OSU Beavers taking care of football players...

I was almost an Oregon State fan. Seriously.

It's the beginning of forming a track team. I think it's great! Supposed to have an xc team starting in two falls I believe. It what you are saying was completely true; which currently it is I'd have a problem with it I suppose, but you have to see the situation as letting the football team participate has been great media and publicity wise. Watching Bishop jump at NCAA's was awesome, even duck fans for celebrating.

Not a fan.... wrote:

Does anyone else think it's wrong that Oregon State Athletics has decided to back men's track these days, ONLY for off season football guys? I mean, you have so many kids in the state who would love to run track for OSU, but only the football players are being supported. It's really nice because football players generally lack the support of athletic administrators already.

My thoughts are: Bring men's track and XC back to OSU, and don't just cater to the already privileged.

I agree. OSU letting these guys compete has nothing to do with track and field. It is a football decision and our sport should not allow schools to manipulate the system like this.

How is this different than having a track team that focuses on the distance events using cross country runners? The "track team" at OSU started as off season training for the football team, but when they realized that they had some guys who could compete at the national level, they then petitioned the NCAA to allow them to compete.

FWIW - as mentioned, OSU is in the process of reinstating a mens track and xc program, as well as building a facility to support it. I believe they have details on their website.

Zombie Apocalypse!! wrote:

How is this different than having a track team that focuses on the distance events using cross country runners? The "track team" at OSU started as off season training for the football team, but when they realized that they had some guys who could compete at the national level, they then petitioned the NCAA to allow them to compete.

FWIW - as mentioned, OSU is in the process of reinstating a mens track and xc program, as well as building a facility to support it. I believe they have details on their website.

It's different because those schools sponsor the sport, have a budget for the sport, give scholarships to track athletes, meet the requirements for minimum number of meets (12 total for indoor/outdoor) and take the minimum number of 14 athletes at each countable meet/weekend.

OSU is putting on a show to appease some football recruiting promises.

I do applaud OSU for working towards having a real track team. But for now what they are doing is disrespectful to our sport.

I thought you were talking about another "Colorado" when I read the subject line.

For what it's worth, the waiver that OSU received for men's track predicated the intention of adding a men's team. Other schools have contacted the NCAA about letting their athletes compete in non-sponsored seasons (ie, indoors for teams without indoors, or indoor/outdoor for teams that are xc only) and have been denied based on the fact they don't intend to add the sport.

It could be smoke and mirrors, but it would seem that OSU provided the NCAA with some plan to add men's track and this is the middle ground to get the process started.

Good points about budgeting and total number of meets, but keep in mind that there are lots of schools that don't even have offer track scholarships (think D3) or only offer them for distance/cross country, which is kind of in the same vein.

I don't understand how this situation is "disrespectful" though. OSU went about it the right way - they have had plans to reinstate the men's program for a number of years (just working on the endowment) and petitioned the NCAA once they realized they had athletes capable of competing at a high level. If anything, I'm suprised more applause isn't given to OSU giving their athletes another opportunity to compete and supporting the sport. Unfair - possibly (again, total number of meets), but disrespectful - I disagree.

How is this different than the other OSU (um, Oklahoma State, not Ohio State), devoting most of their resources to building up a XC team and incidentally a getting distance runners for T&F and not trying to have a serious T&F squad with sprinters and field event athletes?

Anyhow, OSU has to start somewhere and good for them for beginning to build back a T&F program.

What a disappointment!

I clicked on this thread hoping it was going to be something dirty.

You are really confused/misinformed. Oregon State is in the midst of a multi-year, multi million dollar campaign to reinstate men's track and field. They reinstated women's T&F several years ago with only distance runners (centered mostly around Cross Country) when they hired Kelly Sullivan (out of Auburn & Willamette (where he coached Nick Symonds). They are probably within one year of building a new Track and Field facility at which time they will be recruiting men and women for all events. The T&F program at OSU has a history that runs deep with numerous Olympians (not the least of whom invented a funny high jump style called the Flop that won him the Olympic Gold medal in Mexico City in '68) and a CC Championship in '62 which included individual champ Dale Story (running barefoot on a course covered in acorns, look it up if you don't believe it!) The exemption they recieved for the football playing high jumpers and sprinters last season came out of nowhere at the last minute. There was (and is) nothing sinister about it being used as some "unfair" recruiting tool to the exclusion of distance runners or field event people. In point of fact it was something which ended up creating enough public interest that it put the campaingn to restore the program in the news and assisted quite nicely in raising additional donations. Patience is a virtue my friend, watch for OSU to evolve a full men's and women's T&F and CC program, which I predict will be nationally competitve within the next 5-7 years. Good things take time. Consider this; the reinstatement campaign actually started the day they cut the program in '88 and it didn't really gain much traction until the last 3 years!