stanford vs colorado

While your analysis is good, you have to realize there is very little difference is actual team scoring between a guy who finishes 10th and a guy who finishes 20th overall - since there are strong individuals up there who don't count in the team score.

Also, I think you're forgetting that Saarel was 8th last year and he wasn't CUs top guy all season until that meet, which means their top guys won't necessarily top out at 20th, rather it means they have 3-4 guys all capable of top 10 on a good day. Stanford is in the same boat. Plus, Maksim is a big question mark (consistency issues) and McGorty has yet to race (is he actually healthy?).

I'd give CU the edge right now considering all their top guys are healthy and their depth definitely trumps Stanford. Stanford has yet to prove they can come together as a team at nationals, while CU is coming off a championship season and has better 5-7 talent at this point.

It looks VERY close, and it should be a hell of a lot of fun to watch.

Early indications are that Stanford's #5 may be better than a lot of people probably figured --and also deeper (i.e., they may have several guys who are fairly close together, so if one has a crappy day, it may not matter that much).

If that's the case, and if McG and Jim R can both be in top form (or close) by late October, then Stanford may be able to put their top 4 in front of, let's say, all but one of the Buffs, and have their #5 not far behind the Colorado pack.

In that case, I'd probably give Stanford the slight edge.

If Jim's current injury (which sounds like it's probably minor, but who knows) is enough to set him back a step from Joe and Maks,... or if McGorty's comeback from his summer problems is too late to get him up with the bulk of the Buff 5, then they probably won't have enough to overcome the Col depth.

Man, is this gonna be fun to watch.

(I guess I'll actually have to pay for freaking FTP for a month, so I can check it all out live.)

Don't count out Oregon they have 2 guys that will be ahead of the Stanford and Colorado number 1 now it's up to Oregon 3-5 to have a good race at NationalS. Pretty cool that the Pac 12 will go 1-3 at National with Oregon,Colorado and Stanford.

Paper is the right metaphor to describe Stanford.

Sure, if every runner has a career best day, Stanford will be at the top. However, given what happened to Stanford at NCAAs last year, I'm going to have to wait for them to show they can run tough when it counts.

You're right that on paper they look really good, but they were ranked what, 5th last year w/ a lot of the same guys? I'm not going to predict that they fold or crumble that epically two years in a row, but I'm much more confident in a Wetmore team or NAU to show up for a big meet than the Stanford squad.

Prediction: they'll look better at Pac12 or West Regional than they do in Terra Haute.

they call me flopro wrote:

Don't count out Oregon they have 2 guys that will be ahead of the Stanford and Colorado number 1 now it's up to Oregon 3-5 to have a good race at NationalS. Pretty cool that the Pac 12 will go 1-3 at National with Oregon,Colorado and Stanford.

I'm pretty sure the Pac-12 won't go 1,2,3 at nationals.

Koppenberg wrote:

Paper is the right metaphor to describe Stanford.

Sure, if every runner has a career best day, Stanford will be at the top. However, given what happened to Stanford at NCAAs last year, I'm going to have to wait for them to show they can run tough when it counts.

You're right that on paper they look really good, but they were ranked what, 5th last year w/ a lot of the same guys? I'm not going to predict that they fold or crumble that epically two years in a row, but I'm much more confident in a Wetmore team or NAU to show up for a big meet than the Stanford squad.

Prediction: they'll look better at Pac12 or West Regional than they do in Terra Haute.

No, actually they were ranked 5th last year with *two* of the same top 5, and one of those was a frosh. (Atchoo and Sweatt have a shot at #5, so it could be three. Atchoo actually ran pretty well at Nats last year.)

And no, nothing's based on 'everyone having a career-best day.'

It's based on the Big three running about the same as they've run in the last year, #4 running in line with what he's done in the last year (13:37, I think) plus a little bit of strengthening for the longer distance, and a substantial field of candidates for a strong #5 --a couple of whom looked quite strong last week.

My prediction's that your prediction will look pretty dumb come November.

Your prediction's based on nothing, really, except that the team, as a whole, ran badly at Nats the last couple years.

My prediction's based on actual facts about *this* team.

Like the facts that #1 and #2 ran BRILLIANTLY at Nats last year, #3 has run BRILLIANTLY for the last six months or so (since he finally got healthy), ran brilliantly at both indoor and outdoor Nats, and has generally been slightly better in XC than #2 his entire life,... and three of the supporting cast have run at Nats before, two of them performed reasonably well, and all of them have a lot more depth both in front of and behind them this year.

Assuming Jim R and McGorty are on their form by late-season, Stanford's got a superb shot to contest for the title.

Expecting a result like last year's --just cuz that's what happened last year-- would be a pretty dumb bet.

And yeah, Colorado, Stanford, and Oregon DO have a pretty good shot to be the three best teams in the country.

I would NOT be shocked to see them 1-2-3 in Indiana.

How did Saarel achieve a top 8 at NCAA last year in XC? He only ran 13:49 for 5000m in 2014. That was only good enough to rank him 26th in the NCAA... He had a great race last fall... He really over achieved...

Will he pull the trick again this year?

Papua wrote:

they call me flopro wrote:

Don't count out Oregon they have 2 guys that will be ahead of the Stanford and Colorado number 1 now it's up to Oregon 3-5 to have a good race at NationalS. Pretty cool that the Pac 12 will go 1-3 at National with Oregon,Colorado and Stanford.

I'm pretty sure the Pac-12 won't go 1,2,3 at nationals.

It's the same Oregon fanboy/troll that used to go by pac12fan4life or something and jock rid UO hard. Just ignore him/her

What makes you think Jenkins is going to beat CU and Stanford's #1?

sp2 wrote:

Expecting a result like last year's --just cuz that's what happened last year-- would be a pretty dumb bet.

No, that's actually how bets are made. By odds which can he based on historical performances. You are the only dumb one between the two of you.

gender please wrote:

sp2 wrote:

Expecting a result like last year's --just cuz that's what happened last year-- would be a pretty dumb bet.

No, that's actually how bets are made. By odds which can he based on historical performances. You are the only dumb one between the two of you.

Another historical performance

Stanford bombs (read: underperforms relative to expectations) at NCAAs nearly every year in recent history

CU's last 3 finishes? 1st, 3rd, 3rd

Come on you can't be serious questioning if Stanford will actually beat CU. Coaching is King, and everyone knows the differences in this situation.

Wetmore is a ridulous talent, knows how to recruit and coach athletes. Race day will be like a different planet between these two coaches. Wetmore doesn't need to prove a damn thing, and the pressure will not come from that particular coach. Not sure if anyone really nows that dude at Stanford, but it's not even close. In fact it's a joke.

With great athletes on both teams, coaching and Leadership will rule the day. Sorry, but that's the way these things go.

Is Pearson (sp?) running this year for Colorado? Wasn't he their #2 last year?

Coaching is King wrote:

Not sure if anyone really nows that dude at Stanford, but it's not even close. In fact it's a joke.

That dude at Stanford has won at least one NCAA xc title, hasn't he?

Joe Rosa 23:15 29:43

http://xc.tfrrs.org/athletes/3692861.html

Jim Rosa 29:42

http://xc.tfrrs.org/athletes/3692862.html

Maksim Korolev 23:15 29:59

http://xc.tfrrs.org/athletes/4997416.html

http://www.tfrrs.org/athletes/3193360.html

Michael Atchoo 23:48 29:53

http://xc.tfrrs.org/athletes/3272852.html

Garrett Sweatt 23:39 30:34

http://xc.tfrrs.org/athletes/4112512.html

Jack Keelan 23:44

http://xc.tfrrs.org/athletes/4507552.html

Sam Wharton 24:01

http://xc.tfrrs.org/athletes/4507554.html

Sean McGorty 29:56

http://xc.tfrrs.org/athletes/4507553.html

Ghggugyuuyg wrote:

How did Saarel achieve a top 8 at NCAA last year in XC? He only ran 13:49 for 5000m in 2014. That was only good enough to rank him 26th in the NCAA... He had a great race last fall... He really over achieved...

Will he pull the trick again this year?

How did Craig Lutz manage like 10th? I don't even think he has broken 14 minutes for the 5K!

What happened to Stanford's Thomas Graham? He would have 3 years of eligibility left but is no longer on the Stanford roster. He was a stud in high school (8-9 state championships, 8:53, 14:11). He ran a few good XC races as a freshman and ran 14:04/29:37 last year.

Until Stanford runs a full team race where we see how well they can run with their top 7, you can't say that they are better considering the performance Colorado put on at the first meet. Colorado still number one...for now.