Question: Isn't it Unfair For Oregon

No, it is unfair though that if you're a decent runner at Oregon, you get a gift wrapped professional shoe contract without having to relocate.

I don't have a problem with that because I know that no one is going to pay out pro money unless they expect results in return. My problem is that they are basically saying that Oregon is allowed to dominate their Region, when they don't limit the number of athletes per team. I mean, let's face the facts, Oregon gets most of the top track and field athletes, so when they is no limit, they can always dominate. Don't we want it to be a level field at the championships?

The NCAA is and always has been a joke. It's the last refuge of bullshit amateurism and I'm surprised it's still tolerated, considering how much the AAU was hated.

Without the NCAA, there would be genuine minor-league-level professional track, which spectators would actually want to watch. Nobody gives a rip about college track, as the season is a meaningless qualification process for the SEC, Oregon and a couple other talent magnets, and the finals are won by just a few individuals, not by teams.

Imagine all the elites chasing WC standards at the Diamond League meets. Snore.

Penn Relays and the meets at Oregon draw huge crowds, so we can't say that no one watches track. The real questions is why no one watches track meets in Southern California or Texas. I mean Texas has some pretty good college teams, yet they can't seem to get their fans interested. The meets in So. California seem to be getting smaller every year...outside of high school kids.

Who do regionals even exist? Is it anything else but just a made up meet to give athletes another chance to qualify for NCAAs? If that is the case I imagine every other school has more to gain from it than Oregon.

Distance Rumble wrote:

I just became aware of the list of entries for the West Regional championships and notice the Oregon is sending nearly their whole team. Isn't it a bit unfair to let one team have so many people at the Regionals? I mean, shouldn't they be limited to maybe 24 total athletes, to keep a level playing field?

http://www.goducks.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=500&ATCLID=210101807

ryan foreman wrote:

Who do regionals even exist? Is it anything else but just a made up meet to give athletes another chance to qualify for NCAAs? If that is the case I imagine every other school has more to gain from it than Oregon.

I think that regionals are the fairest way to go. Not everyone has an opportunity/fitness to run the times they need if NCAA qualification is by time. Regionals are essentially extended qualifying heats. Those who are ready at the right time advance. Those who were ready in March but have faded, don't go.

Once an Expert wrote:

No, it is unfair though that if you're a decent runner at Oregon, you get a gift wrapped professional shoe contract without having to relocate.

Your perception is a projection.

For years other shoe companies have not offered Oregon athletes contracts; assuming Nike would, and therefore you have a talent such as AJ Acosta with no contract etc.

It's not as easy as you think, no where near as easy.

You're saying that Oregon doesn't serve as a functional b team for Nike?

Show me an example of an (individual) NCAA Champion from Oregon in the last 35 years who didn't leave school with a Nike contract.

As for AJ Acosta, it's no one's fault but his own that he turned down a Nike contract out of college.

Once an Expert wrote:

You're saying that Oregon doesn't serve as a functional b team for Nike?

Show me an example of an (individual) NCAA Champion from Oregon in the last 35 years who didn't leave school with a Nike contract.

As for AJ Acosta, it's no one's fault but his own that he turned down a Nike contract out of college.

What is this about national champions getting shoe contracts? Those contracts should be reserved for message board trolls

I think it's more unfair that they scoop up a bunch of elite runners for their last year of eligibility even though the rule is designed for people going to grad school....which we know is a farce. How about if you transfer under these conditions and don't complete your graduate degree within 3 years, the school forfeits any points scored in Pac-12s and NCAAs.

Bruin Alum wrote:

I think it's more unfair that they scoop up a bunch of elite runners for their last year of eligibility even though the rule is designed for people going to grad school....which we know is a farce. How about if you transfer under these conditions and don't complete your graduate degree within 3 years, the school forfeits any points scored in Pac-12s and NCAAs.

FYI: The don't scoop them up, the athletes contact the university. Same with foreign athletes. A policy that goes back 4 head coaches a go.

malmo wrote:

ryan foreman wrote:

Who do regionals even exist? Is it anything else but just a made up meet to give athletes another chance to qualify for NCAAs? If that is the case I imagine every other school has more to gain from it than Oregon.

I think that regionals are the fairest way to go. Not everyone has an opportunity/fitness to run the times they need if NCAA qualification is by time. Regionals are essentially extended qualifying heats. Those who are ready at the right time advance. Those who were ready in March but have faded, don't go.

Your bias for racing is showing.

Distance Rumble wrote:

Don't we want it to be a level field at the championships?

Yes, and while we're at it, put weight vests on Ches and Jenkins.