NCAA Womens XC National Championships!!! Predictions, Discussion, Analysis!!!

Let's Do This! wrote:

FastTuohy wrote:

I think (ie my opinion) is that you think (ie your opinion) that is what he did. There is a valid basis to do what he did. But you state your opinion as a fact.

My bad I kind of missed your intention. I thought you were saying that starting from 96 had a valid reason when you are really just saying that the older dater is less relevant or accurate to the current situation...

1998! Pre 1998 data... 96 has no significance other than the first of successive 100+ point winners.... 98 is when the field expanded... and with that if Stanford can bring their A-game we will get 6 out of the last 7 years with a winner under a hundred.

fwiw The Stride Report has Stanford at 59 without their 5th, who is not ranked in top 50. They have Lawson and Freymach at 27/28 which seems odd (to me) as there has been a gap there all year. They have Donaghu and Zudek at 1/3 which also seems aggressive to me.

* Heymach, sorry

Flotrack has Heymach at 34, Lawson at 39 and no other Stanford athlete in top 100 (which does not seem right to me)

Flotrack has been saying that there will be a handful of teams in the 150-200 range. I have been saying since last fall that Stanford will score about 110-115 and win by 50. It just stands to reason that the gap would lessen over time between 1-7 since they all do workouts together. Their 1-2 punch will score almost no points so they really are scoring 3 runners against 4 or 5 for other teams.

I saw this report, and really question some of the logic used on the individual and team side.

They Have NC State as the top women's team, even though the top 50 individuals certainly make it Stanford. I like NC State...but they basically need a miracle to win it considering the injuries. I would go on a limb and say they will win the 2021 XC Nats though.

For individuals, again they have some really odd placements of runners.

I'm not saying they are wrong...but I certainly disagree with some of the logic they are using for placements.

Anyway, I think the top 10 will be fairly similar give or take...but 11-50 are completely up in the air.

Will be very interesting....wish there was a way to watch in Canada...oh well...

Let's Do This! wrote:

Also why 1996? If you want to correct me just give the number don't pick an arbitrary year to try to prove a point which doesn't really exist!

Only four winners have ever scored over 125. So 90% of the winners have been under 125 which people some reason think will be this year's winner

So yeah it was a bit of an exaggeration considering I was just speaking extemporaneously, but not by much about 80% of the teams have been right around a hundred or below

Coach d. was correct in what he said, accept it like a man, you were wrong.

NC State just posted this which seems to include Clairmonte

https://www.instagram.com/p/CMajIUIn6MH/

Is duke going to be allowed in the meet?

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/03/14/us/duke-university-covid/index.html?__twitter_impression=true

Time to get Michigan Men.

So here’s a prediction:

1 Stanford 1 4 20 30 40 = 95

2 New Mexico 15 21 24 26 29 = 115

3 BYU 10 17 23 31 39 = 130

4 NC State 18 22 25 35 45 =145

5 Colorado 160

6 Michigan 180

7 Arkansas 200

S- Only real issue is how 4 and 5 run, but talent is there.

NM and CU- These teams are very similar, they both now go 7 deep. Difference is NM has been better and their spread has been about 30 sec, while CU has been about 60 sec. I have Cohen at 15 and the pack in the 20s. If Cohen is 9th and the pack is 15-25, or Stanford falters NM is a real threat to win. CU under Wetmore always has an interesting race strategy and taper. When they get it just right, they absolutely nail it and way overperform, think 2018. Similarly, when they miss, it’s a disaster like 2019. Macarthur is also due for a breakout. With perfect race, CU could be as high as 2nd.

BYU and NC State- Again similar situations with uncertainty around frontrunners Orton and Clairmonte. I have Orton 10th, if she was say 3rd and the BYU pack was just a bit better, they are also a threat to win. For State I have Clairmonte at 25, just behind Steelman and Chmiel. If 1 of these 3 ended up top 5, and the 4 and 5 runners outperform, the Wolfpack could be as high as 2. Dyestat said no Tuohy, but they can replce there quite well with either Bush or Holt.

I then have a solid Michigan team and Arkansas B team rounding out the group. Boise would be the sleeper.

Overall the most competitive womens race in years, with 3 real frontrunners in Stanford, NM and BYU. (4 if Ark A runs) and NC State and CU right on their heels.

No way 7 teams score 200 or less.

From what I understand, Dyestat reported this because the NC coach said she would let girls compete if they ran on Friday (referring to the indoor 5k) and not saturday. I believe she was saying she would not have let Chmiel or Steelman run XC if the 5k was saturday.

The 1200 meter that Tuohy ran should have no issue on the XC.

All of the NC IG pics show Tuohy training with the team, so likely she is running.

I would expect Clairmonte closer to 10th- 12th if healthy but agree that Chmiel and Steelman could be around 20th. If one of those two could be closer to 10th, then they could threaten for podium.

NM will be very interesting to watch...no low stick, but a tight pack could put them at or near the top.

Haven't heard anything about the shape of the course...did they get all the rain that was predicted??

Tuohy is in their final 8 declaration but no guarantee she runs. Everyone scratches to 7 today. Lauren Gregory is not in Arkansas final 8. Orton is in BYU final 8

[quote]Jedsdead wrote:

I would expect Clairmonte closer to 10th- 12th if healthy but agree that Chmiel and Steelman could be around 20th. If one of those two could be closer to 10th, then they could threaten

Steelman and Chmiel we’re 21st and 22nd last year and half the woman in front of them are gone for this year.......also they are both in better shape considering they both ran PR’s in Indoor this season in the 3K and 5k! And you think they are only going to be in the 20’s again??? And you think the frontrunners in this field are better than last year? I don’t think so! Potentially, NC State could put 3 in the top 10-20, if they do they have the best depth at their 4-7 runners in the field and could still win! The question is whether Clairmonte is healthy enough to run with Steelman and Chmiel?

I expect NC State to be a non factor. I didn't realize that they had such a huge fan base here. Did you guys all graduate from that school?

Where do you see that reported? Very interesting.

Jedsdead wrote:

Where do you see that reported? Very interesting.

Richer than most wrote:

I expect NC State to be a non factor. I didn't realize that they had such a huge fan base here. Did you guys all graduate from that school?

How can you think they are a non factor when they only lost 1 runner from their top 7 from last year and gained Steelman? They were 5th last year and 3 of teams in front of them lost way to much!

NM lost their top two who were both CC Champions

Arkansas lost their top 4,

BYU lost 4 of their top 5

NC State is better than last season! I would love to hear the argument that BYU, NM, and ARK are better than last season??????

Stanford 115

NM 165

BYU 175

NC Stste 200

Arkansas 215

.