Not quite... wrote:
That's actually not what he said. What he said was, it is perfectly plausible to expect 1500/mile types to be able to run serviceable in cross country. Or perhaps more specifically, it is perfectly reasonable to expect a 3:36/13:4x guy (centro) and a sub 4/13:5x guy (Acosta) to at least be all-region in XC. This is not the same as a saying that a middle distance runner should beat a long distance runner in xc if each is of similar ability level in their specialty. Look at the track credentials of the Oregon runners and then look at the track credentials of the Stanford/Portland runners, there is a pretty significant advantage to Oregon. That doesn't necessarily translate to an advantage in xc but at the very least they shouldn't be losing by almost 100 points.
Not how I read the post, the original guy seemed to think the fastest milers should be winning 10k XC, which in reality, almost never happens.
Acosta redshirted track due to lingering injuries, Centro pulled out of NCAA outdoor due to injury. Both were considered XC/3200m talents in highschool, in college both turned out to be 1500m talents, both are questionable in regards to health and fitness base.
The original poster was certainly not saying that the fastest milers should be winning 10k XC. He merely pointed out that sub 4 minute milers should be able to at least go 5 flat over the course of a 10k, or in other words 31:00 for 10k. When was the last time 31:00 won NCAA on a normal course? Ok, didn't think so. Centrowitz and Acosta are both underachieving, no reason for performing this poorly at all. Bumbalough, Ulrey, Carey and many others all did quite well at regionals, and they are 1500m specialists.
Nobody is saying Oregon has to stick all their guys in the top 10 at NCAA. All people are saying is that Oregon should not be embarrassed the way they were.
As for this whole Nike thing, I remember Ritzenhein went to Oregon to train in their humidity room or whatever it was to prepare for Beijing. Again, not saying other teams don't have these things, but the fact that Oregon does have this stuff means they should never get beat, certainly not the way they have been beat. They have the athletes, they have the support and facilities, all that is left is coaching. I don't know much about Lananna except that Stanford did well under him before he went to Oregon, but this seems like one of the only things to point to. I personally dislike it when coaches say we are focusing on one sport any less than another.
As for Portland and the whole Kenyan thing, only 1 is actually legit Kenyan. That's not bad. If you look around at other schools Iona, OSU, Alabama, Auburn, and NAU just to name a few, they do the exact same thing. So don't point fingers at one school, it's not like they are doing anything wrong.