Official 2017 NCAA XC Discussion Thread

next year they should hold this race in Europe

I missed Anna Rohrer in this race. Anna is known for taking the races out hard and keeping them honest (both races were very aggressive up front today, rather than the wait and kick tactical type races). It would have interesting to see a healthy Anna in this race. Based on past history, she might have been up front at least in the chase group of Allie and USF runner Charlotte Taylor. Hopefully Anna will be back at her best next year.

Flotrack doesn't understand how to maximize profits through price structure. There are many resources on the subject, and any Finance or Econ major will be able to solve the problem easily. I would wager that for even $13-$14, they would have doubled sales.

But the mid-race commercial is bush league. Now it doesn't matter what their future pricing is, I'll never subscribe to any of their future feeds.

Cracks me up when twins run the entire way within touching distance:

30 DROP, Samantha SO 243 Georgia 22 20:06.4 0:47.4 5:23.4 3:21.1

31 DROP, Jessica SO 242 Georgia 23 20:06.9 0:47.9 5:23.6 3:21.2

Xc follower wrote:

Good run by Ole miss Sean Tobin in 12th

Ha! Distant cousin from across the pond....

Alan

moist wrote:

Hi Mark Fenton wrote:

Sorry Mark, your coverage is simply not worth it, and you know it. Eventually, someone else will take over. Just think if you lowered the price, more subscribers, more money and less whining about the crappy coverage and stupid commercial break because they aren't paying that much. Bye Mr. Fenton.

Flotrack doesn't understand how to maximize profits through price structure. There are many resources on the subject, and any Finance or Econ major will be able to solve the problem easily. I would wager that for even $13-$14, they would have doubled sales.

But the mid-race commercial is bush league. Now it doesn't matter what their future pricing is, I'll never subscribe to any of their future feeds.

Ummmmm....I'm pretty sure that's what the poster was saying, lower the price they'd get more subscribers. Repeat much?

Anna would have done well indeed, it's too bad she was not healthy:(

Not a Stanford hater, but it's kinda amazing with all the talent they bring in that they don't have a better 4-7.

RohrerAnnaFan wrote:

moist wrote:

Flotrack doesn't understand how to maximize profits through price structure. There are many resources on the subject, and any Finance or Econ major will be able to solve the problem easily. I would wager that for even $13-$14, they would have doubled sales.

But the mid-race commercial is bush league. Now it doesn't matter what their future pricing is, I'll never subscribe to any of their future feeds.

Ummmmm....I'm pretty sure that's what the poster was saying, lower the price they'd get more subscribers. Repeat much?

Anna would have done well indeed, it's too bad she was not healthy:(

$5.00 I would pay for sure. $10-$12 is the most I would pay. I'm cheap. I bet they would make a ton if it were only $5.00. Almost everyone interested would pay that.

Bonkers wrote:

Not a Stanford hater, but it's kinda amazing with all the talent they bring in that they don't have a better 4-7.

Same with U of Oregon. It’s sad to see all the talent stuck in the mid pack. While NAU brings in 4:20 guys and makes them into podium individuals.

I picked NAU for 1st and should have followed my gut and put Portland for 2nd, but I didn't cuz I was annoyed at them for their Conference tactics. Oh well!

Olympics has a "best effort" rule that can DQ athletes and teams who hold back for various reasons, though it's almost never enforced. It would be interesting if NCAA had that rule and had consequences for teams that intentionally basically blew off Conference champs.

Depressing thoughts wrote:

Bonkers wrote:

Not a Stanford hater, but it's kinda amazing with all the talent they bring in that they don't have a better 4-7.

Same with U of Oregon. It’s sad to see all the talent stuck in the mid pack. While NAU brings in 4:20 guys and makes them into podium individuals.

Don't forget they train 7000 ft higher than both of those teams.

There was a team tiebreaker in both the women's and men's races. Utah State was involved in both of them. What are the odds?

For the record, they won one and lost won.

running commenter wrote:

Depressing thoughts wrote:

Same with U of Oregon. It’s sad to see all the talent stuck in the mid pack. While NAU brings in 4:20 guys and makes them into podium individuals.

Don't forget they train 7000 ft higher than both of those teams.

Do you seriously think that made the difference?

Another woman named Turgat won the D2 race.

"I'd rather be BYU. BYU won their conference meet and finished on podium at NCAAs.

Portland got perfect scored at conference meet and finished on podium at NCAAs."

Conveniently forgets the most important part of the podium finish at NCAA's, That BYU was 3rd and PORTLAND was 2nd. Can't understand how you would want to finish lower at NCAA's because you won a conference meet that counts for nothing... but maybe that's just me.

Furman and OSU pooped a gigantic brick, how do they do so bad with almost all scholarship money towards distance? I suppose investing in a good coach, over recruiter is essential. Occasionally lightning will strike and they have a good national meet, but for OSU, that means 4 Kenyans.

jkjkljlkjlk wrote:

Biggest surprises:

Tyler Day/Matt Baxter duo!

Peter Lomong - NAU

Dillon Maggard - Utah St

...

Was Maggard really a surprise?

2017 top performers placing in 2016:

Knight - 2nd

Fisher - 5th

Baxter - 11th

Maggard - 12th

If only AO could stay healthy for a year or two in a row.

Colorado High wrote:

running commenter wrote:

Don't forget they train 7000 ft higher than both of those teams.

Do you seriously think that made the difference?

Yup.