BYU Workout Wednesday - Roster Limits, please!!

Cross Country is a great sport, it costs close to $0 to have an extra athlete that doesn't travel. Why not give extra people the chance to train?

Maybe some coaches are just too lazy?

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaa. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.

As a great college coach I know tells kids he has to cut after try outs due to roster limits, "I don't own the track, trails or roads, if you happen to show up after team meeting at the same time and place we are training no one's going to keep your from running except yourself"

knower2 wrote:

As a great college coach I know tells kids he has to cut after try outs due to roster limits, "I don't own the track, trails or roads, if you happen to show up after team meeting at the same time and place we are training no one's going to keep your from running except yourself"

Eyestone doesn't allow that. School still has liability. Unless something has changed in the last several years, he allows non-team members to workout with the team during the open try out period. After that, those that didn't make the cut can train together, separately. He still writes workouts for them.

NAU has had it's share of mercenaries. Right now they have 4 foreigners on the men's side.

Does anybody know why other sports have roster limits?

I don't understand why you'd say this bs, like there's just no good reason at all why these kids who for almost all of them will never run professionally or at this level ever again shouldn't get the chance if they are there and working hard.

It sounds like you're jealous you couldn't run like they can because you weren't good enough

without limits 2 wrote:

Does anybody know why other sports have roster limits?

BYU has just over 30 on the official roster. Do you see a problem with that?

fsdfsdfsdfsdf wrote:

without limits 2 wrote:

Does anybody know why other sports have roster limits?

BYU has just over 30 on the official roster. Do you see a problem with that?

Absolutely. Looks like they've got ineligible runners at official practice...

Somebody count how many are in that video

without limits 2 wrote:

fsdfsdfsdfsdf wrote:

BYU has just over 30 on the official roster. Do you see a problem with that?

Absolutely. Looks like they've got ineligible runners at official practice...

Somebody count how many are in that video

34-35, a few of the guys at the back arnt in BYU shorts though, so looks like 30 on the dot, good bye

Cross Country on the men's side at most schools has roster limits due to Title 9. Most of the guys you saw in that video are probably on a "club" team and not officially members of the team. I didn't go to BYU, but when I ran in college the men's team had tryouts and the roster was trimmed to 10 individuals. A number of other guys ran together on their own, typically doing the same workouts that were posted on the board outside the coaches office. They were then allowed to tryout for the track team again in the winter. BYU has no advantage in that regard (the USAFA probably has the largest roster because cadets are required to do 2 activities each year). BYU's success can mostly be attributed to a history of performing well, athletes who lead clean lives off campus (it's amazing what you can accomplish when you are not drinking or partying), excellent coaching and altitude (think it's a coincidence that 5 of the top 11 teams in Division 1 are all in the mountain region?). BYU's top 7 consists of 5 kids from Utah (4 from one high school) one from AZ and one from CO. I don't see the OPs argument that NAU is doing things better [4 of their top 6 are foreign (2 kiwis, 1 Guatemalan and 1 Sudanese refugee)].

As noted above, Eyestone doesn't let club members train with the team.

If someone wanted to do this alternating 400m workout based on Daniels pacing which paces would they use? (I)nterval for the "on" and (M)arathon for the "off" How long would they run the workout for 5k or 10k training?

Gotta bee wrote:

without limits 2 wrote:

Absolutely. Looks like they've got ineligible runners at official practice...

Somebody count how many are in that video

34-35, a few of the guys at the back arnt in BYU shorts though, so looks like 30 on the dot, good bye

So 34-35....not 30

To answer the original question's intent, yes there's a problem having 30 guys. Basketball plays 5 guys at a time but uses around 10 in a game. The average D1 roster is 16. So, in a sport that needs 5, races 7-8 regularly, 20 should be sufficient. That's nearly 3x competition size. 30 seems excessive. That's double what basketball does.

Those that oppose a roster limit either don't understand the implications or are part of the top-level schools that don't want their competitive advantage disrupted. The NCAA, as it currently stands with no roster limits, creates an environment of bloated squads at the top and very thin rosters at the bottom. By creating roster limits it would distribute the talent further down the line thereby creating a more deep, competitive situation. Plus, to those who claim it would take opportunities away, it won't. What it does is cause kids to not sign with University A and go to University B if they want to run. The actual experience would end up being a richer one, on average, because they wouldn't see the light of day at a BYU type program but would at another local university like, say, Weber State or even Utah Valley down the street. Odds of travelling and seeing scholarship would go up and potentially improvement and overall quality of experience.

Back in the day I competed in this race:

http://www.joelee.co.uk/2000/busa/busa2000.html

Loughborough won the A race (limited to one team per University) and in the simultaneous B race (where there were no limits), placed 1, 2, 4, 6, 9 and 12 (that's 7 full squads, not runners).

I'm not sure if there should be hard roster limits. But, I would really struggle to coach well if I had a team that big (and maybe that's just my problem). I don't think I could give everyone the attention they deserved if I had to coach that many athletes, even with assistants.

I think it would be better to have 15-25 guys and make sure everyone was getting an honest share, intentional training and developing personal relationships. Taking on 40-50 athletes, not being very close with them all (or only the top few guys), having generalized training and "burning through bodies" just doesn't seem fair to anyone.

I think over ~35 guys/gals is too many personally. Just doesn't seem necessary in a sport where 7 makes a full team and only 5 count at the end of the day.

without limits 2 wrote:

What it does is cause kids to not sign with University A and go to University B if they want to run. The actual experience would end up being a richer one, on average, because they wouldn't see the light of day at a BYU type program but would at another local university like, say, Weber State or even Utah Valley down the street. Odds of travelling and seeing scholarship would go up and potentially improvement and overall quality of experience.

If you care about the individual, wouldn't you agree that it's better to be coached by Eyestone than almost anyone else?

You can't really believe that forcing BYU to have a 15 man roster would enrich the sport.

That pretty much sums it up

Didn't anyone else notice Jared Ward in the video?