Michigan cross country is a disappointment there is no way around it. It has never performed to what it should be with their resources. I wish my school nothing but the best, however, I fear Michigan will never be dominate in XC or even thinking about a top 3 finish.
Michigan Man wrote:
Michigan cross country is a disappointment there is no way around it. It has never performed to what it should be with their resources. I wish my school nothing but the best, however, I fear Michigan will never be dominate in XC or even thinking about a top 3 finish.
Cut the crap. You've already made it clear that you are not a Michigan Man.
He won't give up. Michigan won the Big 10 last year and they did it with fewer top recruits than Wisconsin. They appear to be a strong sustainable program for both men and women. Maybe they aren't winning nationals, but they will probably be there most years.
So success is now just making it to Nationals? How come the football team is held to such a higher standard then XC. XC can be mediocre, but football has to be in contention for the playoffs to even remotely have a good season?
The Starved Elephant wrote:
Michigan Man wrote:
Michigan cross country is a disappointment there is no way around it. It has never performed to what it should be with their resources. I wish my school nothing but the best, however, I fear Michigan will never be dominate in XC or even thinking about a top 3 finish.
Cut the crap. You've already made it clear that you are not a Michigan Man.
Starved Elephant:
PLEASE, we all know you never attended Michigan. Wal-Mart Wolverine, go home
I wish Rojo would come to this thread and shed some light to the subject
DIPSH$T ALRET wrote:
Eat a fat one you over grown primate
After you little fella;)
Yes. XC is different than football. You have schools like Furman and NAU who pour their money into distance while Michigan balances their scholarships with the other events. Making it to nationals in XC for the Power 5 schools is success. Football has a much smaller pool of potential national qualifying teams if you want to use the same terminology. Many of the top XC schools don’t even have a football team.
Michiganian33 wrote:
DIPSH$T ALRET wrote:
Eat a fat one you over grown primate
After you little fella;)
Lets fight. Michigan is trash
Predictor wrote:
Yes. XC is different than football. You have schools like Furman and NAU who pour their money into distance while Michigan balances their scholarships with the other events. Making it to nationals in XC for the Power 5 schools is success. Football has a much smaller pool of potential national qualifying teams if you want to use the same terminology. Many of the top XC schools don’t even have a football team.
If you wanna look at it this way, only five power 5 schools beat U-M at nationals. Three of those schools were Oregon, Stanford, and Colorado.