Interesting factoid: Melancon was conceived, born and raised within a 3-mile radius of Hayward Field. The trip to XC Nationals last year was the first time he's been outside of Eugene.
Interesting factoid: Melancon was conceived, born and raised within a 3-mile radius of Hayward Field. The trip to XC Nationals last year was the first time he's been outside of Eugene.
jsjsj wrote:
[quote]the pompous OSU wrote:
Every school has the same limit on the number of scholarships. There is no farce.
Really? So having state of the art facilities that cost millions doesn't make a difference to a recruit?
Having a stadium that holds over 1000,000 fans doesn't make a difference?
Having a coach that espn spends 23 hours a day saying how great he is doesn't influence the top prospects?
Playing on national tv every game doesn't influence top prospects?
Next year when the top prospects in the country are deciding where to go, tell me how many of them will choose Idaho State because they have (just as many scholarships as everyone else).
To answer another question above Oregon football has 24/100 kids from Oregon.
I have been listening to those who want more in-state recruits
http://www.goducks.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=500&ATCLID=209252035
Just found out Canada and France are part of Oregon
Texas too!
Nathan Mathabane, another Portland, Oregon native will be on Oregon's roster this year.
Robert Johnson wrote:
I have been listening to those who want more in-state recruits
http://www.goducks.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=500&ATCLID=209252035Just found out Canada and France are part of Oregon
Texas too!
That is freaking insane. How does a school get 9 top runners to transfer without doing something illegal?
Shouldn't recruiting be going after the best high school kids? Sounds like Oregon can just wait until they find great runners from other universities and steal them. Is that really allowed?
Let's face it, this is about kids finding a way to get to the Track Mecca of the United States. Where else would a track athlete get better coaching, fan support, facilities, and great meets than in Eugene? It's pretty simple, these athletes have figured out that at Hayward Field there are actually fans to watch them perform. Top that off with the fact that they are home to many of the big meets (Trials, Prefontaine, NCAA's).
the pompous OSU wrote:
jsjsj wrote:Every school has the same limit on the number of scholarships. There is no farce.
Really? So having state of the art facilities that cost millions doesn't make a difference to a recruit?
Having a stadium that holds over 1000,000 fans doesn't make a difference?
Having a coach that espn spends 23 hours a day saying how great he is doesn't influence the top prospects?
Playing on national tv every game doesn't influence top prospects?
Next year when the top prospects in the country are deciding where to go, tell me how many of them will choose Idaho State because they have (just as many scholarships as everyone else).
To answer another question above Oregon football has 24/100 kids from Oregon.
What does any of that have to do with what I said? And all of those things you said are a product of winning. Start winning and recruits and money and exposure will follow. There is no farce.
I used to admire UO and Eugene, but no longer do. Mediocre school, dumpy town, and values aligned with corporate America.
William Bowerman wrote:
I used to admire UO and Eugene, but no longer do. Mediocre school, dumpy town, and values aligned with corporate America.
I should add, they don't even have a good coach anymore.
duck duck fraud wrote:
A Duck wrote:We had guys from Oregon on the team too. Martin, Nelson, McChesney, etc.
People make too much of where athletes come from. It is an American tradition to "go away to school" and experience a different part of the country.
I only have a problem with 22 year old "freshman." Instead of funding the world's Oly teams, let's fund out own. Now more than ever, that is important.
You weren't on the team you fraud.
I was on the team; don't let people playing games fool you.
hayward102 wrote:
Here is what I don't understand. What is your solution? To artificially hold down the level of the Oregon team with in-state runners when the state of Oregon is not currently producing many high-level D-1 athletes? As I said previously, other than Matthew Melancon who ran for Oregon, there was a grand total of one Oregon high school athlete at the NCAA meet for another team.
There are plenty of Oregon kids on the roster. If they step up, they will be on the travel squad. If Oregon ran local guys they wouldn't be within a mile of even qualifying for the national meet, so why is it a problem that the local kids aren't running at nationals in great numbers?
You're complaining about the number of local runners without offering up the solution. It is make the team a non-NCAA level team with all Oregon guys? In Oregon's first meet tomorrow they are running 4 guys from Oregon (Melancon, Watson, Winn, and Costin). They all have a chance to show what they can do and make the travel squad. Isn't that all you can ask for, or should they all be guaranteed to make the Pac-12, Regional, etc. lineup because they are from Oregon?
You mention Wisconsin as a better example. Here is who they ran on their 2nd place NCAA team last year in order of finish Ontario Canada, Texas, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. Oregon's one in-state guy beat Wisconsin's in-state guy by 115 places, so you could say Oregon did better in the in-state department.
This be the way it work.
I think a lot of it has to do with oregon having 6 divisions in high school xc and not 4 as in the past. I ran during the same time as rupp, klotz, jespersen (sp), pellegrino, jake gomez, joaquin chapa, etc...when all those guys were pushing each other to low 15s or high 14s to win a state title in xc. I was always middle of the pack runner. But given my times then and given the 6 divisions now, I would be a state champion now. That is not saying a lot. I am just trying to show that having more divisions means that you have less competition in each of them so therefore you have less guys and girls trying to outperform each other at state meets and throughout the season.
A Duck wrote:
I was on the team
Prove it, you POS.
time to show the cards wrote:
A Duck wrote:I was on the team
Prove it, you POS.
What a lovely invitation.
Post your name and address for us.
EX-runner from OREGON wrote:
I think a lot of it has to do with oregon having 6 divisions in high school xc and not 4 as in the past. I ran during the same time as rupp, klotz, jespersen (sp), pellegrino, jake gomez, joaquin chapa, etc...when all those guys were pushing each other to low 15s or high 14s to win a state title in xc. I was always middle of the pack runner. But given my times then and given the 6 divisions now, I would be a state champion now. That is not saying a lot. I am just trying to show that having more divisions means that you have less competition in each of them so therefore you have less guys and girls trying to outperform each other at state meets and throughout the season.
You are preaching to the choir. The OSAA made this change for football and basketball but it has had a negative impact on all the other sports, not only competitively but also economically. Salem and Eugene high schools used to compete in districts where travel to other schools was minutes away, now the districts cover hundreds of miles which increases travel expenses and lost school time. No state the size of Oregon should have 6 divisions. Absurd.
I've regularly attended OSAA state track meets since the 1990s. Since 6 divisions were implemented there has been a decline in performances at state (excluding the Crouser family athletes). 6 divisions has cheapened qualifying for state and placing at state. It also makes for a marathon state meet holding 6 state championships at Hayward Field at the same time.
EX-runner from OREGON wrote:
I think a lot of it has to do with oregon having 6 divisions in high school xc and not 4 as in the past. I ran during the same time as rupp, klotz, jespersen (sp), pellegrino, jake gomez, joaquin chapa, etc...when all those guys were pushing each other to low 15s or high 14s to win a state title in xc. I was always middle of the pack runner. But given my times then and given the 6 divisions now, I would be a state champion now. That is not saying a lot. I am just trying to show that having more divisions means that you have less competition in each of them so therefore you have less guys and girls trying to outperform each other at state meets and throughout the season.
I agree with your point, but to clarify Oregon only has 4 classifications for cross country as 1A-3A are combined in one race, with one champion. However, those schools are small. I agree with you 100% that the biggest negative impact on competition has been the watering down of the top levels. The 6A and 5A races have a much different feel than they did before the split. There isn't the depth to make the races as compelling or increase competition across the entire classifications.
Transfer Wannabe wrote:
Nathan Mathabane, another Portland, Oregon native will be on Oregon's roster this year.
What ever happened to him? Never heard anything from the Ivy boy after he left Lincoln.
First off, Portland is what I would consider a "real D1 program" and has beaten the Ducks the past few years.
I don't necessarily agree with your feeling that U of O Cross Country has an obligation to you as a taxpayer. Their only obligation is to win NCAA titles and they are trying to do that in the way that they think is best.
However, I am in agreement with you that there are ways to do it without using your influence to bring in the top few HS kids every year along with foreigners and major transfers. The aforementioned D1 program at Portland manages to place decently at nationals every year with homegrown talent (not as much in recent years) and Wetmore won NCAAs with a majority CO squad if I'm not mistaken.
Unfortunately we seem to be moving away from these blue collar coaches and more into the OK State and Oregon "Steinbrunner" method of just buying as many expensive recruits as possible. I'm all for the blue collar dudes but its tough to compete with the $$.
The problem is that there is no relationship between how committed an athletic department is to a program and how hard athletes in that program work.
It\'s not like the Oklahoma State runners swim in T. Boone Pickens\' Scrooge McDuck money vault instead of working out. It\'s not like the runners in Eugene coast in workouts because they know they have an Oregon Track Club paycheck coming in four years. Everybody works.
One HUGE reason Oregon gets so many transfers is that they have made sacrifices that allow them to have a bigger men\'s xc and track team than other schools. Beyond the 12.5 scholarship limit, many schools have to trim walk-on and graduate transfer opportunities because they are overloaded on men\'s athletes in general and they\'ll run afoul of Title IX. Oregon has fewer men\'s teams (7) than women\'s teams (10). There is a cushion so that when the Ivy transfer come in w/ a grad fellowship, they have room under title IX to add more male athletes. Most other schools will have a men\'s soccer team, a wrestling team, a lacrosse team, a hockey team, or a men\'s volleyball team that would eat into the gender balance. Oregon made specific choices that allows them to have more track and field/XC athletes on the team. These choices are available at other schools, but most administrations don\'t have the same priorities. For example, Colorado has 15 men on the roster, NAU 16, Arkansas 13. OSU has 20 and Oregon has 27. They may simply not be roster room at other schools for transfers.
Koppenberg wrote:
The problem is that there is no relationship between how committed an athletic department is to a program and how hard athletes in that program work.
It's not like the Oklahoma State runners swim in T. Boone Pickens' Scrooge McDuck money vault instead of working out. It's not like the runners in Eugene coast in workouts because they know they have an Oregon Track Club paycheck coming in four years. Everybody works.
One HUGE reason Oregon gets so many transfers is that they have made sacrifices that allow them to have a bigger men's xc and track team than other schools. Beyond the 12.5 scholarship limit, many schools have to trim walk-on and graduate transfer opportunities because they are overloaded on men's athletes in general and they'll run afoul of Title IX. Oregon has fewer men's teams (7) than women's teams (10). There is a cushion so that when the Ivy transfer come in w/ a grad fellowship, they have room under title IX to add more male athletes. Most other schools will have a men's soccer team, a wrestling team, a lacrosse team, a hockey team, or a men's volleyball team that would eat into the gender balance. Oregon made specific choices that allows them to have more track and field/XC athletes on the team. These choices are available at other schools, but most administrations don't have the same priorities. For example, Colorado has 15 men on the roster, NAU 16, Arkansas 13. OSU has 20 and Oregon has 27. They may simply not be roster room at other schools for transfers.
REASONED ARGUMENT ALERT! REASONED ARGUMENT ALERT!
If you are a regular board participant the above will cause discomfort. It is a transient condition and you can go back to your ad hominen trolling soon and without limitation.
Irish gymnast shows you can have sex in the "anti-sex" cardboard beds in the Olympic village (video)
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion
Per sources, Colorado expected to hire NAU assistant coach Jarred Cornfield as head xc coach
Finishing a mountain stage in the Tour De France vs running a marathon: Which is harder?