Why is Clemson distance atrocious?

...top notch facilities and good academics

Bluntly speaking, the south sucks for distance running. It's a hot and humid hellhole for half the year.

Yea but seriously. NCSU, Georgia, UVA, VT, etc all have basically the same weather and they're good programs.

It is a state school....so look at the prep distance running in that state. that will be the majority of your answer. To overcome that it would require extra scholarship resources for out of state athletes. since so many schools have abandoned track and field and gone "mostly distance" it is not the best way to win with what are in fact track and field scholarships (there is no such thing as a cross country scholarship.) Clemson appears to play to their strengths of 800 down.

Note also that they have had women's DMRs at indoor NCAAs, so they must be doing something right.

once the ncaa moves cross country to 8k for both genders (so the 10k people can stop crying it is too far and too often), and the sport of xc gets their OWN scholarship pool, then you can compare apples to apples. furman and clemson are basically in 2 totally different "sports" due to their scholarship philosophy. It is contributing to the death of our sport.

Imagine if the basketball team said they were ONLY recruiting 7 ft. centers......yet in our sport you are praised for such decisions. And you are seen as "good" or "bad" coaches without any consideration for the scholarships invested in the discipline.

Seyta wrote:

Bluntly speaking, the south sucks for distance running. It's a hot and humid hellhole for half the year.

Lived in the south for a few years, Georgia to be exact and Athens to be precise. Yes, June, July, and August can be pretty hot but it never stopped me from training. It's more about the people willing to do the work and adapt to the weather.

Oh, and Dean Matthews did pretty well as a Clemson Alum.

username69 wrote:

They have plenty of funding and name/brand recognition brought in by their football team.

Because first, foremost, and last, and all points in between it is FOOTBALL that is given all the attention. The baseball team is almost always very good, basketball, meh, golf is often decent but while going there (not as a runner but that is another untold story) I never experienced any Tiger fervor about t&f or x/c.

Their coach prefers coaching mid-D guys and girls. Pretty simple.

What? They have a coach like every other program. What other attention do schools pay to xc? A good football team is a draw for students, not a detriment. They put their scholarships in sprints.

I think they haze and inflict acutely severe wedgies on each other from which they never recover.

Gonna try to spark some more attention to this forum now that the season is over. Tigers post a 14/15 performance at ACC Championships and finish 10+ spots lower at regionals from the previous year. They also only had 8 guys post times all season.

I heard the coach there is a complete buffoon who can't land a male recruit to save his life and makes being on the team so unenjoyable that nearly everyone quits.

It's a real shame because a school like Clemson should be able to ride the momentum of the football team and at least be DECENT in every sport. They have the brand and popularity to do it.

Well... lets take a look.

Great football program, great men's and women's track teams, great volleyball, great soccer, great baseball, softball.

18 teams were tanked in the top 25. 13 went post season play.

Sounds like they can let one sport slip through the cracks... or would you rather support a "one trick pony" athletic program like Colorado boulder?

Seyta wrote:

Bluntly speaking, the south sucks for distance running. It's a hot and humid hellhole for half the year.

Furman is

I agree that Clemson should be able to have a decent distance program jus due to the reasonable cost for in state students. The SE US colleges seem to have that problem though as compared to the B10 conference. I don’t know what happens to all of the 9:20 HS guys who should walk on to their state school whether it is in NC, SC, GA, FL, LA, AL, etc, but they all have the same problems with their distance programs.

Way many more Midwest 9:20 than SE 9:20 guys.

Midwest grow up dreaming of Big 10 schools (usually in their state).

Can't explain why Ohio State sucks so bad at cross country even with just walk-ons though.

Could one or two solid male runners help turn this program around if they got a decent coach? I'm looking at them right now. I just threw down a 16:10 xc5K so I'm assuming I'll whip out a 4:35 and 9:40 as a junior. I would love to go to Clemson. I don't mind being the top kid initially but hopefully if they get a better coach they could get more better runners in and we could so something before I'd graduate.

Have a look at the acc mens results. Boston college, Pittsburg, Clemson, Miami. All great football programs. This means nothing. Zero distance scholarships for any of these schools. Recruits must decide between having a scholarship or a chance for a scholarship if they improve vs nothing.

yahkov3 wrote:

Gonna try to spark some more attention to this forum now that the season is over. Tigers post a 14/15 performance at ACC Championships and finish 10+ spots lower at regionals from the previous year. They also only had 8 guys post times all season.

I heard the coach there is a complete buffoon who can't land a male recruit to save his life and makes being on the team so unenjoyable that nearly everyone quits.

It's a real shame because a school like Clemson should be able to ride the momentum of the football team and at least be DECENT in every sport. They have the brand and popularity to do it.

ACC is incredibly overrated, especially in distance running.

How about the fact that these do not care for cross country. How to solve this problem... don't go to school there if you are a cross country runner.

Tell me more about the coach. Idiot, misunderstood, unlucky or something else?