Disappointed in Washington Women at NCAA's

Lawrence is a Redshirt Freshman. What about Campbell, who was third in the 10k. Schaaf redshirted and has been running pretty well in Canada running a PR in the 1500 of 4:18.

While the Huskies may not have impressed in track, they're the reigning NCAA Division I Cross Country National Champions.

Did the Oregon women fare better at the Track National Championship? The Stanford women? Or any other team you want to put up there in the hunt for the title in 09?

Is Lindsey Scherf going to be there for the Ducks next year? I think so because she had a medical RS. I was thinking it should be a close race next year, but I don't think Hasay will contribute as much as people seem to think.

Well yes, and this is part of my disappointment with the poor performance by Washington. They supposedly had this great distance depth, but look at the Oregon women who did place second at Fayetteville, and made a pretty good run at the national title. They had points from Nicole Blood (who I believe took second in the 5K) also they got points from Bridgeman in the 10K. Others who did quite well from Oregon Claire Michel in the Steeple and Buckman, who was an 800 meter finalist and Alex Kosinski in the 1500. Even Stanford, who was not a XC threat, did well at the Outdoors with points from Lauren Centrowitz in the 1500 (I believe a third place) and Follmar also in the 1500. Also Kate Niehaus in the 5K competed.

With Scherf, Blood, Kosinski, Michel, Bies and Bridgeman back, I too wonder if Hasay will be needed by Oregon for next XC season. I am thinking that they will redshirt their incoming recruits, including Footlocker finalists Hasay, Taylor Wallace, and Mel Thompson.

Why was Schaaf running in Canada? Wasn't she eligible to run in the NCAA championships? Is Metcalf coaching these girls? If he is, that might be an explanation for OP's question.

Follmar did not get Stanford points unfortunately.

Laurynne Chetelat had a stress reaction and so pulled out of the 5k, or she may have been able to score.

Because she redshirted indoors and out

Anita Campbell was ranked 9th in the nation in the 10k and ended up 3rd (not sure how the hell you missed this one)

Mel Lawrence ranked 4th in the steeple and ended up 3rd.

Christine Babcock was ranked 13th in the 1500 and ended up 11th.

The only one who didn't outperform her rank was Katie Follett in the 5k. She was ranked 7th and ended up 12th, but it was a kicker's race which always leaves the field wide open at nationals.

Maybe you wanted to see more out of them from this season but to say they underperformed at Nationals is borderline insanity.

Why so defensive? Based on all the hype about their XC team, I expected that they would be a player at outdoor nationals. Instead they were one of the lower teams. You cite that a couple of the girls finished higher than their seed. All that says is that their season as a whole was poor, leading to low seeds, and seems to confirm what a lot of people have been saying -- that they were overtrained from XC and went downhill from there. I recall a number of Washington fans proclaiming on this board that they would dominate at the track and field distance events this year. Instead, we got Zero champions out of that group and some poor performances. My original comments hold.

Well, if Schaaf wasn't injured she may have done some great things... just looking at how fast Chetelat ran in her debut 5k in March gives the idea that Schaaf may have run at least the same if not faster.

Why was Schaaf injured? Was she overtrained/poorly coached? I think many of us believe that is a big part of Washington's problem. Just saying.

If her injury is an excuse, then nearly every team has excuses--weren't both Scherf and Grelli injured for Oregon? It just seems from the history of the past 5-10 years that Washington always has these problems.

Scherf and Grelli are sad stories. They went through all kinds of work to get the opportunity to run at Oregon, moved across the country and ran like crap.

I remember seeing photos, and results of the first OU meet run at Pre's Trail and although Grelli won you could tell she was maxed and sickly thin. I know Scherf is done but does Grelli have any seasons left for OU?

Honestly, I think Washington has done great with recruiting - major props here go to Kelly MacDonald-Strong.

Look at who they managed to get - Kendra Schaaf, Christine Babcock, Mel Lawrence, etc. Lots of talent right there.

To be fair though, Mel Lawrence has improved... last year she was 117th at NCAA XC Nationals (she redshirted track last year, not xc), and this year she was 25th. Also, the 9:40 steeple is amazing and another huge improvement. If you see an interview with her, she doesn't seem to have a problem with the coaching.

Sorry if it came out as defensive but I was just trying to make a point. All I was saying is they actually did well at NCAA's, unlike your statement in the subject heading, in terms of how their season has been going. If you want to make the statement that there season as a whole didn't live up to expectations, you will probably win that argument. And based on the fact that they had at least 8 women last XC who could all be all-americans, I would have to agree with you there.

The number of points scored (12) by the distance runners may have been a little disappointing; but when you look at the fact that they qualified 5 runners at 1500 and up despite redshirting their #1 runner and graduating two Olympic Trials participants at 1500 who competed in XC for them, I think it's pretty impressive. Looking at Kailey Campbell's progression at UW shows the program is at least working for someone.

Okay, let's look at the top-five teams from NCAA Cross Country plus Stanford from the distances between 1500 and 10k. Washington had five women at NCAA's, Stanford four, Oregon four, FSU one, WVU two, Princeton two.

Four Huskies made the finals in their events, three Ducks made it, one Cardinal made it, Kuijken obviously wins, WVU had one 10k finisher and a DNF in another final, and Princeton had one 10k finalist. The winners come from FSU, Colorado, Illinois, and Providence. Why does the original poster expect UW to be winning every title? They won xc with unrivaled depth.

The way I see it, if Follett had scored in the 5k this already uninformed thread would be even more ludicrous. Yes, Follett bombed in the final. She hasn't been fully healthy all year and yet still won a Pac-10 title. If that's enough to condemn the whole distance group then so be it. Babcock PR'd in the prelims also, going 4:16.10. So she was 11th as a true freshman, that's not good enough?

Meanwhile, Kendra Schaaf redshirted and has been running meets in Canada including a 4:18 time in a 1500. That's a negative? Mel Lawrence redshirted last track season too and it looks like that is working out for her okay.

After looking over the results, I did notice several Villanova women though I didn't keep count. But based on that, I'd say Villanova is challenger No. 1 for UW in the fall, followed by Oregon and Stanford if they are fully healthy (Chetelat injured and Amaro DNFs at natinals).

Okay, Babcock PR'd in the prelims at 4:16, but you forgot some of her amazing performances last year. She hasn't improved off of THOSE... she has kind of stagnated this season in fact.

Nova is good, but they will not be at the level of the Oregon/Washington battle.

Oregon will have Scherf, Hasay, Blood, Kosinski. Washington will have Schaaf, Babcock, Follett, Lawrence. It will be a close battle. I give the edge to Washington because they do have more depth.

Stanford is still in a rebuilding year. They do have Chetelat and get good recruits in Alex Dunne and Kathy Kroeger next year though.

But watch out for FSU... they return almost all of their varsity from last year.