Newbury Park is the greatest prep xc team in history

Let's do so basic math, shall we....

What's 4% of 14mins?

14min x 60s = 840s

840s x .04 = 33s (technically 33.6s)

14mins - 33s = 13.27

I went on the conservative side with 10-25s, but if you want to go with Nike's data, we can do that too....doesnt work out so well for your argument though.

Oh and apparently the Next% improves running economy even more...nike just didn't want to spend the extra cash to be able to legally market it...

Let's do some* basic math, shall we....

What's 4% of 14mins?

14min x 60s = 840s

840s x .04 = 33s (technically 33.6s)

14mins - 33s = 13.27

I went on the conservative side with 10-25s, but if you want to go with Nike's data

ADVERTISEMENT

, we can do that too....doesnt work out so well for your argument though.

Oh and apparently the Next% improves running economy even more...nike just didn't want to spend the extra cash to be able to legally market it...

You need to put some respeck on that boy’s name.

Sage is a legend who ended up as an ncaa track champion and (i think?) 3x top 10 finisher.

This team is much better than those York teams but no way Don isn’t fighting for the win in just about any HS race in any era.

^^^

3x top 10 in XC is what I meant

A fun discussion, even as comparing XC teams across eras and courses is notoriously difficult. One simple basis for comparison is to compare the great Elmhurst York boys team of 1999’s state meet times (top 6) held on the legendary 3 mile Detweiler course, to Josh Methner’s course record breaking time of 13:49.9 in 1999 (albeit under ideal conditions, and the fact that the course was slightly altered in 2003, I believe):

1. Don Sage -14:03. Sr.; 2. Adam Palumbo -14:34 Sr.; 3. Peter Cioni -14:36. Sr.; 4. Adam Roche -14:38. Jr.;

5. Peter Stasilius -14:46 Jr.; 6. John Janulis -14:59. Sr.

As we know, Methner went on to place 2nd in 2019 against perhaps one of the stronger Nike XC National fields ever, yet was defeated handily by NP’s Nico Young by 14 secs under very wet conditions, and Nico subsequently went on to break the indoor 3k record and may have gone on to race 2 miles in the Spring in at least the mid to low 8:30s, if not for COVID...given NP’s top 4 all running within 8 seconds of Nico’s 2019 record breaking 3 mile time of 13:39 at Woodbridge this year, and with 8:56 3200m runner Daniel Appleford’s recovery from illness on schedule, NP makes a formidable case for best Boys XC team ever, even ahead of other legendary squads like Lompoc’s 1972 team and the South Eugene teams led by the McChesneys, among a number of worthy teams...

macded wrote:

California kids run mostly on hard pack dirt surface or grass that is harder. Rest of America not in arid parts of the country run on squishy, soft, energy-sapping grass. This is why York could have trounced NBP on equal footing (literally).

At the 2019, NXN, California went 1 and 2. They handle that course very well. Newbury Park has that secret park near their school that gets over watered that helps them simulate the NXN course, name of this park is in the 2019 Golden State Legends.

California teams have learned how train for the so called “Midwest” courses that’s why California has done so well at NXN the last few years.

So your remark of York would have trounced NBP is wrong.

truthsayer99 wrote:

Let's do some* basic math, shall we....

What's 4% of 14mins?

14min x 60s = 840s

840s x .04 = 33s (technically 33.6s)

14mins - 33s = 13.27

I went on the conservative side with 10-25s, but if you want to go with Nike's data

ADVERTISEMENT

, we can do that too....doesnt work out so well for your argument though.

Oh and apparently the Next% improves running economy even more...nike just didn't want to spend the extra cash to be able to legally market it...

Why stop there? Let’s convert other times down by 4%.

How about Bekele’s 12:37 5k? Now, he would be a 12:07 guy. Or Webb? He was actually a 3:44 miler in HS.

You think you are making a strong argument but you are not. The thing about basic* math is that it should hold up across the board, not just as it suits your argument.

Look, York was a really good team. But in the late 90s, we were pumping out like three 8:57 dudes per year.

truthsayer99 wrote:

Let's do some* basic math, shall we....

What's 4% of 14mins?

14min x 60s = 840s

840s x .04 = 33s (technically 33.6s)

14mins - 33s = 13.27

I went on the conservative side with 10-25s, but if you want to go with Nike's data

ADVERTISEMENT

, we can do that too....doesnt work out so well for your argument though.

Oh and apparently the Next% improves running economy even more...nike just didn't want to spend the extra cash to be able to legally market it...

This is just plain dumb. You think dragonflys dropped 1500-1600/3000-3200 track times by 4%? There is zero evidence of this across elite runners . Seriously? Just give it up. Times are times. Sage or no Sage, NP is not being beaten by any xc team past or present. Just get used to it and enjoy the show.

yeah, I have some firsthand knowledge of York '99, and Newbury Park would wipe the floor with them.

I'd still pick Sage to win the race. But the team contest would not be particularly close.

Newbury Park could win NCAA D2 nationals this year.

4 runners with a chance to break 14 in the 5k this spring and the 5th isn’t far back. I’d like to see a dual meet vs. Adams State or CO School of Mines.

THIS

Wise Old Man wrote:

I agree with you, the denominator matters a great deal. My daughter’s run at highly successful D5 program in CA. They have multiple state championships and podiums. The school only has 550 kids total, boys and girls, but the xc team has nearly 100 runners this season. More runners, more chance to have some talented ones. The team size is greater than many D1 teams and it makes sense that our little school does so well because it’s functionally like a big school program. Now a lot of this turn out can be attributed to the coach and the legacy of success he’s built at the school, but to a great extent it’s a game of probabilities. More kids, more talent.

NO way that's a public school then. Private school right?

truthsayer99 wrote:

Let's do so basic math, shall we....

What's 4% of 14mins?

14min x 60s = 840s

840s x .04 = 33s (technically 33.6s)

14mins - 33s = 13.27

I went on the conservative side with 10-25s, but if you want to go with Nike's data, we can do that too....doesnt work out so well for your argument though.

Oh and apparently the Next% improves running economy even more...nike just didn't want to spend the extra cash to be able to legally market it...

*This is a bunch of gobblygook. The supershoes can drop times 3-4 sec per mile, end of story.

*Donald Sage was amazing and would have been NP's number one if he was on their team. But the Newbury Park team would have crushed York's best team. NP is in another stratosphere.

*Many of Newbury's top boys would not be going to that high school if not for the running. At least 3 of their top 5 do not even live in Newbury Park. Their number 5 ran at a different high school freshman year, where he was one of the top freshman in California. Sean pulls the top club and MS kids from the entire county, and brings them to NP. However, he does a mind-blowing job of turning them into nationally elite competitors.

Meurgyles wrote:

*Many of Newbury's top boys would not be going to that high school if not for the running. At least 3 of their top 5 do not even live in Newbury Park. Their number 5 ran at a different high school freshman year, where he was one of the top freshman in California. Sean pulls the top club and MS kids from the entire county, and brings them to NP. However, he does a mind-blowing job of turning them into nationally elite competitors.

If true, the program should be ashamed of itself and no one should respect it much.

There is no excuse for recruiting in HS. It teaches all the kids exactly the wrong lessons about amateur sports.

All the kids playing it straight in their catchment schools making the best of their teams should be furious at NP for skimming off the top talent from other schools and then being called great.

*if true*

This is getting old. In California you can choose whatever high school you feel is best for you. So if a school has a good track program you decide on that school. If it has a good football program you go to that school. If you want a good debate club then choose according. This is how the state does it. No recruiting involved. If you build it they will come.

enough wrote:

agip wrote:

If true, the program should be ashamed of itself and no one should respect it much.

There is no excuse for recruiting in HS. It teaches all the kids exactly the wrong lessons about amateur sports.

All the kids playing it straight in their catchment schools making the best of their teams should be furious at NP for skimming off the top talent from other schools and then being called great.

*if true*

This is getting old. In California you can choose whatever high school you feel is best for you. So if a school has a good track program you decide on that school. If it has a good football program you go to that school. If you want a good debate club then choose according. This is how the state does it. No recruiting involved. If you build it they will come.

you are overstating it, right? Districts have different rules, from what I can dig up in a few minutes of googling. So a school in a district that allows 'recruiting' has a massive edge over a school in a district that doesn't allow these kinds of shenanigans. Hardly fair in a sporting sense, and therefore teaching bad lessons to kids.

And I'm not sure how what you are saying changes anything. So a good school sucks up a lot of talent from around the region and creates a regional superteam that builds its own momentum. Big whoop. I'm happy for the kids who it helps, but it's not at all good for the sport to have this kind of sucking up of talent, and hurts kids in other schools. In any case, it makes NP's accomplishments much, much less impressive.

I agree, an obviously great team, but really a regional all-star team. Much more impressed by what York has done. Not to mention the summer altitude camps etc..

richmond fc wrote:

I agree, an obviously great team, but really a regional all-star team. Much more impressed by what York has done. Not to mention the summer altitude camps etc..

and remember FM's great years? Not sure if they are good anymore but year after year they seemed to take a regular HS and mold it into a great team, often without standouts.

Meurgyles wrote:

*This is a bunch of gobblygook. The supershoes can drop times 3-4 sec per mile, end of story.

False.

*Donald Sage was amazing and would have been NP's number one if he was on their team. But the Newbury Park team would have crushed York's best team. NP is in another stratosphere.

This is closer to a middle ground that I would be more likely to support. If Donald Sage was born in 2004, or if we transposed him from being a senior in 2000 on York’s team to being a senior in 2022 on NBP’s team, I would give him a greater chance at being their number 1. But, Sage in September 1999 was a ~9 min guy.

I can’t say with 100% confidence that he would be their number 1 because Leo just ran faster than the HS indoor 3k record holder - and he could still lose to the other 3 next race.

But, If Sage were on NBP, he would certainly have run his closer to his HS PR of 8:42.9 3200 as a junior instead of as a senior. So, he would’ve been right there in the mix.