No idea. Interesting question. Bump.
No idea. Interesting question. Bump.
Do you mean dual meet?
I'm thinking SEC has more depth. Obviously at the top end the Brits have some Olympic Champions, but would it be enough?
LetsRun.com wrote:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/athletics/2016/05/19/rio-olympics-2016-nethaneel-mitchell-blake---from-unknown-studen/Did anyone see this?
Ben Bloom wrote:Nethaneel Mitchell-Blake is in his American apartment trying to come to terms with how his life changed in less than 20 seconds.
It is a few days after his spectacular breakthrough performance at a humdrum college athletics meeting in Alabama, when he clocked a staggering 19.95 sec to become the second fastest Briton of all time over 200 metres, just behind three-time Olympian John Regis.
Maybe Bloom doesn't realize how good the SEC is. If you had a conference meet between the SEC and Britain (Mitchell-Blake runs for the SECs) who would win?
Anyone think the SEC would give them a run for their money?
You mean every event?
Wouldn't really be close, would it?
Comparing some of the results from the 2016 SEC meet to the 2012 UK Olympic Trials, it seems pretty clear that the SEC would pretty much dominate everything under 1500m, so I think they would stand a chance.
http://www.britishathletics.org.uk/results/20120622_birmingham/timetable/index/
http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2016/0515/2016%20SEC%20Track%20&%20Field%20Results%20-%20COMPLETE.pdf
I'm too lazy to spend too much time adding all of this up, but the sprint depth in the SEC is remarkable.
Did anyone see this?
Ben Bloom wrote:
Nethaneel Mitchell-Blake is in his American apartment trying to come to terms with how his life changed in less than 20 seconds.
It is a few days after his spectacular breakthrough performance at a humdrum college athletics meeting in Alabama, when he clocked a staggering 19.95 sec to become the second fastest Briton of all time over 200 metres, just behind three-time Olympian John Regis.
Maybe Bloom doesn't realize how good the SEC is. If you had a conference meet between the SEC and Britain (Mitchell-Blake runs for the SECs) who would win?
Anyone think the SEC would give them a run for their money?
I wouldn't get offended, I assume this is just a journalist with no knowledge of the sport not doing his research and assuming US college track and field is like British university sport, ie, basically irrelevant.
juju wrote:
the sprint depth in the SEC is remarkable.
It's not remarkable to have good sprinters where weather is warm year-round. It makes perfect sense.
The sprint depth at Oregon is remarkable, maybe not in a good way. They never used to be able to. North + sprint don't usually mix.
juju wrote:
Comparing some of the results from the 2016 SEC meet to the 2012 UK Olympic Trials, it seems pretty clear that the SEC would pretty much dominate everything under 1500m, so I think they would stand a chance.
http://www.britishathletics.org.uk/results/20120622_birmingham/timetable/index/http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2016/0515/2016%20SEC%20Track%20&%20Field%20Results%20-%20COMPLETE.pdfI'm too lazy to spend too much time adding all of this up, but the sprint depth in the SEC is remarkable.
I appreciate the depth is strong in the SEC, but how do you think Ujah and Gemili would go in that field? I would imagine they would be 1-2 in the 100m.
I'm not sure if we're counting women too, but GB could easily put out 1-2-3 in both the 100m and 200m in the women. A lot of the other events would be just as dominant.
Here are the women at the SEC meet:
Finals
1 Felicia Brown SR Tennessee 22.19 22.26F -1.3 10
2 Taylor Ellis-Watson SR Arkansas 22.52 22.48 -1.3 8
3 Jada Martin JR LSU 22.74 22.60 -1.3 6
4 Kortnei Johnson FR LSU 22.78 22.82 -1.3 5
5 Felecia Majors JR Tennessee 22.85 22.99 -1.3 4
6 Diamond Gause JR Alabama 22.93 23.28 -1.3 3
7 Kianna Gray FR Kentucky 22.90 23.36 -1.3 2
They would go 1-5 at least against the British in that national meet, where first place was something over 23. I suspect that the SEC would destroy the Brits in both men and women on a team scoring system. How would the SEC champions do in dual meets against Great Britain?
You and the author agree. The author's frame of reference is a college conference championship. Pretty humdun in the UK. to see a runner go fast at what the author assumes is similar competition to their own conference championships makes the performance even better.
Not even the SEC but just LSU's 4x1 and 4x4 squads would beat britains!
British Press is Hum Drum.
In addition to the SEC being really good, it misses that the conference meet is the most important meet of the year at the college level (at least in the sense of team accomplishment)!
LetsRun.com wrote:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/athletics/2016/05/19/rio-olympics-2016-nethaneel-mitchell-blake---from-unknown-studen/Did anyone see this?
Ben Bloom wrote:Nethaneel Mitchell-Blake is in his American apartment trying to come to terms with how his life changed in less than 20 seconds.
It is a few days after his spectacular breakthrough performance at a humdrum college athletics meeting in Alabama, when he clocked a staggering 19.95 sec to become the second fastest Briton of all time over 200 metres, just behind three-time Olympian John Regis.
Maybe Bloom doesn't realize how good the SEC is. If you had a conference meet between the SEC and Britain (Mitchell-Blake runs for the SECs) who would win?
Anyone think the SEC would give them a run for their money?
Assuming you are talking about the full table of events, the SEC would get spanked...it wouldn't be close. GB would go 123 in almost all of jumps and multi events and the would every event over 800. Mo could easily win the 1500/5k/10k. GB would likely go 1-2 in the 100 and win all of the throws...like I said it would not be close
SEC fans believe it when ESPN proclaims one of their football teams as playing at a Pro level. "SEC Team Alabama could beat most NFL team!!!" SEC fans extend this poor proclamation to all of their sports teams. Reality is that, no, the SEC's best track team--overall conference--would get slaughtered by most national teams.
At the SEC Champs the athletes brush their teeth, bathe, and use deoderdant on a daily basis. Europeans don't do these things daily, sometime going 6 months between cleansing themselves.
Bad Wigins wrote:
juju wrote:the sprint depth in the SEC is remarkable.
It's not remarkable to have good sprinters where weather is warm year-round. It makes perfect sense.
The sprint depth at Oregon is remarkable, maybe not in a good way. They never used to be able to. North + sprint don't usually mix.
The west coast isn't that cold
It doesn't have to be cold to be bad for sprinting, it just has to not be warm.
THE SEC wrote:
SEC fans believe it when ESPN proclaims one of their football teams as playing at a Pro level. "SEC Team Alabama could beat most NFL team!!!" SEC fans extend this poor proclamation to all of their sports teams. Reality is that, no, the SEC's best track team--overall conference--would get slaughtered by most national teams.
The best college team would get demolished by the worst NFL team. Think! - Even the worst NFL team is made up of the top college athletes. You have Heisman Trophy winners who don't make it in the NFL. The son of a family friend was a mid-major star defensive linemen at 220 lbs with a 4.9 40. In the NFL, 220 lbs is a running back and a 4.9 40 is an offensive lineman.
Lawsuits from insurance companies concerning CTE will end the NFL.