FormerAA wrote:
There are slivers of accuracy in what you're saying, but having been at a school recently that is winning national titles in track and compete for podiums in XC, its not that simple. Distance recruits these days have to have range to get money. No coach in their right mind is going to turn down a kid that can double and place top 5 @ a P5 conference for points and potentially double indoors in the mile/3k or 3k/5k. Outdoors is different when you throw in the 10k, but there are lots of guys who can attempt the double of 5k/10k and score points in both. Round that up over a year and you have a low stick for XC nats, two events for points at indoors, and 1-2 events outdoors. That's a bigger spread than any jumper will give you, even if they are a 8-10 point candidate outdoors. Think off all the bonuses a coach can accrue for XC conference win, XC nationals podium, Indoor/outdoor conference win, indoor/outdoor nats podium/win. You can't do it without a decent stable of distance studs.
As you said, you know what your school's A.D. and head T&F coach did to build a winning T&F team. Including relays, 19 events at college conference and national championship. If your school pieced it together with some decent distance runners, that is your isolated experience at your school. Admit you have a distance runner bias. Since there are 19 events including relays and mind you the relays at conference championships are 4 x 100m and 4 x 400m, distance runners are not needed to win conference or national championship. If there were 4 x 800m relay and 4 x 1500m relay, your argument could close the gap a bit. I am correct, distance runners are not needed to win.