2019 D3 Atlantic Region XC

Get real 09 wrote:

This is a terrible troll job. Obviously a Geneseo soldier throwing accusations out there to get his own team amped up. No other team in the region is even close to as historically great as Geneseo, and this is coming from a Cortland alum.

Yeah I guess Cortland Women's 7 national championships mean nothing.

I think they count as about 4-5 men's championships.

Championship Gap wrote:

I think they count as about 4-5 men's championships.

Which would still best Geneseo's 0 championships.

Definitely! Girl power at its finest.

Jealous? wrote:

[quote]Go Home wrote:

About track, what other teams have respectable track runners? Grant O'Connor from RPI certainly, but other than that, who based on your standards? Sean McAneny had a great indoor season last year. 8:17 in the 3k and AA. So what if he did not make finals last year in outdoor. That is part of the growing process. He will be back. Gillan Faulker, also from Geneseo, AA in the 800 last indoor season. Outside from these top guys, Geneseo runners are better than most in the region on the track. RPI has some great depth on the track, but are they respectable in your eyes? Geneseo has had very similar times on the track the past few years.

are you an idiot or do you just not look at results? I would say RPI going 14:09, 14:26, 14:28, 14:31, 14:55, 14:58, 14:59 is pretty damn respectable (which would 1,2,3,4 geneseo, by the way). Let's not forget the 29:41, 30:32, 30:45, 31:11 and 31:17 (which would 1,2,3 geneseo). So no, Geneseo does not have similar times. 1 guy has similar times to 4 RPI guys. Also, nobody gives a crap about Gillan Faulker, who can only run 1 event. His 400 isnt even good for his 1500/mile being so bad. Low 49 would be good if he could run a fast 15/mile but he runs 4:10/4:30. They both are great programs, but for you to even remotely consider Geneseo on RPI's level in track is hilarious

My reply was asking Go Home what the definition of "respectable" is. I said Geneseo has put in similar times as RPI the past few years. The past few years Geneseo has put down 14:16 (IGC),14:27, 14:33, 14:36, 14:44, 14:46, 14:48, 14:56. As stated, RPI is really deep. RPI put down similar times, as you note, all in one year, to Geneseo doing it the past 3 years. My apologies for the confusing semantics in the previous post. My post was not meant to compare what Geneseo does on an annual basis compared to what RPI does on the track. It was to point out that Geneseo has put in times that I feel are "respectable." Apparently 14:27, 14:33, etc. are not respectable times to the poster Go Home is my point . So according to that post, only IGC and Sean O'Connor are "respectable." I disagree. Geneseo has had some nice times on the track, and RPI, comparatively, is way better, with respectable times. In terms of 800, it is not even close, Geneseo hands down crushes RPI on the track. RPI last year 1:55, 1:55, 1:57, 2:00 to Geneseo's 1:52, 1:53, 1:54, 1:55, 1:56, 1:56, 1:57, 1:58, 1:58, 2:00. Geneseo seems to have the better mid-distance performances on the track with RPI certainly taking the cake in the distance events on the track. But with that said, it is interesting as Geneseo has had better cross country performances comparatively to RPI. RPI has beaten Geneseo just one time, last Regional Championship, over the years. Even last year Geneseo beat RPI at the Rowan meet and at the National Championship. Before that, Geneseo has beaten RPI in every cross country race to my knowledge. Both of these two teams are great and this cross country season should be a battle with these two teams again. I am pulling for both of them to do well all season, and hopefully have two top 10 teams in the country at the NCAA Championship, if not higher.

Wow Geneseo's "respectable" 800 times landed them with exactly 0 All Americans and 0 points scored in the 800 at outdoor nationals! But hey, at least Faulkner got a 4th place finish for indoors which is respectable! Cheers mate!

Just wanted to point out that RIT has more Swedish All-Americans than both of those programs combined

Boofer has more All America's then the current RIT team

Ohhhhhh so how good a 400 performance is depends on how good you are at the 1500/mile that actually makes a ton of sense. Just so I get a better understanding of your logic, who is better at the 400, Sean McAneny who runs about 53 but 3:47 or me, Gillan Faulkner, who runs 49 but only 4:10? Its gotta be pretty close!

Go Knights!

misogyny at it's finest wrote:

Which would still best Geneseo's 0 championships.

National Champs in 2005 on the Women's side.

Hey guys, stop bullying Geneseo and please keep the team and community in your thoughts. They just lost their teammate to suicide.

Your reading comprehension is outstanding. If his mile was good (say 4:20), his 400 time of 49 would be considered good because he would be more long-distance based than sprint based. If you’re a 4:20 miler than can run 1:52 and also 49, that’s good. But his mile sucks (4:30), showing he isn’t long-distance based, and his 400 should be way faster. Hard logic, I know

you're my hero. kudo's, good sir.

Genny dudes (with exception to a few such as IGC and Mcaneny) come together to create a team thats one giant fish in one small cess pool that is the SUNYAC. Moore has a historic program and a few good aa's to pull a bunch of 9:40/4:30 dudes. For the most part, he doesn't really develop them all that well. just good enough to where almost any other team in the 'yac cant do much to beat them. So really, their jerk squad just looks like a bunch of a -holes.

IGC was a 4:15 miler in high school and Mcaneny was a stud as well. There are many more sub 4:30 guys on Geneseo. The unfortunate part of collegiate athletics is that not everyone is as motivated to succeed in college and not everyone’s high school program trains to allow four more years of training hard. Then you also have the people close to the top 7 being motivated to progress and the other lost in the shuffle. I wouldn’t blame Moore for the lack of some athletes progression although he probably has better progression stats than other SUNYAC schools. The claim of Geneseo not progressing athletes is so old and used up. If they don’t develop someone should be beating them right? Otherwise the other teams develops worse, ergo Geneseo develops better?

You're a dick.

Also, SUNY g isn’t a “historic program”. There men’s team was so irrelevant until relatively recently. Moore’s a good coach. This forum is filled with 18 year olds who think how things have been in the last decade is how things have always been.

lol when have we ever discussed women's rankings here?