.

Stating someone is a "24:10 guy" shows you know very little about cross country. Distances are inaccurate and courses vary greatly. Times are a very poor indicator of ones ability.

I think GV could win, but don't know that them dominating USI proves much.

He did it on multiple courses. I have run on many 8k courses in my life son. If anyone here lacks knowledge it isn't me. As it is, I have raced at Kensington Metropark multiple times. It is no where close to a fast course. Not the hardest I've competed on, but by no means a pr magnet. So unless you have some verifiable information that it was short you should back off on the condescension because you appear out of your depth. He also ran 24:11 at Lewis where it seemed only GV runners where running times 10-15 seconds faster than at other races. You are under a widely held delusion that times in a XC never mean anything. You are wrong. Particularly when you are talking about places that have hosted many meets over a long period of time.

GLIACXC wrote:

He did it on multiple courses. I have run on many 8k courses in my life son. If anyone here lacks knowledge it isn't me. As it is, I have raced at Kensington Metropark multiple times. It is no where close to a fast course. Not the hardest I've competed on, but by no means a pr magnet. So unless you have some verifiable information that it was short you should back off on the condescension because you appear out of your depth. He also ran 24:11 at Lewis where it seemed only GV runners where running times 10-15 seconds faster than at other races. You are under a widely held delusion that times in a XC never mean anything. You are wrong. Particularly when you are talking about places that have hosted many meets over a long period of time.

+1

if you're looking for me to give verifiable information you probably shouldn't say "I have raced many 8ks and I know what I'm talking about" because that is not verifiable. You stating, "this course is not fast" is also not verifiable.

If you'd like verifiable info you probably shouldn't be slap dicking around on the biggest unverifiable forum cluster f*ck ever.

Continue your grand valley fap session. I'll leave you be.

Go Chico.

This is such a weak response. I have been to the course three times. We wheeled months before the race when our went there to check it out. Then wheeled it and raced twice in one season. Accurate every time. And clearly I'm familiar with the terrain. Face it, you threw up some nonsense, we're called and have too much of an ego to admit you are full of crap. You should have simply stopped posting but dug yourself into a bigger hole. I kind of want you to you to keep posting now. Mindless speculation and classless insults... Never goes away here I guess. It's ok. You'll find out at Nationals.

The course doesn't appear to have changed much so I would say I have a MUCH better grasp on what times run at Kensington indicate. This is where you probably want go away... But please don't.

GLIACXC you realize you're telling this guy he is an idiot because you know you're right don't you? If you'd like to tell us all who you are so we could verify some info you'd maybe have ground to stand on. As of now you're making yourself look foolish. And you either can't type or can't spell and it's really annoying.

You really can't give times too much weight in cross. Yes you can compare on the same course, but not course to course. One could argue the RMAC ran fastest because they did it at 7500 feet but nobody could say for sure because courses don't compare.

You can say *so and so is a 24:10 guy on this course* but not just a 24:10 guy because a hard course he's maybe a 25 flat guy, and a super flat and fast course he's a 23:40 guy. It's all a circle jerk to argue times in cross country.

If I wanted to use my real name I would. Read the whole thread and it will be obvious I am quite familiar with GLIAC xc. Your opinion of whether or not I know the course means absolutely nothing. I have raced multiple times. By all means, don't take my word for it. The course is outlined in the online program. It's the same course I raced on. Go out and wheel it yourself. This isn't a matter of opinion. The course is accurate and certainly not flat. Based on the results I can confidently conclude that both Ngandu and Panning could run sub 24:00 on a flat 8k course. It's funny when people respond with mindless speculation and dick jomes as if that proves a point. You are talking about a course that has hosted many meets and measured many, many times. You absolutely CAN look at xc times, if you are familiar with the course length and conditions.

I will share a little logic with you guys since a few seem to have issues in that area. If a course is 8000m and a runner finishes the race in 24:07, then one can logically conclude that the runner can complete 8000m in 24:07. I know... Mind blowing. As the course in question also has hills in various areas, and we all agree hills can slow times, then it seems reasonable to suggest that the ruuner most likely run even faster on a less challenging course. Like I said, your speculation has no bearing on my experiences at Kensington or the length of the course. Go out and measure it like countless others have over the years.

Dear GLIAC XC.

JUST STFU already.

Ok... Regional predictions?

Anything else? What a positive contribution to the discussion. Where as I have given actual insight on this thread, you have just posted some crap. I know providing insight on a course I have firsthand knowledge of isn't as fun as mindless trash talk but perhaps you should take your own advice. Or maybe post a little more maturely. Just a suggestion.

Hostile environment we have on our hands. Not sure where they came from.

1. Grand Valley

2. Southern Indiana

3. UW-Parkside

4. Malone

5. Saginaw Valley

6. Lewis

7. Indianapolis

8. Walsh

9. Ferris

10. Michigan Tech

Team

1-GVSU

2-USI

3-UWP

4-Malone

5-Indianapolis

Individual

1-Johnnie Guy USI

2-James Ngandu Tiffin

3-Zach Panning GVSU

4-Alex Cushman Indianapolis

5-Chris May GVSU

6-Bryce Bradley GVSU

100% agree with individuals