another name that needs to be included is jed christiansen...ok...that being said.....i agree with your assessment....but couldn't it also mean that d3 is more competitive??
another name that needs to be included is jed christiansen...ok...that being said.....i agree with your assessment....but couldn't it also mean that d3 is more competitive??
yea i would agree that d3 is more competitive, especially when you try to figure out who has a shot at all american. the relative talent in d3 is really deep and any of 100 runners can finish in the top 35, it just depends on the day and the course. if the course is hilly/sloppy look for colorado to have 3 all americans and boggs 1st or second. if its running pretty quick those with more speed such as abdallah and kosgei and others to prevail. last year was a prime example on how the course can have a huge effect on the results
scacer wrote:
its not. there are probably about 10 people who have a legitimate shot at the title. it seems a lot of people just want to rep the best runner on their team.
so for legitimate contenders we have
boggs
kosgei
butzler
maybe kaul
place
abdallah
chavez
sigl
and two or three others that i can't think of off the top of my head.
In D I there is a clear cut line. you have the guys that are national/international caliber and the ones who arent. thats not really the case in diii
I'm sorry you seem to forget that Chris Erichsen finished 2nd behind Kosgei in the steeple at Nats, and he finished 4th both indoors and 4th outdoors last year with times in the 14:30 range. How does that not make him a legitimate contender for a national title?
that is why i added that there were others that i couldn't think of off the top of my head. also how has erichsen performed in xc in the past. i do not know much about him.
so go ahead and add christianson and erichsen to the list of contenders which brings the list up to around 10. and of course these are not the people i am picking to finish in the top 10, just those i think (and the rest of the thread) seem to have a good shot at taking home the title.
i see that erichsen finished 50th last year. so if the course gets tough it doesnt seem like he will be able to hang, if its fast then i guess he could be up there.
That Basista kid from Mount Union has looked pretty strong
quote]scacer wrote:
i see that erichsen finished 50th last year. so if the course gets tough it doesnt seem like he will be able to hang, if its fast then i guess he could be up there.[/quote]
Erichsen has run on the St. Olaf course quite a few times in his career, because St. Olaf (where nationals is run this year) is in the MIAC as well as Saint John's (where Erichsen goes). This gives Erichsen an automatic leg up on a lot of the competition he will see. In fact, he'll be there a week before for the regions race.
Knowing the course well is really not a particularly compelling reason for someone who got 50th last year to be a title contender. His track performances are good, but I would guess there are 20+ returning all-americans who have shown more XC potential.
Now I would have to put Boggs as my pick. The conditions are likely to be very cold, seeing that the race is in Minnesota, and I think Boggs would be prepared for that. I'm not sure how well Kosgei would handle the weather though, considering Kenyans traditionally don't run as well in the cold.
Someone from a conference like the SCAC would think the top 100 runners have shot at AA. If you're going to say that, then you might as well say all 280 runners have a legitimate shot at AA. Neither are true. There are roughly, approx. (however you want to word it) 50-60 runners who are potential AA's. Even then, those runners from 30-60 are fighting for spots 30-35 (this mostly has to do with luck). There is clearly a difference between the top 25 runners and the rest of DIII. I would say a significant difference. Now this is an assumption, but I would say the top 25 runners at Nats every year is pretty accurate of who the better runners are. Those 25 runners are the best and prove it when it matters. Now, every now and again someone who is AA material runs bad at Nats (i.e. Butzler last year...a handful actually - there were def. runners in the top 35 who wouldn't have been AA's if the course were dry, Herlihy in 2005, LeRoy in 2004, Haxton in 2003, etc. My point is, being an AA isn't easy so saying top 100 have a legitimate shot is ignorant.
can you give a good description of the course for those of us who have never run on it?
Is there going to be a preview of the course at St. Olaf on video? I think the champion will be one of these six runners: Sigl, Kosgei, Abdallah, Place, Christianson, or Boggs. Runners such as Chaves, Ramon, Erichsen, etc. will be up there, but I think the first six are in a league of their own. Two other runners who will mix it up as well will be Dunker and Williams. A lot of returnees in the top 35 (I think around 23-24).
why should i get real, you put down the same people i did. i also look for john greis to have a repeat top 10 performance
Sigle is a definite pick. But everyone except for 1, has forgotten about Marc O'Dozzi! I honestly think he could take the win this year. Challenges?
have you guys been to
its pretty good and more geared for d3 check it out
what do you think??
redshirt, injury
MK wrote:
Willy Kaul (Oshkosh) is rumored to be out for the season.
get real scacer wrote:
Someone from a conference like the SCAC would think the top 100 runners have shot at AA. If you're going to say that, then you might as well say all 280 runners have a legitimate shot at AA. Neither are true. There are roughly, approx. (however you want to word it) 50-60 runners who are potential AA's. Even then, those runners from 30-60 are fighting for spots 30-35 (this mostly has to do with luck). There is clearly a difference between the top 25 runners and the rest of DIII. I would say a significant difference. Now this is an assumption, but I would say the top 25 runners at Nats every year is pretty accurate of who the better runners are. Those 25 runners are the best and prove it when it matters. Now, every now and again someone who is AA material runs bad at Nats (i.e. Butzler last year...a handful actually - there were def. runners in the top 35 who wouldn't have been AA's if the course were dry, Herlihy in 2005, LeRoy in 2004, Haxton in 2003, etc. My point is, being an AA isn't easy so saying top 100 have a legitimate shot is ignorant.
Are you saying that Tom Haxton, the 2004 NATIONAL CHAMPION for 10,000 meters wouldn't have even been AA in 2003, had it not been for a wet course?
My point is, calling others ignorant doesn't guarantee you know your ass from a hole in the ground.
Your assumptions are poor.
in last years national results dozzi was listed as a senior. Is he back this year?
I think both of the top 2 guys from Oxy are contenders, as is the top returner from Colorado Coll, I am blanking on names here since its out of my region. As for the guy from Mt. Union...if he is the same one who blew the 50+ meter lead in the DMR last year, I do not think he stands a chance. Kosgie ran very well this weekend against some decent competition so his name should be thrown in there, as should at least phillips and abdallah from NYU.
so you are telling me guys like stephen cohen and ryan terlouw didnt have a shot at becoming an AA they were 77 and 80 something last year. cohen had finished 16th th year before so shouldnt he have been in a league of his own. the fact of the matter is that in d3 there are only a handful of people that are in their own league..the others can be beat. d3 isnt balck and white like d1 it has a huge gray area.
Ok so now we have the ten mentioned above, plus an additional 20 people mentioned after. This is why d3 gets looked down upon by higher divisions. People are just talking out of their .ss. Lets try to get a list of 5 or 6 people who have a legitimate shot at winning. There can't possibly be more than that who have a shot to win a national championship otherwise the meet is a joke.