Yikes, could you imagine, he would have won the thing, Colorado guys would have had a team score of like 60 or so points, he would have had two individual titles and two team titles in his three years.
He must have really wanted to leave.
Yikes, could you imagine, he would have won the thing, Colorado guys would have had a team score of like 60 or so points, he would have had two individual titles and two team titles in his three years.
He must have really wanted to leave.
He has bigger and better things to do than win NCAA titles, team or individual. Not to mention, he gets paid a lot more money doing what he is now....
Uh, I think Colorado just proved that they can win Nationals without him. So what would the point be?
NCAA title is an honor, you'll have it with you the rest of your life.
It's too bad he left but they obviously didn't need him to win. Colorado is great without the Ritz!
It is an honor but isn't the honor diluted a bit when the better competition leaves before their eligibility is up?
index puppy wrote:
NCAA title is an honor, you'll have it with you the rest of your life.
And so he will.
X Runner wrote:
It is an honor but isn't the honor diluted a bit when the better competition leaves before their eligibility is up?
only in the minds of the perpetually cynical letsrun poster.
is it diluted when a top athlete is injured or not at their best (see cragg last year)? or when a top competitor decides to red-shirt (see bob kennedy)? who's to say that any of the results would have changed? and how are any of these things different from any other year? i don't think anyone could legitimately say cragg's wins in track were any less impressive because ritz was hurt. we're not talking about a bekele-esque athlete leaving, someone who is clearly dominant; we're talking about a guy who won last year by a second.
I absolutely agree with you. You always have "what if's" that could change the outcome.
But if a trend of top athletes leaving early comes about then you would eventually have inferior champions (is that an oxymoron?).
The quality of college basketball has lessoned since the good guys never stay more than 2 years. Not that cross country compares.
Ritz could stick around and win little league trophies or get whipped by the big boys but play at a higher level. It depends on what's more important to him.
i think if the trend becomes ridiculous, maybe, but ritz is the only one who would affect an xc outcome. and i don't see this trend becoming particularly prevalent. and i personally think that if american athletes begin to leave early, you're just going to see more foreign athletes take their place. i don't really see the quality being diminished very much unless a whole bunch of the top athletes leave. and that's rather unlikely.
CFitz wrote:
Uh, I think Colorado just proved that they can win Nationals without him. So what would the point be?
I think the original poster's point was that Colorado would have had a really low score "like 60". I think he was just speaking out loud, but way to get pissed pussy.
Ritz will be out and about in the spring, chasing the American 10K record... you can talk with him then, see what his thought process was.
i don't think one needs to talk to him much about the thought process. went something like: "...wait, how much money did you just say? where do i sign?"
It wouldn't have been nearly as much of an upset if they had Ritz on their team still.