Nebraska only 38 points on track but dominate Big 10

I noticed that same thing. Not counting the hurdles, they only scored 15 points on the track.
That is one way to win a meet, to stock up on specialty events, hurdles and field events, because there are more of those than running events.

But yes, it does seem strange that they weren’t much of a factor on the track but won the meet handily.

The Nebraska women were third and only scored one point in non-hurdle running events.

As a fan, I would rather see my team take a balanced approach and compete across all events.

Both the men and women crushed the javelin throw. It’s a great way to gain points, to specialize in an event where some teams don’t have anyone.

In NCAA swimming there are always complaint why diving is added to team points, easy answer it is swimming and diving champs.... You know the rules of point scoring and then you game the system to win if you need to keep your job, high ideals mean small cash payments.... There are millions of reason why some coach would do this, might be that they do not have money to recruit elites in every sport.... I wonder how many schools there are doing focus just on track? It is TRACK and FIELD .

This type of strategy was Pepin's hallmark. St. Clair has tweaked the formula a bit, but you can't blame them.

Not surprised to see the throws dominate...I remember watching NDSU vs SDSU summit league track shootouts where it would be throwers versus distance.

The next step for them is to develop some talent in the traditional running events. Unfortunately, 47xx, 149, 345 and 1400 won't score too many points.

They have a commit who has run 49/9:05/15:00

Yeah bro, It's called Track AND Field. Whining because your team is full of skinny distance runners is not a good look

This has always been their game plan. I used to compete against them in their big 12 days: field events, hurdles, and one or two good distance or mid distance runners.

One year we had the lead going into the 3k at the end of indoors and put up some big points, thought we had the thing wrapped up.

Then 3 field events finished and once those scores rolled in they crushed us.

I just got beat for a conference championship (not college) because a team scored 33 points in pole vault.

So, 38 of 151 were scored on the track.

Places in the field:

High Jump: 1-2-8

Pole Vault - nothing

Long Jump: 1-4

Triple Jump: 3-4

Shot Put: 1-2-6

Discus: 1-2

Hammer - nothing

Javelin: 1-2

Yep, pretty impressive.

It's a conference meet. Points are points no matter how you get them. Credit them for using their strengths.

Petros while at Georgia won two NCAA team titles with basically field events only. Winning is winning and Nebraska did. Go Big Red!

Pepin was an excellent coach before arriving at Nebraska. He had outstanding pole vaulters, high jumpers, triple jumpers, long jumpers and a great decathlete at KU. A competitor like Pepin recognized titles could be won with an emphasis on the field events. That strategy is still part of the NCAA game.

113 points in the 8 or 9 field events. I can't remember if I included decathlon in that 113 total. That's crazy.

Their high jump, long jump, shot put and discus placers are the most impressive, because those are the most competitive events that every kid with a little talent tries. The others could be considered more fringe events because they are more technical and fewer people grew up doing them.

Didn't Florida win NCAAs last year with only 100m, 200m, and 400m runners? Couldn't win their conference with that but what is the main goal? Nothing wrong with playing to your strengths.

That's been Rovelto's formula down at KSU, and it did work a lot. Unfortunately, the last few years he realized that recruiting takes effort and he'd rather just stay home count his money during NCAAs

Personally I like the Florida approach with a sprint, hurdles, relays emphasis. The field event approach works for others. I'm happy to see Nebraska have success. GBR!

In Canada Guelph University Gryphons does both well. Now that's a winning combination.