transplant wrote:
props to portland for beating the most well funded college cross country team in the history of the sport. zero gravity treadmills, tutors, world class facilities, and all of nike's support gets trumped by a bunch of guys who log sick mileage in Forest Park.
I agree with this. I also agree that most Oregon's supporters are probably mostly bitter people and washed-up runners which is why some of this thread is pretty negative.
shizzy wrote:
And certainly they have nice facilities. But how many teams also have anti-g tredmils? I've heard Baylor has them and Nebraska and a few others do as well. How many teams actually have the same advantages?
It didn't help Nebraska. That is a bad cross country for the resources they drop into the program. Almost as bad as Creighton which may be the worst cross country program in the country.
Portland ran a wonderful race yesterday, but to make UP out to be some blue collar team that just trains harder than Oregon - is not telling the whole truth. The fact of the matter is that UP spends 12.6 full rides on distance runners (only). When it comes down to resources, this is the only fact that really matters. Not to mention that three athletes on UPs team yesterday are foreigners. That means full rides, people.
Rob Conner is an awesome coach, but he has a huge advantage over the rest of west in the fall. How many UP guys made it to track nationals last spring?
Things have changed over the past decade or so. If you want to win a track title, or even get a trophy in the spring, you need to have a well balanced team. You cannot win with just distance runners. At the end of the year, look at all the track teams that finish in the top eight this indoor and outdoor season and see how they did this fall in cross country. You'll find that the teams who do well this fall spend most, if not all, of their resources on distances (UW, Colorado, NAU, Stanford, OSU, Alabama, Iona, Portland, William and Mary, Syracuse, etc.). It would be surprising if any of these teams scare even the top 10 at the NCAA indoor and outdoor meets.
It's all about picking your battles. UP knows where they can win and have aced the formula, but it doesn't come cheap.
Coach D wrote:
BYU, for one, has indoor and outdoor tracks with mondo super-x. They also have one of the best strength facilities in the nation. Along with Oklahoma State, New Mexico, USC, and some others, they have an Alter-G. And they have the trails and altitude that Oregon doesn't have.
New Mexico has no Alter-G, I dont know where you are getting your information from, but it is entirely incorrect. In terms of facilities, New Mexico has nothing to brag about except the indoor track, which they only get to use for racing and never for practice.
Direct from the Alter-G website, the NCAA programs that have them:
NCAA ATHLETIC PROGRAMS
Adams State College
Baylor University (4)
Brigham Young University
Oklahoma State University
Princeton University
Stanford University
University of Arkansas
University of California Berkeley (2)
University of California Davis (VA)
University of Colorado
University of Illinois
University of Kent
University of Kentucky
University of Las Vegas – Nevada
University of Marquette
University of Michigan
University of Nebraska
University of Oregon (3)
University of Southern California
University of Texas
University of Tulsa
University of Washington
Virginia Tech University
Cost: $75,000.00
D O Riordan wrote:
transplant wrote:props to portland for beating the most well funded college cross country team in the history of the sport. zero gravity treadmills, tutors, world class facilities, and all of nike's support gets trumped by a bunch of guys who log sick mileage in Forest Park.
These are tired, and inaccurate, criticisms.
Most major programs have Alter-Gs by now.
Every school has tutors.
There are nice facilities at a lot of places.
What Portland has that UO doesn't is a coach who gives a shit about coaching and actually shows up to practice. If a bunch of naive HS kids didn't buy into Lananna's lies the Ducks would not be on a plane to Terre Haute. Left to his own devices, Andy Powell couldn't coach his way out of a paper bag much less the West Region.
I beg to differ. I've seen Lananna coaching these kids--individually and in groups--numerous times--at Hayward Field, South Eugene HS, and the Amazon trail . . . and weekends too.
when you die of cancer, I'm sure I'll be there to laugh and molest your brother
Sorry to say, but Portland only has 6 full scholarships and the school costs $30,000 to attend. I don't see an advantage in those numbers.
V6 wrote:
I realize they graduated Rupp and Kiptoo, but Oregon STILL has BY FAR the most natural talent in the NCAA....
dont you mean most paid talent?
The original poster talked about how he thought they would become like the Arkansas teams. People then started to argue that Oregon cares about track more than cross. Don't forget that during Arkansas run they had extremely good track teams as well as cross teams. They were able to win the triple crown multiple times. So don't tell me that a school can't be good at both and use that as an excuse for Oregon.
I'm pretty sure New Mexico doesn't have an alter g. And if USC has a great conditioning program I'm not sure that matters one bit considering they don't even have a men's cross country team. Ok state is at 984 feet, so definitely not high altitude. I haven't been to all those places but Oregon has pretty decent trails so I'm really not sure where you're getting that.
I can't deny that other schools have some of the toys ect that Oregon does. In fact one or two might have most. But I certainly doubt that Portland does. Furthermore, I'm pretty sure as far as top ten schools Portland is by far and away the least well funded and supported. I'm pretty sure all the other schools at least have a track...
a Duck wrote:
Alan Arkin wrote:1. Oregon has won two straight NCAA XC titles. What more do you want? 3? 4?! 5?!!
2. The suggestion that a faster 800/1500 runner is so heroic running a good 10k is ridiculous. In the broad spectrum of mammalian potential, humans are endurance animals and the slight change in energy systems, muscle fiber types, etc. should not be enough for AJ Acosta, Matt Centrowitz, et al. to get destroyed at this level. Remember, these are 3:55-4:00 milers in US collegiate distance running. I think they should be able to run 5-flats for 10k on soft grass, don't you? I'm sure they've run close to that in thresholds...
Based on your "wisdom" Centrowitz Sr. would have beaten Salazar in cross country.
NEVER happened.
In fact, all the 5k guys beat the 1500 guys back in the last Duck hey day.
I don't know how you came up with that logic, I'm just saying Centrowitz is way better than 70th in the Region, 1500m or not.
shizzy wrote:
... D1 teams on the whole all have great facilities and "amenities".
You've clearly never been to cal poly
are you serious...? wrote:
There is a beautiful track only facility. Ect.
Etc. stands for et cetera, and the rest.
Ect. stands for edjicashun ceriously terrible.
What did Oregon do the past two years?
They got a hit from the loss of Wheating, but Centrowitz could have been expected to do better, given the Regionals victories of fellow milers Jeff See and Dorian Ulrey. Maybe he's just an 800/1500 guy and the latter are 1500m/5000m guys. Their team right now seems stacked with 800m/1500m guys, Fleet, Greer, Wheating, Centrowitz, ... However, you can't judge a program by its performance at regionals. A lot of teams have done far better at nationals than regionals. As for Vin, how many national titles does he have? What is there to criticize?
a Duck wrote:
Alan Arkin wrote:1. Oregon has won two straight NCAA XC titles. What more do you want? 3? 4?! 5?!!
2. The suggestion that a faster 800/1500 runner is so heroic running a good 10k is ridiculous. In the broad spectrum of mammalian potential, humans are endurance animals and the slight change in energy systems, muscle fiber types, etc. should not be enough for AJ Acosta, Matt Centrowitz, et al. to get destroyed at this level. Remember, these are 3:55-4:00 milers in US collegiate distance running. I think they should be able to run 5-flats for 10k on soft grass, don't you? I'm sure they've run close to that in thresholds...
Based on your "wisdom" Centrowitz Sr. would have beaten Salazar in cross country.
NEVER happened.
In fact, all the 5k guys beat the 1500 guys back in the last Duck hey day.
That's actually not what he said. What he said was, it is perfectly plausible to expect 1500/mile types to be able to run serviceable in cross country. Or perhaps more specifically, it is perfectly reasonable to expect a 3:36/13:4x guy (centro) and a sub 4/13:5x guy (Acosta) to at least be all-region in XC. This is not the same as a saying that a middle distance runner should beat a long distance runner in xc if each is of similar ability level in their specialty. Look at the track credentials of the Oregon runners and then look at the track credentials of the Stanford/Portland runners, there is a pretty significant advantage to Oregon. That doesn't necessarily translate to an advantage in xc but at the very least they shouldn't be losing by almost 100 points.
Indeed, why would a school at 5200 feet altitude, with easy access to trails going up to 10,000 ft, like UNM, have an altitude simulator?
but then I am a stupid fk for not knowing what the alter g treadmill is.
Getting back to the original question:
NO! The Oregon dynasty continues!! In Portland!!!!~
nyuk nyuk nyuk
Why doesn't Portland save more of its limited (the poster says six) scholarships for local and/or American kids? No, they spend them on Kenyans, and then come here and thump their chests because these 25 year old Kenyans beat the 18-22 year old American Oregon team. Does anyone see the irony here?