Greg Metcalf opens his mouth again, BS comes out

I'm guessing you are a UO grad. While some freshman classes at UW are large, you don't really need one-on-one instruction for introduction to Sociology or whatever else you take. Once you choose a major and take upper level classes, you get the needed attention for the more specific areas of study. My upper level classes and seminars had on average 10-20 people.

Some athletes choose to just breeze by taking entry level classes at every school. If you do that at UW, you'll likely have larger classes. But if you actually choose

Nope, not a UO graduate, but your paranoia over your big brother from the NW is amusing. You don't think that upper division classes and seminars aren't in small class sizes at every university?

I'm not paranoid about UO grads, but they seem to be the ones quickest in criticizing UW. Apart from the occasional good-humored joke, WSU grads don't really care. You're right, upper division courses at every school are small, that's exactly my point. To insinuate that UW has only large classes ignores that most major schools have large entry level classes, but small classes when it counts. No one is saying you can't get an education at Texas, but they have big class sizes too.

Bump. Metcalf is a bum.

When you've been trashed on letsrun.com that's when you know you're good. It's happened to Wetmore, Salazar, Cook, Lannana, McDonnell, Smith and more. When you're successful some people will hate on you. Nobody is perfect but this is just pure jealousy.

How many coaches, probably from the Pac 10, do you think are anonymously making posts on this thread just to try and scare off recruits? How many athletes, probably from the Pac 10, do you think are doing the same?

Yeah I agree on the success and jealously thing...there are plenty of other programs who have had athletes leave, get injured, have eating disorder issues, etc. but Metcalf and UW seem to really be targeted on here. Clearly they are a successful program and yes Kelly Strong probably played a part in that, but not ALL of it. Metcalf seems like a good guy to me and some of the top runners in the country have been coming year after year, so it can't be that awful.

I think that was the point..top runners keep going there and keep falling flat. I'm not sure the "jealousy thing" is as big a genuine concern that an inordinate number of kids are being misused/mis-coached by that program.

Haters will be haters!

For what it's worth, I know a guy in his 2nd year at UW and he's quite happy. Not a single complaint and it seems like the overall morale of the team is high. I don't hear much complaint about athletes being misued or miscoached.

I attended UW and promptly left after I figured out that Metcalf (he doesn't like when you call him Metcalf; he prefers Coach or Greg) has no clue what to do with a distance runner (xc, 5k, 10k). If you think your a 1500 meter runner then by all means go to UW; join the other 12 1500 meter runners on the roster.

claim to fame wrote:

When you've been trashed on letsrun.com that's when you know you're good. It's happened to Wetmore, Salazar, Cook, Lannana, McDonnell, Smith and more. When you're successful some people will hate on you. Nobody is perfect but this is just pure jealousy.

Some people have been quite jealous of my great successes.

Let's be honest. Metcalf has had some success (not a lot, but some...or was it Kelley Strong's success). Look at his record overall and judge if his failures haven't far exceeded his successes. How can you go from having a XC team 8 deep in All American freshmen and sophomores, to one that is vitually starting over with 4-5 new freshmen just two years later?

Your sure you didn't fail out of the U with you're grasp of the English language? No, I'm sure your too smart to let you're shortcomings have that kind of impact.

"I attended UW and promptly left after I figured out that Metcalf (he doesn't like when you call him Metcalf; he prefers Coach or Greg)"

Which is understandable...I don't think I have called any of my coaches by their last name

And I guess I really don't see the misuse of athletes...look at other schools in the Pac-10 (ex: Oregon, Stanford...I could name a handful of girls on each team who had potential going in and then nothing really ever happened or they have been injured for years. I guess I just don't see how UW is SO much worse (for girls at least...I'm not quite as familiar with the guys program)

Honesty is Best Policy wrote: Let's be honest. Metcalf has had some success (not a lot, but some...or was it Kelley Strong's success). Look at his record overall and judge if his failures haven't far exceeded his successes. How can you go from having a XC team 8 deep in All American freshmen and sophomores, to one that is vitually starting over with 4-5 new freshmen just two years later?

I have no opinion of Metcalf personally at all, but he has clearly had a lot of success. Other than Washington's, every women's XC title since 1996 has been won solely by Stanford, BYU, Villanova, and Colorado. The coach of any team that overcomes those odds has clearly had a lot of success. For those that say it is easier to win in women's xc or talk about failure to success ratios, how do you consider Oregon's women's program?

Same argument on the men's side applies for Dave Smith at Oklahoma State. Other than Oklahoma State's, since 1995, only Arkansas, Stanford, Colorado, Wisconsin, and Oregon have won titles. Dave Smith has accomplished something special.

If it is so easy to import runners and buy titles, why were Metcalf and Dave Smith the only ones able to do it?

uw wrote:

I'm not paranoid about UO grads, but they seem to be the ones quickest in criticizing UW. Apart from the occasional good-humored joke, WSU grads don't really care. You're right, upper division courses at every school are small, that's exactly my point. To insinuate that UW has only large classes ignores that most major schools have large entry level classes, but small classes when it counts. No one is saying you can't get an education at Texas, but they have big class sizes too.

This is really funny. When I was at the UO, we never, I repeat, never talked about UW. You guys just never came up; not even your football program that was good at the time. We talked about how bad our football team was, but we never talked about the UW.

You know, Oregon has been called "The University of California, Eugene" for a reason, thoughts as minds were more pointed to our southern border than to you guys.

Now that I live in Seattle, all I hear is poor sport crap against Oregon, because you guys had a series of unethical coaches and scandals (read the Seattle times series from a year or two ago, outing what really happened with your program).

Now, when I hang out with Seattle Ducks, we never talk about UW. First, your football team has sucked for a long time, second, your men's track is a rumor, and second, the women's XC team is around for what, a few months, and then they tank in track.

You are a non factor.

Academically, yes, indeed the UW is ranked 100's of universities ahead of Oregon. But Oregon Track is far more glamorous and prestigious than UW has ever been.

I can add that EVEN METCALF HIMSELF admits that he had a lot of talent go to waste under him before the last few years. At a clinic where he spoke recently he told coaches that he looked back at what he was doing in the late 90s and early 2000s and realized that it was utter garbage and threw it away. And that was why he was getting guys that were 4:05 milers and leaving college 5 years later as 4:02 milers.

I havent seen a whole lot of evidence of change yet, as his national class women's teams have been more about recruiting than about coaching, but he sure aint hurting em either. And he does seem to have more guys improving than he used to.

Every single program/team that is doing well will eventually get trashed.

Everyone loved the Cowboys until they won a few.

Everyone loved the 49ers until they won a few.

Everyone loved the Patriots until they won a few.

Everyone loved the Red Sox until they won a few.

Everyone loved Arkansas until they won a few.

Everyone loved Oregon until they won a few.

Rinse. Repeat.

An underdog can't win every year.

We all agree that the great teams get trashed on LR, so why are the Washington fanboys so sensitive? They should be happy that they are being critized on LR. Whiners!!