Can the Cornell Women win Nationals

RuKiddingMe??

If I was betting man, I bet they don't make top 10 at nationals even thought....currently they are ranked 8th. When the other teams show up they will be running full squads at full strenght....Cornell doesnt have a prayer to win this thing

ever heard of Fl state, Oregon, Iowa st......Cornell best runner would be lucky to make their top 5!

I'm the Big Red Fan and even *I* don't see that happening--but a podium spot would be nice. (It's been a while.)

Assuming no illness/injury in the next couple weeks, Heps probably helped to solidify their top-seven lineup. It's a good mix: two seniors, three juniors, two frosh.

A (somewhat) overlooked performance at Heps was that of Cornell's fourth finisher, the junior Devin McMahon. She was first-team all-Ivy as a frosh in cross (and third in the Heps 10,000m last spring, then just missed qualifying for Nationals by finishing 13th in the Regional race), but Saturday's may have been the sharpest race I've seen from her to date. Finishing tenth in this year's field was no joke--she's really coming around at just the right time. She could give tremendous support to the top three (or be one of them!) in the NCAA races.

Cornell Big Red wrote:

Do they have a shot at winning nationals? They have a LOT of depth and their top 12 runners at Heps were all under 22 minutes. I know it's top 7 and their top 7 can all be under 21 minutes. Does anyone see them winning it all this year?

Simple answer without knowing anything about it.

NO (although my wife says an emphatic yes as she loves Artie Smith and the motto of my website is "Where your dreams become reality" so I guess it's possible that all the teams that are better than them on paper could really lay a goose-egg.)

But i'm not really writing in to answer that question.

My longer answer and the reason why I'm posting on this thread is I hate when people talk about times in cross country. Times mean almost nothing to me and they shouldn't even be talked about unless given the proper context - and 99% of the people don't know how to give them the proper context.

Do people realize how much a course with grass like the Princeton course can very depending on how hard/soft the weather last year? Do people realize that the start line can change (apparently the women's start line was moved up this year)?

A time at a place like VCP which has very little run on grass means something to me although the wind can make a difference there. But on a grass course like Terre Haute or Princeton that can be as dry as concrete or a mud pit, they mean next to nothing to me.

I go so mad reading the various Heps team website's recaps of the races as many of them talked a lot about times. Some of them were talking about how people ran a minute faster than the year before or how such and such broke 25.

Do they realize that last year's race was run in snow blizzard?

But I gues I shouldn't get too uspet that some SID that probalby doesn't know anything about xc is talking about times as people pretty involved in the sport talk about times as well. I was talking to employee 1.1 the other day about Heps as he's a Cornell alum and I said it was great that runner x came through at Heps. He response nearl floored me: "Well wasn't that kind of expected, didn't he run well at Wisconsin?"

I was like, "Did you see the results at Wisconsin? THey beat like 2 teams and had one guy in the top 200. It's almost as if they took the weekend off in honor of their old coach's wedding."

He said, "Well a bunch of them ran 25 flat."

WHO CARES ABOUT TIME?

I don't.

If you want to re-post your question based on who they've beaten and margin of victory or how such and such team isn't deep and could be in trouble if anyone blows up, I'll consider it. But to talk about times from a grass course that has been lightning fast all year is absurd.

I hope they do win. We'll have a red homepage for a week or maybe for eternity until I get David Epstein or Tim Layden to do a feature on them in Sports Illustrated.

So Rojo leaves and they improved?

SMJO wrote:

So Rojo leaves and they improved?

RoJo never coached the women.

RoJo did leave after last year, and the men's cross team did run better this year than last.

As you may have heard, however, correlation is not (necessarily) causality.

all that for a "pip dream"...be honest with the fans! Florida State's second five could beat Cornell!

They completely dominated at Paul Short and Heps. Took 5th at Wisconsin. I'm not an idiot. I realize times mean absolutely nothing in XC. I should have stated what I was trying to say differently. However the depth this team has is insane. They all finish one after another. Do I think they can do it? Idk but I know their team is loaded and they've raced extremely well all season.

But thanks for calling me an idiot when in fact 98% of people talk about times in terms of XC. Doesn't make it right but I'm not the first nor will I be the last person who does that. I was just trying to show how much depth they have.

BRF wrote:

RoJo never coached the women.

RoJo did leave after last year, and the men's cross team did run better this year than last.

As you may have heard, however, correlation is not (necessarily) causality.

You are correct Big Red Fan.

Take a look at last year's Heps Results:

Last year, the Red were what 5th with no seniors in the top 5 at Heps but with a freshman and two sophs in the top 5. The team in front of them Brown was full of seniors - it's top 3 were seniors including two who were 4th and 6th.

Thus you'd expect them to move up to at least 4th and for Brown to move way down.

Coming into the year, it was pretty much what it has been for the last few years. One would expect Columbia and Princeton to battle it out for 1st and Dartmouth and Cornell to battle it out for third with the one question being 'Is Harvard ever going to live up its talent?'

That's what happened.