Who do you WANT to see win Footlocker?

I'll agree, my he replacement changed the question, so instead I have gone to the link you provided and butchered those examples instead.

Example #1 from your link:

Who/Whom wrote the letter?

He wrote the letter. Therefore, who is correct.

Or, could one answer the above question as follows?

Jim, it was him. Who? Where? Him. Jim over there.

Here now, whom would be correct, correct?

Example #2 from your link:

We all know who/whom pulled that prank.

This sentence contains two clauses: we all know and who/whom pulled that prank. We are interested in the second clause because it contains the who/whom.

He pulled that prank. Therefore, who is correct.

Again, devil's advocate here, but isn't this correct too?

It was him. OR, We all know it was him. Therefore, once again, making whom correct.

And finally:

He is the runner I would want to see win FootLocker

vs I would want to see him win FootLocker

I do know the difference lies in the subject of the sentence and you have applied it correctly. But, to a casual person just replacing him/he is not enough; they must also make certain the subject remains consistent in both cases.

The grammar discussion on this thread is one of the most ridiculous things I've seen on LRC. Really, who gives a damn?

Not Dressel

Shawn H wrote:

The grammar discussion on this thread is one of the most ridiculous things I've seen on LRC. Really, who gives a damn?

This, for sure! ^^^^^

Shawn H wrote:

Not quite Shawn H wrote:

Conner Mantz hands down.

I wasn't going to comment on this thread until I saw your post with my name in it. LOL. Ok, of course I would like Conner Mantz to win it. Utah high school runner, just like I was. He's a good, smart kid, and he lives where in Smithfield, Utah, where I lived for a few years as a boy. He would be a very deserving winner. Of course he's an underdog, and I like underdogs who beat the odds and win.

My all-time favorite Footlocker champion is Matt Withrow. Another underdog who beat the odds.

Good luck to Conner.

Sorry, I wasn't meaning to mock you. You're just the most vocal Mantz fan on the board. He's a good kid, works hard, has oodles of talent, and I really want to see this comeback story happen. He might not even qualify though, considering how incredibly difficult the West region is.

Runcogrun wrote:

(sensible stuff)...

I do know the difference lies in the subject of the sentence and you have applied it correctly. But, to a casual person just replacing him/he is not enough; they must also make certain the subject remains consistent in both cases.

Agreed

iowakidscanrun wrote:

Shawn H wrote:

The grammar discussion on this thread is one of the most ridiculous things I've seen on LRC. Really, who gives a damn?

This, for sure! ^^^^^

So?

Go Dressel!!!

Ari Klau

Olin Hacker!!!!!!

I would say that I want a kid from California to win, but I know that is not going to happen, because ALL the best California runners will be running Nike Nationals.

I do think California has a few runners who could be in the mix to win it all at Footlocker (Tamagno, Rocha, Webb, and Brandt to name a few), but none of them will be running there!!! While most of them probably consider Footlocker to be the superior individual they all automatically qualified out of the CA state meet and thus didn't need to run a regional qualifier making the decision pretty easy. Not to mention the fact that kids from southern california already have 4 difficult races over 4 weeks leading up to this race (League, SS prelims, SS Finals, State) making the idea of 2 more races at maximum effort seem more daunting.

This is a tragedy for our sport.

My opinion is that Nike should get rid of the Individual Championship element and stick with the team championship (how it started). Also FL should split the west into two regions (the current west and CA). Five auto bids should go to CA from their state meet - same system that is used for NXN auto-qualifiers.

Halfhourbauer wrote:

Jesse Hersha...

Yes, that would be awesome! I was so excited about his Regional run. Good to see another Mliver on here.

Also... last year CA had 5 runners in the top 23 at NXN and 3 runners in the top 14 at FL... if that doesn't warrant 5 automatic bids to a national championship I don't know what does.

Cali Coach wrote:

I do think California has a few runners who could be in the mix to win it all at Footlocker (Tamagno, Rocha, Webb, and Brandt to name a few), but none of them will be running there!!!

Tamagno is running FL, not NXN.

Wow thanks for the update.

I think they made the right decision, but this is exactly why things need to change, because one way or another each race becomes weaker.

Brendan effing ralph

Or Drew o donohue mc learning disability

"whom" is correct.

Withrow

https://www.google.com/search?q=ballerness&client=firefox-a&hs=Gw1&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=nts&biw=1600&bih=763&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=t-eAVJWQCMXooASY94G4AQ&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=fyldYQQZ1LHz4M%253A%3BhhH4C1I8rTOAFM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.runnerspace.com%252Fmembers%252Fphotos%252F3026%252FsvOnOPTx_full.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.runnerspace.com%252Fphotos.php%253Fphoto_id%253D363322%3B720%3B527

BALLERNESS

Pre!