NCAA Regionals: Surprises and Chokes

sp2 wrote:

A Duck wrote:

In what world was Stanford beating Oregon an upset?

Stanford did not rise up as some lowly underdog.

Their loaded. Oregon coming within ten points of them was the real news.

--------------------------------------

WTF are you talking about?

Oregon's been the much higher-ranked team all season, and has beaten the pants off Stanford till yesterday.

The most interesting part of yesterday was the slightly-embarrassing way the Ducks tried to play it off.

"We don't care about this race at all."

"We were just jogging."

"It was a tempo run."

Stinson and Fleet better back that up big-time next week, or they're gonna look really stupid.

And it doesn't look like they're gonna have Jenkins swoop in to bail them out.

It's on them.

Are you high? Oregon barely made nationals last year. You have got to be kidding me if Parker was "just doing a workout" when we tried to go out and gap the field. Mac Fleet and Parker are going to look like even bigger tools/doushebags than normal next week when they bomb and miss the podium.

ASU has several 9:00 high school 3200 guy sunning 31 minutes for 10k. This puts them onto my underachiever list. The best programs make the most of what they have every year.

What it comes down to is that there's a big gap in NCAA distance running between the best coaches and the average coaches. This is way different than the big money NCAA sports where the best basketball coaches (for example) are only slightly better than the average coaches.

I've stated this before, that many of the best coaches in NCAA distance running are at D2 and D3.

-------------------------------------

Hmm. No, Tom, I'm not high. You appear to be mentally deficient, though.

I'll recap briefly for you, and speak slowly.

Oregon has been much higher-ranked, by everyone, throughout the season, in spite of the fact they've missed some key guys whose arrivals we've been awaiting, and that some other key guys have been horribly subpar.

The Flotrack ratings have put Oregon at #2 or #3 every week for the last month.

Stanford's been mostly at #10, and then dropped down to the #7 spot just last week.

What happened last season has nothing to do with anything at this point of the year.

The two times they raced, before yesterday, Oregon blew them away --in spite of the aforementioned absences.

Oregon was clearly deemed the far superior team by just about everyone.

Of COURSE it was an UPSET, therefore, when Stanford kicked their collective a$$ yesterday.

Is this somehow over your head? (It appears to be over A Duck's head, but that's his problem.)

The second part of my post pointed out that the Ducks --specifically Fleet and Stinson-- went to amazing lengths in their post-race interview to excuse their loss by telling us that they weren't actually trying yesterday.

"Everybody knows this race doesn't mean anything," and "we just jogged it," and "we were just doing a tempo."

My point, which I thought was incredibly clear, though it apparently eluded your comprehension, was that they look pretty pathetic in saying all that about the one race this year where Stanford beat them... and that they're gonna look REALLY STUPID for saying all that if they don't run a whole lot better next week than they did this week.

Stinson and Fleet would have to be pretty close to top-10 next week to make us believe that they were actually 'jogging' out there yesterday.

If Stinson goes out with Ches again, and this time hangs with him to the end of the race, and ends up 9th, lets say (I could definitely see Ches getting 5th or 6th or so), then I'll believe what he said yesterday.

If Fleet is close behind, and outruns Rosa, Olson, and McGorty --and all the other guys on that same level-- and comes in 13th, let's say, then we'll have to respect his assertions from yesterday.

If, OTOH, they finish about like they finished in this race, and Stanford kicks their a$$ again (or even if the Ducks get by based on #4 and 5 performances), then we'll know that they were completely full of crap... which is what I suspect.

Do you understand now?

BTW, you should learn to spell 'doushebag' [sic].

Especially when you seem to be one.

XC 4 Life which coaches/schools (any division) would you say are the best? I'm a high school senior and I really wanna go to a program that can develop. I don't wanna go with a crappy coach. I don't need a national contender, I'm just average (4:25 1600 9:25 3200), but I want to keep at it. What are some of the D2/D3's you think have the best coaching?

XC 4 Life wrote:

ASU has several 9:00 high school 3200 guy sunning 31 minutes for 10k. This puts them onto my underachiever list. The best programs make the most of what they have every year.

ASU and UW: West Coast Talent Cemeteries

No huge surprises:

Western

Adams (I think Damon Martin is top 3 a amongst all NCAA coaches)

Grand Valley

Augustana

Chico

UW-LaCrosse

UW-Oshkosh

UW-Stevens Point

UW-Stout

Williams

Middlebury

North Central (Al Carius might be the best program builder in the country)

St. Olaf

Luther

The great news for a DII or DIII guy is that there lots of good choices--- including many I didn't list).

You don't know wrote:

ASU - worst? Give me a break. They have 1.5 scholarships for distance and are always in the mix. You, my friend, have zero clue. I would say ASU does the most with what they have than any one. Ridiculous. I know for a fact they raced with 5 walk on's at regionals. Portland, CO, NAU, Wisco, Iona, OK State, NOVA - those are distance schools - 6-10 schollies in their teams. I could see Minn, Duke and CAL on that list, but please tell me how ASU is doing worse. Credit to Quintana. Quite honestly, I don't know why Quintana stays at ASU. He is clearly a good coach. Be neat to see him with the resources of, let's say, CAL.

except that Wisco actually has a track program that eats up scholarships. They were almost program of the year least year, and you can't do that with 6-10 scholarships spent on just distance.

curiouskid wrote:

XC 4 Life which coaches/schools (any division) would you say are the best? I'm a high school senior and I really wanna go to a program that can develop. I don't wanna go with a crappy coach. I don't need a national contender, I'm just average (4:25 1600 9:25 3200), but I want to keep at it. What are some of the D2/D3's you think have the best coaching?

Well, Wisconsin's first finisher at NCAA Regionals was right in that ballpark.

sp2

Maybe you cannot read, but we seem to be on the same page in our argument.

Oregon is going to look really stupid when they talked like that after getting spanked by Stanford at Regionals. If they beat Stanford next week or not? Who knows, but I would bet against them taking a podium spot.

UCLA is the top of this list.

harder they come wrote:

XC 4 Life wrote:

ASU has several 9:00 high school 3200 guy sunning 31 minutes for 10k. This puts them onto my underachiever list. The best programs make the most of what they have every year.

ASU and UW: West Coast Talent Cemeteries

I get why people go to UCLA. But if you're a serious runner this is a black hole where talent goes to disappear.

curiouskid wrote:

XC 4 Life which coaches/schools (any division) would you say are the best? I'm a high school senior and I really wanna go to a program that can develop. I don't wanna go with a crappy coach. I don't need a national contender, I'm just average (4:25 1600 9:25 3200), but I want to keep at it. What are some of the D2/D3's you think have the best coaching?

What kind of academic goals do you have, and what parts of the country would you consider?

I'm disappointed with Bernie Montoya of ASU, not just in this race but in his season overall. I was expecting him to be one of the top freshman in the nation and hoping he would have similar success to Cheserek but no cigar. It's kida sad watching all the freshman around the country doing so well and Bernie is doing so so. Kids that he schooled in high school are now enjoying more success than him in college and that kida sucks. Hope he improves and makes a name for himself. He's too talented to let it slip away.

Montaya had an extremely good regional performance. Second true freshman behind McGorty. Well ahead of Leingang.

Considering that Montoya's best performances in HS were at 800/1500, for him to run this well at 10K is borderline spectacular.

Bernie Montoya fan wrote:

I'm disappointed with Bernie Montoya of ASU, not just in this race but in his season overall. I was expecting him to be one of the top freshman in the nation and hoping he would have similar success to Cheserek but no cigar. It's kida sad watching all the freshman around the country doing so well and Bernie is doing so so. Kids that he schooled in high school are now enjoying more success than him in college and that kida sucks. Hope he improves and makes a name for himself. He's too talented to let it slip away.

You gotta be kidding me. Bernie just ran a 30 min 10k on the grass as a freshman miler. He led his entire team yesterday and almost single handedly dragged ASU into Nationals out of a very tough region. Any miler running 30 min over 10k on grass is capable of a 3:40 1500. He's progressing nicely and will be a 340 guy inside of six months.

I think Bernie met expectations this season. He did exactly what I thought he was capable of. This guy was very capable at the 3200 in High School but he was relying on his leg speed in those races and superior athleticism. He obviously is not as gifted at the long races as your McGorty and Saarel. And i'm not saying I expected Ches to do as well as he is. But if you look back into his HS career, it's kind of obvious. He ran a few fast mile times but he has records at 5000. It was a good thing that he didn't do amazing his senior year, otherwise there would be a lot of pressure on him now. He laid low for a while and the hype machine shifted to Saarel, Montoya and Andres Arroyo.

In response to the Oregon/Stanford argument, I somewhat believe Fleet and Stinson but they have a lot to prove. If what they're saying is true, they haven't raced yet this season. And Oregon's problem right now is that they're relying on a true freshman to be there 4th or 5th man every single race. Leingang is very good, but he might be overworked right now. And he doesn't have very much experience.

bro loco wrote:

Which teams or individuals came out from under the radar?

Which teams or individuals choked hard?

I went to Nova and UVA, so I gotta go with Nova Women (Men beat expectations, too) and UVA Men.

UVA Men are going to be nasty the next few years. They didn't even run Connor Rog, who's a beast. They are a very young team.

canyouopen wrote:

Edward Cheserek is the real deal. Got it done at 10k.

"Real deal?"

Ummm, I guess someone forgot to tell you this guy is as real as a three dollar bill. He is not a real American American. He is an import from Kenya. To import ringers from non-US countries of indeterminate age to compete in the American collegiate scene is nonsensical. I love the guy and respect the success of Kenyan runners. But why should they, or any other ringers, be recruited into the American collegiate running scene.

Let the non-US runners battle it out with Americans in the professional contests, not our colleges.

Just a thought.

dkny64 wrote:

Can someone explain what exactly happened to the Duke women and the UCLA men this year?

I heard that some of the Duke gals have been sick and super frosh Wesley Frazier is out for the session.

No surprise how Oregon did vs Stanford.

Oregon is a Mid-Distance school and Stanford is a Distance school.

Oregon currently has more talented(National Caliber, Milers and Freshmen) runners, but Stanford has a solid team.

Stanford is CU without a great coach.