Jgt11 wrote:
Nau held our Bosely at regional s and look how well he did. Should have done the same with Harrison.
Same with CU and Hornecker. He was the #3 guy today.
Jgt11 wrote:
Nau held our Bosely at regional s and look how well he did. Should have done the same with Harrison.
Same with CU and Hornecker. He was the #3 guy today.
Anybody who constantly cries about this exaggerated age advantage that somehow only BYU has (Utah State finished very well and has plenty of missionaries as well) is just a case of looking for any excuse as to why they can't compete. 100%. It's all excuse finding. Looking for justification for your failures. How about you just get better and win?
Ha ha, haters. The average age of BYU's top 5 is 22. Two didn't go on missions. Three are sophomores. Casey Clinger is back next year. NAU is human after all. Looks like lots of people crying in their beer in Flagstaff and Palo Alto tonight, and for years to come.
But please, just go on hating. It provides an extra boost as a BYU athlete to know that every time you win, some weirdo hater on the Internet is going to burst an artery in rage. It's a great deal, actually. You supply the pure hate for free, and BYU runs on it.
NAU did choke, stop making excuses.
Maybe Smith is not the greatest, the teams he inherited won, now it's on him, lets see how they develop?
I love that Furman (14th) is pretty much just as good as Oregon (9th).
What a great sport.
tally wrote:
Ratcliffe in 152nd team place.
If he's top ten, Stanford is right there.
Would like to find out, obviously, what happened to Ratcliffe, but Stanford never found a 5 this year, so there's no way they were getting there. Even with a solid Ratcliffe today, they would've been 4th.
Fahy and Parsons with a excellent end-of-season comebacks to give very solid performances today was nice, but without a solid 5, it wasn't gonna happen.
Mantz should have graduated last year. He was a senior with Grant Fisher in 2014 Footlocker. Grant graduated Stanford last year. Mantz is a sophmore. He will be like Josh Rohatinsky was, running at BYU for many many more years.
They were already ranked #1,2,3. Great Lakes had the best showing.
I'm not denying it. I don't think people should be allowed to do or say whatever and blame it on religion. I am completely intolerant of mormons. I think they should be banned by the NCAA.
Ummm... at least you’re being, honest(?). So ban anyone who is Mormon from competing in the NCAA? What about hateful bigots? Cuz then you’d be out.
Or are you saying ban the missions? I’d be okay with that. I think BYU would do better if they didn’t have to deal with all of that anyway and it would shut people like you up.
Former BYU runner here. For most of my mission I only ran once/week, and the last few months I didn’t run at all. This was over 15 years ago, so I don’t know if/how things have changed since then. At the time, my experience was very typical. There were even a few guys that came back 30lb overweight. It took most of us 6 months to a year to get back to where we were before the mission, and some never made it back. Once you get back into shape, age is definitely an advantage, but you lose a year of eligibility getting there.
tally wrote:
tally wrote:
Ratcliffe in 152nd team place.
If he's top ten, Stanford is right there.
Correct myself. He was sixth man so he would not have improved the score that much. But could have been close for second.
WTF are you talking about? If he's on form, he'd at least be top 25 or so, so, obviously, he would've dropped a good ~60 points off Stanford's total.
Still wouldn't have gotten them better than 4th.
furmann wrote:
I love that Furman (14th) is pretty much just as good as Oregon (9th).
What a great sport.
There are 73 points that say otherwise
What????? wrote:
So a religion that encourages a healthy living style, based on good family morals that believes in Jesus Christ should be banned from the ncaa??? So the same with every catholic school or religious school??
There are some fair criticisms of the Mormon church. They didn't allow African Americans to be priests until 1978. That's pretty ridiculous to me. Brown v Board of Education was 1954, and it took the Mormon church another 24 years to change their racist doctrine. Sure, that was 40 years ago, and it appears to me that the Mormon church has gotten more multi-cultural and accepting in those past 40 years. Currently, they seem pretty homophobic.
wooOOOOOOoooo wrote:
thinkers wrote:
Quick take on the women's race:
-Wow, BYU looked good. Knew they had a chance. Their #4 killed their shot
-Arkansas is serious
-Of course Harvard got last. Anyone legitimately surprised?
-Big props to Boston College
-Huge race by Air Force women. Who knew a female service academy could place top 10??
-I would say the season was a disappointment for both Colorado and New Mexico, despite Kelati's win
-Any team more inconsistent than Washington this year??
-The overall quality of the women's race seemed to be exceptional
On to the men. How cool would it be to actually watch the race?
-I knew Melany smart was going to do well, a shame that the Washington team couldn't get it together.
-I think New Mexico getting 4th was good, better than I expected and impressive considering the strength of those top 3 teams.
-I'm so happy Arkansas was able to pull it off, I'm sorry but I just cannot support BYU and their weird/racist mormon lifestyle. I just can't.
-Disappointing for Anna Rohrer who was in the mix but just didn't have it at the end.
I don't care at all who wins the mens race as long as NAU wins, it's weird to be so uninvested in the winner.
agree-great to see the Razorbacks pull it off---must have been a letdown for Washington despite Smart's performance-Rainsberger was 4th as a frosh on this course 3 years ago and now 33rd...yeah-liked seeing Rohrer mix it up and a sedimental pick given that she was really close as a soph in 2016..
Sweet Nell Fenwick wrote:
Quick take on the women's race:
... Of course Harvard got last. Anyone legitimately surprised?
I am. I figured Texas would be last. Harvard could have been near Columbia. But they had a couple of blowups (which you can't have at this meet), so there you go.
The surprise of the meet, though, was the Harvard men! Where did that come from? Bring 'Em Young winning overall was definitely an upset, but it wasn't 100% out of the blue. Harvard getting 15th was.
Yep, Harvard impressed the hell out of me. If Milner's up where he ought to be, they could've been 8th or so.
whatttttkjgj wrote:
So the winning time was 30:32. Now thats a great year in NCAA Div.1 xc .
It was raining pretty heavily during men's race based on livestream, so that would explain slower times a bit. Plus in xc times really don't matter in the grand scheme of things.
haters lose again wrote:
Ha ha, haters. The average age of BYU's top 5 is 22. Two didn't go on missions. Three are sophomores. Casey Clinger is back next year. NAU is human after all. Looks like lots of people crying in their beer in Flagstaff and Palo Alto tonight, and for years to come.
But please, just go on hating. It provides an extra boost as a BYU athlete to know that every time you win, some weirdo hater on the Internet is going to burst an artery in rage. It's a great deal, actually. You supply the pure hate for free, and BYU runs on it.
A few things:
- You act like having an average age of 22 isn't an advantage...I guarantee no schools have an average age that high outside of maybe Utah State (don't know as much about their roster / how many missions were involved)
- Something tells me that Mormons have learned to tune out the hate and ignore outside perspectives by now
- I have no affiliation to any school that was running today. Just want the most fair result
- The arguments from others saying age doesn't make a difference are clearly false...there is a reason you don't see 19 year olds winning USAs
- Did Conner Mantz also get a redshirt year in addition to his mission?? It looks like he graduated high school in 2015 so sat out the 2015, 2016, and 2017 cross country seasons? If so, what a joke
Alliner wrote:
So about 5:00 flat a mile. So Ingebretsen could have jumped in this race and smoked a cigarette the whole way and destroyed our entire NCAA field.
Yet Spencer Brown thinks he can beat him after finishing dead last.
Mossback wrote:
Former BYU runner here. For most of my mission I only ran once/week, and the last few months I didn’t run at all. This was over 15 years ago, so I don’t know if/how things have changed since then. At the time, my experience was very typical. There were even a few guys that came back 30lb overweight. It took most of us 6 months to a year to get back to where we were before the mission, and some never made it back. Once you get back into shape, age is definitely an advantage, but you lose a year of eligibility getting there.
Didn't Mantz redshirt his first year back? Meaning he lost no years of eligibility and only got the advantage?
alshaw wrote:
Buster Cherry wrote:
Yes, a strong culture is certainly a contributing factor. But unfortunately (or fortunately for BYU) there are other programs with strong cultures whose runners are much younger and are thus at a disadvantage.
Why is it an advantage to be a 24-25 year old senior who took 2 years off (cuz going for a run once a month doesn’t count as running) compared to being 22-23? If the NCAA and BYU were to do away with the missions and have a group of guys the same age as everyone else, I would bet money BYU does as well or better on average.
Having to figure out who’s coming and going to/from missions and who’s gonna get back in shape is not an advantage.
The age-old lie of a sedentary mission. “One run a month.” Intellectually dishonest from a people who are supposed to have strong morals.