Husky Invite - Any big names and races?

No Teg, but about two dozen seeds each under 4:01/1:49/7:58. If half of them pan out, it will be epic for speed+depth

Mac Fleet has a seed time 3:57. How unethical can Oregon get?

Mab wrote:

Mac Fleet has a seed time 3:57. How unethical can Oregon get?

Are you aware that he ran 2:54 for a 1200 leg, going out in 61, and then doubled back to win the mile the next day in 4:03, running a huge negative split?

The guy is deceptively fast. I am waiting for him to embarrass you.

it doesn't matter if he run 3:50 at Washington. HE HASN'T YET, and the entire purpose of the 2008 Coaches Convention and the 2009/2010 TFRRS system was to eliminate false seed marks.

Your times are supposed to be documented. If EVERYONE enters their correct time, then EVERYONE gets in the correct heat.

But if his coach lies by 6 seconds, then every other coach has to lie by 6 seconds. And the coach that only lies by 3 seconds will feel he got screwed and lie by 10 seconds next time. The result is the pure NONSENSE we have seen in the recent years. It is why our sport is a mockery.

The guy is good and belongs in the fast heat. Unless every pro shows up, his regular seed time would get him in the fast heat. if the biggest schools refuse to set the correct example, then we will continue the sport will continue to be a joke

And the Washington meet management needs to follow the highlighted and bolded honesty clause and tell every coach with a fake seed mark that their athlete is either not allowed to run in the meet at all, or put them in the slow heat.

Someone has to have the balls to stop this.

And if a top 5 program shows up to a meet only to find out they have been held accountable for their dishonesty and contribution to the demise of a meet and a sport, then I bet they would learn their lesson for the next time.

flotrack might not broadcast midday events for XC nationals. Hoping they open a 2nd stream instead and show both live.

.............................. wrote:

it doesn't matter if he run 3:50 at Washington. HE HASN'T YET, and the entire purpose of the 2008 Coaches Convention and the 2009/2010 TFRRS system was to eliminate false seed marks.

Your times are supposed to be documented. If EVERYONE enters their correct time, then EVERYONE gets in the correct heat.

You spoke with so much authority that I thought I would track down this policy on the ustfccca.org site. I'm having trouble finding anything that lays this out. Could you point me to the governing document?

Greg wrote:

flotrack might not broadcast midday events for XC nationals. Hoping they open a 2nd stream instead and show both live.

We'll have two separate feeds going so no interference to worry about.

2009/2010 NCAA Cross Country Track and Field Manual

NCAA Rule: Section 1. Misconduct: Misconduct is any act of dishonesty, unsportsmanlike conduct, unprofessional behavior or breach of law occurring at the locale of the competition or warm-up, that discredits the event or intercollegiate athletics. Misconduct includes the intentional reporting of false marks for entry purposes. Acts of misconduct are subject to reprimand or ejection by the referee or meet management.

.............................. wrote:

And the Washington meet management needs to follow the highlighted and bolded honesty clause and tell every coach with a fake seed mark that their athlete is either not allowed to run in the meet at all, or put them in the slow heat.

Someone has to have the balls to stop this.

And if a top 5 program shows up to a meet only to find out they have been held accountable for their dishonesty and contribution to the demise of a meet and a sport, then I bet they would learn their lesson for the next time.

So how do you treat people like Elliott Heath? He ran 7:53/13:42 last year (that 7:53 was at this meet). He has not run a 3k yet this year. According to your logic he has to go in unseeded and run in the slowest heat, how does that work out? Fact is, the people that run these meets all know each other and have a pretty good idea of who belongs where. Sometimes this means people from smaller schools won't get the same benefit of the doubt but I think that's better than some ridiculous system where all-americans have to run the slow heat because they don't have a seed time.

.............................. wrote:

2009/2010 NCAA Cross Country Track and Field Manual

NCAA Rule: Section 1. Misconduct: Misconduct is any act of dishonesty, unsportsmanlike conduct, unprofessional behavior or breach of law occurring at the locale of the competition or warm-up, that discredits the event or intercollegiate athletics. Misconduct includes the intentional reporting of false marks for entry purposes. Acts of misconduct are subject to reprimand or ejection by the referee or meet management.

I was able to find "Cross Country Track & Field 2009 and 2010 Rules" at

.

I found the section you quoted under "Rule 4 The Meet". What does it mean when it says that misconduct occurs when false marks are submitted "for entry purposes"? Entry into what?

Mab wrote:

Mac Fleet has a seed time 3:57. How unethical can Oregon get?

koose wrote:

Are you aware that he ran 2:54 for a 1200 leg, going out in 61, and then doubled back to win the mile the next day in 4:03, running a huge negative split?

The guy is deceptively fast. I am waiting for him to embarrass you.

I forgot, I'm arguing with an Oregon fan, the same people who say Rupp has already run the equivalent of 26:40 based on blah blah blah.

koose wrote:

The guy is deceptively fast.

Yes, a 3:57 seed time is pretty deceptive.

Mab wrote:

I forgot, I'm arguing with an Oregon fan, the same people who say Rupp has already run the equivalent of 26:40 based on blah blah blah.

Well, it is true that I'm a fan of several Oregon runners, but I'm also a fan of many other runners from colleges across the US. Your comment might infer that you are opposed to anything Oregon, but I don't think that's your real argument, nor would I argue basis on your part. I don't know enough about Rupp's times or past races to know prior arguments or wounds, so I can't say if I'm in that group of "Oregon fan" or not.

I'm just reading the NCAA publication and asking what their terms mean. I thought I might get a few different answers about what "entry purposes" was referring to. What do you think it is referring to? Do you think it is referring to seeding in a heat, or to entry into the meet itself, or perhaps to something else?

We are dealing here with jealous anti Oregon fools. Mac Fleet will run a 2:57 - 2:58 this weekend. Do you want Vin Lananna to seed him incorrectly. Oregon has tons of speed in the mid distances and I can't wait to see Mac join in with Cento, Andrew Wheating, Elijah Greer, and etc. Only a fool would make the argument that Mac Fleet shouldn't be seeded at 3:57, because based on the 1200 that he just ran, 3:57 is a legit seed. So, go Ph#*ck yourself and watch him do his thing. Oh, and yes, I am a Mac Fleet (and Oregon) fan...I like winners.

"Entry into what?"

Entry into any meet. Meet directors toss out those with false marks when they assemble the accepted entry lists. Times with x:xx.00 are usually first-timer guesses.

bogus seed marks/meet entries has been a point of emphasis for a couple of years at our national convention. it is a major problem in our sport. a football team with a record of 5-8 can't just tell the BCS they are 12-1 and get into a good bowl game.

Honesty and integrity must prevail at some point. You should enter the time you have run, not what training indicates you might run, or what a relay split indicates you could run or what your coach thinks you will run or what your grandmother hopes you could run. You enter what you have run. it is a pretty simple concept.

But what about freshmen, or the first meet of the year? some will argue. WEll, then you enter their indoor PR from the past. And that should happen in January, or in an early outdoor meet and it should be a small percentage of the entries, AND it should be clarified with the meet director in advance.

But by mid February, once you have raced, or when you are no longer a freshman you should enter the time you have run THIS SEASON.

One major mid west school lists the above rule right in the entry information and requests a team performance list for the current indoor season and the past indoor season in an attempt to verify marks. THAT IS HOW IT SHOULD BE DONE.

But until all meets require this, OR MORE IMPORTANTLY, until all coaches, especially the most prominent ones, begin to act with integrity towards our sport, we will continue to have this issue.

The athlete in question is super talented. His season's best would get him in the fast heat. So why lie? And if the meet director told the coach upon arrival that his star was out of the meet or in the slow heat, it would be very painful for that program, but i believe it is a lesson they would not soon forget.

It is a pretty simple concept. Tell the truth and it all works out fine. It is crazy that our sport acutally has to have a clause that says....tell the truth. It needs it because the culture has become that false seed times are the norm. ridiculous i think.

Does this mean entry to 'regionals', which is the only thing that would correspond to the example of the bowl games. I think more clarity needs to be given on the context of the rule. Also, it certainly seems reasonable to me that entry into related events could be done with a conversion to an equivalent time (3:42.22 3:59.99 and even 3000 to 1500 or to 5000, etc.).

CLearly, most times entered as, say, 4:04.00 are likely not actual marks. Do mark have to be from this season or within the last 12 months or what?

Not only hasn;t a guy like Borchers run 4:00.00, he ran 4:01.98 two full years ago, he not approached it since or looked like it in any event.

The year he ran that he ran 1:48.x and 2:22.x he just ran 1:52.70.

PSU should really have done the right thing here, he should be in some back heat.