D3 XC 2010

Anyone know where the results are with the splits. there were tons of mats down?

Teemster wrote:

It's really no use even arguing with the MW guys. Yeah, their region is good, but its because they lack academic standards, which is also why they can't argue or understand why they're wrong.

Seriously though, if you are just referencing the UW schools, then I understand your point, they do seem to lack academic standards.

What happened to Lawton from Chicago? I thought she was supposed to beat Pavlus?!?! Didn't even challenge her one bit!

Ralphy wrote:

Teemster wrote:

It's really no use even arguing with the MW guys. Yeah, their region is good, but its because they lack academic standards, which is also why they can't argue or understand why they're wrong.

Really guy?

Central Region: Grinnell, Luther, Hamlike, Nebraska Wesleyan...ever heard of any of these academically. Hell NO.

I would say the MW Region is definetely "smarter" than the Central or the Southeast and on par with the Mideast.[/quote]

The Midwest region is not even close to being "smarter" than the Central. Yes, the Midwest has Wash U and U of Chicago. However, the Central contains Grinnell, Carleton, St Olaf, and St Thomas, all of which are comparable. Plus the MIAC as a whole is a much more demanding group of institutions than the WIAC.

I believe this message board is to talk about d3 running not which school has higher academic standards than others. That being said the MIAC gets their sh*t rocked by the WIAC year after year in running.

More often than not the runners in those WIAC schools are of better quality students than the rest of their student bodies which give the WIAC a bad name in regards to academics. So if we compare strictly the runners of those teams it's a bit more comparable.

Uh, well said.

(What did he say?)

(My brain hurts.)

If you convert the Haverford times from NCAA's and put them in the D1 NCAA meet they would have run fairly well. I have them in 21st place. The goats would have beat schools like Duke, Villanova, and Providence. Who knows how fast Anders could have run given the competition there?

Are you serious?

what happened to st. lawrence women? they returned 4 of 5, including the ncaa champion, from a team that almost won it last year...and they fall to 23rd? that's really incredibly bad. what the hell happened? another swine flu outbreak?

I do not think they would be 21st. They are a good D3 team but not good enough to beat almost half of the D1 field. North Central's team last year might be around there but not this Haverford team.

I love Haverford, but look at the Paul Short results. They would have zero shot at qualifying for D-1 nationals.

Apples and Oranges wrote:

If you convert the Haverford times from NCAA's and put them in the D1 NCAA meet they would have run fairly well. I have them in 21st place. The goats would have beat schools like Duke, Villanova, and Providence. Who knows how fast Anders could have run given the competition there?

centralissmarter wrote:

The Midwest region is not even close to being "smarter" than the Central. Yes, the Midwest has Wash U and U of Chicago. However, the Central contains Grinnell, Carleton, St Olaf, and St Thomas, all of which are comparable.

Comparable to what, each other? Those schools aren't even close to the same level.

HS Dad wrote:

I love Haverford, but look at the Paul Short results. They would have zero shot at qualifying for D-1 nationals.

You clearly have no idea how much of a difference 7 weeks of training can make in a smartly designed training program.

That being said, I'd like to know what standard for conversion was used to determine Haverford would get 21st at D1 Nationals.

Not that simple.

Haverford had the luxury of running "their" race at Division III. Look at the splits on the bottom half of the Division I field. Had Haverford run "their race" at Division I, they would have been all by themselves and about one county behind in the early going and still at 5K. Good luck with that. Had they run with the back of the Division I field (still too fast), their performance would still have suffered, as did the performances of the back half (or more) of the Division I field.

you're right, they aren't close. carleton is a much better school than any of those listed.

I just threw it into merv's. Not saying it is factual but it is food for thought.

And as far as them "running their race" it shouldn't matter. You can go out as fast as you want, 5k split is crap. It's the 10k time that truly matters. They would have plenty of people to pick off during the final stages of the race.

And carbonara is correct... 7 weeks of training did wonders for this team!

Most of the guys who went out @ 15:20 in DI race ran 31:xx. If we assume Haverfurd guys rans average 31:45 (reasonable), they would score roughly 700 points. They would have to try very hard to beat Cal (who as usual probably had a long list of excuses)

there is no way their DIII champ performance would have made the cut at regionals even.

Great race for sure, but listen to what you are saying, "They would have sucked at the DI level!"

what happened to st. lawrence women? they returned 4 of 5, including the ncaa champion, from a team that almost won it last year...and they fall to 23rd? that's really incredibly bad. what the hell happened? another swine flu outbreak?

------

-Yeah what happened? They were ranked 2nd all season, they haven't fallen to a D3 team since last year at nationals when they were runners up. Does anyone know?? Pavlus was amazing though (as always).

yeah, that's strange. And Lawton fell off too... there was so much talk of her beating Pavlus and she finished what, like 6th or 8th? Guess some just rise to the occasion much better than others! Strange for St. Lawrence to have such a drop off from last year, though. Wow.