Would Newbury Park have won D3?

patrackfan wrote:

Also, looking at how well Nico and Jace (23:36 for 24th at PAC 12s last spring) have run in college,

the Newbury Park top 4, with Colin, Lex, and Leo running better than Nico did his senior year in XC, and all running better than Jace, would easily be in the top 10. Just to throw numbers out there, I say they go 3-4-7-8-30 for 52 points

So, the fifth guy is going to run around 24:20?

He ran just over three minutes per kilometer in the state finals. We can safely assume that he couldn't run any faster or he would have. He hits the line totally gassed.

But you magically have him running at just over three minutes per kilometer (the same speed) for an additional three kilometers because it fits your (failing) narrative?

No. He would not be 30th. He would not have been inside the top 80 (24:40 to 24:50). He easily could have been 120th to 150th (25:00 +).

femurboy69 wrote:

In 2018, Pomona runner Andy Rieschling ran 25:04 (The course is very hilly) at the SCIAC championship to win in a competitive race. He went on to run 14:07 in the 5k that spring. (He had run 14:15 the spring before)

Pomona's Top 7 on the same course at the 2021 SCIAC champs: 24:30, 24:47, 24:51, 25:00, 25:03, 25:03, 25:04

Pomona's entire top 5 could break 14:10 in the 5k guaranteed.

Pomona Pitzer's home course is not hilly at all. I've been running through there since I was a kid and raced there a ton of times in college. Narrow as all heck but definitely not on the level of the old SCIAC courses like La Mirada or Prado.

Rieschling ran 24:49 in 2018 and 14:06 the following spring. This team is very good and I could see their top 6 from Nationals going sub 14:25ish. Top 25 all time is 14:11. Would absolutely love to see them do it but just wanted to put that in perspective. As a poster earlier said, the majority of the conference didn't run track last year. Should be a very interesting year for the conference.

You may actually see them race each other if NP puts some guys in at Rossi Relays for the 3K (if they're allowing HS entries still). As for who would win in the 8K? Championship style I'd give the nod to PP just based on NP's 4 and 5. PP would easily put 6 in front of NP 5 .

The superspikes are going to make a dent on all-time lists. Even if you're not a huge superspikes believer and put it at something like 1 second per K that makes a big difference for these lists.

If it were April 1st, would be a perfect time for an LRC story that NP is filing paperwork to be certified as a college (they already have a lot of AP classes), and is applying to NCAA for D3 status, and former runners are going to transfer, and now the NP runners don’t have to leave the successful program upon graduation, the coach now has a college job but doesn’t have to relocate his family, and best of all, we can settle the big rivalry vs PP once and for all.

Colin and the Youngs would finish top 10 tbh. Younger Salhman probably top 40. Their 5th is kinda a weak link and would get exposed more in an 8k. So i’ll say he finishes top 80 at worst. They probably place top 3 as a team

i think Aidan Ryan’s PR is just above 8 minutes

Hejendo76 wrote:

i think Aidan Ryan’s PR is just above 8 minutes

The problem with all of these track times for the college kids is they are 2+ years old. Ryan ran that as a sophomore. He's a 5th year senior now. Unlike HS, College only runs the 3k indoors, and a lot of programs don't take indoor very seriously, or don't even have a team. I don't think Pomona has an indoor program so they wouldn't run the 3000m, and certainly don't focus on it. High school is different, they might run the 3k or 3200 10 times in a season two try to PR and run some super fast time to impress a coach. College races tend to be far fewer and are typically more strategic on the track. Its not about the time but the place. And that becomes even more of a factor in the 5k. Sure, the college runners want to throw down something special (I can think of 4-5 who will go sub 13:50 this year on the track) but in general, the track times aren't nearly as focused on as they were in HS.

THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:

The superspikes are going to make a dent on all-time lists. Even if you're not a huge superspikes believer and put it at something like 1 second per K that makes a big difference for these lists.

Yes. Last spring was the first time high school athletes had access to dragonflys.

patrackfan wrote:

Also, looking at how well Nico and Jace (23:36 for 24th at PAC 12s last spring) have run in college,

the Newbury Park top 4, with Colin, Lex, and Leo running better than Nico did his senior year in XC, and all running better than Jace, would easily be in the top 10. Just to throw numbers out there, I say they go 3-4-7-8-30 for 52 points

Please stop!

You're embarrassing yourself.

Does anyone recall back when the NCAA individual D3 Champion was allowed two race to days later in the D1 Meet on a course that was 2000m longer(men) than what they just raced on the past Saturday?

I recall Arnie Schrader who ran for Wisconsin - Stevens Point up near the front for much of the race in Arizona and was even leading for awhile. If I recall correctly he may have fallen after hitting a sprinkler head, but still finished in the top 10! I bring this up because few ever gave the D3 top runners much credit, and the NP debate reminded me of this.

Again, NP currently has an amazing group and there is not a team in D3 that would ever have an incoming class like what they currently have, so based on that I strongly believe they would be extremely competitive in the D3 field but can not guarantee them the win.

Why are people saying it's a dumb thread and a dumb question? Even the people saying NP wouldn't win admit that it would ONLY be because of their 5th man. That means it's a GOOD question because it would be close.

In 2019 Pomona won D3 nationals with 164 points. These same guys versus the 2019 Pomona team and NP would have won easily.

Schrader ran 13:57 in an era when good D1 teams had only 1 or 2 guys breaking 14 minutes.

No. It wouldn't have been close. That is the point. Yes it is mainly due to their 5th man but so what? Their 5th man would score more than the entire PP team so it would not be close. Imagine you are running high school cross country and your team wins the conference meet going 2-4-6-8-10. Another team finishes 2nd going 5-7-9-11-12-25 and they keep telling you how close the score was. Their 5th runner always runs 17:30 while your 5th always runs 16:30. He scored 25 at the conference meet while your team score was 22.

full of it wrote:

Why are people saying it's a dumb thread and a dumb question? Even the people saying NP wouldn't win admit that it would ONLY be because of their 5th man. That means it's a GOOD question because it would be close.

In 2019 Pomona won D3 nationals with 164 points. These same guys versus the 2019 Pomona team and NP would have won easily.

People are saying it because it was a very strong D3 champion this year. So the easy answer is no, and there's not really any argument that the could score under 100+ points at D3 nationals because of the struggles of their 5th guy.

It would be a good question if they could podium this year or win in a super-weak year.

Engineer of Plates wrote:

No. It wouldn't have been close. That is the point. Yes it is mainly due to their 5th man but so what? Their 5th man would score more than the entire PP team so it would not be close. Imagine you are running high school cross country and your team wins the conference meet going 2-4-6-8-10. Another team finishes 2nd going 5-7-9-11-12-25 and they keep telling you how close the score was. Their 5th runner always runs 17:30 while your 5th always runs 16:30. He scored 25 at the conference meet while your team score was 22.

Your math is way off, but I see you point and wonder why you can't see that maybe, just maybe NP doesn't win D3 Nationals but they finish top 10 - that is still damn good for a high school team. I say on a track, at 5k - NP Currently would be top three or better, but that's just me...

Engineer of Plates wrote:

No. It wouldn't have been close. That is the point. Yes it is mainly due to their 5th man but so what? Their 5th man would score more than the entire PP team so it would not be close. Imagine you are running high school cross country and your team wins the conference meet going 2-4-6-8-10. Another team finishes 2nd going 5-7-9-11-12-25 and they keep telling you how close the score was. Their 5th runner always runs 17:30 while your 5th always runs 16:30. He scored 25 at the conference meet while your team score was 22.

The team in your example scored 30, not 22, and the other team has six men, but your point is made. If the fifth guy on one team scores more alone than the winning score, it wasn't close.

The fifth runner from NP would score more points alone than PP did as a whole team because as the runners pour in at a rate of one or more per second, and his gap back from the fourth man is just WAY too big.

Nobody has really made a case yet that the NP fifth man could finish in the top 80 (he would need to be at worst in the mid-sixties if his teammates went 1, 2, 3, 4, which they NEVER would).

As they have to concede that the answer to the OP is "No, they could not have won Division III," they will then shift the goalposts to "But they could have won in a different year!"

No. They would not have won that year either.

Yes I typed the incorrect numbers in there. NP would have finished about 8th according to looking at LACCTiC.

Before reaching physical maturity, younger athletes with more talent/skill will be able to compete against older athletes with less talent/skill. This is true across all sports. This is not a new discovery.

After that, we are just quibbling about the details, and that’s fun mostly for the fans of the younger athletes because it is just another way to say, “these younger athletes are so talented and skilled that they can hang with older athletes”. Kudos to NP, including the 5th, 6th and 7th runners who are very good runners. My personal final answer is that PP are still the champs in the XC Thought Experiment of 2021. I’m moving on…