UCONN XC/Track

Dr. Blackjack wrote:

Coach Roy shares a philosophy that quite a few NCAA coaches have; take all of you're athletes, run them through the grinding mill by pounding the hell out of them every day in practice, and hope to see 7 bodies left standing by the end of the season.

You are insane and obviously know nothing about the program. I knew guys on the team that were distant runners and were running 70 miles a week during cross. I know girl teams that run that much... what would you call a girls team that runs that much? Dr. Blackjack you are an idiot and you have now made us all dumber for posting on here.

Dr. Blackjack:

Stick to hitekracing messageboards and other CT fun run events. Stop judging DI programs when the best you can do is run local fun runs.

Dr. Blackjack,

I think you and I have known quite a few athletes that have been chewed up by this program and others that have made it through. You are spot on in your assessment. As I said earlier, and you apparently agree, this philosophy is not unique to UConn. It is prevalent throughout the US. it is one of the major reasons we have zero depth in events 800 and over in this counttry. Coaches recruit to score points and score them now. They don't have teams of 50-60 athletes or even 25 at most schools. There are no "development projects" or letting a kid walk on and train with the team. One look at US depth in 1980 compared to 2004 willl show the effect that this has had. Coaches that don't give a damn about their athletes on a personal level only magnify the problem.

To the 4:16 miler. Did you have an appointment? What did you say? Cause your negative ‘tude comes over loud and clear here. Your time just isn’t that great to expect the red carpet treatment. I love it when high school seniors are sure that they are such a hot commodity. I can picture you telling coach Roy that you need at least a half scholarship to go there. I’d show you the door too. The people who succeed in college are those that still feel they have something to prove. You obviously have made it to the top.

At Uconn money goes to someone who can make an immediate impact on the Big East or IC4A level. You can’t. Get back to them when you have something to offer or go to a school that specializes in distance and doesn’t have a lot to choose from.

The Chad Johnson issue. To say that in front of a coach is inexcusable. He had to be looking for a fight to do that. It is one thing to advise against a school or tell someone why the program wasn’t right for you. To do it in front of a coach is a direct insult.

And again with the Ahmed Haji. He was never going to go to UConn and it was well known.

special red carpet treatment haha this is funny

i went there just wanting to find more about the program...

maybe meet a few guys on the team? i got there and coach roy asked if i had any questions.. i asked one or two.. and that's the visit..

i think if coach roy had the better "attitude" you'd have a better distance program...

guy, why would he roll out even the blue carpet for a 4:16 1500 runner?

You'd be solid on their girls squad though.

Have you looked at UConn's results? A 4:16 miler would be one of their top runners for that distance.

You act like UConn's distance program is like Colorado or Stanford or something. Not the case.

they had a good crew with Wilson, Jensen, etc

\"if you are basing your school choice on money, then yes. go to quinnipiac, tufts, dartmoth or another less competitive school\"

ummmm quinnipiac, tufts and dartmouth are LESS competitive?

New england XC 2004

5. Quinnipiac

6. Tufts

7. Dartmouth 'B'

14. Uconn

ah... no.

dean moriarty wrote:

Have you looked at UConn's results? A 4:16 miler would be one of their top runners for that distance.

yeah right. just a few years ago they went 1-2 in the big east 1500, won the dmr at penn with a 2:51 1200 and a 3:59 mile. a 4:16 miler in that race would still be out running that race.

The coach at UConn must have not helped one of the athletes there, an 800 guy that was in my conference in HS. He ran 1:56 in HS and ended up with a 1:57 indoors last year and then a 1:58 outdoors, that doesn't seem like the kind of improvement I would want.

Just a few years ago the mets were in the world series.

what happened to david higgs? he dropped a 1:54 on uconn a year ago, ran a 1:58 in high school. but didnt run last year or xc this year.

nobody is gonna argue how great uconn xc is. in fact it is just average, 5-7th in the big east in most years, and this year they ran one senior one soph and 3 frosh in their top 5. the main focus for many years has been a complete track team (with roster and scholarsip limitations giving a half scholarship to a 416 guy just isnt the right play). and those schools cant even touch uconn in that respect. so i think the previous poster was talking about uconns dominance amongst new england schools regarding track and field.

and to the guy who said uri is better than uconn in track, i can only laugh at that. good program, but not on the same level. i couldn't even believe that somebody wrote that, i figured it was a joke, so if it is than disregard that last comment.

Hm. One year defines a program? What have they done in the post-Wilson era from the mile up?

Ray, thanks for your support. And to "hometown", you don't know what you're talking about. I didn't know you set the standard for who can comment on NCAA Division I programs and who can't. Fun Run? Not sure what that means. There are other aspects to training distance runners than mileage. I never said Roy preaches high mileage. And I'm not some angry recruit whining because Coach Roy didn't stroke me for running 4:30 in high school. Just my analysis: for every improved runner at UConn there are a half dozen wrecked. And we shouldn't talk like UConn is an XC powerhouse; they are far from it. While they have built an admiral track program and a strong core of middle distance runners, their XC team is no national power. They would very much need a 4:16 high school miler. There are plenty of runners out there who are loyal to Coach Roy and support his methods 100%, and then there are plenty more who can't stand him. I am in neither category.

so dean, if one year doesnt define a program than how do 2 years define a program. i guess with a second year magical things happen.

We keep talking apples and oranges. UConn has an OK cross country program but distance runners are just one cog in a machine that is seeking success in two more seasons, winter and spring.

They don't need a 4:16 miler as much as some people think they do because that runner may never get them points they need at the level they are aiming toward. So no money.

But if the runner is durable and committed and they like the school, by all means attend. Then you get a chance to run at a school where basketball is more important than football. Oops, did I say that.

This argument is one that comes up time and time again with programs like UCONN which care about winning in track & field, first and foremost. Because UCONN is in the Big East, a strong distance conference, it would make no sense to throw a lot of money into the distance events. Therefore, there are a lot of good solid HS distance kids who aren't going to be getting stroked by UCONN in the recruiting process. These same kids are geeting lots of recruiting attention from other programs which might have a better XC/distance program than UCONN. They think to themselves, "University X kicks UCONN's ass in XC and they want me, but UCONN hardly pays attention to me." UCONN isn't paying attention to you because they know it is going to cost $$$ to get you and you are not going to help them win the Big East in track. I've seen this scenario time and time again at the good track programs.

SOME of you don't understand that there is a limit of 12.6 TOTAL scholarships for men's XC/track combined. If you are trying to have a balanced track & field team (outdoors - 18 individual events + multi + relays) you are going to put the money, time and effort into the areas that are going to score you points. At some schools it makes sense to build your team around the middle distance / distance events. UCONN isn't one of those places.

Another great example of this is at the University of Tennessee. They have had an outstanding track & field program. They've beaten Arkansas at the SEC meet (a rare and tough feat to accomplish) and they have won NCAA titles. However, they don't put a ton of money into XC and distance. Their head coach wants to put emphasis on other events. However, their distance / xc coach, George Watts, is a very good coach. His athletes seem to do a very good job of developing. Look how many post collegians still train under him. His 800 meter post collegiate group is outstanding! However, you still hear people complain that UT should be so much better in XC!

There are a number of programs at the top of the NCAA standings at the national track & field meets (indoors and outdoors) who don't field strong cross country teams. And, there are very good cross country teams that don't do squat in track and field (Colorado).

Just ramblin'.