Top 15? Seems a bit pointless to keep dominating the CIS year after year.
Top 15? Seems a bit pointless to keep dominating the CIS year after year.
top 20?
they looked great @ Short and then Pre-Nats. Too bad that is their "season".
They probably would have won Paul Short if their 5th man didn't lose a shoe. But I guess that is the name of the game sometimes.
Top 15? Really? Are they that good? Not being a doubter, I'm just curious. A rough measure of runners is by track times, but I don't know how many of the Guelph guys get to run outdoor track.
The Men's team has a very solid top 5 led by an 8:27 steeplechaser and a sub 4:00 miler. Their next two runners and not too far behind them and their 5th runner is young and has a lot of promise. This past weekend Guelph almost scored a perfect score at the OUA Championships (their conference/regional championships) having runners place 1,2,3,4,6..for 16 points!!
That being all said I think they are a top 10 team.
They werent at PreNats
didn't they lose to some DIII teams in the last year or 2?
DonDraper wrote:
They werent at PreNats
right, Dellinger.
There is no way they would be ahead of Ghibelline.
Track Times (in order of finish at OUAs):
Genest - 3000m Steeplechase 8:27.53
Boorsma - 1500m 3:40.55, 3000m 7:59.92i 5000m 13:54.92
Brett - 1500m 3:46.42 3000m 8:13.39i
Proudfoot (Freshman) - 1500m 3:50.x 3000m - 8:24? 5000m 14:43
Nixon - 5000m 14:44 10000m 30:26
Mosher - No clue
Jackson - 1500m 3:47.19
They also have koziarski, a sub 31 track guy and a slew of decent MD guys.
For what its worth, they averaged 30:59 on a hilly, legitimate 10km course at OUAs. I doubt they would be a top ten team, but they should be able to mix it up for the top 15 or so.
one other point - the DII teams they have lost to (Eastern Michigan) occured when they were not running genest, boorsma, or brett.
How old are their guys? Dont you have 5 yrs in the canadian system? Would they even be eligible in the NCAA?
Finally someone said it...
Hard to say really. I think they could put 4 guys under 30:00 on a good day if they were to run Nationals. They lots Brunsting this year and he was their top runner at CIS. And everyone knows Jackson is great on the track, not so great at xc. Hard to say. One can speculate thought... or slader.
NorthAmericanrunner wrote:This past weekend Guelph almost scored a perfect score at the OUA Championships (their conference/regional championships) having runners place 1,2,3,4,6..for 16 points!!
That being all said I think they are a top 10 team.
After watching them at OUAs, I can't imagine there being much more than 10 teams to beat them in the US. They are insanely good.
NorthAmericanrunner wrote:
I think they are a top 10 team.
same
They have two 14:40 5k runners rounding out their top 5, they are not a top ten team. You seriously underestimate how good a DI top ten team is.
I am very interested in this - can you give me an idea of a number ten team's PRs at 5 or 10km?
How old are their guys? Dont you have 5 yrs in the canadian system? Would they even be eligible in the NCAA?[/quote]
You're right that Genest wouldn't be eligible for an NCAA school. He's 24. [quote]-- wrote:
Chelenga's still got at least 5 years on him
hipster doofus wrote:
I am very interested in this - can you give me an idea of a number ten team's PRs at 5 or 10km?
If we go by the rankings that came out yesterday, New Mexico is the #10 team in the country, and before that Arkansas was the #10 team.
New Mexico's #5 is usually either Brock Hagerman (14:27/29:20) or David Bishop (4:00miler, 3:43 1500m)
Arkansas's #5 is usually either Dey Tuach (1:47, 3:48, 30:24 XC 10k), or Bryan Cantero(FR, 3:41 1500m), with the occasional good show by Michael Chinchar (3:44 1500m)