21. Page
One of these years, the Pirates are going to catch some good luck for a change. Last year's team looked like a top-10 team in 4A until two key runners were lost late in the season, which caused said season to end (agonizingly) a week earlier than it should have. The silver lining to that regional was that only one senior competed, allowing the future Pirates to get some big-race experience. They will need that in the intense Midwest 4A this season, but there is enough talent in the top 5 to make a run at the state meet again. Unfortunately, Page also has a big gap between the 5th and 6th returners, so let's hope for that good luck to come through!
- Returning Ranking: 17th
- 3-Year Improvement Rating: 29th
- 5-Year Improvement Rating: 44th
- Returning 1600 Team Ranking: 15th
| 1) Ian Shanklin | 16:12.02 | 36 | ||
| 2) Nolan Cook | 16:19.32 | 51 | ||
| 3) Mike Weaver | 16:59.18 | 167 | ||
| 4) Nathan Gillespie | 17:09.79 | 215 | ||
| 5) Stuart Coates | 17:37.36 | 340 | ||
| Average Time: 16:51.53 Total Time: 1:24:17.67 1-5 Split: 1:25.34 | ||||
| 6) Jack Stichter | 18:48.60 | 704 | ||
| 7) Daniel Hestenes | 19:01.80 | 766 | ||
22. Northwest Guilford
This is a veteran team loaded with juniors (as well as two seniors), and the returning talent from last fall is also quite deep, although no individuals stood out as potential #1 runners. The Vikings' results from this spring were really solid as well, but they reinforce the idea that this will have to be a pack-running team. With a 1-minute 1-7 split and 45 seconds between 1 and 5, that could work for this Northwest Guilford squad...but the Midwest 4A is going to be a murderer's row this year, and the lack of a top-30 returning runner in that meet could be difficult to overcome. Zach Sanger made the top 10 returners in the 3200 from the region, so that's an encouraging sign.
- Returning Ranking: 28th
- 3-Year Improvement Rating: 22nd
- 5-Year Improvement Rating: 33rd
- Returning 3200 Team Ranking: 13th
- Returning 1600 Team Ranking: 16th
| 1) Zach Sanger | 16:46.48 | 114 | ||
| 2) Matt Howard | 17:04.71 | 195 | ||
| 3) Andrew Pegram | 17:16.37 | 237 | ||
| 4) Keegan Clary | 17:30.00 | 312 | ||
| 5) Braun Wilson | 17:31.00 | 317 | ||
| Average Time: 17:13.71 Total Time: 1:26:08.56 1-5 Split: 44.52 | ||||
| 6) Dallin Pool | 17:45.00 | 384 | ||
| 7) William Crandall | 17:46.00 | 391 | ||
23. Epiphany School
The Falcons burst into the rankings last fall by virtue of three transfers - which would make it easy to overlook the fact that all three of them improved measurably over their 2013 season at their previous schools. This squad will have 2 seniors to provide leadership, and they had solid track results (especially for such a small school). With 6 runners back from the team that won the NCISAA 2A state meet last year, and the development of young talents Maximus Russo (rising 10th grader) and Bryce Austin (rising 9th grader), the sky is the limit for Epiphany School this year.
- Returning Ranking: 21st
- 3-Year Improvement Rating: 25th
- 5-Year Improvement Rating: 36th
- Returning 1600 Ranking: 20th
| 1) Parker White | 16:21.10 | 55 | ||
| 2) Jarrett Gingrich | 16:21.20 | 56 | ||
| 3) Brady Gingrich | 17:21.70 | 264 | ||
| 4) Maximus Russo | 17:29.10 | 308 | ||
| 5) Nick Epperson | 17:41.60 | 361 | ||
| Average Time: 17:02.94 Total Time: 1:25:14.70 1-5 Split: 1:20.50 | ||||
| 6) Jake Oros | 18:33.73 | 631 | ||
| 7) Bryce Austin | 18:34.35 | 635 | ||
24. Leesville Road
Speaking of former state powers, the Pride has been on the rise over the last 3 years, for both boys and girls. The girls have gotten more attention - national champion runners will do that - but this has become a potentially very strong boys' team. The lack of a front-runner is the glaring weakness, but this is the deepest team in this tier of the rankings (and Leesville is deeper than several teams ranked ahead of them). If this squad can average close to 16:30 with a similar 1-5 split, that could easily move them into the top 20 by the end of the season. With 5 seniors in its returning top 7, the future is now for the Pride - a setback after this year is almost inevitable. On the other hand, they are returning all 7 runners from last year, and that experience should combine with a solid spring season to provide Leesville Road with a boost this fall.
- Returning Ranking: 26th
- 3-Year Improvement Rating: 18th
- 5-Year Improvement Rating: 34th
- 1600 Team Ranking: 13th
| 1) Eric Artrip | 17:04.00 | 192 | ||
| 2) Nathan Gamble | 17:06.10 | 203 | ||
| 3) Sean Nicol | 17:12.00 | 221 | ||
| 4) Andrew Galamb | 17:16.10 | 236 | ||
| 5) Caleb Petty | 17:21.60 | 263 | ||
| Average Time: 17:11.96 Total Time: 1:25:59.80 1-5 Split: 17.60 | ||||
| 6) Joey Quesenberry | 17:27.00 | 296 | ||
| 7) Josh Quesenberry | 17:48.00 | 400 | ||
25. Watauga
Is one of the state's greatest historical powers rising back to prominence after a long lull? We may not know for sure until 2016 - behind senior Matt Hellenbrand the rest of the returning top 7 is all juniors and sophomores - but the signs are encouraging. Depth is a concern, but that is fairly common for a young team, and the top 4 is quite solid. Hellenbrand showed signs in the spring of becoming a strong #1 runner, but his most important task this fall is to set the tone for the younger runners, so that they can carry the team back into the top 20 in the future.
- Returning Ranking: 22nd
- 3-Year Improvement Rating: 41st
- 5-Year Improvement Rating: 28th
| 1) Matthew Hellenbrand | 16:50.00 | 127 | ||
| 2) Grant Pilkington | 16:55.00 | 145 | ||
| 3) River Rhodes | 17:02.00 | 183 | ||
| 4) Josh Lamont | 17:15.00 | 232 | ||
| 5) Price St. Clair | 17:41.00 | 359 | ||
| Average Time: 17:08.60 Total Time: 1:25:43.00 1-5 Split: 51.00 | ||||
| 6) John Corley | 18:27.00 | 588 | ||
| 7) Sam Williams | 18:29.00 | 596 | ||