Over the last year: Ducks 15 titles, Buffs 2...

Oregon is very much more a track team overall than a cross country team. It's been that way for a long time. Notice that in terms of athletes Oregon has predominantly athletes who can win individual events, while Colorado has a bunch of guys who can run together as a team for cross, but don't have the huge breakaway guys for individual track events. Colorado also doesn't have a heavy sprinting/throwing/field event recruitment philosophy. Colorado is a big Cross Country team, with less of an emphasis on track. The inverse goes for Oregon.

I think the last thread is definitely pretty obvious. Oregon fans would agree. I think. I can see their attitude may stem partially from continuous knocking of their cross country program. The focus on not living up to the expectations of others. I agree that Oregon has possibly been more successful in training cross country and track individual champions than cross country team champions but if you research the entire history of the sport of NCAA cross country up thru Saturday, not just ancient history, you will find Wisconsin and Oregon are the top 2 performing schools in the history of NCAA cross country.

Oregon's supposed "slump" recently has still seen them take a fifth and 2 sixth's in the last 5 years and qualify 4 of those years. That's not bad for being in a "down" spell. Plus look at what they did immediately prior to that. Two championships (2007,2008) sandwiched in between a runner-up and a 5th.

Yes, it's a great track program, but it's also a great cross country program. One of the top 2 ever. And not just back in the day. Look at the results from 2006 to present. Other than Colorado, Wisconsin and Ok. St., not many (any?) schools can match that record from 2006 to 2013. And other than Wisconsin, no one can match their record in the entire history of the meet.

Having said all that GO BADGERS!!

lol you Oregon fanboys are really embarrassing yourselfs

my 2 cents: Ed Ches did indeed run away from the field w/ no competition. like, Goucher, Ritz, Hall, Solinsky, Rupp, Torres, etc. would have all chased him down and at least fought for 1st. how come no one did it in this year's race??? is he really just that fast?

I count 37 individual indoor and outdoor track titles since 2006 by LSU.

Whining is boring and I hope it's just trolls.

The "Stanford would have won if not for Rosa's injury" whining detract from what was an AMAZING race day performance by the runners.

The "Oregon is better than Colorado" whining takes away from two great individual performances.

The clock doesn't lie. The results are the results. Colorado is the best XC team, Oregon has had an amazing run lately, Stanford put together a great race-day performance. All of those things are true and all of the "yeah, but" whining just detracts from the great performances.

You don't know much about XC then. Getting 5-6 individuals all to perform at or near their best on the same day is a much tougher feat to pull off.

The Donger wrote:

Team titles are fun. Like all team sports you don't need to be the best and still feel like a winner. But the goal in this sport is to be the fastest runner on the day. That is the individual title.

It is harder to win the individual title than a team championship.

Why do we go there is correct. The NCAA cross country race is exceedingly difficult.

I have a different take. Oregon's 1-2 individual performance was fantastic. So was Colorado's race, getting that many All American runners through the finish.

The fact that Oregon finished 6th with essentially 3 scorers shows just how difficult and competitive NCAA cross country happens to be.

The most interesting thing about this race is that it went out slow, the last thing anyone with years of experience watching the race would expect.

The give and take as between Oregon and Colorado is useless, They are different schools, with different objectives. And I am not sure Oregon's supposed academic mediocrity matters, One can obtain an excellent education there, if they apply themselves. That is all that matters, i.e., making the most of the resources wherever you attend (although there are schools with awful graduation rates which perhaps should be avoided).

fact checker wrote:

Why not both? wrote:

Wetmore has also created individual champions, but not like Powell has.

Powell coached Centro, Fleet, and Ches.

Wetmore has coached Goucher, Torres, Ritz, K Goucher, Simpson, Coburn, Kipp.

Powell also coached Greer.

Powell has coached 3 individuals to 9 NCAA individual championships over the span of the last 3 years. No Duck would ever knock Coach Wetmore, but if you're a HS stud looking to win a mid/distrance individual championship, who you gonna call?

Wetmore factor? wrote:

colorado has only 2 national titles over the last year with so much depth? How can that be?

They have so much depth but not many titles.. just 2 for XC. no individual titles.

king ches alone has more, like 5 tiles in the same time frame. and that is just one person.

Ducks over the last year:

King ches = 5 (XC, indoor, outdoor)

devon allen hurdles

sam crouser javelin

Ducks mens team title outdoor

laura roesler 800 outdoor & indoor

mac fleet 1500

men team indoors

women indoors

phyliss francis 400

women indoor 4*400

that's like 15 titles... what is the wetmore factor? because these results appear to point to an Andy Powell factor...

Does any team have more titles than oregon over the last year? or couple years?

Seriously, the way you Americans go on about college sports as if it counts for anything, is laughable. Get over yourselves for fvcks sake

CU beats Oregon by 124 if CU has to score 6 men and UO has to score 5...they couldn't have even won with a handicap.

They're different sports with different championships, plain and simple. CU's xc success is attributed to Wetmore, whereas UO's track success is attributed to multiple coaches, not just Powell. I believe this settles both arguments here.

I'm sobbing just reading about Oregon's terrible recruiting problems, only getting a couple studs every year and then losing all its scholarships to sprints and jumps. Here are just a few of the other guys on or should be on their squad, aside from Jenkins (13:18 before Oregon), Verzbicas (3:59/8:29 in high school, but they let him get away) and Cheserek (incredibly dominant against non-Verzbicas opponents in hs, after already winning a Kenyan national xc championship before starting NJ hs):

Haney 3:44/4:02 mile/8:46 2M

Pepiot, 3:46, 8:06 3k, 8:33 steeple in 2012 prior to uo, 30:58 at oregon in 2013

Prakel 3:46/9:16

Elkaim 4:12/8:46

Leingang 8:51/14:11 5k track

Melancon 4:01 1500m/8:30 3k

Watson 1:52/3:50/8:45 3k

Winn, 3:58/8:33 3k. Has run 3:42 at Oregon

That's just some of the reservoir of talent they had to back up their 3 pts from their top two guys. And they scored another 218 or so??

And here are a bunch of the Buffaloes:

Colorado

Hurysz 1:52/4:06 mile/8:49

Peterman 1:58/4:17/8:57 3200m

Theroux 1:55/4:14/9:13

Saarel 4:02 mile/8:45 3200m

Murphy 2:00/4:29/9:14/16:26

Moussa 1:53/4:10/8:49

Barchet 4:09/9:03

Dowdy 1:56/4:15/9:39

Emmert 1:55/4:32

Not nearly the level of miling talent here as on Oregon, except for Saarel, but a solid group of 2 milers with three close to 8:50 or under. Oregon has four guys at 8:51 or under, PLUS Cheserek and Jenkins (just considering that he ran 13:18 prior to Oregon, not his hs times). And Oregon had three or four guys at 3:50 or below in the 1500m, plus Cheserek. So, no reason to say that Colorado should have had better depth.

What you just showed is that Colorado gets their share of A1 recruits too. Oregon doesn't corner the market on them.

10/10. All he pointed out was what the Oregon people have been saying...Colorado loads up on Cross Country runners. And all the Oregon people have been saying is that they had 4 guys who ran well enough to get the team on the podium with just a good day from a 5th runner. As it turned out, their 5-7 guys did not have good enough races to vault Oregon to the podium. Nothing wrong with 6th place, especially when paired with their women's team that also got 6th. I don't believe any combined men's/women's teams did as well as Oregon, did they? So the haters can knock off the bullcrap.

Duck Men and Women Did Well wrote:

10/10. All he pointed out was what the Oregon people have been saying...Colorado loads up on Cross Country runners. And all the Oregon people have been saying is that they had 4 guys who ran well enough to get the team on the podium with just a good day from a 5th runner. As it turned out, their 5-7 guys did not have good enough races to vault Oregon to the podium. Nothing wrong with 6th place, especially when paired with their women's team that also got 6th. I don't believe any combined men's/women's teams did as well as Oregon, did they? So the haters can knock off the bullcrap.

No biggie, but Colorado women came in right after the Ducks in 7th, so they had a better combined day also.

Oregon is just a better running school...

if CU wants to be the best running school they need multiple individual and team titles, like Oregon. it's just no match for dem ducks.

indoor / outdoor track season will garner no titles for CU either. the current CU group are like japanese runners. stuck in the group... but can't make it happen when it matters individually.

No, no Cu runners for the bowerman this year.

How about Oregon?

Oregon = the king & larua roesler

count so far = Oregon 2, CU 1

in one month it will be Oregon 3 (or 4), CU 1

This is because CU is one dimensional in running and limited

recruiting talent being equal: why doesn't Colorado have more titles? I still think Andy Powell is a very underrated coach because his results are amazing the last 3 - 4 in particular..

Whoever said LSU titles trump all... you are right! How is their cross team?