Syracuse - From Nothing to National Champ - How a Cross Country Powerhouse Was Built From Scratch in 10 Years

LetsRun.com wrote:

We've just published a 6,000 word piece on the rise of Syracuse. Hope you enjoy it.

http://www.letsrun.com/news/2017/09/rise-syracuse-cross-country-powerhouse-built-scratch-10-years/

Why are you guys always touting your word count like it's inherently a good thing? You can cover a subject in great depth in 600 words, and you can write 6,000 words that say nothing.

If I write 12,000 words about the rise of Syracuse, will it be twice as good as your article?

Check the word count of the Gettsyburg Address some time.

this comes down to a matter of focus. scholarships are a zero sum game - whatever syracuse theoretically chooses to invest in an 800/miler type is an investment they can't make in a 5k/10k guy. syracuse has very clearly chosen to put their entire focus on distance with the mantra "do one thing, and do it well". why spread their scholarships across mid distance guys and end up being mediocre at both types of events?

also keep in mind that syracuse is a private school. a quick google search gives a university of colorado in-state annual cost of attendance of 29k, university of oregon and northern arizona 26k, and university of wisconsin 25k. syracuse's all-in annual cost is 63k.

so now think about the recruiting game. a half scholarship to any of the schools above drops the annual cost to 13k for a family - certainly not cheap, but a far better deal than one would find with the equivalent scholarship at syracuse, which would leave a cost of 32k. syracuse HAS to put all their money into distance to be competitive and provide a similar cost of attendance as a kid might get elsewhere - its the only way to compete with the public universities. if i'm a 9:10 guy and getting a half scholarship to a public school, dropping my cost to $13k a year, syracuse has to provide a three-quarter scholarship to get the cost down to the same amount, effectively giving them a 50% disadvantage / 6 scholarship handicap. whether you see this as a plus or minus, fair or unfair, its just a fact. stanford faces the same challenge, but arguably has a more national reach in the recruiting game, has perfect weather, california girls, and is, well, stanford - there's a lot more things they can leverage in the recruiting argument than syracuse can.

so now if you're syracuse, where do you put your scholarships? you almost are forced to go all in on one area of focus. nova and georgetown have historically focused on mid distance, while syracuse has chosen to go distance. those schools have plenty of wooden wheels; syracuse has plenty of conference, regional and national titles. its a matter of choices. btw, hats off to rob conner for having a similar track record of excellence at university of portland, which is also a private school with hefty tuition.

Trialswatcher wrote:

It is not the same model as Nova or Gtown who have Penn and indoor DMR as a big deal, whether folks think it should be or not, alumni do..

Georgetown?? What are you talking about? They haven't been good at Penn relays or really anywhere for quite some time on the men's side.

I don't have the Penn media guide in front of me but a quick look at the online results shows that Georgetown hasn't won a men's 4 x 800, DMR or 4 x mile title at Penn in more than 10 years.

Xcrunner5 wrote:

Hobby Logger wrote:

The secret is one sentence: put all of your scholarship money into distance for 10 years.

That's a sentence fragment, not a sentence.

"Put all of your scholarship money into distance for 10 years." Is one sentence.

easily confused wrote:

Why are you guys always touting your word count like it's inherently a good thing? You can cover a subject in great depth in 600 words, and you can write 6,000 words that say nothing.

Actually, I saw it as a heads-up to let prospective readers know that it would take a while to read the piece...found that somewhat helpful.

y55y wrote:

easily confused wrote:

Why are you guys always touting your word count like it's inherently a good thing? You can cover a subject in great depth in 600 words, and you can write 6,000 words that say nothing.

Actually, I saw it as a heads-up to let prospective readers know that it would take a while to read the piece...found that somewhat helpful.

That's a good point. But I still think the Brojos automatically liken length to quality, at least for LRC productions.

Because the Syracuse piece is by Gault, it's probably a well-constructed 6,000 words. If it were by other LRC writers, I'd take 6,000 words as a logorrhea warning.

King99 -

Don't you owe me $1000?

Gerry McNamara wrote:

Of course, it takes top notch coaches and athletes to win a national championship

It's funny, the article almost makes it sound like Fox and Bell don't know what they're doing with training. They just stumbled upon their hill tempo? And now they just do it whenever "because it makes us better"? Overall the piece was fantastic, but this was a bit of a blunder, journalism-wise.

Just get lucky wrote:

So they run 35-60 miles per week? Or is that just Knight? Either way, someone should give Knight a luckiest boy in North America Award. Some people have to work hard to get where they are.

Running a lot of miles does not equal working hard. The fact you don't understand that is probably why you aren't as good as Knight.

I ran at Syracuse before Fox and Bell. We were pretty bad. We left nothing but EMPTY LOCKERS. Needless to say, the alumni are very happy with Fox and Bell. Program is night and day. Ironically, the sprinters are better now than in the "non-distance" years at Syracuse. I think it's important to note how important the culture change is from Fox and Bell. They've been able to keep the athletes disciplined at a pretty rowdy party school. Fox and Bell have also been nothing but cordial to alums. They respond to emails and spend quite a bit of time talking at meets.

Good points about recruiting and money towards the program being key.

Chris Fox is a great competitor and knows how and when to get his kids ready. I'm guessing that competitive drive carries over into his recruiting - finding those diamonds-in-the-rough.

I had the highest regard for Chris when I ran against him. He was ALWAYS tough.

Chris, I still remember your name on the dorm room door, but, after all of that, I guess you couldn't get the release to run with us when you transferred. Too bad, that would have been fun.

jewbacca wrote:

It's funny, the article almost makes it sound like Fox and Bell don't know what they're doing with training. They just stumbled upon their hill tempo? And now they just do it whenever "because it makes us better"? Overall the piece was fantastic, but this was a bit of a blunder, journalism-wise.

WTF, that whole paragraph you're referring to was a direct quote. How is that a blunder? Your a blunder.

Just get lucky wrote:

So they run 35-60 miles per week? Or is that just Knight? Either way, someone should give Knight a luckiest boy in North America Award. Some people have to work hard to get where they are.

He's at least, 21 - not a boy, but a man, and a great all-around man, too.

Jerk!

get ugly wrote:

jewbacca wrote:

It's funny, the article almost makes it sound like Fox and Bell don't know what they're doing with training. They just stumbled upon their hill tempo? And now they just do it whenever "because it makes us better"? Overall the piece was fantastic, but this was a bit of a blunder, journalism-wise.

WTF, that whole paragraph you're referring to was a direct quote. How is that a blunder? Your a blunder.

Ironic.

If the interviewer couldn't uncover more about training than "Oh we just stumbled our way into what we do," then that's a disappointment and I don't buy it. One of the brojos compared the article to a condensed RWTB, but in RWTB the training program is clear.

This is Chris MF Fox we're talking about.

I can't stand the stupid orange. I can't root for them. They took the import route. No respect.

kwallcuse wrote:

This was a really well done piece. As a runner on teams at SU in the 90s, the thought of the program winning a Big East title seemed like a pipe dream. Our group believed that the program had potential because of the distance running talent in the Northeast, but it was hard to imagine people not going to PC/Nova/Gtown if given the option.

It's not just about having the scholarships to offer, it's convincing talent to take a chance on a program that didn't have recent history. The earlier guys took a bit of a chance to come to the Cuse and trust what was being built. It was nice to see them acknowledged as their work paved the way for that title team.

It's interesting that the article mentions Jay Kolosseus from the 1st recruiting class in 2006 and Steve Murdock from the 2nd in 2007 who were the 1st 2 footlocker finalists to attend Syracuse. They also happened to be 2 of the largest underperformers from the "early years". From 2006 to 2008 the team was still riddled with talented runners who arguably achieved more success than Pat DuPont and Tito Medrano and ran the fastest times until Hehir and Knight but none of them are mentioned.

These were the runners that really paved the way for Syracuse's success that took a chance on a program with nothing but scholarship money and promises. (in no particular order)

Kyle Heath (class of '04 predating fox and bell)

Jeff Scull ('06 transfer from Colo State)

Brad Miller ('06)

Dan Busby ('06)

The class of 2008 that was heavily quoted in the article was already coming into a team with established performing runners. It makes me wonder why the author chose to start the emergence in 2008 quoting runners instead of 2006. My guess is because several of the '08 guys are still involved in the running community and easier contact while the '06 guys have faded into obscurity.

2009 was the true breakout year for Syracuse with the team winning big east and regionals and finished 14th at nationals and it wouldn't have been possible without the class of 2006 who at this time were seniors and 3 of the top 7 and usually 3 of the top 5.

-i was on the team

None of this seems like important information that needs clarification.

Please.....This is so boring. Seriously, school team competetions in xc ?

In the rest of the (real) world, something you are forced to do in grade 3 once a year with your non-athletic classmates.