How did Michigan State beat the women's race and beat teams like Georgetown, Oregon, Colorado, Stanford, etc.?!?!

Walt Drenth must be a pretty good coach. He did well at Arizona State.

He also recruits tough athletes.

The academics at michigan state are as good as anywhere for undergrad. What great location do you need to run well? All you need is ground. If their environment is that bad then maybe it makes them tougher.

The recruiting point is your only point that might be a legitimate point.

Good group of girls. 3 RS seniors. Best team from start to finish this season.

Factors like good weather, altitude, running trails are definitely an advantage. When it comes to recruiting, things like that + areas that have a running culture + schools with good academics (for post college prospects) have a huge advantage recruiting.

That's why it seems so amazing that a school like MSU beats out schools that have clear recruiting advantages.

'How did Michigan State beat the women's race'

The entire race?

It is not particularly a weak team and have been winning the Big Ten most of the time for the last 4-5 years. The women on the team were good but not 'great' high school runners by and large. However, they produced all year long, even when they were running in training mode during the season (see Wisconsin meet).

I saw them run a couple times this season and saw video once or twice - they always looked strong. There biggest challenge was probably through the first 4+km at the Big Ten meet where Wisconsin was running them pretty tough but they finished well to win fairly handily. Schulist has not really gotten her due this season; see the thread on her.

Michigan produces a lot of very good home grown talent and there is a lot of loyalty and passion for the in-state schools. Every once in a while, when the stars align, it is enough to win a NCAA title. When Michigan State won basketball titles in 1979 and 2000, it was with almost all in-state talent. Michigan gets more out-of-state recruits but they have had significant Michigan grown talent on some of their great teams too. And, come on, the academics at Michigan State are not that bad. It's not Ivy league but they do have several elite programs and generally get the solid but not spectacular rankings typical of Big 10 schools not named Northwestern and Michigan. They are probably ahead of Oregon and Colorado academically.

Michigander wrote:

Michigan produces a lot of very good home grown talent and there is a lot of loyalty and passion for the in-state schools. Every once in a while, when the stars align, it is enough to win a NCAA title. When Michigan State won basketball titles in 1979 and 2000, it was with almost all in-state talent. Michigan gets more out-of-state recruits but they have had significant Michigan grown talent on some of their great teams too. And, come on, the academics at Michigan State are not that bad. It's not Ivy league but they do have several elite programs and generally get the solid but not spectacular rankings typical of Big 10 schools not named Northwestern and Michigan. They are probably ahead of Oregon and Colorado academically.

This is all correct. MSU recruits strong, underrated athletes and transforms them into team contributors. There are exceptions but for the most part, everyone on their national championship winning squad didn't do anything special in high school.

Here's a lot more info:

Kudos to Michigan State. They deserved it. One thing to point out, and i'm not taking anything away from Michigan State, is no injuries. Lots of contenders had injuries from Sarah Baxter of Oregon to Aisling Cuffe of Standford to Erin Finn of Michigan. I don't think it would have mattered since Mich State was clearly the best team but a little good fortune doesn't hurt.

I think OP meant to write "How did Michigan state win the women's race."

Really, really impressive by Michigan State. Great to see a team develop and do so well, beating a lot of teams that get much better recruits, etc. This is what running is all about!

well.... wrote:

Factors like good weather, altitude, running trails are definitely an advantage. When it comes to recruiting, things like that + areas that have a running culture + schools with good academics (for post college prospects) have a huge advantage recruiting.

That's why it seems so amazing that a school like MSU beats out schools that have clear recruiting advantages.

Plenty of schools at nationals have low altitude and "bad weather" (which is a non issue for xc season because everyone is coming out of summer).

Academically MSU has a fairly distinguished reputation which includes quite a few top 20 nationally ranked specializations. If a prospective undergrad hopes to attain a post-bac then there are even more top tier specializations to choose from. #1 ranked nuclear physics, #1 ranked education #1 ranked I/O psychology.

http://www.msu.edu/about/rankings-and-recognitions/

Well, call me crazy, but I think it had something to do with running faster than the other teams.

Walt understands that you are better off with four 11:00 3200 meter runners than two 4:45 milers. They have a better attitude toward work.

Then look out cause he just got 4 sub 11:00 3200ers

That is my point. He will continue to be good because Michigan (the State of) has 8 of these kids every year. He has gotten 4 more this year ...so far and will add another couple in January. 4-6 of these tough work ethic kids will produce a couple of quality kids in 2-3 years. This means you have 3 kids per year that develop into pretty good college runners. Over the course of 5 years you have a damn good team.

They won because they were able to run faster and get their team to have a lower combined score than the other teams competing. I hope this clears things up.