East Aurora is a strong possibility, where Holy Names is a leading favorite. There is a difference. The top 4 teams should go, whoever they may be. But only if they race well enough
East Aurora is a strong possibility, where Holy Names is a leading favorite. There is a difference. The top 4 teams should go, whoever they may be. But only if they race well enough
The Tank wrote:
Summit shouldn't go simply because their 4/5 aren't that great. I was at NXN NW and pretty much right at the start of the race they started right in the back.
On the other hand, one of the most important factors in doing well at NXN is to have runners up front. Especially when you're talking about teams that weren't strong enough to finish in the top two of their regions!
History of teams at NXN with similar team splits (#3-4 in particular) as Summit:
2010 Marcus TX boys - tenth place, 267 points
2010 North Shore NY girls - ninth place, 267 points
2009 Cedar Park TX boys - 11th place, 289 points
2009 Queensbury NY girls - 7th place, 284 points
2009 The Classical Academy CO girls - 9th place, 291 points
2009 Palatine IL girls - 19th place, 407 points
2008 Loyola CA boys - 15th place, 309 points
2007 Hanover NH girls - 4th place, 206 points
2006 Newport CA girls - 6th place, 210 points
2005 St. Xavier KY boys - 17th place, 366 points
2005 Rocky Mountain CO girls - 8th place, 218 points
2005 Roxbury NJ girls - 9th place, 225 points
2005 Fremont UT girls - 10th place, 252 points
2004 Southlake Carroll TX boys - 14th place, 327 points
I'd say Summit is most similar to the 2008 Loyola team, just that Neuman isn't as good as Gedyon. And given the strength of the AQ teams this year, and the lack of quality at-large teams by the looks of it, I wouldn't say a potential top 15/16 team should be dismissed very easily.
Another thing to consider: Summit's front three were ahead of NW#1 North Central's #4 and NW#2 Kamiakin's #3, despite Neuman having an off day (Summit's top 2 - who are their usual #2/3 runners - were ahead of Kamiakin's #1 and right with North Central's #2).
Los Alamos had a total of one runner inside SW#2 Davis' top 5, and none ahead of SW#1 American Fork's top six.
St. Xavier had a total of one runner ahead of MW#2 Carmel's #5 and three ahead of York's #5, but only one ahead of York's #4.
Edina and Stillwater were the only teams more competitive - in terms of getting runners ahead of their counterparts - with the AQ teams in their region.
MileSplit Guy wrote:
East Aurora is a strong possibility, where Holy Names is a leading favorite. There is a difference. The top 4 teams should go, whoever they may be. But only if they race well enough
Indeed.
watchout wrote:Los Alamos had a total of one runner inside SW#2 Davis' top 5, and none ahead of SW#1 American Fork's top six.
Correction: Los Alamos had five in before Davis' #5, but ZERO in before American Fork's #6 or Davis' #4.
Also, there was this result on Sunday at BorderClash...
11. Travis Neuman - 14:01 - OREGON - 190.2 (Summit OR#1)
13. Keith Williams - 14:02 - WASHINGTON - 189.8 (North Central WA#2)
15. Tanner Anderson - 14:08 - WASHINGTON - 187.6 (North Central WA#1)
17. Matthew Maton - 14:11 - OREGON - 186.5 (Summit OR#2)
22. Eric Alldritt - 14:18 - OREGON - 183.9 (Summit OR#3)
28. Ahmed Ibrahim - 14:26 - WASHINGTON - 181.0 (Kamiakin WA#2)
33. Austin Oser - 14:31 - WASHINGTON - 179.2 (Kamiakin WA#1)
38. Oliver Reed - 14:36 - WASHINGTON - 177.3 (North Central WA#3)
59. Luke Hinz - 15:00 - OREGON - 168.5 (Summit OR#4)
61. Isaac Kitzan - 15:01 - WASHINGTON - 168.1 (North Central WA#5)
71. Nik Taylor - 15:11 - WASHINGTON - 164.4 (North Central WA#6)
(North Central WA's #4, Austin Frostad, was a little off at state and just missed qualifying)
It's hard to say Summit OR wouldn't be competitive, when their top three were better than one of the favorites to trophy this year and their #4 was ahead of that trophy favorite team's #5.
watchout wrote:
Boys, I really don't know what is going to happen. Summit has a very strong front trio but questionable #4/5; St. Xavier and Los Alamos have strong #4/5's but are questionable up front, and I doubt there will be four boys teams that stand out this weekend alone (though maybe that will happen, you never know). And maybe we shouldn't be so quick to dismiss the Heartland teams, given that...
However, from previous race performance, you can tell that Los Alamos's top runners were off at their regional race. I've been watching many of the races in NM and it's always been a battle between LA's Hill & Reardon with Cleveland's Flores. At NXR-SW, Flores came in at 22nd.
At regionals, Hill seemed off and Reardon lost his shoe. It seems likely that on a regular day they would be with Flores.
Additionally, I don't think any other team has a fourth or fifth man like LA. Their top 5 all came in under 16:00, with a 6 second spread. It's impossible to ignore a performance like that, front-runners or not
swinsider wrote:
watchout wrote:Boys, I really don't know what is going to happen. Summit has a very strong front trio but questionable #4/5; St. Xavier and Los Alamos have strong #4/5's but are questionable up front, and I doubt there will be four boys teams that stand out this weekend alone (though maybe that will happen, you never know). And maybe we shouldn't be so quick to dismiss the Heartland teams, given that...
However, from previous race performance, you can tell that Los Alamos's top runners were off at their regional race. I've been watching many of the races in NM and it's always been a battle between LA's Hill & Reardon with Cleveland's Flores. At NXR-SW, Flores came in at 22nd.
At regionals, Hill seemed off and Reardon lost his shoe. It seems likely that on a regular day they would be with Flores.
Additionally, I don't think any other team has a fourth or fifth man like LA. Their top 5 all came in under 16:00, with a 6 second spread. It's impossible to ignore a performance like that, front-runners or not
Times are only notable relative to course difficulty.
If, as it seems, the course ran about on par with WakeMed or Woodward, five under 16:00 is pretty good but not by itself good enough (that would be five guys under 16:45-50 at NXN probably in decent weather years such as 2008/2009/2011... that's 90th place or worse (16:45 was ~90 in 2009, ~105 in 2010 and ~90 in 2011; 16:50 was 97, 112 and 99). And even if you give LA's top guys credit for what Flores did (and I think you can make a good case for both Hill and Reardan being within 5 seconds of that if not right with him on their best days), that's still putting zero inside of American Fork's top five and two inside Davis' top 4. Better than what they actually ran, sure... but would it be enough?
Three as good as a favorite-to-trophy teams'#2 and better than an AQ teams' #1 is very, very strong running up front, and should significantly help ease any questions about their back end (even though they have shown that their #4 can run with strong-packed AQ teams' #5's)
I just did some research on Pine Creek team. I notice that Fort Collins and Pine Creek race three times this year and Fort Collins always victorious. Might this hurt Pine Creek team for at large bid?
Ann Sung wrote:
I just did some research on Pine Creek team. I notice that Fort Collins and Pine Creek race three times this year and Fort Collins always victorious. Might this hurt Pine Creek team for at large bid?
I don't think so.
If last year was any indication, a lot of weighting will be placed on how well teams do at their regional meet, and Pine Creek was very very close to both the first and second place teams in one of the strongest regionals. No reason to think they won't get invited. (not to mention, Pine Creek was pretty close all three times they had their full lineup - first the Titan Thunder Invite but especially CO State and NXN-SW)
I think Pine Creek is just about as safe as can be.
watchout wrote:
I think Pine Creek is just about as safe as can be.
I agree. Well, as safe as any team can be before the final 4 regionals... and when decisions occur behind close doors.... But seriously, they're in good shape. Xavier and New Trier (not necessarily in that order) have good shots, but are hoping for no surprises Saturday.
Any boys' teams you think are equally safe to PC?
SW vs Calif wrote:
watchout wrote:I think Pine Creek is just about as safe as can be.
I agree. Well, as safe as any team can be before the final 4 regionals... and when decisions occur behind close doors.... But seriously, they're in good shape. Xavier and New Trier (not necessarily in that order) have good shots, but are hoping for no surprises Saturday.
Any boys' teams you think are equally safe to PC?
Exactly my thoughts re: XP and NT as well.
Boys - don't think any of the teams are near safe yet. Should be interesting to see who ends up getting the invites there... none finished extremely close in traditionally strong regions, each team has some notable strengths and weaknesses which means it will probably come down to what the committee members see as important to do well in the national meet. The only team with a resume for racing any NXN-bound teams so far is St. Xavier OH, and you can clearly see that their season took a different path than did the team they beat (Carmel IN) back in September (re: Carmel peaked very well, while not running as well in September; St. Xavier ran very well in September, and made some but not as much improvement since - kind of like Xavier Prep vs. Great Oak on the girls side, in that sense, except that Great Oak started showing they were better more than a month ago and probably won't have to worry about at-large invites if they run well this weekend).
I wish I could be fly on wall when these choices decided! I will be checking result all weekend long! And while these are all very good points I just do not know what will happen. It seem like every year I try and try to predict but am somehow never correct. Crazy business and so much fun to follow!
Interesting fact I just learn! Go to result of 2010 SW region race. It was last race Pine Creek ran a team at for region and they were dead last place. How they get so good so fast? Really improve. I wonder if they got new coach or if just better runners.
watchout wrote:
Boys - don't think any of the teams are near safe yet. Should be interesting to see who ends up getting the invites there... none finished extremely close in traditionally strong regions, each team has some notable strengths and weaknesses which means it will probably come down to what the committee members see as important to do well in the national meet. The only team with a resume for racing any NXN-bound teams so far is St. Xavier OH, and you can clearly see that their season took a different path than did the team they beat (Carmel IN) back in September (re: Carmel peaked very well, while not running as well in September; St. Xavier ran very well in September, and made some but not as much improvement since - kind of like Xavier Prep vs. Great Oak on the girls side, in that sense, except that Great Oak started showing they were better more than a month ago and probably won't have to worry about at-large invites if they run well this weekend).
Honestly, I thought Xavier (OH) finished too far back in MW to contend: 116 pts behind York, 49 behind Carmel - whose boys, unlike girls, are new to the scene. But then again, other regions:
HL: Edina was close (18 pts behind 2nd, 29 behind 1st), but... enough? (I was going to say not a strong region, but HL did get 8th & 10th last year, which isn't bad).
NW: Summit was way back of NCentral, but perhaps that can be forgiven, and they weren't too far from 2nd (38 pts). But not far ahead of 4th, either.
South: I don't see a team scoring 263 in a regional getting in. I know Carroll (48 pts) is good, but come on...
SW: LosAlamos and Herriman have similar problem. Over 200 pts, almost 180 back of winner. Stronger region overall, but 3rd & 4th tied at 215 makes it tough to differentiate, and I certainly don't see them both getting slots.
Of those above, I think Xavier (OH) wins on speed ratings, Edina on closeness to the AQs.
Will certainly be interesting to see what shakes out this weekend...
SW vs Calif wrote:
Of those above, I think Xavier (OH) wins on speed ratings, Edina on closeness to the AQs.
To elaborate a bit more: Was MW regional that good that York, a team many think will contend for podium (and on a perfect day, possibly for title) scored 95? Or is York not as strong as those "many" think? Personally, I think they will do well at Nationals, if everyone is healthy - they've had a lot of individuals have ups and downs. At NXN-MW, Chris May was down. He's their usual 4th, if he gets back up with 2-3 (where he was earlier in season), AND one of their guys who recently stepped up (Bashqawi, Libert) stays up, they will score very well. Milling has been running strong, and if he can pull a low stick, they'll do well. (OK, sorry. That's like the football commentators saying "The team that puts the most points on the board will win this game").
I think the only boys teams that don't really have a shot, at this point, are probably the two South teams, Seattle Prep WA and Columbus North IN.
Summit OR will be the choice for those that favor front runners in a national race (given a normal race by Neuman, and they would have had three runners in the top 12 of the NW overall... the Northwest is a pretty strong region, so that is definitely saying something).
Los Alamos NM or more likely St. Xavier OH (not because they are better, but simply because they raced and beat MW#2 Carmel earlier in the year) will be the choice for those that think it doesn't matter as much where your front two or three are, but where your #4/5 finish. If Los Alamos is chosen, I would think Herriman will be as well - they have better front runners, beat SW#2 Davis UT earlier in the year at Bob Firman, and had a better team time at NXN-SW than Los Alamos. Personally, I think Los Alamos is the better team of the two, but they just didn't show it up front at NXN-SW and that might cost them too much.
Edina and possibly Stillwater would be the choice for those that worry less about how team strengths would translate to success at nationals and put more weight into actual team scores and how close they were to qualifying.
I would like to say it'll get easier after this weekend, but I'm not so sure it will...
Vista Murrieta CA is a solid team from a strong region, so if they are close to Arcadia and the CA#2 (assuming they aren't #2) then their chances are pretty strong. Same could potentially happen for a fourth CA team once again.
The Northeast picture is pretty unclear - how well will the PA teams, Bishop Hendricken and Don Bosco do?
New York might have a shot this year, Northport has been coming along decently and that will give a direct comparison to at least the Northeast as they run on the same course.
And, the very long shot: if McGorty runs NXN-SE, and there are three teams that significantly break away from the rest and run very good times at WakeMed, will the committee disregard the history of the SE at NXN and invite them?
I do think Summit and probably St. Xavier are the two teams in best position so far, BUT neither are without their blemishes.
I think Watchout has summarized the NXN "At-Large" possibilities very nicely as we approach the "Super Saturday" weekend ... And it is obvious we really need to see Saturday’s results before making final judgment, especially on the boy’s side.
The main selection criteria appears to be performance at the regional qualifying meets ... that was the main criteria last year, and I strongly suspect that will be the main selection criteria again this year ... other factors will come into play, but as relayed to me, "Performance at the regional meets determines the two auto qualifiers, so why not use it to determine the at-large” teams?" ... Teams are given the opportunity to toe-the-line and they all know what is at stake for this one race ... it gives prime importance to this "one race" which may be the intent Nike wants (I do not know, but I understand the concept).
So which 3rd and 4th place teams performed best at NXN regionals?? ... This is where the judgment call begins ... Watchout has outlined it nicely to date ... People are going to have differing opinions ... And since it looks fairly even-up on the boy’s-side, the other factors will come into play ... The boys teams racing this Saturday have been given an opportunity to step-up and perform above expectations and make a strong case for at-large selection should they finish 3rd or 4th based on current regional results.
The girl’s side is a bit clearer ... Pine Creek CO is looking good ... I suspect the 3rd-place New York team will get selected (barring any surprises) ... Of the teams remaining who have already raced at regionals, I'm leaning towards New Trier IL and Xavier Prep (not sure in which order; depends on other teams in the comparison) ... Should Saugus finish 3rd in the California power merge, I would give them strong consideration base on their history at NXN if they are close in the comparison ... But I’m hoping the 4th-place NY team has a great performance.
Side-note ... I believe an idea is being floated to combine future NXN New York and Northeast regional championship races into a single race and then score the regions separately ... it would give direct head-to-head comparison of the two regions and avoid the "merge" comparison ... My first two thoughts were (1) I do not believe most coaches will want that and (2) I do not think the Bowdoin Park course could handle the combined traffic unless the number of runners are limited ... as a fan, it would be interesting!
BMeylan wrote:
The girl’s side is a bit clearer ... Pine Creek CO is looking good ... I suspect the 3rd-place New York team will get selected (barring any surprises) ... Of the teams remaining who have already raced at regionals, I'm leaning towards New Trier IL and Xavier Prep (not sure in which order; depends on other teams in the comparison) ... Should Saugus finish 3rd in the California power merge, I would give them strong consideration base on their history at NXN if they are close in the comparison ... But I’m hoping the 4th-place NY team has a great performance.
History:
In 2010 Saugus was 2nd in 2008, 4th in 2009, and 3rd in 2010. But last year they didn't make it, behind 4 Calif teams that didn't fare great at NXN.
Xavier was 8th last year, ahead of 1st Calif team. (Then again, New Trier was 4th).
So which will committee weigh more strongly, most recent year, or 3 prior years?
Here are Bill Meylan's speed ratings for many of the girls teams he mentioned and a few others.
Pine Creek - 154 / 126 / 126 / 124 / 114 / 104 / 97 - 129.2 (highest)
Xavier Prep - 144 / 130 / 124 / 122 / 119 / 113 / 112 - 128.8 (highest)
New Trier - 142 / 133 / 132 / 114 / 111 / 105 / 104 - 126.4 (highest)
FM - 143 / 141 / 136 / 136 / 133 / 127 / 123 - 137.8
Saratoga - 145 / 134 / 133 / 123 / 117 / 110 / 108 - 130.4
Holy Names - 133 / 131 / 126 / 124 / 121 / 120 / 97 - 127.0
East Aurora - 132 / 126 / 122 / 120 / 115 / 102 / 96 - 123.0
Tatnall - 144 / 136 / 134 / 128 / 122 / 110 / 82 - 132.8 (highest)
Assumption - 143 / 133 / 131 / 123 / 110 / 84 / 81 - 128.0 (single)
Lake Braddock - 147 / 137 / 129 / 117 / 106 / 94 / 88 - 127.2 (single)
Mountain Brook - 150 / 122 / 116 / 116 / 113 / 106 / 105 - 123.0 (single)
Great Oak - 135 / 135 / 131 / 127 / 127 / 123 / 117 - 131.0 (highest)
Simi Valley - 164 / 128 / 127 / 126 / 125 / 124 / 116 - 134.0 (highest)
Buchanan - 150 / 121 / 116 / 115 / 112 / 112 / 101 - 122.8 (highest)
Saugus - 136 / 126 / 118 / 116 / 116 / 114 / 112 - 122.4 (highest)
La Costa Canyon, St. Francis and Davis did not have a sectional rating but should be in the mix with Buchanan and Saugus.
(highest) means Meylan has rated multiple races and I took the highest rating for each girl.
(single) means I used his ratings from a single race.
NY ratings are from his seasonal chart.
Obviously, at-large selection depends on Saturday's performances and then the committee's evaluation of the top non-qualifying teams.
Not sure what you're looking at but Saugus ran at NXN last year and finished 12th. Newhall = Saugus.
Does not wanting my kids to watch a bisexual threesome at the Olympics make me a bigot?
No scholarship limits anymore! (NCAA Track and Field inequality is going to get way worse, right?)
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion
Gudaf Tsegay will not race the 10000m? Just to spite the federation?