San Francisco (in the regional)
San Francisco (in the regional)
Does the fact that Gonzaga lost to San Fran at regionals not count?
Records of the teams under consideration against common opponents. If the
committee cannot make a decision based upon head-to-head competition, it reviews
results against common opponents.
a. In order to maintain seven competition opportunities, results versus common
opponents must have occurred between the seventh weekend prior to the NCAA
regional meet (i.e., Friday, Saturday and Sunday, September 24-26, 2010) THROUGH THE CONCLUSION OF THE NCAA REGIONAL CROSS COUNTRY CHAMPIONSHIPS
(scheduled for
November 13, 2010).
Sounds like Gonzaga should be 1-1 and would therefore not make it, even if pushing in on common opponents and not just points is a thing
Can some one clarify the at large process ( and the individuals who will get it maybe?) for me? Someone had said Mascari would be one for the men but I don't understand why? Also who is for the women?
It's the two highest individual placers out of all the regions once all of the team and individual qualifiers are taken out. No other criteria.
Sue P. wrote:
It's the two highest individual placers out of all the regions once all of the team and individual qualifiers are taken out. No other criteria.
and if they are the same place?
StateSucks wrote:
and if they are the same place?
At-large selections. To break a tie for any at-large individual selection, the time differential between tied runners
and the last automatic individual qualifier (the fourth-place automatic qualifier) from their respective regions will be
compared. The runner with the smallest differential will advance.
Did Flotrack give credit to LetsRun for their projections? The article on their site has no mention of the inaccuracy.
Derek Melo wrote:
Did Flotrack give credit to LetsRun for their projections? The article on their site has no mention of the inaccuracy.
lol. when pigs fly.
Seriously though, has anyone who knows/understands the at-large process for individual runners gone through to determine who they would be, men and women?
Rulebook wrote:
Records of the teams under consideration against common opponents. If the
committee cannot make a decision based upon head-to-head competition, it reviews
results against common opponents.
a. In order to maintain seven competition opportunities, results versus common
opponents must have occurred between the seventh weekend prior to the NCAA
regional meet (i.e., Friday, Saturday and Sunday, September 24-26, 2010) THROUGH THE CONCLUSION OF THE NCAA REGIONAL CROSS COUNTRY CHAMPIONSHIPS
(scheduled for
November 13, 2010).
Sounds like Gonzaga should be 1-1 and would therefore not make it, even if pushing in on common opponents and not just points is a thing
Why is gonzaga 1-1? It says regionals doesn't count.
Through the conclusion of Regionals....as in AFTER the race is done. AFTER the race was done Gonzaga was 1-1.
I bet one of those Apple computers at FloTrack was refreshing this thread every few minutes. Ha.
Anyone know if watching live video of division 3 regionals is possible?
Anyone know who the at large individual selections are now?
John Mascari seemed confident that he was going to get an at large selection.
You can catch his interview and the Great Lakes race videos here:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLjcQvz86VpMmgzLO_pYd9HYzBBFv_9N_9
To pique your interest, Molly Seidel and #15 Notre Dame vs. Erin Finn and #7 Michigan.
4 All-Americans in the mens race from last year. 2 ranked squads and Wisconsin's streak breaking run.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLjcQvz86VpMmgzLO_pYd9HYzBBFv_9N_9
Mascari is in for sure, he was 6th in the GL regional, no other 5th place individual finisher (not on a qualifying team) placed as high as 6th in their regional.
SoConfused wrote:
Through the conclusion of Regionals....as in AFTER the race is done. AFTER the race was done Gonzaga was 1-1.
The way the program works I think is if Princeton is 5-0 Head to head vs other teams and Gonzaga is 2-0 but has no losses to Princeton it considers them equal. This may not be the way it is done.
"If teams under consideration are tied in total wins against the teams already in the championships, the committee will not select the team with a head-to-head loss over the team with the head-to-head win. This is important when there are more than two teams tied with total wins against the teams already in the championships."
And I've written Bo to ask how it handles the loss to Gonzaga. I think it should exclude Gonzaga as a result and is not doing that but he may ignore it because it's not vs Princeton.
I can see the logic of not wanting to put Princeton at say 5-0 into the meet vs Gonzaga at 2-0 if they that is solely because one ran at Wisco and one at Pre Nats (I'm making up the meets) but If Gonzaga does have a loss to anyone under consideration it would make sense to exclude them I think but the rules are fairly vague.
Derek Melo wrote:
Did Flotrack give credit to LetsRun for their projections? The article on their site has no mention of the inaccuracy.
I wouldn't expect them too. They don't follow the norms of journalists.
There is no way that Perdue should be out of the championship. They have beaten Villanova twice and beat San Francisco at the pre-national meet. The whole push philosophy would not make any sense and apply to that situation. Even though Wisconsin has beaten Purdue twice, both teams should be in the meet, especially Purdue since they have a win over Texas. Thoughts anyone?
For the women, my best guess (assuming the team predictions are correct):
Regan Rome, W&M (5th in SE Region, no other 5th place finishers in pool)
Laura Rose Donegan, UNH (6th in NE Region, differential +1.0) gets in over Hannah Christen, UNC (6th in SE Region, differential +4.8)
Well, it looks like Letsrun was right and flotrack was wrong with both the women's and the men's team qualifiers. So good for them, I guess.