Congrats to Oklahoma State and Dave Smith

George Arinow wrote:

Great execution. And I'm with the perspective of not over-crediting Smith on this. When he wins a title without a)transfers, b)questionable 6th year eligibility, or c)foreign athletes (this year he had all 3), then he will deserve more props.

The only thing a coach should be judged by is whether or not his players improve. If they are improving year after year, then that means that he is a good coach. Where these players come from is entirely irrelevant.

Honest question - does any other major D1 university focus all their scholarship money on distance runners only?

It seems he only has 2 foreign runners, so that acceptable. but if OK State is the only school that spends all its money on xc...that does cheapen the victory.

agip wrote:

Honest question - does any other major D1 university focus all their scholarship money on distance runners only?

It seems he only has 2 foreign runners, so that acceptable. but if OK State is the only school that spends all its money on xc...that does cheapen the victory.

CU basically does that. CU is god awful at track. But that's fine, it's one approach. How does doing that cheapen it at all?

Dennis Reynolds wrote:

agip wrote:

Honest question - does any other major D1 university focus all their scholarship money on distance runners only?

It seems he only has 2 foreign runners, so that acceptable. but if OK State is the only school that spends all its money on xc...that does cheapen the victory.

CU basically does that. CU is god awful at track. But that's fine, it's one approach. How does doing that cheapen it at all?

__

yeah, I just scanned teh PAC 12 outdoor track results...CU doesn't have much outside the distance team. A decathlete, a couple of sprinters.

As for how focusing dollars on XC rather than track cheapens the title - if every school but a couple try to have full track teams and you don't, then that is not an even playing field. it's not cheating - it just doesn't make it a fair fight.

If a school decided to have just one sport, and focused the entire athletic department on that one sport, and they won every year, would that not cheapen the victory?

agip wrote:

As for how focusing dollars on XC rather than track cheapens the title - if every school but a couple try to have full track teams and you don't, then that is not an even playing field. it's not cheating - it just doesn't make it a fair fight.

If a school decided to have just one sport, and focused the entire athletic department on that one sport, and they won every year, would that not cheapen the victory?

No, it does not cheapen the victory. All of the top schools recruit the big names so Oklahoma should not be singled out. Unless you want to single out Oregon, Stanford, Washington, etc also.

But again no it does not cheapen the victory. All that scholarships and big time recruiting do is determine whether you will have a freshmen-led team or an upperclassmen-led team.