Cornell XC

yes you should wrote:

wejo:

If you are going to delete this thread then you should delete ever other one where some idiot starts a thread to trash a college coach. If you aren't going to remove the others, then leave this one also. Personally, I believe you should always remove threads slamming college coaches or athletes.

Thanks.

I've removed a lot of threads bashing coaches. I don't remove a lot of threads but I do hear from coaches asking me to remove threads. Generally I tell them some criticism is part of the game and usually should be taken as a compliment. Martin Smith, Lananna, Wetmore all get criticized. But when a thread gets overboard and I see one person posting over and over personal attacks then oftentimes as a courtesy to the coach I will remove it. Especially once a thread gets removed, and then gets started with the same stuff again.

As for the person posting 3 times, I was trying to say 3 negative posts were all by the same ip. The first 2 posts on this thread and then a third one later on, not the first 3 posts in the thread. I think he's at 4 or 5 posts now. I'll double check when I get bored.

Let's see how regionals goes. There are 40 plus schools going to the line. If Cornell finishes in bottom half, then that's weak. If it finishes in top ten, that's not bad. If it finishes top six, then that's good. Better than that, and it's time for the negative poster to eat a full plate of crow.

C'mon, boys, it's time to run.

wejo:

Thanks for your thoughtful response. I just respectfully don't agree that the junk people throw on here about college coaches is a compliment. As I have always read the stuff I can rarely find anyone who comes on and says, "Hey, Coach D is a great guy/girl and we are happy to have them at our school"

When any college coach gets mentioned (for any reason) it is "slam city" and all sorts of people jump on to trash the person.

Any coach, at any level is open to criticism, we just shouldn't encourage it, or allow it to fester on your fine message board.

Keep up the great job. We appreciate it.

1st: whoever looked up regional results last year for those schools and compared them to cornell's regional scores is rediculous. you do realize that track points DON'T only come from distance runners. ie dartmouth racked up lots of points from all americans mustafa abdur rahim and sean furey in the dec and jav.

2nd: this is NOT the same poster as the 1st 2 posts, i was praising the cornell program. wejo, work on that ip tracer. i don't even live in america.

cheers.

Cheers mate.

1st: whoever looked up regional results last year for those schools and compared them to cornell's regional scores is rediculous. you do realize that track points DON'T only come from distance runners. ie dartmouth racked up lots of points from all americans mustafa abdur rahim and sean furey in the dec and jav.

Well then, where were their distance points? Columbia, Penn, and Yale sent distance guys to nationals (Dusen, Jaworski, Meyer). The point by Speed Kills still remains.

Honestly, sending a guy from your team to nats doesn't show CRAP about the program or coaching on the whole.

Why don't you take a look at how Cornell's relay teams did at Penn last year? Also take a look at where those kids were in High School and see who they're mixing it up with now.

Speed kills can flick my twat.

and the winner is......MY DICK wrote:

Honestly, sending a guy from your team to nats doesn't show CRAP about the program or coaching on the whole.

Why don't you take a look at how Cornell's relay teams did at Penn last year? Also take a look at where those kids were in High School and see who they're mixing it up with now.

Speed kills can flick my twat.

A great "national" caliber team should send AT LEAST one person if not several. At the end of the day, doing well at a relay meet is nothing compared to the big dance. For example, is Kerron Clement known more for running well at Penn Relays or for being a world record holder and multiple NCAA champion. Honestly,if Penn Relays is your major argument, that's pathetic.

I apologize, I didn't realize that having depth at such a high level meant so little.

Their DMR ran 9:33 (2:55, 48, 1:48, 4:00) losing only to mich and arkanssas, beating stanford, georgetown and indiana

4xMile ran 16:29 (4:04, 4:07, 4:06, 4:11)

They had 8 guys sub 1:53.

They had 5 gusy sub 3:53.

These guys dominated heps in mid distance events both indoors and outdoors and if you fail to recognize a quality program like this by comparing their relay results to Kerron Clement's world record, then that truly is sad.

Maybe in your mind the true judge of caliber is sending one person to nationals in track, but in my mind, the strength of a program lies in its numbers, not in the results of just one man.

So winning t&f Heps because they send the most athletes is supposed to show how genius their coach is? It's pretty easy to beat teams like Brown, Harvard, Yale & Columbia when you have more than twice the number of athletes. Picking up all those field events points because no one else has enough people to put out 4 long jumpers and 3 hammer throwers... Wow, that must really take some coaching talent.

In Cross Country they can only send out 12 athletes, just like everyone else, and they get their asses handed to them every year. And that will continue as long as Rojo is there.

Buddy, go read my last post again before you make a fool of yourself. I said they trounced the rest of the Heps in MID DISTANCE EVENTS, which has nothing to do with their overall scores or hammer throwers or anything else. Their production in numbers is not a testament to the size of their team but the production of the coach. We're not debating about XC here because we all know they haven't been performing up to par.

and the winner is......MY DICK wrote:

I apologize, I didn't realize that having depth at such a high level meant so little.

Their DMR ran 9:33 (2:55, 48, 1:48, 4:00) losing only to mich and arkanssas, beating stanford, georgetown and indiana

4xMile ran 16:29 (4:04, 4:07, 4:06, 4:11)

They had 8 guys sub 1:53.

They had 5 gusy sub 3:53.

These guys dominated heps in mid distance events both indoors and outdoors and if you fail to recognize a quality program like this by comparing their relay results to Kerron Clement's world record, then that truly is sad.

Maybe in your mind the true judge of caliber is sending one person to nationals in track, but in my mind, the strength of a program lies in its numbers, not in the results of just one man.

Excellent point sir.

I recommend that people stop engaging the obsessive idiot who is posting every single post on this thread against Cornell. Read Wejo's very humorous note about checking IP addresses. I think this guy has got a dart board made out of his Cornell rejection letter. Grow a pair of round objects and state your name or piss off, anti-Cornell loser. They have a great program and you have...nothing.

good job rojo wrote:

So winning t&f Heps because they send the most athletes is supposed to show how genius their coach is? It's pretty easy to beat teams like Brown, Harvard, Yale & Columbia when you have more than twice the number of athletes. Picking up all those field events points because no one else has enough people to put out 4 long jumpers and 3 hammer throwers... Wow, that must really take some coaching talent.

In Cross Country they can only send out 12 athletes, just like everyone else, and they get their asses handed to them every year. And that will continue as long as Rojo is there.

Hey pal, you fail to recognize the point once again. Forget even winning Heps, Cornell's mid-d squad rocked in such a way that it DOES take some coaching talent. Look at the aforementioned stats.

Thankerz. Goodnight.

"dominated mid-distance"?? Huh?

At outdoor Heps, the scores for 800-5k were (by my quick count)

Cornell - 24

Penn - 15

Princeton - 15

Yale - 12

Dartmouth - 11

Columbia - 10

Brown - 4

Harvard - 0

They won that one meet... but not really a domination. And, like I said, they have so many athletes. They can run the max in every event - and they have extras that they leave home. Most of the other schools are lucky to have 3 guys in each event. Cornell has their choice of 6.

Putting up 24 mid-d points in one meet is good, but let's see Rojo do it at Brown. Then I might be impressed.

And his distance guys still sucked - they only had 1 FINISHER in the 5k/10. And that guy scored 0 points.

and the winner is......ME! wrote:

Hey pal, you fail to recognize the point once again. Forget even winning Heps, Cornell's mid-d squad rocked in such a way that it DOES take some coaching talent. Look at the aforementioned stats.

Thankerz. Goodnight.

Considering that the title of this thread is "Cornell XC you clowns have spent an awful lot of time defending the middle distance track team.

The fact is, Cornell XC under rojo hasn't been very good at all. They are consistently bringing up the rear of the Ivies, not exactly an XC powerhouse conference.

On the track, in the middle distance events, it is a different story. Cornell has been the class of the Ivies there, one of the best in the East, and starting to make some noise nationally.

But the defenders of Rojo's XC program really have no leg to stand on. Can't you give an honest assessment of the XC program, or are you so concerned about kissing ass that you'll defend rojo to the death in face of overwhelming evidence?

Damn son.....Cornell has ALWAYS had the numbers....but have they always been winning?

Get it straight.

The answer is no. Look at when they started winning.

Do some math.

Stop posting.

Thankerz. Goodnight.

Hey, let's be glad that guys like Rojo, and by extension-Wejo, are giving so much to the sport. Not too long ago, we had P.E. degree clowns controlling the more academic collegiate programs.

Hey don't take my closing line.

SonicView wrote:

Damn son.....Cornell has ALWAYS had the numbers....but have they always been winning?

Get it straight.

The answer is no. Look at when they started winning.

Do some math.

Stop posting.

Thankerz. Goodnight.

So your argument is that the old coaches REALLY sucked, and rojo is the big improvement by being just mediocre?

The track team started being good before rojo got there. All those sprint points and field events points? That's not his doing either.

Also, atleast the other ivy league coaches have the class to not talk about their teams on a message board. I don't understand why Nathan Taylor and the other Cornell coaches allow rojo and his athletes to constantly brag about themselves online.