Guelph men lose Canadian XC collegaite champs for first time in over a decade

CaptainLife wrote:

Ok, we can throw one or two names out there, but that doesn't mean that their experience is entirely representative of the Guelph experience. Plus you might end up eating your words in a couple years...

And people talk about this burnout/chewed up and spat out metaphor as if it happens more than it should at Guelph just because they finished a close second at Canadian nationals instead of destroying everyone this year. It doesn't happen THAT much, and even if it did, why is it unusual? Have you ever heard of Wisconsin?

Saying these things takes away from the credit the Vikes deserve. Congrats to them on a great race!

Dang, another person who did not actually read what I posted.

I did not claim that Guelph is the only program to ever have a contingent of relatively good athletes who never make it out the other side. I believe my exact words from my initial post were "Like every high caliber program," so maybe try being a bit smarter about following the thread before trying to get smart with me.

The point was this: historically, many HS kids have chosen Guelph despite the real possibility that they may never make the champs squad because they believe the program will allow them to flourish. Doesn't matter if they did or not or whether that was the program's fault, I am just explaining the rationale of a recruit.

Props to the Vikes for winning, they very much deserved it. More teams being competitive is better for the CIS, hope this trend continues.

Guelph and Victoria are fine teams. They are very competitive compared to Yankee schools. But they would not win ncaa division I when you see that Guelph did not beat penn at the Princeton invite. Victoria ran at the Charles Bowles invite and ran a 25:00 team average compared to Spokane community colleges 25:50 and change. That course is very fast. I highly respect Spokane like Victoria and Guelph but all three absolutely are not winning the ncaa championships. Furthermore Victoria's ladies lost to nw Christian, a nice naia team that will not beat their cross the street Oregon Ducks. Guelph competes well but Michigan and Michigan state women even grand valley state holds their own in many track meets against each other. Eastern Michigan's men's team would beat Guelph and they are not even going to nationals.

Again, no disrespect to the vikes or gryphons.

Most people would have ranked them 4-6th going in. They lost to both Windsor and TWU (Twice) going in. Nobody had them anywhere near one. And there 5th guy is a 8:13 3k guy and 6th guy is 14:26 5k guy. It was the rise of there 3rd and 4th scorer that was the real surprise. Even there 1 and 2 had been having sub par seasons going into CIS.

vikesforreal wrote:

Erik Jillis wrote:

The team is better suited for men/boys.

The coaches don't quite "get" (understand) women.

They need a high level female coach.

Agree with the first two.

There are male coaches who do a great job developing female athletes.

maybe they meant a coach of high level females, not necessarily a coach that is personally a female.

girl-uelph wrote:

To state Guelph would have won NCAAs is a bit much. I have watched them for the past decade-plus and this is the weakest team they have had. I would say, however, about 2 years ago they were extraordinary and likely would have medalled at NCAAs

As a Canadian, I think, in general, that the CIS is comparable to NCAA D3, though I'm willing to be corrected on that. I hadn't followed the CIS in a few years, so I looked up the Guelph team from 2013. They went 1-2-4-7-8, winning with 22 points by more than 60 points over a couple of other very good teams. On the team were:

Aaron Hendrikx

Tristan Woodfine

Andrew Nixon

Ross Proudfoot

Yves Sikubwabo

Granted, outdoor track isn't really a thing for Canadian university guys, who do cross country and indoor track, but Hendrikx and Woodfine are 28-high 10k guys, Nixon and Proudfoot ran 13:55 and 13:58 that year, and Sikubwabo is another 14-low guy.

The third-place team at NCAA that year was Oklahoma State, but they were a favourite that underperformed, so let's just use the fourth-place team, which is BYU. They ran Tylor Thatcher, Jared Ward, Jonathan Nelson, Jason Witt, and Spencer Gardner. Thatcher's lifetime PBs are 13:45 and 28:53 from that spring. Ward has since run 2:12, but his PBs at the time were 13:37 and 28:36. Nelon's ran a 14:16 the spring after the championships. Witt has since run 27:54, but ran 13:52 the spring after the championships. From what I can see, Gardner was a 14-low-mid guy at the time.

Obviously, track PBs don't tell you who is the better runner and I think American guys are more likely to have faster track PBs, but I actually started writing this post to show that while Guelph is good, the Guelph team of 2013 couldn't have medaled at NCAA. It's impossible to say how that Guelph team would have performed at the NCAA Championships, but if that had been their focus all season, they certainly had the calibre of athlete needed to medal. Of course, that was an exceptional team, but I think the Guelph teams of the past decade would probably not have been embarrassed at the NCAA Championships.

Whoa, slow down cowboy. YOU are the one that didn't read MY post.

The first half of my post had nothing to do with you, but rather someone who thought they could reach a conclusion about Guelph by referring to two people

As for the second half of the post, contrary to what you think I never refer to you or your posts individually. By starting with the phrase"And people talk about this...", I am referring to ANYONE who either directly (as in your case multiple times) or indirectly uses this burnout/ chewed up and spat out metaphor as an inappropriate exxageration of the Guelph program, because now that they didn't win a championship it gives them a platform to do so. No one is claiming you said Guelph was the only school; in fact, I agreed with you that they weren't the only one when I said it wasn't "unusual" and referred to Wisconsin as an example. I assume the reason why you're confused is because I quoted your post on my own, and you immediately assumed I misinterpreted it because someone did before and you're looking out for it again. You have absolutely no reason to get mad. Cheers.

Good post, and I mostly agree. But using times after college isn't always fair, So if you do that, please note Proudfoot ran 13:28 this year, and was their 4th counter in 2013. They were a solid team, so I think a medal was possible.

would not send my daughter to Guelph.

XCC wrote:

Most people would have ranked them 4-6th going in. They lost to both Windsor and TWU (Twice) going in. Nobody had them anywhere near one. And there 5th guy is a 8:13 3k guy and 6th guy is 14:26 5k guy. It was the rise of there 3rd and 4th scorer that was the real surprise. Even there 1 and 2 had been having sub par seasons going into CIS.

5th guy fell was pushed down at the start, got a concussion and still pulled through. 3rd guy had knee injury 3 weeks prior and pool rain until the day before the race. 2nd guy "quit" running for 6 months prior, showed up mid September unfit when he decided to try one more time.