Syracuse and Pitt to ACC - Track and X-C implications

Creighton

Dayton

DePaul

Fordham

Georgetown

Marquette

Notre Dame

Providence

St. John's

St. Joseph's

St. Louis

Seton Hall

Villanova

Xavier

In my opinion, this is the strongest 14 team Catholic Conference you could put together (realistically). Most of these teams contends for the NCAA tournament every year, is strong academically, and are decent geographic fits. Plus, this alignment gives you some presence in some solid media markets (Chicago, Cincinnati, Dayton, Milwaukee, New York, Philadelphia, Providence, St. Louis, Washington DC)

OTHER CANDIDATES

Boston College - Wouldn't leave the ACC

Duquesne, LaSalle, St. Bonaventure, Siena - Not stronger than the above schools

Gonzaga, St. Mary's, Portland, Santa Clara, San Diego - Attractive, but too far west

This conference would give Notre Dame exactly what it wants - the opportunity to stay Independant in football while joining all their other sports. Of course, if the 16 team "Super Conferences" happens, Notre Dame will have to join one for football purposes.

There are no track or xc implications.

Pitt is terrible at both. Syracuse is good in xc recently (though over-rated this year), and they'll eventually be hurt by being in the weak ACC. 2nd or 3rd place team if they're lucky - as long as FSU has a foreign pipeline and N.C. State is in the conference - then nothing really will change.

On the track, both teams suck.

--------------------------------------

N.C. State will get rocked by Syracuse when they join.

N.C. State is one of the most overrated institutions of higher learning on the planet. It is an oversized jr. college. Syracuse introduces 3 men's teams that are consistently ranked in the top 10-15 in the NCAA...Basketball, Lax and X-C. Women ...X-C, Ice Hockey,Field Hockey and Lacrosse.

That's a decent offering. What are N.C. State's top programs? Rifle? Baseball (in a good year)?

I see the future of ACC X-C Men panning out like

1. FSU 2. Syracuse 3. UVA 4. Duke ...and a similar set of teams for women.

Snipes,

This is VERY on the money. My inclination would be to move it to 16 and I'd also look at non-Catholic, but like-minded universities. For example, I could see Richmond or GW in the mix.

In fact, here'd be my super hoops conference:

East

Fordham

Georgetown

Providence

Richmond

St. John's

St. Joseph's

Seton Hall

Villanova

West

Creighton

Dayton

DePaul

Duquesne

Marquette

Notre Dame

St. Louis

Xavier

I ran for Pitt XC and Track within the past decade... What has happened to that program is an absolute disaster. All of the coaching staff should be fired for what they've done. Pitt may not have been at the top of the Big East, but they were at least competitive from 2004-2008. Now they are losing meets to no-name schools handily. What an embarrassment.

http://www.goduquesne.com/sports/m-xc/stats/090311aag.html

I am assuming most of you have seen SportsCenter today if you guys arent that much of running nerds. ND would choose the ACC if this is all going to fall in to place like it has...So I don't believe the ACC will add anymore teams until Notre Dame decides to commit and they will add ND and UCONN in a pair and that will be the end of this debate.

I see the future of ACC X-C Men panning out like

1. FSU 2. Syracuse 3. UVA 4. Duke ...and a similar set of teams for women.

How is UNC getting overlooked.

1. FSU 2. UNC 3. Syracuse 4. NCSTATE

Women:

1. FSU 2. DUKE 3. UNC

Yes. A a little bit of an oversight but, SU, FSU and UVA will still trump UNC.

Coaching: Fox, Brahman and Vig.

Watson: a great future, just a little too young for the

other masters. + UNC Head Coach will likely keep the distance program in check.

Pittsburgh's XC program is absolutely atrocious. Even 2 years ago, at least they had a solid 2 or 3 guys to make having the program worthwhile. Now? Looks like they took their only decent distance offering in track, their middle distance runners, and put them on a cross country course. I've seen mid-level d3 schools with a better team than Pitt has assembled now. Pathetic.

ACC'er wrote:

I feel for schools like G'twn, Nova, PC and maybe even ND.

ND? I've never felt sorry for ND. Never. NBC gives them millions of reasons why no one should ever feel sorry for them. Ever.

Pitt is a fully funded program, but seem to be choosing to spend their time and money on hurdlers/sprinters while doing zero for any athlete above 800m. The result has been getting walk-on middle and distance runners that wouldn't even place in the top half of a decent D3 XC conference and that would have a hard time competing in conference meets at even an average D3 school. I saw their 31 men's runner at a recent meet ran the 8K in 27-mid.

The best track/XC programs build their teams around runners who are versatile (800m-10k on track who can also contribute in XC.) Pitt does things the opposite way, and even at that only have a few sprinters/hurdlers who are competetive at the regional/national level. Thus, they are not competetive as a team, and their XC program has become a pseudo-sport.

This coach has to be worried about his job, unless of course like many places, Pitt doesn't care about Olympic sports like track and XC. In that case, 'Zo will be there forever.

RU is horrible they dont even update there website no results and no updated rosters what a joke talent goes there and nobody does anything what a joke!!!!!

Alan513 wrote:

Snipes,

This is VERY on the money. My inclination would be to move it to 16 and I'd also look at non-Catholic, but like-minded universities. For example, I could see Richmond or GW in the mix.

I agree that this is a viable option. I think they'd probably try to add Butler, though.

I also wouldn't be surprised if they kept it to fewer than 16 schools.

STEEL HURTIN' wrote:

Pittsburgh's XC program is absolutely atrocious.

Try to keep it a little civil. Some of those guys might be reading this. The program has taken a few steps back, for sure. They won't improve until there is a coaching change. But Pitt can't fire the head coach because he's the only black head coach in any sport at the school.

Ex-Pitt Runner wrote:

I ran for Pitt XC and Track within the past decade... What has happened to that program is an absolute disaster. All of the coaching staff should be fired for what they've done. Pitt may not have been at the top of the Big East, but they were at least competitive from 2004-2008. Now they are losing meets to no-name schools handily. What an embarrassment.

http://www.goduquesne.com/sports/m-xc/stats/090311aag.html

Having Sam Bair as a Panther doesn't count as being 'competitive.'

I guess there was that Canadian kid, too, but I don't recall him making it to NCAAs.

Maureen McCandless, too - I think she won XC regionals one year.

The guys had a few decent guys after Bair - Lane King, Teddy Miller, Josh Christopher.. and even recently, have done really well with recruiting in PA, pulling in runners like Greg Kareis and Kevin Hull - two high school studs. But their coaching is less than prime and these runners have their talent wasted. It's really a shame.

I was surprised Hull chose Pitt. I think I remember him doubling at states, running 1:53 low and 4:12(?).

I hope he can continue to improve.

noticer of tv contracts wrote:

ND? I've never felt sorry for ND. Never. NBC gives them millions of reasons why no one should ever feel sorry for them. Ever.

Except Indiana has made more money than ND over the last decade because the Big Ten has an equal revenue sharing model.

I doubt that Pitt is a fully funded program and has not been one for years!

Just because the present Head Coach is Pitt's only AA Head Coach does not mean that they could not fire him after he reaches 10 years of service and higher another AA just as they did hiring him after they fired his AAM successor after 20 years of service!?! Possibly Roger Kingdom this time around.

Pitt does not even have a track on campus.

I think they borrow a high school track.