Comments thread for DyeStat Team Rankings

[Heracles]

The Woodland's district meet summary:

BOYS

Varsiy Boys 5K
1st place was Brian Gohlke from College Park in 15:36
The Woodlands went 2-8
Sanderson 2nd in 15:37 followed by:
15:59, 16:01, 16:02, 16:04, 16:11, 16:24

JV Race TWL's scored 15--- Winner was 16:22 with 2nd in 16:33.
Freshman Race TWL's scored 15



GIRLS

Andrews wins in 11:44
2nd was Bree (CP) in 12:16
College Park wins 25-34 over TWL, 7 in the top 10

TWL's wins girl's JV easily, dunno about freshman

[DistanceDan]

Originally Posted by Heracles

The Woodland's district meet summary:

BOYS

Varsiy Boys 5K
1st place was Brian Gohlke from College Park in 15:36
The Woodlands went 2-8
Sanderson 2nd in 15:37 followed by:
15:59, 16:01, 16:02, 16:04, 16:11, 16:24

JV Race TWL's scored 15--- Winner was 16:22 with 2nd in 16:33.
Freshman Race TWL's scored 15



GIRLS

Andrews wins in 11:44
2nd was Bree (CP) in 12:16
College Park wins 25-34 over TWL, 7 in the top 10

TWL's wins girl's JV easily, dunno about freshman

It's funny, the Woodlands' JV squad would have advanced to regionals.

[HoriconAve]

Originally Posted by NYrunner

true, I thought she was a little higher....but I think they are at the same level as last year going into sectionals.....BH is close enough to push them all out at sectionals. I am really hoping for good weather next weekend in Albany area Could be some really fast times by a lot of teams.

I wonder if they will skip Feds for a better chance at NXN?

Not sure... with no open weekend between Feds and NXN, I think you'll see a lot of teams skipping Feds (which is a shame). It's a fine line between being race-sharp and being rested. On the boys side... out of the 4 contenders for the NXN bids, Liverpool may be the only team to run Feds - if they don't, they'll go 3 weeks between races (assuming they don't pull off the upset of Fayetteville at Sectionals).

[eh]

Change of topic: River Ridge district meet in Virginia last week had #14 Blacksburg girls perfect-score over #47 Hidden Valley. I don't know if Hidden Valley just had a bad race, or whether they were not at full strength.

[fasteddy]

Dana Hills has a great program and has been there before. Their 2nd place finish at Mt Sac was essentially equivalent to Royal. The spread was about 8 points and 25 seconds or so. That is nothing. I am a Royal fan but I think Dana Hills should be ranked right up there with or close to Royal. Lastly knowing they have a great program and have their eye on the ball I believe they trained right through Mt. Sac. i.e. This was not a late mid / late season peak.

[watchout]

Originally Posted by fasteddy

Dana Hills has a great program and has been there before. Their 2nd place finish at Mt Sac was essentially equivalent to Royal. The spread was about 8 points and 25 seconds or so. That is nothing. I am a Royal fan but I think Dana Hills should be ranked right up there with or close to Royal. Lastly knowing they have a great program and have their eye on the ball I believe they trained right through Mt. Sac. i.e. This was not a late mid / late season peak.

I agree, there isn't much distance between Royal and Dana Hills.

On the guys side, I think there are 11-13 teams with the potential to win an NXN title.

However, unless I missed something, their spread wasn't 8 points/25 seconds... their #1 was 14:57 and their #5 was 15:48 (30 points in their race)

[IDon'tRun]

Originally Posted by watchout

I agree, there isn't much distance between Royal and Dana Hills.

On the guys side, I think there are 11-13 teams with the potential to win an NXN title.

However, unless I missed something, their spread wasn't 8 points/25 seconds... their #1 was 14:57 and their #5 was 15:48 (30 points in their race)

I believe he was referring to the spread between Royal and Dana Hills.

And fasteddy, I also agree there is much less daylight between the two teams than the rankings might seem to suggest/many might seem to think (I believe I read Mountain View's coach deem Royal "untouchable") but your point about Dana Hills' peak is somewhat moot, as if any team has shown in its past history the ability to match Dana Hills' vaunted post season peaking ability, it is without a doubt Royal.

[watchout]

Originally Posted by IDon'tRun

I believe he was referring to the spread between Royal and Dana Hills.

And fasteddy, I also agree there is much less daylight between the two teams than the rankings might seem to suggest/many might seem to think (I believe I read Mountain View's coach deem Royal "untouchable") but your point about Dana Hills' peak is somewhat moot, as if any team has shown in its past history the ability to match Dana Hills' vaunted post season peaking ability, it is without a doubt Royal.

Ahh, that makes sense. thanks.

[fasteddy]

Originally Posted by IDon'tRun

I believe he was referring to the spread between Royal and Dana Hills.

And fasteddy, I also agree there is much less daylight between the two teams than the rankings might seem to suggest/many might seem to think (I believe I read Mountain View's coach deem Royal "untouchable") but your point about Dana Hills' peak is somewhat moot, as if any team has shown in its past history the ability to match Dana Hills' vaunted post season peaking ability, it is without a doubt Royal.

Yep Dana hills does peak very well; surely there is no luck involved there! Royal does the same. We on the Royal side of things will not take anyone for granted knowing that programs like Dana are nothing short of unbelievable. Heck last year the Dana B team could beat some top teams. Exageration perhaps but you get the point. See you at Sac, State, and hopefully NTN!!!

[NYrunner]

Bloom has no Queensbury in his rankings?