UCLA XC - What's Up???

Tri This wrote:

Well, UCLA got their butts kicked

So, after 18 months your ego told you that it was time to bump this to the front page and do a little more anti-UCLA trolling? Just out of curiosity, how old are you? I would think that a "talent" like yours would be much more popular in an environment like Xbox Live.

Some one has to come in last. If it's two people running against each other only one can win. I don't think you should judge them or any team for being last in their confrence. If they weren't last then another team would be and someone would be talking bad about them.

I saw the results of the UCLA vs USC dual meet and my Bruins are in big trouble. We lost both the men's and women's meet by 20 points. The Trojans dominated this meet on the track and I just don't understand what is going on over at Westwood. Art Venegas has been in charge of the UCLA program for 10 years now and they just don't get better as a team.

The women are just as bad now. Coach Bolden lost to USC for the 2nd year in a row and things just don't seem to be getting better. The female throws program over in Westwood has really taken a tumble. And the female distance runners at UCLA are just getting trounced. I think the coaching staff needs to get its act together because a lot of the Bruin alums are tired of losing to USC in a dual meet, and then doing nothing at Pac-10's or NCAA's. I wish we had coach Larson back at UCLA. He knew how to run a program.

UCLA is just another one of "those" distance programs, and by "those" programs I mean the ones that are in athletic departments that have more money than they can possibly spend, incredible facilities, and are at universities with great big time academic reputations that make recruiting easy compared to smaller D-I schools. UCLA also has location going for them-they are on the west coast in southern California, a benefit for them in just about every category you can imagine! In short, when I see schools with similar set ups, I can't fathom why they don't win everything, all the time, in every sport. This isn't every program in every major conference, these are the elite, top dollar producers. The bottom line is that there isn't an excuse for poor production at these schools. It should be the rule, not the exception.

I like Jeanette too but she can't manage the XC, distance, throws, and vault. Art can't manage nothing but the throws. They need to get a real general on board. At least Jeanette and Art don't spit on runners, throwers, and vaulters like Stephanie Hightower does.

Update?

I am a little confused and maybe my skimming of the posts is the reason, but isn't Forest Braden the coach of the XC team? He is listed as the long distance coach in track. maynard is listed as the head coach, but I thought braden was the person doing the actual coaching.

The vast majority of this thread is from 2007. That might be why you are confused.

UCLA is not update.

they're still mediocre

Stanford is a much better place to run as a distance runner than UCLA.

Almost anywhere is a better place to be running (for a serious distance runner) than UCLA. Places like Stanford and Oregon are light years better than LA for distance running.

Norcal > socal

UCLA still not so good....

You can't hide in the fish bowl. L.A. is the most visible city in the world. Every little thing that happens in L.A. is headline news from Antarctica to the North Pole, and headline news even across the information firewalls of facist China, Israel, Russia, North Korea, Iran, Cuba, Cambodia, ... UCLA XC had better get their shit together or sumthin better be up ;-)

Rather Be Running wrote:

Almost anywhere is a better place to be running (for a serious distance runner) than UCLA. Places like Stanford and Oregon are light years better than LA for distance running.

Cal Poly SLO comes to mind. Great place to train, great education, experienced coach. Still, Long Beach St. had that kid who ran 13:44 a few years back and I think Westwood and the surrounding mountains is a better place to train than Long Beach.

Like someone mentioned before there really is no excuse. UCLA is a fantastic school with plenty of great places to train in the surrounding area. Unlike USC it is not landlocked in downtown LA... plenty of trails in the Santa Monica mountains nearby, etc. I know the changed their coaching staff last year so maybe it is too early to pass judgement so only time can tell.

What I do know is this has nothing to do with LA. Southern California, specifically the Southern Section (which includes most of LA, San Bernadino, Santa Barbara, and Orange Counties) is easily the most competitive and deepest region in high school running. Just to qualify for the state meet in this region it is not unheard of to run sub 4:15 or sub 9:15. UCLA mid-D has experienced a resurgence with Cory Primm running 1:45 and change last year under new assistant coach Johnny Gray (AR holder). Let's hope the XC program can follow suit

ya know wrote:

Like someone mentioned before there really is no excuse. UCLA is a fantastic school with plenty of great places to train in the surrounding area. Unlike USC it is not landlocked in downtown LA... plenty of trails in the Santa Monica mountains nearby, etc. I know the changed their coaching staff last year so maybe it is too early to pass judgement so only time can tell.

Trust me, I completely agree. I KNOW there is lots of great running around Westwood and easy access to the mountains nearby. Great year-round weather and it is one of the top five public universities in the US. However, Cal Poly SLO has more variety for training, is also a great school, and has an experienced coach. The same can be said of Santa Barbara and Stanford.

Yet Stanford is the only school consistently qualifying for NCAA's and running well there... the other schools in California should be running better in cross. As a Californian myself I would like to see it but for some reason in the West the schools taking those NCAA qualifying spots are usually Oregon, (Stanford), and Portland.