Florida
Florida
Distance guru wrote:
Wisconsin 4:04 8:06
Villanova 8:08
Princeton 4:12 8:09
Notre Dame 4:08 8:09
Villanova, is right. Basketball as well.
Cuckoldistan wrote:
That article pisses me off so much. Nebraskas football team has been garbage and 15 roster spots won't make the different. The 135th best player on the roster is already trash and adding 15 more won't do anything except to cripple the track team. And Nebraskas track team is actually a powerhouse in the big ten unlike the football team
I was curious so went ahead and looked up the Cross Country Roster sizes
from the web site:
Year M W
16 14 17
17 14 19
18 18 19
19 18 27
Didn't look at other sports, but looks like they went the route of upping
the women's cross country roster size to be able to up the football roster.
Since most will also be on the indoor and outdoor track rosters, those extra
9 spots would more than allow the 15 football spots. So kudos to Neb, they
could have knocked the mens roster size to a 13, which is about where they
were operating in earlier years.
A big women's roster is a strategy for many of the big football schools. I think
someone listed Florida State with 41 or something on the roster in an earlier
post.
FSU and the going through the motions collecting a big pay check Bob Braman.
That article about the absurd roster size of college football programs does illustrate some of the drawbacks to having small track and xc rosters, namely, that you can't bring in an enormous number of prospects with the increased competition and potential for getting a high ceiling talent with poor hs coaching or low expectations, and you can't shelter many good athletes from other programs that might do more with them. Having higher quality hs performers, 4:09 instead of 4:20, does mean you are closer to getting scorers, but in distance running, it is just not that obvious who is going to be great with great training and the vast majority of athletes in the sport are not at high quality programs that produce lots of sub 4:20 and 4:10 athletes, so the greatest talents of all statistically are probably not those athletes unless they were from bad programs and achieved anyway. Wheating was one of those late developers who entered the sport at the end of hs, but then he did have a Nike founder as a coach before Oregon.
4000260 wrote:
poor coaching? wrote:
Agreed. How does Oklahoma State go from winning multiple national titles to not qualifying in 2019.... with regionals at their home course???
Neither the men nor the women made it to nationals. What does this say about the coaching there?
The kid who got 4th place the year before didn’t qualify for nationals this year. Somethings up.
You seem like the kind of person that ignores the reality that's right in front of you absent a "study". That's a rough way to go through life. I feel for you, brah.
And just so you know there are "studies" from medical doctors showing the benefits of smoking.
Arkansas
They used to be a good program, especially in the distance events. Now what? Everybody busy chasing hogs somewhere?
turtleb wrote:
Cuckoldistan wrote:
That article pisses me off so much. Nebraskas football team has been garbage and 15 roster spots won't make the different. The 135th best player on the roster is already trash and adding 15 more won't do anything except to cripple the track team. And Nebraskas track team is actually a powerhouse in the big ten unlike the football team
I was curious so went ahead and looked up the Cross Country Roster sizes
from the web site:
Year M W
16 14 17
17 14 19
18 18 19
19 18 27
Didn't look at other sports, but looks like they went the route of upping
the women's cross country roster size to be able to up the football roster.
Since most will also be on the indoor and outdoor track rosters, those extra
9 spots would more than allow the 15 football spots. So kudos to Neb, they
could have knocked the mens roster size to a 13, which is about where they
were operating in earlier years.
A big women's roster is a strategy for many of the big football schools. I think
someone listed Florida State with 41 or something on the roster in an earlier
post.
Use to be 60 + women during the Harvey regime , 15 A team girls, the rest were a club team or unofficial B team
Are there any teams in the top 25 that aren't listed? I would like to add them to the list.
William and Mary.
agirl wrote:
William and Mary.
Lol don’t even get me started on William and Mary. They haven’t been average in years..
Portland Hobby Jogger wrote:
Alabama BSS wrote:
To give scholarships for something as meaningless as running to a foreign student is stupid. There are American athletes who could benefit from the coaching and the money. To those that say “maybe they should get better”, well you are right. They should. But that opportunity would exist if they didn’t have foreigners in their way taking up roster space and money. The foreign athletes can run in their own country.
I would like to see an NCAA ban on using scholarships on foreign athletes. Foreign athlete can self-finance ( personal/family funds, homeland government provided money, etc.) and are welcome to walk on and compete. University and taxpayer funds that count against your scholarship total should only be allocated to domestic athletes.
You all say this, while at the same time your precious domestic kid only cares about the biggest schools in the country, disregarding important factors, especially the opportunity to race, the success of the coach(not all P5 coaches know what they’re doing), and financial. You can offer a full to a domestic kid and an international kid who is as good or slightly better, and the domestic kid will Not take the offer, but the international kid will!
So while you’re spewing your nonsense about giving it to domestic kids, how about you spend that time telling the kid to take the scholarship! When coaches bring on international talent best believe they also offered it to domestic kids of the same caliber, it’s just the they went for the top 25 football team and not for the opportunity to compete and attend college for free!
Thank you for absolutely nailing it.
The private school costs $60k while your in state P5 school costs $25k. Each offers you 10%. Now do you see why the US kid chooses the P5?
Uh, not quite. That is not what he is saying.
Washington has been doing horrible. Powell is great at recruiting but horrible at developing every athlete he has is already really talented. When it comes to running xc UW sucks and never performs well, they were better off with Metcalf coaching. For some reason his athletes will suck during xc but will run fast in track...seems weird right? I think that Andy gets his shipment of EPO in the winter which is why UW runs fast.
Times are a changing wrote:
Both. Title IX requires equal opportunity be provided. Here are 3 examples of XC roster spots.
Wisconsin 18 men 30 women
Arkansas 15 men 22 women
FSU 14 men 41 women
What are the roster sizes for BYU? They always seem to have hordes of men and women.
Slightly off topic but instead of blaming Australians and women (“It’s not fair they get more spots!” Ignores decades and decades of the reverse) let’s blame 150 man football rosters for lack of running opportunities in college .....
Colleges could have 300 guys on the football roster if it were not for Title IX.
Distance guru wrote:
Colleges could have 300 guys on the football roster if it were not for Title IX.
Back in 1970s D-1 university Am, football teams had as many as 105 football scholarships, not football roster spots. At the same time, N.F.L. teams only had 40 men. If a N.F.L. team had a non-QB who played QB in college, N.F.L. teams in late 1960s/early 1970s sometimes did not have a second string QB. Colleges before 1970s had unlimited scholarships. It was a way for wealthy & powerful universities to hoard talent. No college football team needs more than 60 Am. football players on roaster. That's enough men for 4 QBs and 6 tailbacks. Guys complaining about girls are arguing incorrectly. Men need women on our side. We need to argue for men to have 30 athletic grants and women to have 30 athletic grants, T&F. Am. football could be cut down to 25 athletic grants. No one would notice a change of productivity on football field.