PRE NATIONALS RESULTS

Unfortunately, this probably isn't that far off. The Good Old Boys network will still continue to rank teams on what they should be instead of where they are. Im sure this will happen in the womens poll, CU will probably stay in the top 5 because coaches give them credit (however, CU maybe one program that should get that credit Runners often redshirt, coaches shouldnt assume that someone is going to start running later in the year, espically after missing the biggest meet of the year (up until regionals). Like someone else said, UCSB ran great this weekend and beat a lot teams that are ranked ahead in this mock poll. its probably more realistic to have them around 12th, but if they had a name of a major confrence team they probably would be top 10.

The California pick is horrible, I can only guess that is a joke.

Why did you leave out Georgetown? They're a top-15 team... they finished 5th in the blue race even without two of their top 5 (levi miller and daniel nunn)

irun,

Pretty good rankings!

Top six teams are solid. After that, they are all looking for a fifth man.

I saw someone say ouch for Ohio State and I definately agree. They were very hyped at the beginning of the year. See did not run well at all. My question is what is up with Arizona? Did I see the results right? They were way down. I also saw a someone aska bout the best true freshman in the country. On the girls side i feel that Bona Jones is making a strong argument for best freshman in the nation. She is running very well for NC State.

I'm always hopin' for the best for CAL and I was tired of comparing teams at that point so I through in Cal.

To the guy who tried bashing on me for putting Michigain above Kansas, Iowa, etc.:

The reason why I put Michigain above Kansas, Iowa, and some other school is because when Mike Woods starts competing their team is going to do much better. Just because Michigain was beat by some other teams doesn't mean that that team's top 5 are better than Michigain's top 5. If Woods would have been running, he would've placed up their with Williams (in the top 20), which means their 5th guy who came in at 99th place would've been dropped from their score, making a solid difference of 70 - 80 points, which means that Michigain would've placed 4th or maybe 3rd in the White race. That means they possibly would've finished ahead of Florida, who I ranked as being in the top 10 and the new national polls ranked Florida at 10th, so if anything, I was being modest when I ranked Michigain. If we were basing rankings on just who teams have ran thus far this season, Wisconsin wouldn't be ranked 1st in the nation at all yet this season. Well, maybe, but you get my point.

Yeah, I probably should have put Georgetown in there. Those were just the teams on my mind at the time I guess. After some more thought, here is my re-ranking.

1. Wisconsin

2. Iona

3. UTEP

4. Colorado

5. Arkansas

6. Stanford

7. Florida State

8. Oregon

9. Portland

10. Florida

11. NC State

12. BYU - remember, Rohatinsky didn't run at prenat's - but he's still on the team

13. Alabama

14. Georgetown

15. UC Santa Barbara

16. UC Santa Barbara

17. Michigan

18. Kansas

19. Iowa

20. Minnesota

1. Wisconsin

2. Iona

3. UTEP

4. Colorado

5. Arkansas

6. Stanford

7. Florida State

8. Oregon

9. Portland

10. Florida

11. NC State

12. BYU - remember, Rohatinsky didn't run at prenat's - but he's still on the team

13. Alabama

14. Georgetown

15. Notre Dame

16. UC Santa Barbara

17. Michigan

18. Kansas

19. Iowa

20. Minnesota

Why did Villanova suck so badly? 31st at Pre-Nats? I thought they were supposed to be pretty good this year.

How can Wisco still be ranked No. 1 ? They definitely have a lot of talent on the team, no one doubts that. But, for me they have done nothing to earn this ranking so far this year.

Don't forget Ryan Vail (Ok St's #1) wasn't at Pre-nats. You can take a good 80 points off their score (just in the Blue Race) with him there.

correction.. OkSt was in the White race.

They are ranked #1 because people think that they are the team to beat. They are not concerned with racing a full team in any one meet. You can add together what they will do by taking Solinsky, Eagon, and several possible 5ths (most likely Wagner). Then you have Nelson [I cannot remember if has really raced this fall] and Withrow. All but Wagner placed in the top 15 (scoring-wise) last year and Wagner looks better than last year when he was in the 40s scoring-wise. Add to this the whole set of Freshmen (redshirt and true).They have beaten some good competition running only one one of their top guys in a meet. Still, there will be a question until we see them really race, especially Withrow (who some are picking to win the race, although I think tat that is overly optimistic). I presume that the Big Ten meet will see a full effort, although possibily Withrow, who seems to be able to run 'one-off' races.I presume that they are trying to develop the freshmen because next year they lose another two of their top guys.

zubrek wrote:

How can Wisco still be ranked No. 1 ? They definitely have a lot of talent on the team, no one doubts that. But, for me they have done nothing to earn this ranking so far this year.

timbroerocks wrote:

... I also saw a someone aska bout the best true freshman in the country. On the girls side....

Hanna Grinaker ran fifth in her race (Freshman out of Minesota), only 16 seconds off first and 15 seconds ahead of her teammate Rundhaug who ran a pretty good 5000 and 10,000 last year. She had run a strong race at FL, surprising many people with her 7th place (after looking like she was only #3 in Minnesota).

I do understand what you are saying. And if this was a pre-season poll I would rank them Number 1. But it is not. I do understand how Wisco approaches the season, and that the polls are just that, polls, mostly for the fans and the sports info departments. But at least they should reflect the current state of the sport. Can you imagine Ohio State still ranked number 1 if they had lost a few games because they did not play their top guys? Oh well....

Agreed. I wonder how Wisconsin would stack up against UTEP or Iona right now. It's kind of assumed that Wisconsin could take Arkansas and Colorado, although I think Colorado and Wisconsin would be a close one. Wisconsin seems to have better depth than Arkansas. But the truth of the matter could very well be that UTEP could be Wisconsin. I don't think Wisconsin is any stronger this year than last year, or at least I haven't seen any evidence of it yet. Their top 7 would probably be Solinsky, Withrow, Eagon, Nelson, Wagner, Bethke, Porter?

irun, we are thinking alike. Colorado, UTEP, Iona are performing, and with no real team performance from Wisco, there is a real question as to who is number 1. If I had a vote it would be for a team that is performing. Not to say that my opinion won't change after conference meets and regionals.

Right now I would say it is a real toss up between 5 teams for the top 5 spots: Wisconsin, UTEP, Colorado, Iona, and Arkansas. I don't think Stanford has the strength to break that top 5. With combined results of both blue and white races from pre-nats, Iona barely beats Colorado, but Iona was in a faster race, so it isn't really fair to do that, although it makes for interesting speculation or whatever. I think that if Colorado was in the faster race, they would have beat Iona because Colorado would have gone out with the leaders and competed for the win and won. They would know that Iona would be a hard team to beat so they would have gone after them. Arkansas has had some good performances from Scott MacPhearson and Kenny Cormier (who placed 22nd at NCAAs last year, 28th overall), but I don't think they're consistent enough. Shawn Forrest has underperformed in the past on a couple of important occasions, and they don't really run as a team. UTEP and Iona are kind of unpredictable. UTEP only placed 14th last year at NCAA's, but only lost one of their top 5 this year, but Patrick Mutai had a bad race last year at NCAA's also. I think it's only safe to say who should be in contention for the top 5 spots because I think any of those teams could take it. So much can happen on race day that a team that would normally have placed 5th with every runner running at their full potential actually ends up winning because one team went out too hard, one team had a couple of guys who were not rest enough, etc., etc. I'm not trying to make excuses now if my team doesn't win, because really, I don't have a team. Actually, I would like to see Oregon place in the top 5 with a top 10 finish from Rupp. I think it could happen.

I think of the polls as predictions of the best team (and 2nd best...) when reconning comes in November. Others may view it as recognition of what has been accomplished. Both perspectives are valid and I do not know if there is a set of criteria for the voting.

I do think that there is uncertainty about the runners that have not raced or raced hard, particularly Withrow, who ran two races last year 3rd/Big Tens, 7th/NCAAs. I have no inside information about anyone.

Ben Porter has not had any good races this season and I would guess that Codie See or Miller or Lacy will be the 7th man, which will probably be determined by the Big Ten meet.

Wisconsin is probably number 1, if nothing else, by default. If they end up winning this year, it will be a lot closer, but I'm not convinced there is any team strong enough to beat them. CU is solid, but they won't have enough firepower up front (unless Vaughn makes a lot of progress in the next five weeks). Arkansas is hard to figure. UTEP seems to fizzle. Maybe Iona will surprise, who knows...Considering Harkrader and Vaughn haven't really raced CC in almost two years, I look for them to shake off the race rust and fortify the Buffs, but I don't think it will be enough against the likes of Solinsky and Withrow-both of whom should be top 5.

CU: 10, 14, 18, 28, 36, (40), (62)=106

Wis: 1, 5, 13, 20, 35, (44), (75)=84