I, for one, can't wait to see what happens at XC Nationals and if Colorado's altitude performances actually mean something or they totally underperform.
I've been involved in XC for over 20 years and haven't seen anything like this... should be fun.
I, for one, can't wait to see what happens at XC Nationals and if Colorado's altitude performances actually mean something or they totally underperform.
I've been involved in XC for over 20 years and haven't seen anything like this... should be fun.
San Jose State will rock the entire universe at NCAAs this year mark my words or D'yer Mak'er!
1. 62 Edward Cheserek Oregon 24:36
2. 115 Jim Rosa Stanford 24:42
3. 58 Blake Theroux Colorado 24:47
4. 61 Connor Winter Colorado 24:49
5. 56 Ben Saarel Colorado 24:53
6. 83 Parker Stinson Oregon 24:56
7. 52 Pierce Murphy Colorado 25:00
8. 177 Aaron Nelson Washington 25:01
9. 51 Ammar Moussa Colorado 25:15
10. 67 Mac Fleet Oregon 25:23
Their race last year at altitude was pretty good too before they won ncaa's. The xc champ, 5th placer, 3 time track NCAA guy and 20th place only ones to break up their top 5 followed by 2 time 1500 champ. That was without Hursyz and Pearson on an off day.
I wouldn't bet against Colorado this year. Wetmore is the best cross coach in the NCAA.
I don't think they are as good as a team as the Oklahoma State teams of the recent past but they are solid compared to the field this year.
Wcol wrote:
I, for one, can't wait to see what happens at XC Nationals and if Colorado's altitude performances actually mean something or they totally underperform.
I've been involved in XC for over 20 years and haven't seen anything like this... should be fun.
I think you meant to say, '...Stanford Implosion...'
Colorado often seems to get a boost from a muddy course and running intelligently. Maybe this year it will be 45 degrees with a fast course, neutralizing their advantage.
Wcol wrote:
I, for one, can't wait to see what happens at XC Nationals and if Colorado's altitude performances actually mean something or they totally underperform.
I've been involved in XC for over 20 years and haven't seen anything like this... should be fun.
I can't wait for them to rock your socks and obliterate all the schools with similar recruiting classes whose coaches don't believe in mileage and tempo runs.
doo doo wrote:
Wcol wrote:I, for one, can't wait to see what happens at XC Nationals and if Colorado's altitude performances actually mean something or they totally underperform.
I've been involved in XC for over 20 years and haven't seen anything like this... should be fun.
I can't wait for them to rock your socks and obliterate all the schools with similar recruiting classes whose coaches don't believe in mileage and tempo runs.
What coaches don't believe in mileage and tempo runs? I've not heard of any even moderately successful college coach like that. Do you expect Wetmore to be coaching against ghosts from 1950?
Why do you think muddy conditions benefit Colorado? Because those were the conditions last year? Their standard training fare is hard pack. Maybe they're just fast.
Historically, Colorado has run BETTER than other teams at Nationals even when they weren't favored to win.
gnome de plume wrote:
Why do you think muddy conditions benefit Colorado? Because those were the conditions last year? Their standard training fare is hard pack. Maybe they're just fast.
Muddy conditions could benefit certain athletes more. And an overall slower tougher race could maybe benefit altitude athletes because they're used to putting more effort for the slower times.
Wcol wrote:
I, for one, can't wait to see what happens at XC Nationals and if Colorado's altitude performances actually mean something or they totally underperform.
I've been involved in XC for over 20 years and haven't seen anything like this... should be fun.
You're right, I'd much rather see a team with a bunch of foreigners dominate.