NCAA Selection Sunday for xc is this weekend. Please post who should make it here

What you may not understand is that Syracuse improved and so would all of those teams. You cannot compare 2 teams times from March 5th while using the times from a meet a month earlier for the other teams. Statistics are great but stop cherry picking stats for your agenda in proving that Michigan should have been in.

Again, I believe Michigan is a top 20 team. They got screwed by not running Big 10 but given the criteria for qualification they should not be in and Syracuse got lucky. I actually think Michigan should get in over Furman. They sat on winning a crap conference. The NCAA criteria should have made teams run at least one race in the winter to prove they are ready. And for all of you Furman whiners, running a mile and 5k indoors does not prove you are ready for NCAA XC. You will do just fine at NCAA but you still should not have made the meet.

And Michigan indoor this year ran 7:58-7:59-8:00-8:01-8:04-8:05-8:06 and 13:46-13:48-13:56. Are there 31 better teams? All of the talk of scholarships and making D1 teams. Imagine now that you have to run 8:05 to make every D1 team in the top 31. Not even close. 8:05 is 72nd in the NCAA. So Michigan has 7 guys in the top 73 in the NCAA 3k but are not a top 31 team? Do that math. That means there are many teams with 1 or 2 guys faster than Michigan's 7th but they qualified.

I believe if the ACC and B10 team all lined up in the FSU race last Friday, Michigan and Syracuse would have been in the hunt for the win. But based on the selections, they would finish about 10th place. I feel bad for Michigan. Covid killed them. It is not their fault. They ran well at this meet. They ran well indoor. Had they won by 1 pt, they would be going and Syracuse wouldn't and Duke probably wouldn't.

Blake Boldon did an interview on Flotrack. He was full of it. They didn't consider track. They didn't consider history. Then how do they exclude conference champs while including multiple teams from other conferences?

Last time I checked, NCAA XC nationals is a 10K. Am I mistaken? last time I checked, this race is on grass with hills. 3K times are not a gauge of cross country strength, especially when you can't beat a Syracuse team who shouldn't be there. You can't keep a team out of CROSS COUNTRY NATIONALS because Michigan ran well on the track. They had a chance to make it and couldn't beat the 31st team in. Therefore you loose.

They honestly did the best they could. There are a couple snubs but Michigan ain't one. Syracuse got in through common opponents with UMass. UMass couldn't beat UConn, Syracuse did. Therefore Syracuse is in. It has nothing to do with Syracuse beating Michigan. UMass dominated their conference but it is not in the best conference which is why they didn't immediately get moved into the accepted list. One thing led to another and you're looking at Syracuse and UMass for the last spot. I don't think Michigan ever moved into the maybe section of teams. They weren't even close.

What criteria permitted 4 B10 teams but no MVC teams? They didn't look at track times. The B10 had no head-to-head. They didn't look at history so there is no way to determine strength of a conference. They didn't look at cross country times. Based on the committee's criteria, the B10 and ACC probably should each have 2 teams in the meet and many other conferences should be included. At least be honest.

rojo wrote:

I don't get why they had to let Duke in. THey beat Syrcause by like 1 or 2 points and it's clear that Syracuse is WAY better know than then. They had like two 14 flagt guys finish 80th and 50th at conference.

If I'm on the committee, I don't reallhy care who is 5th or 6th at a conference meet, 5 months ago. I'd credit the winner but 5ht or 6th that long ago wouldn't factor in.

Yes, Syracuse ran way better last week, but the selection isn't who looks best right now, it's the body of work from the season. They don't just get a free pass for running poorly at conference, all your results matter. It was the same set of guys on the line at conference and they didn't run well. You mention guys who finished 50th and 80th but have run good track times. But the committee isn't choosing who they think will be the top 31 teams on March 15 they're choosing the 31 teams that had the best seasons.

Further, yes even if in reality Syracuse at their best is much better than Duke, the committee is using criteria that doesn't allow for discretion (which makes sense -- you describe how Syracuse looks fitter now, how do you know Duke isn't too?). Duke is 2-0 against Syracuse, with a win over them in the fall and a win over them at FSU meet on Feb 5. Then Syracuse gets a win over a Michigan team who has no other races to their name (covid preventing them from running conf. meet does screw them. Unfortunate, but all they have to show the committee is one race, and it's a loss to Syracuse. Yes, if Michigan wins, they get it no question. But 'cuse ran well). So since Michigan has no body of work to their name, Syracuse's win over them gives them no "points" in the eyes of the committee. You can't just compare times -- the races are run very differently. If you look at the splits, in the smaller meet last week they went out at a much more sane, even pace and ended up running faster than many guys who blew up in the big race on Feb 5. Plus they're a month fitter. Who's to say Wake, Duke, SUU also don't run faster (as Syracuse and FSU did).

Again, I do think Syracuse is really good at their best, probably better than Duke. But not only are they 0 and 2 against Duke, but they don't even have a win against any team that has beat Duke means there's actually zero way the committee can take them over Duke.

Also, to answer your question about teams that only ran in the fall and made it, Virginia, Charlotte, Furman all haven't run cross country since the fall.

Illinois State won their conference meet scoring 24 points beating Bradley who scored 70. Bradley was at nationals 2 years ago. Michigan State scored 94 in their conference meet losing to Wisconsin who scored 40. The committee didn't look at history or rankings or track. How did Michigan State get in of Illinois State did not? Their is no head-to-head so there is no way to say that Wisconsin is better than Illinois State yet the 4th team in the B10 made it but the champ in the MVC did not. I don't like when people are not upfront but Boldon stated a set of criteria but they didn't follow that set.

I have only one question. What's the point, other than coaches feeling a need to have their team represented at a watered down national meet? Certainly the athletes are not gaining much, if anything. They got cheated a long time ago when football was allowed to compete and XC was not.

Time to move on. The selection process has always been an afterthought, never providing a logical approach on qualifying to the nationals. Needing a computer to figure out who goes and who stays home is pure nonsense.

Reminds me of an old Laurel and Hardy skit about she gave it to him and he gave it you and you gave it to her.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w281NPUSj7o

Tugma wrote:

Last time I checked, NCAA XC nationals is a 10K. Am I mistaken? last time I checked, this race is on grass with hills. 3K times are not a gauge of cross country strength, especially when you can't beat a Syracuse team who shouldn't be there. You can't keep a team out of CROSS COUNTRY NATIONALS because Michigan ran well on the track. They had a chance to make it and couldn't beat the 31st team in. Therefore you loose.

+1

This kid is so rattled his team didn’t make it he doesn’t even know what he’s arguing about anymore. Just post another workout video on your Instagram and start getting ready for the sport you say your so good at. Track. Michibitches

Tugma wrote:

They honestly did the best they could. There are a couple snubs but Michigan ain't one. Syracuse got in through common opponents with UMass. UMass couldn't beat UConn, Syracuse did. Therefore Syracuse is in. It has nothing to do with Syracuse beating Michigan. UMass dominated their conference but it is not in the best conference which is why they didn't immediately get moved into the accepted list. One thing led to another and you're looking at Syracuse and UMass for the last spot. I don't think Michigan ever moved into the maybe section of teams. They weren't even close.

Syracuse is going to finish like 12th at nationals based on their recent performance. Mark my words.

You can’t say Michigan didn’t get snubbed when they placed ninth last year and return 5 guys

I agree Michigan deserved to be there but last year SHOULD be irrelevant. It was supposed to be about your body of work this year with the main factor being conference champs. As we know because of Furman and the Big East, that is not the case. They definitely used history to decide the field this year. The NCAA failed by not providing correct guidelines on how to qualify and Michigan suffers.

Tugma wrote:

Last time I checked, NCAA XC nationals is a 10K. Am I mistaken? last time I checked, this race is on grass with hills. 3K times are not a gauge of cross country strength, especially when you can't beat a Syracuse team who shouldn't be there. You can't keep a team out of CROSS COUNTRY NATIONALS because Michigan ran well on the track. They had a chance to make it and couldn't beat the 31st team in. Therefore you loose.

Here is some data from 2018 XC and 2019 Indoors, the last year with a full season. This shows colleges ordered by their top 5 3k average time (unconverted) as well as what place they were at nationals. Every team with a < 8:10 3k made it to nationals that year. 18/21 teams with < 8:15 3k made it to nationals.

The 3k obviously is a lot shorter than a 10k but it is still a very good indicator. If a team has fast 3ks then they will be solid on the XC course.

College Avg Place

BYU 7:55 2

Stanford 7:56 5

Oregon 7:56 15

Wisconsin 7:57 8

ISU 7:59 7

UW 8:00 6

Portland 8:00 3

NAU 8:03 1

Arkansas 8:03 25

IU 8:05 18

Boise 8:06 10

Syracuse 8:08 26

Notre Dame 8:08 14

OSU 8:09 13

Villanova 8:10 23

Ole Miss 8:10 17

Gonzaga 8:13

Penn State 8:13

Michigan 8:14 19

Bradley 8:14 24

Alabama 8:14

Purdue 8:14 29

NC State 8:14 11

EKU 8:14 16

Georgia Tech 8:15

WSU 8:16

Adams State 8:16

Texas 8:16 27

Illinois 8:16

Army 8:16

CU 8:16 4

Virginia Tech 8:17

Virginia 8:17

UMass Lowell 8:17

Georgetown 8:18

Princeton 8:18 22

Kansas 8:18

Cal 8:19

Iona 8:19 28

Minnesota 8:19

Kentucky 8:19

Columbia 8:20

Stony Brook 8:20

CSU 8:20 9

Tennessee 8:21

Penn 8:21

Harvard 8:21

Michigan State 8:21

Duke 8:22

Tulsa 8:22 30

Iowa 8:22

GVSU 8:22

Navy 8:23

Connecticut 8:23

Northeastern 8:23

Wyoming 8:23 12

… … …

Air Force 8:35 20

SUU 8:44 21

FSU NA 31

You put some work on that list. If 3K mattered then why are so many of those teams not going to nationals? Why are so many of those teams never in the mix? It’s because track times are irrelevant. The amount of times tough strong athletes beat good track runners in cross is unreal. It don’t matta

Isn’t that the three person squad. You need 5 in cross. Alabama should know that well going 1,2,3 at SEC a few years ago and loosing. Or Ole Miss for that matter. Cross Country is a mans sport. Track and Cross don’t equate. Especially in a year when Michigan can’t beat Syracuse. I know it sucks to be you guys but you blew it. It’s no ones fault but your own. Syracuse 31/31 coming up.

This is so idiotic. The 3000m might be the most irrelevant distance event that is ran frequently. No one cares about the 3k everyone runs 5ks and would be a better indicator anyway. ALSO there is no reason to use the 2019 numbers, 2020 missed one meet.

Notice how programs like NAU and BYU went all in for cross and Oregon goes all in on Indoor. Michigan is just not dominant enough at either and now has some mediocre 3k times and no team at nationals.

Those 3k times didn’t help you against a Syracuse team that couldn’t even beat Duke. Michigan has no one to blame but themselves. If those track times were such good indicators why on earth did they suck so bad.

You want the committee to bow down cause you’re a historic program? Boohoo.

Hope you guys are all feeling really good about your 3k prs! I’m sure no one will forget the year Michigan had some guys go sub 8:05! Is this the mediocrity you guys strive for?? Add 5 seconds to all those that were wearing dragon flys while you’re at it.

Maybe run a real distance and show up when it matters instead of whining all over this message boards.

You really should convert these as you can see. SUU, AF, Colorado St, etc are all massively outperforming (screwing up) your r-value here.