Pac-10 XC results ['03 thread revived]

[vaulter83]

Women's Team Scores:
Stanford 22
Arizona State 78
UCLA 79
Washington 123
Oregon 161
Arizona 179
Southern California 185
Washington State 187
California 202

Men's Team Scores:
Stanford 23
Oregon 91
Washington 93
Arizona 109
Arizona State 112
Washington State 136
UCLA 150
California 192

Bei and Dobson win individual titles. Looks like the 30 degree weather didn't bother Stanford too much.
How about UW nearly taking 2nd?

[vaulter83]

Re: Pac-10 XC results

forgot link to full results. http://wsucougars.ocsn.com/sports/c-xc/ ... 03aaa.html

[Guest]

Re: Pac-10 XC results

>Bei and
>Dobson win individual titles. Looks like the 30
>degree weather didn't bother Stanford too much.>>

Ahh.... I see it was unseasonably warm in the Palouse Country.

[dl]

Re: Pac-10 XC results

Check out results from all the conferences at:

http://www.trackandfieldnews.com/genera ... 31101.html

[Guest]

Re: Pac-10 XC results

>Women's Team Scores:
Stanford 22
Arizona State
>78
UCLA 79
Washington 123
Oregon 161
Arizona
>179
Southern California 185
Washington State
>187
California 202

Men's Team
>Scores:
Stanford 23
Oregon 91
Washington
>93
Arizona 109
Arizona State 112
Washington
>State 136
UCLA 150
California 192

Bei and
>Dobson win individual titles. Looks like the 30
>degree weather didn't bother Stanford too much.
>
How about UW nearly taking 2nd?>

Looks like those team scores are from 2002. Stanford men scored 19 taking 7 of top 9.

[Guest]

Re: Pac-10 XC results

Chris Huffins needs to take a look at the distance side of his program. I honestly doubt Cal's competitive in xc with the top Div III schools in its region. Huffins should have Sandoval schedule nothing but duals with the non-scholarship programs until they can win handily at that level. Sad. What happened to pride... let alone athlete development and improvement? I realize Stanford's crosstown "rival" has been a doormat for at least 20 years... but it doesn't have to be THIS bad. Not based on the times of at least a few of those runners from high school. Those guys have gotten worse, not better. This is an ongoing pattern with a few exceptions.

[Guest]

Re: Pac-10 XC results

>>Women's Team Scores:
Stanford 22
Arizona
>State
>78
UCLA 79
Washington 123
Oregon
>161
Arizona
>179
Southern California
>185
Washington State
>187
California
>202

Men's Team
>Scores:
Stanford 23
Oregon
>91
Washington
>93
Arizona 109
Arizona State
>112
Washington
>State 136
UCLA 150
California
>192

Bei and
>Dobson win individual titles.
>Looks like the 30
>degree weather didn't bother
>Stanford too much.
>
How about UW nearly
>taking 2nd?>

Looks like those team scores are
>from 2002. Stanford men scored 19 taking 7 of
>top 9.>

I'm wrong about this. That's what I get for posting late in the evening.

[Guest]

Re: Pac-10 XC results

Vaulter,
"How about UW nearly taking second?" Were you there? UW ran short, one star injured and not competing, the second gutting it out with the kids pulling it out by 17 points. I'd say UW, fifth time in a row Big Ten Champions, made quite a statement! We Badger fans are very proud of the team. Any Stanford stars run under 24 as the winner of Big Ten did?

[Guest]

Re: Pac-10 XC results

I don't know if that was an attempt at humor, but the "UW" in question is the "other" UW.

[Guest]

Re: Pac-10 XC results

Any Stanford stars run under
>24 as the winner of Big Ten did?>

Trying to compare times on different XC courses?

[dl]

Re: Pac-10 XC results

I don't mean to bash Coach Sandoval (God knows he gets it bad enough from others) but it's not like he's not getting talented kids. He's been stocking some solid kids from within state for the last couple of years. The team is young, but it's not like Cal has a great record of developing athletes either. I write this because I'm a lifelong Cal fan. My great-grandfather was on the Cal track team and my grandfather played Hoops for the Bears.

Here's Cal's finishers at Pac-10:

28. Girmay Guangul 25:56.90, 39. Giliat Ghebray 26:14.80, 44. David Torrence 26:28.60, 45. Carlos Carballo 26:28.90, 55. Ozzie Pina 26:49.40, 59. Jonathan Balzer 27:10.80, 66. Abadir Barre 27:44.70, 71. Kevin Davis 28:12.40, 72. Eric Roberts 28:12.60.

1. Guangul had a decent race, but he ran 29:17.78 in the spring, so he should be running better.
2. Ghebray is only a frosh, but is a big talent (his brother ran 9:00 as a HS soph last year) and ran 4:14.19y/9:07.2 last year.
3. Torrence, didn't run all that bad, considering he's a frosh, but he was 3rd in the Cal State mile and ran 4:11/9:05 last year.
4. Carballo, I've been hearing for years how good this guy was gonna be as a senior. He ran 15:49 at Woodwark Park in high school (Cal State Meet site), so he's got some talent.
5. Pina, a JUCO transfer, ran 4:14/9:05 in high school. Was State JC 1500 champ last year, running 3:53/14:27.
6. Balzer, a senior, not a great talent, but did run 4:22 in high school.
7. Barre, only a frosh, but ran 9:14.59 last year.
8. Davis, only a frosh, but ran 9:06.99.
9. Roberts, only a frosh, but ran 4:16 last year.

[Guest]

Re: Pac-10 XC results

Developing athletes? That's a laugh. Cal's a graveyard for distance runner development. I am interested because I too am a fan and an alum (graduate school). The Bears went downhill from Pre-Nats to the Pac-10. Will they continue the slide or reverse it for Regionals?

Sorry for crying in my beer about the worst team in the Pac-10. I'm sure others would rather talk about the good teams.

[Guest]

Re: Pac-10 XC results

Is the success of recent cal grads on the cross country and road scene (3 in the trials marathon and others having success at shorter distances) a result of Sandoval's development or further evidence that he let good talent go undeveloped? I tend to lean toward the former, but am always open for any new insights.

[Guest]

Re: Pac-10 XC results

>Chris Huffins needs to take a look at the
>distance side of his program. I honestly doubt
>Cal's competitive in xc with the top Div III
>schools in its region. Huffins should have
>Sandoval schedule nothing but duals with the
>non-scholarship programs until they can win
>handily at that level.

The Cal woman actually won the Stanford Invite 4k team race this year, but I don't know what happened to them at Pac 10. On the other hand, Cal was only 40 points out of 5th, which is relatively close in such a big meet.

But yes, the team needs to build back up. Unfortunately, I think it's across the board, not just in the distances. I hope Chris generates enough enthusiasm to get it rolling again.

As an interesting aside, Cal alums seem to dominate the Northern California road racing scene. The Stanford folks are often running at the national level, skipping these races, but other schools aren't cranking out many runners who are competive with the Old Blues.

[Guest]

Re: Pac-10 XC results

Didn't say he irrevocably destroyed runners. But a failure to develop on average during college, absolutely. If you are THE Peter Gilmore, you are the rare exception that proves the rule.

I'm curious. What were the high school PRs for you, Creasey and Moreno? And PRs at Cal?

Here's something hard to argue. Cal Poly SLO has had more recent success over several years in cross than Cal. Conover takes lesser talents based on high school times and makes them better in college. What say after regionals we stack up the times and places of the SLO runners versus the Cal guys and compare their high school times? Can't make any promises, but I think my point about development during college will become clear.

Does that sound reasonable?

>Is the success of recent cal grads on the cross
>country and road scene (3 in the trials marathon
>and others having success at shorter distances) a
>result of Sandoval's development or further
>evidence that he let good talent go undeveloped?
>I tend to lean toward the former, but am always
>open for any new insights.