So an undefeated collegiate woman who won an Olympic silver medal isn't the NCAA track AOY - a non Olympian is?

LetsRun.com wrote:

Should non-collegiate action be considered?

No

Absolutely not.

Never

Pointless

Sure it should be considered... But only as a deciding factor when for all practical purposes the decision process comes to a tie. Other than that, maybe it shouldn't count since it isn't reflective of the stated goals of determining the award.

So, what you're saying is that NCAA coaches should consider in awarding the award for NCAA-only competition: Performances in the same Olympic games that an NCAA coach was prohibited by NCAA rules to coach in?

Totally ridiculous.

what about a 7-time NCAA champ and NCAA record holder....

The Bowerman is for NCAA competition and that's it. As I understand it, nothing else is allowed to be considered. If you don't like those rules, you can submit a change for a vote, as was done with the bring back the mile thing.

white girl was robbed.

to those saying duncan was the right choice:

what would a high jumper have to do to win the award?

i don't think it's right to give such a strong preference to athletes who compete in a variety of similar events...

The award was determined n June -- they present it at their major confab in the year -- kind of silly to wait 6 months when they could have presented it at the time of the USATF.

The deadline for submitting ballots was BEFORE the Olympics began, so don't start with the Olympic medal stuff. Also, voters are clearly directed to consider the collegiate season only and to disregard everything that happens after the NCAA outdoor championships.

I'm a voter and given those criteria, I chose Duncan.

Of course she scored more points, she had 4 events in most meets......the HJ girl only had one.

QTPi wrote:

to those saying duncan was the right choice:

what would a high jumper have to do to win the award?

i don't think it's right to give such a strong preference to athletes who compete in a variety of similar events...

That's what I was thinking at first but then I thought this is supposed to like the Heisman - and they have that same type of biases/intrigue.

A defensive player has never won the Heisman. I don't think a lineman has either.

It's hard for a lot of track fans to admit but all events aren't created equally. The 100/200 sprint - those are the QBs of our sport.

Acknowledging the differences in the events is one of the reason Letsrun is actually successful. So many track purists basically treat all events equally.

I thik the bigger question is, "Should post-collegiate competition be considered?"

That's a real tough one. I see why they don't do it as this is a collegiate award. But since track is known on most college campuses as one of the "Olympic sports" it's also easy to justify.

On a lot of campuses, this sport is funded to get theem Sears points or whatever it's called now and then generate some good publicity either with some conference/NCAA wins,sub 4 miles or Olympic births.

coach d wrote:

So, what you're saying is that NCAA coaches should consider in awarding the award for NCAA-only competition: Performances in the same Olympic games that an NCAA coach was prohibited by NCAA rules to coach in?

Totally ridiculous.

What?! That sounds idiotic.

Look at the numbers.

How many girls go out for the 100, 200, and 400 in the NCAAs.

How many girls did Duncan have to beat to get to the top?

How many girls in the NCAA go out for the HJ?

How many could be considered National or World class?

I'd vote for Duncan.

What part of "NCAA Track Athlete of the Year" do you not understand?

No doubt the silver medal is a superior performance. As a 100 meter sprinter you clearly have more events to choose and... it's a silver medal!

That said, the athlete that won the 200 meters and scored more points in the NCAA Championship should be the track athlete of the year.

Tim Tebow won the Heisman, but he did not go #1 in the NFL draft. So one might argue the "Athlete of the Year" was not the best player. It is just the way it goes.

rojo wrote:

[quote]QTPi wrote:

to those saying duncan was the right choice:

what would a high jumper have to do to win the award?

i don't think it's right to give such a strong preference to athletes who compete in a variety of similar events...

That's what I was thinking at first but then I thought this is supposed to like the Heisman - and they have that same type of biases/intrigue.

A defensive player has never won the Heisman. I don't think a lineman has either.

It's hard for a lot of track fans to admit but all events aren't created equally. The 100/200 sprint - those are the QBs of our sport.

Acknowledging the differences in the events is one of the reason Letsrun is actually successful. So many track purists basically treat all events equally.

*****************************************************

Charles Woodson won the Heisman in 1997

A defensive player has never won the Heisman.

Charles Woodson won it as a cornerback in 1997. He also returned punts but was primarily a defensive player.

i'm willing to bet Brigetta Barrett really doesn't care too much. she just won a f%cking silver medal! i'm sure that will be remembered more than the bowerman award....

i'd take an olympic medal over any other athletics award. period

QTPi wrote:

to those saying duncan was the right choice:

what would a high jumper have to do to win the award?

i don't think it's right to give such a strong preference to athletes who compete in a variety of similar events...

This is the most insightful quote. She won 100% of her competitions that senior year and then got the silver. Would they have considered her any more strongly if she had won the gold? Or would she have had to place in a sprint event to get consideration? I can understand rewarding multi-event athletes, but it's a big snub to a field athlete at the top of her game.