sj quik wrote:
yes, cal does have "tags" for athletes. the number is limited, though (i'm not sure how many). but cal has continually relied on its academic reputation to attract recruits who would otherwise go elsewhere to a better program. ask the alumni who went there because of the program/tony, and who went there because of the school.
there seem to be a lot of cal guys here. for those that think all we're doing is talking sh*t about the bears, wait a couple years. you will too realize that the athletic department allows mediocrity when it comes to track and field. and, that cal has underperformed considering the amount of talent they have. it really is sad for many of the athletes who could thrive with a coach who emphasizes longer distances, and who is not apathetic to creating a strong program. if you create a program, they will come (look at arkansas). but the cal staff seems to have talked themselves into the idea that "if you have a great school, they will come." this is also true. but if they come, they (not just a few) should perform.
I don't think that you understand the philosophy at Cal, let alone the history of recruiting at Cal. First off, Cal has ALWAYS recruited middle-distance runners since the days of Brutus Hamilton. Anyone that has an ounce of track and field knowledge knows that.
Secondly, I have noticed that LetsRun seems to be filled with "distance-junkies" and that the people that wind-up most critical of the Cal program, are one's that lodge attacks at the XC program, or the longer-distances and yet they have no clue about the fact that Irv Hunt ( the previous coach ) did absolutely zero recruiting, let alone the fact that Chris Huffins over the last 5 years has always embraced running a "balanced" program and NOT emphasizing/specializing the XC program or the 5 and 10k races like Stanford, Wisco, and Colorado does. Since a school marches to the drummer of its head track coach, Huffins has been the one to call the final "shot" on recruiting priorities. Again, that's just a fact. And anyone that thinks that schools have XC scholarships to give out at a school that also has a track and field program knows little to nothing about collegiate recruiting.
In large D-1 programs, it is the head T&F coach that calls the shots. I know that all of you distance "geeks" out there don't want to hear this, but it's true.
That's why I found it pretty funny that an earlier poster said that UCLA would "double" the number of throwers ( the Bruins are sending 4, Cal is sending 3 ) to the NCAA's if head coach Art Venegas was still coaching the women. Who are you trying to kid? Do you not think that Art ( a throws coach ) doesn't throw just about every "resource" he has availible to the throwers, both men AND women on the team? Of course he does!!! Just like he decided to take a total of 6 vaulters to Pac-10's even though one of the vaulters/javelin thrower had been recovering from surgery and it was questionable whether he would be able to score points at Pac-10's ( which he did ) in lieu of bringing along a 5,000m runner to compete at the Pac-10's.
Another poster here billed as "impartial-observer" seems to think that it is easy getting kids into Cal and Stanford. Yet, has anyone ever noticed that both schools have been devoid of sprinters for a pretty long time? In fact, at last year's Pac-10 Finals Stanford had no male competitor in the 100, 200, 400, 110m hurdles, 400m hurdles, and even failed to enter a relay team. (Cal had atleast a few hurdlers and a 400m guy ) Gee, ever wonder why there aren't any sprinters at these two schools?
And one more thing . . .
"impartial-observer" seems to think that Cal ( or Stanford for that matter ) can get any athlete admitted into school with a special "tag". Yet, unfortunately people like Mr. Impartial fail to have the brainpower to realize that it doesn't matter if you can get a great prep athlete into school that may not have sufficient grades or SAT scores, YOU ALSO HAVE TO KEEP HIM IN SCHOOL otherwise he adds no value to your program.
There have been a number of sprinters/jumpers that have been admitted to Cal over the years, that have then dropped out due to academic ineligibility. That's a fact. Thus, highly rigorous academic schools like Cal and Stanford have to be most sensitive to who they wind-up recruiting. Anyone that thinks otherwise is just fooling themselves.