Longnecker

smoker,

Nice job on the site.

I have to say, I’m really excited to see the results of this meet this year. CMU’s back with a really strong team. The 400 relays should be particularly exciting. It’s unfortunate, though, that Gannon’s not returning.

Wish I could be there for it…

We should see some pretty impressive times from this meet. GCC with a week off and some good competition (from within or otherwise)… am I early in calling an A cut or two?

I’m pretty stoked about the relays, Peter Larsen’s 100 fly, distance events and seeing Caleb and Timmy go at it. Tomas and the flyer from Fairmont should be interesting, too. GCC girls 1-2 on the psych sheet in the 100 free… sweet.

whoever can be there in person make some noise for me

@not_a_grover wrote:

am I early in calling an A cut or two?

One and counting…
(Courage: 20.63 in the 50)

So, to sum up the invite.. What did you all think?
I wasn’t really impressed. Women’s side was pretty weak and on the guys side, William had a pretty tough meet. Couple of relays were fun, but overall this invite is not much fun..

@Balki wrote:

William had a pretty tough meet.

who is william?

William Muriel, a guy from Fairmont who was 3 times second and last year he won those same 3 events..

isn’t fairmont d2?

what are you looking for in an invite? it did’t seem different than any other.

yes, they are d2.. I was just saying that the results were slower than expected.. There are just not that many good swimmers at the meet is all I was saying.. Gannon, Wesleyan and CalU left the invite in the last couple of years and it doesn’t look fast anymore..

Maybe not as deep, but certainly just as fast-I haven’t looked, but I’m sure a bulk of the meet records for the men atleast come from CMU, Grove City, and Fairmont.

@Balki wrote:

yes, they are d2.. I was just saying that the results were slower than expected.. There are just not that many good swimmers at the meet is all I was saying.. Gannon, Wesleyan and CalU left the invite in the last couple of years and it doesn’t look fast anymore..

Doesn’t look fast because there are studs breaking meet records? I don’t understand, dude. What did those teams really contribute as far as fast goes?

I guess when I said fast I really meant more depth.. those team were getting a bunch of 3rd-7th places.. Now all we see are fast guys getting first places and that’s about it..

Hate to make more of this, but a comparison for you, compared to the 2003 Meet for all 8th place finishes.

200 Free Relay: 2003 1:33.65 2006 1:33.17

500 Freestyle: 2003 5:04.52 2006: 5:00.52

200 IM: 2003 2:06.73 2006: 2:06.70

50 Free: 2003: 22.78 2006: 22.53

400 MR: 2003: 3:52.25 2006: 3:52.87

200 MR: 2003: 1:44.83 2006: 1:46.68

400 IM: 2003: 4:42.14 2006: 4:31.45

100 Fly: 2003: 56.09 2006: 55.76

200 Free: 2003: 1:52.07 2006: 1:49.70

100 Breast 2003: 1:06.75 2006: 1:03.77

100 Back 2003: 57.13 2006: 58.42

800 FR 2003: 7:40.47 2006: 7:51.48

1650 Free 2003: 18:25.19 2006: 18:07.28

200 Back 2003: 2:09.40 2006: 2:08.97

100 Free 2003: 49.95 2006: 49.65

200 Breast 2003: 2:23.88 2006: 2:19.92

200 Fly 2003: 2:12.55 2006: 2:09.22

400 FR 2003: 3:24.42 (7) 2006: 3:22.75 (7th)

Clearly, 2006 was much deeper in almost all of the events.

Fine, but I do think that other invites have improved more, or just that swimming results in general have been improving more than those at Grove City, but we can stop here, I wasn’t really correct I do admit that.
It just came from a wish that this invite had better results and 3 day program which is more fun in my opinion but more expensive..