Even as good as our men's and women's teams are again this year in track & field, this is probably Oregon's year to win national team titles.

Oregon's teams are deeper than ours, and several of their stars have been turning in amazing performances.

And the national meet is in Eugene.

quote:

---

Oregon's teams are deeper than ours

---

Wheating went off on everyone this past week and they've got some other guys starting to light it up, but I'm not seeing the incredible depth you speak of.

[This message has been edited by TXAggie2011 (edited 5/2/2010 7:31p).]

Here is the latest from Track and Field News:

Florida Men See Their Margin Shrink

Chart #2

In the three weeks since we posted the first NCAA Men’s Predictions of the year, defending champ Texas A&M’s stock has dropped by 2 points, but favored Florida’s went down by 7. As a result, the healthy 8-point lead that Mike Holloway’s Gators enjoyed previously has slipped to just 3 over Pat Henry’s Aggies.

Both are projected to score in 8 different events, Florida 10 times (2 in the 100 and 400, both relays, LJ, 2 in the TJ, SP, Dec), A&M 11 times: (100, 2 in the 200, 400, both relays, 2 in the TJ, JT, Dec).

With 6 events on tap in which both teams are projected to score (100, 400, 4x1, 4x4, TJ, Decathlon), no end of head-to-head battles could make for one of the more exciting team races in recent memory.

Oregon (which has added 6 points to its calculation) will get a lot of fervid local support, but to climb over either of the top 2 would need a lot of comethrough performances, which isn’t completely out of the question at Hayward Field.


TOP 10 TEAMS
1. Florida 65
2. Texas A&M 62
3. Oregon 51
4. Arizona State 39
=5 Auburn 28
=5 LSU 28
7. Florida State 27
8. Mississippi 26
9. USC 23
10. South Carolina 20

Complete release is at trackandfieldnews.com go to this page and click on formcharts. Deep event predictions plus women's predictions.

Ags have the #1 Men's and Women's team right now.

quote:

---

Ags have the #1 Men's and Women's team right now.

---

Link?

http://www.aggieathletics.com/sports/c-xctrack/tam-c-xctrack-body.html

Remember, though, that the USTFCCCA rankings don't neccasarily reflect how the teams would fare at nationals. Their rankings are usually good for "picking" about 70%-80% of teams in the general area of their finish at nationals.

I think what this is all telling us is that it is going to be a crapshoot about who is on their very best form come race day.

quote:

---

I think what this is all telling us is that it is going to be a crapshoot about who is on their very best form come race day.

---

That's absolutely correct. I like the women's chances to repeat with their strength and depth in the sprints, hurdles, and relays. I think the men have a tougher task.

Anyway, the guy asked for a link, and I provided it.

quote:

---

Anyway, the guy asked for a link, and I provided it.

---

Ok?

Admit I'm an idiot when it comes to track, but if A&M is ranking #1 and "projected" to compete for the national title again this year, how did we come in #3 in the Big 12 meet? Do we have a bunch of injuries that we held guys out for? Just curious....thanks.

I think there are a couple ot things.........
1. a couple of injuries
2. a few guys did not perform their best
3. Huskers did well

Re being no. 1, we still have the quality in enough events to get the points to win at the NCAA meet when some of the depth in conf by say Nebrtaska and OU won't be good enough at that level to get points....and the points will be spread out more.

The USTasddfjasdfklasdf rankings give points for a lot of performances that won't score at a meet. (I wanna say the rankings go something like 25 deep or so).

Thus, some teams, like A&M, that are deep in every race, score a lot of points in the rankings that they won't get at a meet.

Plus, as said above, we weren't neccasarily completely on form...and the difference between 1 and 3 isnt that much.

It is possible for us to have a better chance to win the National Championship than to win the conference championship.

Let that sink in for a moment and then read the reasoning below. (please feel free to correct me if you know better).

In the conference meet you are rewarded for being a more well rounded team. Nebraska had a lot of competitors who finish in the 3-5th range in a lot of events, but wouldn't be able to score at the national level (or at least not enough points to matter) because while they are "good" they aren't elite. Ours top runners in the sprints, TJ and Javelin will get their same points in the conference meet as they will at the national meet (maybe not quite as many points at the national meet), but since our talent is elite they will score points at both levels. We are punished by not having as well rounded a team as it shows up at the conference level. Now as you can see with our women's side, if you have elite talent and TONS of it, you can dominate at both levels. For our men, we have the athletes in place to score a lot of points at the national level, but not as well rounded a team as to win the conference level.

As for Oregon being on a roll... well they will very likely win this year. They are clearly the best at the distance events and Texas A&M and Florida may just beat each other up too much in the sprinting events for us to be able to catch Oregon. Honestly, it could come down to the 4x400 race (as it did last year) to see who claims the National Championship.

Thanks for the info...makes sense.

quote:

---

It is possible for us to have a better chance to win the National Championship than to win the conference championship.

Let that sink in for a moment and then read the reasoning below. (please feel free to correct me if you know better).

In the conference meet you are rewarded for being a more well rounded team. Nebraska had a lot of competitors who finish in the 3-5th range in a lot of events, but wouldn't be able to score at the national level (or at least not enough points to matter) because while they are "good" they aren't elite. Ours top runners in the sprints, TJ and Javelin will get their same points in the conference meet as they will at the national meet (maybe not quite as many points at the national meet), but since our talent is elite they will score points at both levels. We are punished by not having as well rounded a team as it shows up at the conference level. Now as you can see with our women's side, if you have elite talent and TONS of it, you can dominate at both levels. For our men, we have the athletes in place to score a lot of points at the national level, but not as well rounded a team as to win the conference level.

As for Oregon being on a roll... well they will very likely win this year. They are clearly the best at the distance events and Texas A&M and Florida may just beat each other up too much in the sprinting events for us to be able to catch Oregon. Honestly, it could come down to the 4x400 race (as it did last year) to see who claims the National Championship.

---

I think the bigger difference between a conference and national championship meet isn't being well-rounded (which ALWAYS helps) but rather that a team's "non-elite" performers will not be providing as many/any points at a national championship meet.

In a conference championship, a school will have 4-5 people gain points in an event where they are strong. That won't happen in a national meet. Also, people that would "sneak" points in events that are NOT a strength for that team will not gain many/any points at a national event.

As I posted on another thread:

quote:

---

Most schools specialize in one "type" of event and, therefore are more dangerous in a conference meet where the pool of potentials in the "other" events are smaller and they can get some points. Get a team that is known for its distance running into a national meet and their sprinters won't earn points. The best teams for big meets are more diverse.

Relays are the biggest events at many meets because they will bring double points, but if I recall correctly, the NC meet doesn't reward double points for relays.

Oregon is strong as hell in distance running, but they are also strong in other areas. We're strong in sprints but we're also strong in jumps and relays. When/If we can get our distance running to give us some consistent points (not even win), we will be in a much better position for a conference meet.

---

[This message has been edited by Chase (edited 5/23/2010 12:33p).]

Chase:

As a former Aggie Track Athlete, I would like to respectfully disagree with you, or at least the point I THINK you are trying to get across.

You seem to think teams like A&M who specialize in just a few event areas (for us it is sprints and horizontal jumps) are more dangerous at the conference championship level than the national meet level. This just flat isn't the case. Nebraska is a prime example of this. Nebraska always has a pretty well balanced team with some depth. At the conference level they are always in the hunt, but not because they win tons of events, but because they will have 2-3 decent athletes in many events who get just a few points each, but they add up. Nebraska is nowhere to be seen at the national meet while they always compete for the Big 12 title.

Winning conference can be done with many decent athletes. Winning nationals takes far less, but more elite athletes.

The difference is, at the conference level each team is allowed a set number of athletes. I believe the number is 27 for indoors and 32 for outdoors but don't quote me on that. On the national level, each athlete has to qualify on an individual basis. Because of this difference in the number of teams attending and the average number athletes per team, it takes far fewer points to win nationals, therefore requiring the fewer, more elite athletes I referred to earlier.

No, actually I think the opposite, so either I typed something wrong or you read it different than I intended it.

In a nutshell, I feel that:

The ability to garner points from 3-5 athletes in a multiple events you specialize in AND/OR gain some "garbage" points at positions 5-8 allows a team that is somewhat well-rounded an advantage in conference meets.

At the national level, there are so many competitors from different schools that having 3-5 people point in an event is rare and you don't end up with "garbage" points just because there are not many people better in your conference or area of specialization. Everyone at Nationals has to qualify, so that eliminates a lot of folks a conference team might use to tally up points.

We are a team built around a few elite athletes that will score points at the national meet and we will without question be first among the Big 12 schools. It is disappointing that we have yet to win conference on the men's side because those cheap points are often scored by walk on or books type athletes. In this area we have a huge advantage over other schools in the conference because we have the state of Texas to recruit from. Athletes from in state can often walk on here cheaper than they can go for almost a half scholarship to an out of state school. We did not have a good conference meet on the men's side and that is why we didn't win. We were a team more than capable of winning.

As for nationals, the new format should play to our strengths. It is much easier on sprinters now at the national meet and much more difficult for distance runners. Over the period for regionals and nationals our sprinters will actually run one fewer round in the 100 and 200 and the same number of rounds in the 400 and both relays. The distance runners will run twice as many races in the 800, 1500, and steeplechase. The distance runners will also have to run a qualifying race in the 10000 which makes it almost impossible to double in the 5 and 10. It badly hurts Oregon's chances to win the meet, even at home. The meet should come down to just us and Florida. If Oregon gets on a huge role and both A&M and Florida choke then it is possible for the Oregon men to win. I don't know much about the women's side.

aggie2207, that is interesting to hear about having to run more races in the distance competition. I knew they were changing it up, and being in the west area, we have a huge advantage because most elite sprinters are in the east. I guess we could hope that there are some surprises and Florida doesn't even get some of their athletes to the national meet, but who knows.

It will be a battle to win the national championship. I think our women have a very solid chance, and our men will be competing at the top. The top three teams that could win would be Texas A&M, Florida and Oregon, but as has been shown in past years, anything can happen at the national meet.

There is no question that things line up better for us this year than last year on the men's side as far as qualifying. Our sprinters should have an easy time getting through as the men's side on the west is weak. The jumps are tough and that is where we have to be careful. If we have a vulnerability in qualifying it is there because of the talent in the west. Florida does not appear to be doubling many of their sprinters and are basically doing nothing in the 200. It would be huge for us if Phiri were to place there. This weekend will be interesting as the meets are so weird in how they are constructed. There will be surprises as always.

VERY interesting about the distance-sprint number of races difference. Wonder why they decided to do it that way. Maybe to encourage sprinters more, rather than teams loading up with CC guys?

Anyways, the fact of the matter is that it takes 120 points (roughly) to win Conference. There's not "1 way" to do that. You can have 1 stud guy in each of 12 events. You can have 12 diverse guys who score 4 points in 2 different events each. You can have scorers in every event who go 5-6-7 in every event, but don't win a single one. Or you can win with some combination of the two, or any other number of things.

Now, you could do a statistical study of what happens most FREQUENTLY, and I think it'd be interesting to see, but every team who does well at Conference and poorly at NCAA's, or vice-versa, does not have to fall into the same category.

Here is the latest from "the Bible of the sport" Track and Field News:
NCAA FORMCHART - Men
compiled by John Auka
Florida Men Rebuild Their Margin
The Super-Conference Weekend was kind to Mike Holloway’s Florida Gators, and not so much for Pat Henry’s Texas A&M squad. The healthy 8-point lead that the Gators enjoyed in our first chart of the year slipped to just 3 in iteration 2. But Florida has now picked up 6, with A&M dropping 3 at the same time, so the projected margin is now a healthy 12.

Host Oregon picked up a point and is now just 7 behind A&M, but what would appear to be an unreachable 19 behind the leaders. Stranger things have happened at Hayward Field, though.

Both are projected to score in 8 different events, Florida 10 times (2 in the 100 and 400, both relays, LJ, 2 in the TJ, SP, Dec), A&M 11 times: (100, 2 in the 200, 400, both relays, 2 in the TJ, JT, Dec).

Complete report (top 10 in each event) and women's predictions found at trackandfieldnews.com

hurdledog, I think some of that drop for us comes from our TJ underperforming at the conference meet. If they perform how they did most of the season, then we should get a couple more points. If I have faith in one coach for our school to get the most out of his athletes and to compete (and win) national championships, that would be Pat Henry. He is internationally recognized for his coaching and it is a blessing to have him. Lets just hope we have no injuries and that everyone performs at their highest level.

A&M men and women move back to #1 in the latest USTFCCCA rankings.

But the men and women still wouldn't win the meet based on best performances using meet scoring.

UF men score about 71 points to A&M 54. Oregon is close to 52.

Oregon women score 53 with A&M at 52.

These are approximate, but have a spreadsheet at home.

quote:

---

But the men and women still wouldn't win the meet based on best performances using meet scoring.

---

Fortunately, "best performances" won't decide the outcome of the meet. For example, Keisha Baker has the best time in the 400m, yet she has failed in two attempts to beat Jessica Beard. And I would be willing to bet a six-pack that Tarmoh or Lucas, or both, will place higher than their current "best performance" ranking in the 100m. Both out-qualified Blessing Okagbare last weekend.

Of course these things can go both ways and some of our athletes could underperform. But these intangibles are part of the reason the Aggies are back at the top of the rankings.

The reason that the Aggies are on top of the rankings are because A&M has higher qualifiers that are not in point position versus Oregon's qualifiers that are not in point position.

Dominique Duncan gives points for A&M at the 16th spot.

The rankings still give Keshia Baker 40 points for first place and 38 points to Beard for second place so your example does not seem to work.

Essentially what you have said is the track rankings are just as worthless as the point totals that I posted because people are not going to finish in the place of their ranking.

The only difference between the point totals that I posted and the track rankings are the track rankings give points for everybody that qualified for Eugene while I just gave point totals for those who qualified for Eugene in the top 8 places.

quote:

---

The rankings still give Keshia Baker 40 points for first place and 38 points to Beard for second place so your example does not seem to work.

---

I see the numbers the same as you do. When has Baker beaten Beard this season? The answer is ...... she hasn't. So my example works just fine. I'll take Beard over Baker in Eugene......

Baker beat Beard at the NCAA Indoor Championships. Baker was second, Beard was third. McCrory from Hampton won.

OK, that's once, indoors, and they ran in separate sections in the finals. And Beard destroyed her on her home track when the Aggies went to Eugene. Look, I realize they are the cream of the 400 crop. I will still take Beard.

But that's really not the point

[This message has been edited by JR69 (edited 6/3/2010 6:30a).]

Latest from Track and Field News...trackandfieldnews.com for complete men and women's 10 deep event predictions and team scores
Florida Men Holding On Over Surging Texas A&M
Chart #4
(as of June 3)
For Chart # we said, "The Super-Conference Weekend was kind to Mike Holloway’s Florida Gators, and not so much for Pat Henry’s Texas A&M squad." You can reverse that equation for the Regionals, with Florida losing 2 points and the Lone Star bunch jumping up by 8.
As a result, Florida’s healthy 12-point lead is suddenly down to just a pair, with projected scoring as Florida 69-Texas A&M 67. With the two schools predicted to go 1-2 in the 4x4 (with the Aggies winning) it’s obviously going to go right down to the wire in a barnburner finish.
Assuming all other events are done when the 4x4s step to the line, the scoring will be Florida 61, A&M 57, Oregon 54 (up 2 from Chart #3). But the hosts won’t have a relay team, so will have to settle for the 3rd-place trophy, unless homefield advantage has been particularly kind to them during the rest of the meet.
Only 1 new winner is predicted in the latest chart: Texas A&M in the 4x4 (replacing Florida). But Florida still gets the big prize.

Women's...

The ebb and flow in the Texas A&M/Oregon team battle has been fascinating this year. In our first formchart of the year, the host Ducks were rated as a 3-point favorite over the defending champion Aggies, 67–64. Three weeks later, the Aggies had pulled to within a point, 67–66. After the Conferences were contested, both powerhouses picked up minor points, so that the gap became a pair, 67–69.

The Regionals provided some serious shakeout for both teams. Oregon, most notably with Amber Purvis’s false start in the 200, dropped by 9. Texas A&M lost hurdler Natasha Ruddock to injury and dropped by 7. The result: Texas A&M is now on top by a single digit, 61–60.

No other team is remotely in the team hunt, Florida remaining in the No. 3 position with 36 points.

Threepeat???

Go Ags!

Aggie Women 72 points; OU 52
Aggie Men 55 points; OU 45

Back to Back!!! Outstanding Men and Women and Coaches!!!!

Gig'em, Ole Army Class of '70