Who ever said it was about winning, I think the interest is just seeing our best compete as a team.
Who ever said it was about winning, I think the interest is just seeing our best compete as a team.
jjjjjjl wrote:
Who's driving the Batmobile, malmo?
The Solinskymobile? It started off as a dumptruck, but when I saw the Solinskymoblie I changed my mind.
OK, Tegenkamp doesn't arrive on a gilded litter, maybe the dumptruck or a Humvee.
TrackCoach wrote:
Who ever said it was about winning, I think the interest is just seeing our best compete as a team.
Precisely, but I just don't get guys saying that we don't have a shot to medal when we've done it before, we have several guys who have been in the top 20 or top 15 before and our top guys now are likely better then them. That doesn't add up.
And malmo, that is pretty good, maybe we can start by getting Batman committed.
The difference between the dumptruck and the XC dream team is that people actually care if the dumptruck makes its appointed rounds.
US top distance athletes simply see the USATF XC Champs as an early season test of fitness, and that's not going to change. I'd much prefer to see 26:59 (hopefully faster) at Stanford.
coach d wrote:
The difference between the dumptruck and the XC dream team is that people actually care if the dumptruck makes its appointed rounds.
US top distance athletes simply see the USATF XC Champs as an early season test of fitness, and that's not going to change. I'd much prefer to see 26:59 (hopefully faster) at Stanford.
This coming from one of the most negative posters on here. No surprise. Keep your little stateside sneak under 27:00.
I'd pay my $20 to see our best take on a slew of sub 27 runners and do it with national pride on the line, an THEN run under 27 in the season 3 or 4 months later. No reason both can't be accomplished.
Perspectivation wrote:
Precisely, but I just don't get guys saying that we don't have a shot to medal when we've done it before, we have several guys who have been in the top 20 or top 15 before and our top guys now are likely better then them. That doesn't add up.
And that's where you fail little dude. You keep wanting it to add up but in running it never does. Kenya had a 12:58 guy finish 19th. Morocco had a 12:55 guy DNF. Tanzania had 1:00 half guy finish in 41st. Qatar had a 7:30 guy finish 54th. Australia had a 27:29 guy finsh 84th, Mexico had a 13:11 guy finish 63rd. Yet you expect every top American from the last decade to all be ready to run a career race on the same day.
And Canada had a 27:2X guy finish 13th. Ohh, and he ran his 27:2X last weekend race and was smoked by two of the Americans discussed for this proposed dream team.
I think if things were PERFECT Ritz is in top 5, Rupp top ten and both Teg & Solinsky 15th to 20th and any of Meb, Hall, Nelson etc. to finish between 20th to 40th. As mentioned Meb has been top 14 THREE times, and he doesn't appear to be in the grave right now.
We have enough guys that whoever the top 6 go even if 2 or 3 have flat performances (and with Rupp a flat performance is always a good one) we still have a good shot at a medal.
I don't think anyone in favor has stated a guarantee to get a medal, just that we damn well have a shot and we should take it. Instead of looking for ways to lose, look for ways to win (relative to what a victory would be for the US).
Incidentally, I have a feeling you picked out the exceptions rather than the rule with your examples, but a 12:58 guy finish 19th is not much of an example, that's about where I'd hope Teg to be. A 12:55 morrocan pussin out? What does that prove, he was off drugs and it hurt? A 7:30 3K guy isn't so great at 12K cross? Wow. Granted there are some legit cross guys who faltered, but if you just look at the top 3 teams you get the norm, not the exceptions.
Say we go over there and don't medal but have one or two guys in the single digits and another couple in the teens, that still says a lot about the common perception about us VS. the E. Africans.
Jenny B talks about her future plans toward the end of this interview and touches on cross country...
It's less likely to get what we'd all want when WXC is held during wartimes in backwards countries like Poland, Kenya, and Jordan. Athletes don't feel safe with just one U.S. State Department attache escorting the USA XC team when there are millions of liberation fighters out there looking for revenge on US citizens. Chelsea Clinton had a squad of U.S. Marines secretly follow her around while a student at Stanford. A friend of mine said the Marines would come into Subway in civvies and eat there angry, all jacked-up, looking to leap at anyone and kill then with their bare hands. If the USA XC could get those fellas to escort the team then more elites might go to uncivilized countries for WXC.
Hoss, the WXC could be held in Huntsville, Alabama and they would still get their asses handed to them.
It made my paper back then. There was even a little section all spring and summer with the title "track and field".
Silly Valley wrote:
A friend of mine said the Marines would come into Subway in civvies and eat there angry, all jacked-up, looking to leap at anyone and kill then with their bare hands.
Stupid idiots.
Nike has a huge presence at WXC already with all the athletes they sponsor. They don't really get any additional advertising value by sponsoring an American team. Also, they're sort of playing favorite if they go through all that trouble to get Americans to show up when there are Nike sponsored athletes from other countries who could be quite bitter they weren't given added incentive.