NCAA Track & Field Championship – June 11-14 [Wed – Sat]
Eugene, Oregon

There are two ways to predict the outcome of the meet.
First, there are the rankings by the experts at Track & Field News (Jack Pfeifer for the women and John Auka for the men).
Second, there are the rankings based on the best performances so far this outdoor season.

Projections:
The numbers in front of each school are the rankings based on NCAA Formcharts and best performances. The numbers after each school are the projection points each school will obtain based on the same criteria.

MEN
1, 3 – Oregon [78, 53]
2, 1 – Florida [72, 66]
3, 2 – Texas A&M [58, 60]
4, 5 – Arkansas [35, 28]
5, 4 – LSU [30, 30]

WOMEN
1, 1 – tu [70, 77]
2, 4 – Oregon [67, 53.5]
3, 2 – Texas A&M [66, 65]
4, 3 – Florida [56, 57.5]
5, 5 – Kentucky [41, 44.5]
6, 6 – Georgia [33, 44]

Note the significant differences in the projection points for Oregon [78 vs. 53 and 67 vs. 53.5]. Could having the meet on their own turf have a lot to do with how much better Formcharts expect from the Oregon participants as compared to how they have performed so far this season?

Granted, Oregon is a track hotbed with lots of support. And the weather will probably be better, in terms of not that hot. (Although it could easily be 60 degrees and a lot of showers.)

But Oregon just hosted the NCAA track and field championships either two or three years ago. Why do they get to do it again? That seems to me to be a tremendous advantage, especially for a teams that is pretty certain to contend for both titles.

Oregon will host the NCAA meet through 2021. They also have been awarded the US Junior Championships and the World Junior Championships this year and the Olympic Trials in 2016. I believe they have the US Senior Championships in 2015 but could be mistaken on this. NIKE picks the winners in track and field and everyone takes a back seat to Oregon. If their distance runners repeat what they did indoors they will be tough to beat though it would remain possible. Edward Chesarek won the 3000 and 5000 comfortably indoors but is not ranked very high in either race. He will be the big one to watch for them. We need to get Coach Henry and proper outdoor facility because the program deserves it. We need to do it even though we are not likely to get an NCAA championship or the Olympic Trials.

I'll say this. A&M have built very nicely throughout the season. Expect them to show up.

Edward Chesarek: As Ed stated, Oregon’s freshman Edward Chesarek easily won the NCAA indoor 3K and 5K races. He also won the fall NCAA cross-county race. He is a freshman distance running phenom.

However, his times have not been that great in these races this outdoor season. I actually used his indoor 5K time to rank him in the 5K race for the NCAA meet, which gave him the seventh best time among participants. His outdoor 10K time is the sixth best time among participants.

The Formchart expert believes that he will return to his cross-country and indoor form. It projects him to finish second in the 5K and first in the 10K.

Formchart projects him to earn 18 points for Oregon. Best performances project him to earn only 5 points. He will almost certainly earn significantly more than 5 points.

Just some observation from the heat sheet posted today. Aggies have some tough heats The 100m and 200m are very critical for us. The Aggies must run real fast to make the finals.

Women 100m Top two plus next best two times
Heat 1
Ashton Purvis, Shayla Sanders Remona Burchell Dezerea Bryant

Heat 2
Morolake Akinosun,Katie Wise,Aaliyah Brown

Heat 3
Jennifer Madu, Olivia Ekpone, Jenna Prandini

Women 200m Top two plus next best two times
Kamaria and Olivia in same heat
Heat 1
Olivia Ekpone Felicia Brown, Kamaria Brown

Heat 2
Very tough for the Aggies
Jenna Prandini, Dezerea Bryant, Ashton Purvis Aaliyah Brown

Men 100m

Shavez and Prezel is in the same heat
Heat 3 very tough heat
1 Prezel Hardy, Jr. SR Texas A&M 10.29
2 Shavez Hart JR Texas A&M 10.27
3 Johnathan Smith SR Georgia 10.27
4 Chris Royster SR South Carolina 10.20
5 Dentarius Locke SR Florida State 10.03
6 Ronnie Baker SO TCU 10.14
7 BeeJay Lee JR USC 10.16
8 Tevin Hester SO Clemson 10.28

Men 400m
Three Aggies in heat 1. Very tough heat. Only two automatic qualifiers
Heat 1 Prelims
1 DJ Zahn JR Illinois 45.82
2 Cass Brown-StewartSR Steph F. Austin 45.95
3 Zack Bilderback SO Texas 45.70
4 Deon Lendore JR Texas A&M 45.22
5 Hugh Graham, Jr JR Florida 45.29
6 Carlyle Roudette SR Texas A&M 45.66
7 Aldrich Bailey, Jr.SO Texas A&M 45.74
8 Je'von Hutchison SR Hampton 45.71

Based on some of the heat sheets the Aggies have some tough draws and would have to be at their best to make the finals. I expect some really fast semi final races. We are heavily dependent on 100m, 200m and 400m and therefore we got to get a couple of persons in each final.

The women 400m has a very tough heat 3 as well with two longhorns and an Oregon athlete. It has Courtney Okolo, Phyllis Francis and Kendall Baisden with only two automatic qualifiers. This would be a fast race as well.

All the best to our Aggies in Oregon

With the sprint competition, you can't win the championship on Wednesday and Thursday but you can definitely lose the championship on Wednesday and Thursday by not advancing to finals.

Md Tenn Ag Cheserek did bust out a 3:36 1500m at PAC 12's. His 10000m was a tempo run to Qualify. I think he win's at least one if not 2 events.

He probably will. He is a good one. He has the second best collegiate 1500m time behind the Arizona runner.

[This message has been edited by MidTnAg (edited 6/10/2014 7:29a).]

I still do not understand the rational for the heat placement at nationals.

For example: The two individuals with the best two times in the Women 200m race at both regionals are in the SAME heat and they also happen to be from the SAME university – Heat 1 has Olivia Ekpone (1st) and Kamaria Brown (2nd) of the AGGIES. Definitely do not understand this rational.

Heat 1 also has the sixth best time. Since there are three heats, the performers are definitely not evenly distributed. Heat 2 has only one top 6 qualifier; Heat 3 has only 2.

The only good thing is that both Ashton Purvis (8th) and Aaliyah Brown (10th) are in Heat 2.

I have listed the WEDNESDAY participants for the top teams [4 Women and 3 Men]. I listed every participant in these teams who are projected to finish in the top 10 on either the Formchart or by best 2014 performance. Trini has listed the heats for the Aggies.

All field events and the 10K are finals; the rest are prelims. Wednesday result should go a long way in determining the final outcome.

After each team’s name is the projected points based on the Formchart predictions followed by the projected points based on best 2014 performances.
Before each participant name is the projected finish by Formchart prediction followed by the projected finish based on best 2014 performance.
= =

MEN

Oregon [78, 55]
1, 6 – Cheserek, Edward (Fr) – 10K
3, 2 – Berry, Mike (Sr) – 400m
3, 3 – Keys, Dakotah (Jr) – decathlon
5, 6 – Stinson, Parker (Sr) – 10K
6, 8 – Dunbar, Trevor (Sr) – 10K

Florida [72, 66]
1, 2 – Florida – 4x100
2, 2 – Zunic, Stipe (Jr) – shot
2, 6 – Hall, Arman (So) – 400m
5, 4 – Obinwa, Sean (Sr) – 800m
8, 6 – Schuler, Ryan (So) – 800m
8, 7 – Graham, Jr, Hugh (Jr) – 400m
10, 9 – Glass, Najee (So) – 400m
10, 9 – Arroyo, Andres (Fr) – 800m

Texas A&M [58, 60]
1, 1 – Lendore, Deon (Jr) – 400m
2, 1 – Texas A&M – 4x100
4, 4 – Coleman, Gregory – (Jr) 400H
4, 5 – Taplin, Bralon (Jr) – 400m
8, 6 – Wolfle, Chase (So) – PV
9, 15 – Hart, Shavez (Jr) – 100m


WOMEN

tu [70, 77]
1, 1 – Okolo, Courtney (So) – 400m
3, 2 – Akinosun, Morolake (So) – 100m
3, 4 – Spencer, Ashley (Jr) – 400m
4, 2 – Baisden, Kendall (Fr) – 400m
4, 6 – Texas – 4x100
7, 10 – Dowie, Danielle (Sr) – 400H
9, 3 – Nelson, Briana (Sr) – 400m

Oregon [67, 53.5]
1, 1 – Roesler, Laura (Sr) – 800m
1, 4 – Prandini, Jenna (So) – 100m
2, 2 – Prandini, Jenna (So) – LJ
2, 5 – Francis, Phyllis (Sr) – 400m
3, 10 – Leblanc, Annie (So) – 800m
3, 5 – Oregon – 4x100
6, 3 – Weir, Jillian (Jr) – hammer
10, 12 – Okodogbe, Chizoba (Sr) – 400m

Texas A&M [66, 65]
1, 1 – Texas A&M – 4x100
2, 4 – Little, Shamier (Fr) – 400H
4, 2 – Bellille, Janeil (Sr) – 400H
4, 4 – Ekpone, Olivia (Jr) – 100m
7, 9 – Brown, Aaliyah (Fr) – 100m

Florida [56, 57.5]
1, 1 – Miller, Fawn (Jr) – javelin
2, 4 – Florida – 4x100
4, 5 – Vucenovic, Marija (So) – javelin
5, 5 – Reynolds, Robin (So) – 400m
9, 9 – Sanders, Shayla (So) – 100m

If there are errors, please let me know.

MidTn
This is how the Heats are done. It is not based on times but on place in the regionals.
Below are the 200m qualifiers from both EAST and WEST regionals. The qualifiers are ranked in terms of place. So Kamaria Brown having the second best time overall gave a ranked of 4th because she finished 2nd to Olivia and had the best time of all second place athletes in the 200m. Olivia ended up first because she had the best time of the three heat winnes from the West Regionals
The three heats will have a first place, a second place, a third place and fourth place person from the EAST and WEST.
Therefore Heat 1 will have the ist, 4th, 7th and 10th place persons and these are from the West and these are Olivia Ekpone (1st), Kamaria Brown (4th), Brittany Brown (7th) and Shapri Romeo (10th). The same will be for the EAST


200 Meters Semifinals WEST
PLACE NAME YEAR TEAM TIME WIND HEAT(PL)
1. Ekpone, Olivia JR-3 Texas A&M 22.59 0.9 1(1)
2. Akinosun, Morolake SO-2 Texas 22.68 1.4 2(1)
3. Prandini, Jenna SO-2 Oregon 22.73 1.5 3(1)
4. Brown, Kamaria JR-3 Texas A&M 22.66 0.9 1(2)
5. Gaither, Tynia JR-3 USC 22.88 1.5 3(2)
6. Purvis, Ashton JR-3 Texas A&M 23.03 1.4 2(2)
7. Brown, Brittany FR-1 Iowa 22.95 0.9 1(3)
8. Fields, Ashley SO-2 Baylor 22.97 1.5 3(3)
9. Brown, Aaliyah FR-1 Texas A&M 23.12 1.4 2(3)
10. Romero, Shapri SR-4 Arizona 23.20 1.4 2(4)
11. Goodman, Antoinette SR-4 North Dakota St. 23.31 1.5 3(4)
12. White, Cierra JR-3 Texas Tech 23.32 1.4 2(5)

200 Meters Semifinals EAST
PLACE NAME YEAR TEAM TIME WIND HEAT(PL)
1. Bryant, Dezerea JR-3 Kentucky 23.09 0.4 3(1)
2. Jones, Mahagony SR-4 Penn State 23.14 0.7 2(1)
3. Brown, Felicia SO-2 Tennessee 23.34 0.7 1(1)
4. Abraham, Ashlee SR-4 Ohio State 23.36 0.7 2(2)
5. Johnson, Ahty JR-3 South Carolina 23.40 0.4 3(2)
6. Johnson, Tristie SO-2 Bethune-Cookman 23.47 0.7 1(2)
7. Parker, Le'Quisha JR-3 Hampton 23.46 0.4 3(3)
8. Wise, Katie SO-2 Indiana State 23.53 0.7 1(3)
9. Evans, Gayon SR-4 Maryland-Eastern Shore 23.56 0.7 2(3)
10. Minkins, Tania SR-4 East Carolina 23.59 0.7 1(4)
11. Sylvester, Toshika SR-4 LSU 23.59 0.7 2(4)
12. Hawkins, Tyshonda JR-3 East Carolina 23.60 0.4 3(4)

I really hope this explains the process of allocation of the heats.
People are saying it is just good to qualify but my point is and I have been saying I prefer that the Aggies not just qualify but to win their heats to be seeded not only to get better lanes but help spread our athletes out in different heats.

Look at the mens 400m with three Aggies and also Hugh Graham from Florida. Only two can qualify. The third and fourth place will have to run fast and hope to advance on time. Lendone will need to run fast to help the other Aggies qualify.

Looking at Track and Field News formcharts some things are very predictable. There has always been a west coast bias with their predictions and that continues. There is little left in their predictions for Oregon to pick up points and a lot of optimistic thinking. On the women's side I believe A&M is badly undervalued with only Davis' third place prediction seeming a little nervous. We are almost certain to score more than predicted in the intermediate hurdles and I believe in the 100 as well. You can't plan for things like dropped batons but the women look very strong to me. Texas has little room for upside in their picks other than perhaps the 400 and 400 hurdles. They could easily drop points in the 100-200-5000-100 hurdles as well as possibly the pole vault because of its volatility.

On the men's side I think they are fairly accurate on Oregon though Cabral in the hurdles and Keys in the Decathlon might have trouble reaching those spots. I also question the strength of their relays. Florida is badly over-rated based on late season form in the 400 and 800 as well as 400 relay. Their hurdler is also very erratic. A&M has upside in the pole vault, 400 hurdles and the 100 with virtually no downside as I see it.

I hate having the meet in Eugene. As an allergy sufferer I am hurting up here big time and can't wait to leave. Fortunately I don't have to stay through the whole meet and will watch the last day on television. It should be very entertaining.

Thanks to everyone above for the great information. Please keep us updated with all that takes place. Thanks in advance.

Gig'em, Ole Army Class of '70

quote:

---

The qualifiers are ranked in terms of place.

---

But is this fair? Definitely not.

Of the 24 runners at nationals, the individuals with the best two times in the 200m race at regionals are placed in the same heat at nationals.

The same individuals had the first (Ekpone) and third (K. Brown) best times all season long and are placed in the same heat at nationals.
Still makes no sense to me. Fortunately, this will not happen at the indoor national meets – no regionals.
It also does not happen in any other NCAA sport.

Placing runners in heats based on places and times at regionals alone is not fair. The 200m runners in the West are much superior to the runners in the East.

The top eight regional times were posted by runners in the West. Seven of the top eight runners with the best times all season long are from the West. Trying to balance the two is like trying to balance Aggies with longhorns. They will not balance.

Then with this imbalance in distribution of talent, not placing by past performances can cause unequal and unfair races.

Currently: The person with the best time among those who finished first in regionals is placed in Heat 1. The person with the best time among those who finish second in the regionals is also placed in Heat 1. The person with the best time who finished third is also placed in Heat 1. The person with the best time who finished fourth is also placed in Heat 1.

Thus, using place in a previous, non-championship meet as a method to “seed” individuals can easily stack a Heat as has been done in Heat 1 of the Women 200m race.

quote:

---

Texas A&M has won four of the past five men’s NCAA Outdoor team championships while the women have achieved top four team finishes in each of the past six seasons. The Aggies claimed a trio of men’s and women’s dual NCAA Championships during the 2009, 2010, and 2011 campaigns as Texas A&M became the first school to achieve the feat in track and field.

---

Amazing accomplishments by the great Coach Henry!

Truly, an incredible accomplishment.
He has also been extremely valuable in accumulating Director Cup points for us.
We probably would not have finished in the Top 10 over the past few years without him.

Ed, I believe your assessments are very accurate. For us to “win,” I believe the other teams have to lose.

WEDNESDAY
Aggies in today’s events.

The first number before each name is projected finish based on Formchart data.
The second number is projected finish based on best 2014 performance.
“X” = not projected to finish in the top 10 by Formchart.

MEN
1, 1 – Lendore, Deon (Jr) – 400m
2, 1 – Texas A&M – 4x100
4, 4 – Coleman, Gregory (Jr) – 400H
4, 5 – Taplin, Bralon (Jr) – 400m
8, 6 – Wolfle, Chase (So) – pole vault
9, 15 – Hart, Shavez (Jr) – 100m
x, 12 – Hernandez, Hector (So) – 800m
x, 13 – Roudette, Carlyle (Sr) – 400m
x, 17 – Bailey, Jr., Aldrich (So) – 400m
x, 17 – Hardy, Jr., Prezel (Sr) – 100m

WOMEN
1, 1 – Texas A&M – 4x100
2, 4 – Little, Shamier (Fr) – 400H
4, 2 – Bellille, Janeil (Sr) – 400H
4, 4 – Ekpone, Olivia (Jr) – 100m
7, 9 – Brown, Aaliyah (Fr) – 100m
x, 16 – Garrett, Brea (Jr) – hammer
x, 16 – Madu, Jennifer (So) – 100m
x, 19 – Purvis, Ashton (Jr) – 100m

Trini, are these correct?

I lived in Corvallis, OR, 50 miles from Eugene for 10 years. Until Ed reminded me, not only is the weather in Eugene potentially miserable this time of the year (50 degrees and rain), it is by far the worst allergy place in the nation. It is the grass growing capital of the nation, and at this time of year, the pollen count is off the charts. I had people working under me that had to take a three month leave of absence and work in a sister HP plant in California to survive the late spring and early summer in western Oregon.

Unfortunately, the medicine that would give you the most relief from the pollen is a banned substance for athletic performance. Talk about a catch 22. I assume the Oregon athletes are not allergic to pollen. Otherwise, they'd never be able to stay there at this time of the year.

[This message has been edited by coloradoag69 (edited 6/11/2014 10:51a).]

The NCAA wants the regional meet to be considered the first round of the NCAA national championship. It is flawed logic on their part because 1. the object of the regional meet is to advance and so some athletes run just for a top three place to advance rather than competing for points which would have the added benefit of producing a truer seeding at the national meet, 2. the regions are broken geographically and there is a disparity of talent between the two regions as you go on an event by event basis, 3. as there are three winners in heats that don't go head to head against each other and wind conditions/competitive balance can effect seeding/performance your are almost guaranteed seeding issues. It is luck of the draw in the first round of the national meet. On the plus side, if you win your heat or get second your get preferred lanes so at least you are no stuck in lane one.

Where are ******s for this official thread?

Ed
I couldn't agree with you more.
First the Formchart I agree did undervalued our women sprinters. Kamaria is much better than her projected place. Only injury will keep her from running 1st or second. Ashton Purvis has consistently run under 23.00.
Look at Jenna Prandini (Oregon)in the long jump. She had ONE jump at 6.58m and they project her to win the long jump. She has not been consistently jumping in that range. Her next best jump probably less than 6.30m.

I also agree with you ED in your analysis of regionals. I don't think it is fair. The top 3 ranked teams in the country Oregon. Aggies and Texas are in the same region. In some events one region would be stronger than the other and therefore some really good athletes wouldn't make the NCAA because their event is stronger for example in West than in the EAST.

MidTn
I also agree with you. I don't like the way the seeding are done for the heats. It makes no sense but that is what is being used.
The Aggies therefore will have to find ways to work around it by first getting a very good time and mark going into regionals and then trying to win their heat to qualify or NCAA.

[This message has been edited by triniaggie (edited 6/11/2014 2:41p).]

Brea finished 11th position in first flight with 54.65m, Foul, Foul
She does not advance to the finals

quote:

---

Brea finished 11th position in first flight with 54.65m, Foul, Foul
She does not advance to the finals

---

Ouch. Anyone know where you can get live results?

http://results.flashresults.com/2014_Meets/outdoor/06-09-NCAA/

Oregon loses about 3 points from the TFN projections in Hammer Throw.

Weir appears to have performed as well as best throw (3 pts) for 6th placed based on the numbers above.

[This message has been edited by clw04 (edited 6/11/2014 5:51p).]

Brea finished 23rd. Foul throws continue to haunt her. Somebody has got to work with her on that part of her game.

HERE WE GO. ESPN3. SPRINT RELAY.

Multiple changes to the mens 4x100 relay.

Hardy leading off instead of Hart, Bailey running anchor instead of Lendore.

You're fortunate. I can't get ESPN3 here.

Unless there is a problem we do not know about, Lendore will certainly run in the finals.

I don't like changing up the relay team too much but I guess they want to allow Michael Bryan to get his final run as an Aggie at the NCAA championship.

38.60 for the men.....fastest qualifier!