Is CU still considered a top program?

Luv2Run wrote:

Ralphie wrote:

2013 - 1. COLORADO........... 149

2014 - 1. COLORADO............. 65

2015 - 2. Colorado.................. 91

2016 - 6. Colorado................ 223

2017 - 8. Colorado................ 294

So, in the last five years they have had two national championships, a second place finish, and two top tens. If that's not awesome I don't know what is.

I think the OP pointed out that the track results do not compare well with the XC results.

Yeah, the Buffs just never could recover from Ryan "Tweakin'" Deak transferring to George Mason.

C'mon, show me perennial D1 top 10 track program that is the same in xc since 2000. I don't mean a couple years per decade but most years. Certainly Oregon, flush with Nike ca$h and Lananna-style creative financial aid maneuverings, but who else? Arkansas isn't even in the top 3 among SEC programs on the track much of the time now. For all the hype NAU seems to be getting from their distance guys, they won't get a sniff at the team podium in Eugene.

CO Coach wrote:

...but it’s much harder to replicate over the winter in Colorado in preparation for track.

Compared to where?

Still waiting on the answer to the question... when was the last CU had an NCAA All American in something other than an event less than the mile. What about the last AA in a field event?

A while. Probably a long while. What's your point? Everyone here is basically in agreement that they are a good XC school and not a good track school. That's not news.

If you're waiting for someone else who cares to show up, you may as well give up. Clearly the CU AD doesn't even care that much or they'd fund the coaches salaries and facilities better. It takes a long time to build from being underfunded for so long. They're just now getting around to a full allocation of track scholarships as they finish paying off former football coaches. CU's AD exists in a backwater of the Power 5 and are in a decades-long game of catch-up with the rest of the PAC12, never mind the SEC. I'm sure they're just happy that the xc teams compete well nationally and that they graduate athletes on time who don't run afoul of the law. Nobody cries about CU tennis or golf not being better.

critic 100 wrote:

Still waiting on the answer to the question... when was the last CU had an NCAA All American in something other than an event less than the mile. What about the last AA in a field event?

I don't understand the problem with Wetmore having 5-6 all-americans in track every year no matter what the event. 99% of programs would call that a success but it's pretty obvious you're just trying to troll everyone, so it's fine.

critic 100 wrote:

Still waiting on the answer to the question... when was the last CU had an NCAA All American in something other than an event less than the mile. What about the last AA in a field event?

Side note: there was a thrower a couple years ago who was all american on the women's side.

boring, correct answer wrote:

A while. Probably a long while. What's your point? Everyone here is basically in agreement that they are a good XC school and not a good track school. That's not news.

They had a 2x All-American in the 60m on the men's side in the last 5 years.

I'm about as big of a Wetmore backer as there is. And admittedly have this unrealistic view of CU and Boulder from reading Running with the Buffaloes...but I was thinking about this the other day. It does seem that they've 'fallen' off a bit...but then you look at the stats from the last five years in XC and it's like...Have they really fallen off?

I know that the answer is...they run a lot and put in a summer base, etc. But I would really be curious to know the details day to day like we were able to see in Running with the Buffaloes. Such a great XC coach and such a great XC program...

critic 100 wrote:

Still waiting on the answer to the question... when was the last CU had an NCAA All American in something other than an event less than the mile. What about the last AA in a field event?

Here you go:

Have at it. Quite honestly I think you are the only one who cares.

John Utah wrote:

CO Coach wrote:

...but it’s much harder to replicate over the winter in Colorado in preparation for track.

Compared to where?

Stanford, UNM, even Oregon and NAU arguably have better weather for training from December to February than Boulder.

Of course it wasn’t all that long ago when CU had some studs on the track too, guys like Goucher and Culpepper come to mind. You could make the argument that CU has fallen off a bit just comparing their track team to it’s former self.

As others have said, to say that they are not an XC power is absurd, even though the were not at the top the past two years. Track has never been a strong sport there they've had some good teams. CU joined the Pac 12 in 2012 here are their outdoor standings in T&F, looks like they are inching up. The new indoor facilities will help with recruiting. Look for them to be a consistent top 5 performer nationally in XC, upper division in their conference in track. Pac 12 is a pretty tough track conference.

Year - M/W

2012 - 9/7

2013 - 10/10

2014 - 10/10

2015 - 7/8

2016 - 7/6

2017 - 4/3

2018 - 4/5

Yep... thats what I thought. What has it been, 20 years since CU has done anything in the balistic events? Soon Wetmore will abandon the 800m and the mile too as those events are now leaning towards sprinting. And we are all aware of how much he knows about sprinting. He is down to three events and not doing very well in those. Sometimes it is best to let it go and go out on top instead of becoming a chump.

The number of Oly & Out WC medals puts CU Boulder on top as #1 Distance School

Well you were a chump at arguing your point in your first post and you are still a chump at that now - when are you planning to let it go?

What other coach is the United States has coached a female to multiple world/olympic medals in the 1500?