The CardBoard
What happened to LSJU's rich track heritage? - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: What happened to LSJU's rich track heritage? (/thread-7018.html)

Pages: 1 2 3

What happened to LSJU's rich track heritage? - 71Bear - 04-13-2014

Payton Jordan must be spinning in his grave over the disintegration of the Stanford Track program.  What happened? 

Re: What happened to LSJU's rich track heritage? - yvonne - 04-13-2014

The same thing that's happened to the sport throughout the country, I'm afraid.

Not strictly track, but... - Mick - 04-13-2014

Stanford sent 40 athletes to the 2012 Olympics, tied with USC for the most and two ahead of UCB.  But we didn't crack the top 10 in T&F (Auburn, FSU, USC, LSU, Arkansas, Texas, Florida, Georgia, Oregon, Tex A&M), and with just one male and one female athlete we weren't close to the top 10 (8 athletes to get in the top 10).

Stanford's collegians won 16 medals, the fourth most medals among college Olympians, behind USC (25), Florida and UCB (17 each).

Re: What happened to LSJU's rich track heritage? - terry - 04-13-2014

Just out of curiosity, did any Stanford fans go to C'al message boards after the last Big Game and post "What happened to UCBerkeley's football heritage"?

Re: What happened to LSJU's rich track heritage? - rudruff - 04-13-2014

I will be more offended when the football team is losing. As the son of a track coach, I would like to see us do better. Combine some football players with some distance running nerds and we should be fine.

Re: What happened to LSJU's rich track heritage? - BobK - 04-13-2014

As bad as it was yesterday it's the first time in 14 years that cal has swept us.  There is a dying breed and it's called a two sport athlete.  Once we had FBers who were great sprinters and jumpers but non more.  Rector an excellent HS sprinter didn't even run as a HS Sr.  It's FB full time.    Brandt -Sims plans to sprint next year.

We have no sprinters or hurdlers.  The loss of Carter turning pro hurts as she could have won 3 events yesterday and Nelms who graduated early really hurt.  Forbes might have won both jumps but is hurt. 

Our recruiting for men and women is great with sprinters for both coming in.  This weekend our recruits did  at the brobdingnagian Arcadia Meet is very encouraging. 

I guarantee you we will out score cal at the NCAAs both men and women. 

Re: What happened to LSJU's rich track heritage? - BobK - 04-13-2014

Also the women tied for 7th and the men 12th at the indoor NCAAs. 

I was at a family wedding missing the Big meet for the first time since my time in SE Asia.  And the first time to not dope out the meet since the early 60s.  A good day to miss and not in expected. 

Re: What happened to LSJU's rich track heritage? - yvonne - 04-13-2014

(04-13-2014, 06:25 PM)BobK link Wrote:As bad as it was yesterday it's the first time in 14 years that Low APR U has swept us.

That explains it. Striking while the iron is hot. He can't act like he's been there before because he hasn't.

Quote:I guarantee you we will out score Low APR U at the NCAAs both men and women.


Re: What happened to LSJU's rich track heritage? - Stymie - 04-14-2014

Interesting thread, and all you have to do is follow the money.....

Some of us are old enough to remember Bill Walsh turning a world-class long jumper and OK footballer at Stanford into a very good WR who went on to great success and serious riches in the NFL (James Lofton).  A few years later, when Walsh had moved to the 49ers, he signed the world-record holder in the 110M high hurdles (Renaldo Nemiah) as a wide receiver project.  In those days, track and field was (officially) an "amateur" sport, and IIRC Walsh said that Renaldo was earning ~$100k in "under the table" t&f payments then (late 1970's), so he offerred him $130k and Nemiah took it, and had a decent NFL career for a few years, probably earning much more money than he could take under the table in Basle and Singapore, et. al.

Jumping to today, why would any young man or woman with serious athletic ability choose t&f over football (or basketball or baseball, or even tennis?).  Outside of Hussain Bolt, how many runners and jumpers make a journeyman NFL/MLB/NBA salary.  Oor Toby just signed a 3-year deal for $10mm+ and he was just a situational/relief player for his past 3 years.  And, let's face it, t&f brings only red ink to the t&f programme at any serious DivI school.  They have expenses, but where is the income?  (Well, maybe if you are Oregon, the dark Knight might just help balance the books....).

Interestingly, this year our 2014 (FB) class has at least one guy (and there might be another) who just might be a great football player as well as a potential Olympic athlete.  If any one of them is good enough to eventually (say) do a few 100s in the 9.8-9.9 range and maybe make it to the Olympics, would he really want to go for it, if the alternative was to focus on football and get good enough to be drafted in round 2-3 and effectively fixed for life, financially?

I'd hate to be a t&f coach these days.....



Re: What happened to LSJU's rich track heritage? - BobK - 04-14-2014

Not to be rude but  :).  A 9.9 100 yards manually timed is about an 11.00 auto times 100 meters and a so what.

Lofton was a brobdingnagian FB recruit the head of Stanford's class coming in. 
P
Stanford has about 8 pro track and field athletes and since some are women I don't get your point at all.  One does not choose to be a great FB or Basketball player. 

Sorry rant over back to happy. 

Re: What happened to LSJU's rich track heritage? - 71Bear - 04-14-2014

Appreciate BobK and Stymie's responses.  I think they summed up the situation.

Contrary, to what some thought, the post was not meant to be a dig at LSJU.  It was based not on UC winning a track meet but rather LSJU's failure to compete in several events.  That seemed odd for a program that has known so much success.

As for UC's "rich athletic heritage", the sad truth is that only aquatic sports (water polo, crew and swimming) have known consistent success over the years.  I would never characterize the football program as having a rich heritage.  Except for Andy Smith's Wonder Teams and Pappy's success with guys who came back from WW II to dominate west coast competition, there has been no sustained success. 




Re: What happened to LSJU's rich track heritage? - unclechuck - 04-14-2014

(04-13-2014, 11:03 AM)71Bear link Wrote:Payton Jordan must be spinning in his grave over the disintegration of the Stanford Track program.  What happened?

A couple years ago, Kentucky tired of being an SEC doormat in T&F so hired away the Stanford head coach with 3+ assistants. With a big financial commitment for facilities and support, plus SEC admissions standards the KY program has flourished with the women now a national top 5 program and the men improving rapidly.

Track & field & XC get 18 full rides for women, and 12.5 for men that need to be spread out over XC, indoor T&F, and outdoor T&F seasons, so most schools have to cherry pick what events they choose to do well in. That argues for a high level of walk on and partial scholarship participation. Given Stanford's robust academic/need-based scholarship situation it's not clear to me if it's lack of ADept. support or coaching that is allowing our running-jumping-throwing teams to regress so significantly.

Our event-rich, scholarship restrained Olympic sports like T&F or swimming & diving, need to take a page from the Harbaugh-Shaw coaching book and be aggressive about casting a wide and early net to identify and recruit elite scholar athletes to the Farm and its sports programs. As an example, women's swimming has made an excellent recovery from a significant coaching turnover with this approach. They had a great NCAA meet performance and look great going forward.

The current career earning opportunities in T&F are far different from what Stymie recalls; one easy example is runner Mary Cain skipping college T&F to go straight to pro. Is it the same as football, hoops, or baseball? Of course not, but as the NCAA commercials tell us so often, 90-something percent of college athletes don't go pro.

Certainly T&F has its challenges in meet format and fan-friendlyness for the casual supporter, but we should still be able to do much better than what we are now.



Re: What happened to LSJU's rich track heritage? - Farm93 - 04-14-2014

I can see a lot of HS parents pushing their kids into track over baseball, football or hockey.  Unlike those other sports there is not really a big risk for brain injuries, and your kids can get those coveted Varsity letters for college applications while staying in shape. 

However college T&F has become big event oriented.  If you are not capable of NCAA qualifying marks you've really got only one event a year that counts.  Props to all of those students that are never going to run in the NCAA meets and stil train relentlessly for 12 months for that one dual meet against UCB.  I think most former HS Track athletes at Stanford know that training for months for one dual meet is just not a good use of their time.

Stanford likely will continue to have a handful of world elite level stars that will grab Stanford points in the NCAA meet, but winning dual meets takes a lot of worker bees.  And many of those worker bees suspect they should skip track and focus exclusively on academics.  And even if they want to dabble in sports then they should opt for a club sport where they can use their running skills in competitions more often than once a year.

It is not shocking to me that Stanford struggles to field competitive dual meet teams, and it is actually shocking that Stanford is able to win regularly against UCB since math dictates that UCB must have more worker bees on their campus.

FWIW - That was basically my equation 25 years ago.  I was far more likely to join the ultimate club team than run endless miles as a worker bee running on the 4X400 B Team for 3 or 4 years.  Every once and a while I regret not participating in team sports at college, but even with that regret I know I would have been happier playing ultimate than running through the foothills every morning.

Re: What happened to LSJU's rich track heritage? - BobK - 04-14-2014

We have a brobdingnagian class coming in with a number ranked top 10 and a couple # 1 presently plus a brobdingnagian Aussie recruit.  We will know more Weds. 

We have lost a large number from the team this year about 20 but I think all here understand what farm just posted about the termendous time and work involved to be a both a distance runner and a student at Stanford.  And keep in mind with a 25-35% scholarship

This year not norm but uncle chuck mails it with number of scholies  and a team's goals.  It's been years and years since we had a dual meet other than cal.

For the record we have and outstanding women LJer / TJer and male LJer / HJer and TJer.  Sadly all hurt. 

Re: What happened to LSJU's rich track heritage? - BobK - 04-14-2014

Here's a great and encouraging story.

http://www.marinij.com/track/ci_25559660/college-notebook-coaching-change-has-been-turning-point



Re: What happened to LSJU's rich track heritage? - Stymie - 04-14-2014

(04-14-2014, 01:17 PM)BobK link Wrote:Not to be rude but  :).  A 9.9 100 yards manually timed is about an 11.00 auto times 100 meters and a so what.

Lofton was a brobdingnagian FB recruit the head of Stanford's class coming in. 
P
Stanford has about 8 pro track and field athletes and since some are women I don't get your point at all.  One does not choose to be a great FB or Basketball player. 

Sorry rant over back to happy.

No rudeness felt, BobK, but I thought it was obvious that I meant a 9.8-9.9 100M time.  Does anybody still run 100Y races?

Re: What happened to LSJU's rich track heritage? - BobK - 04-15-2014

I'm sorry but who runs a 9.8/9.9 100 meters.  Olympic finalists only.  Our school record is 10.39. 

Re: What happened to LSJU's rich track heritage? - Mick - 04-15-2014

(04-15-2014, 07:47 AM)BobK link Wrote:I'm sorry but who runs a 9.8/9.9 100 meters.  Olympic finalists only.  Our school record is 10.39.

In high school, I ran a 100-yard sprint against a guy who had a cup of coffee as a defensive end with the 49ers.  He ran a 9.9.

Re: What happened to LSJU's rich track heritage? - BobK - 04-15-2014

I think we all know 100M is about 10 yards longer than 100 yards. 

Re: What happened to LSJU's rich track heritage? - Stymie - 04-15-2014

(04-15-2014, 07:47 AM)BobK link Wrote:I'm sorry but who runs a 9.8/9.9 100 meters.  Olympic finalists only.  Our school record is 10.39.

Don't feel sorry BobK, but my original post said (in effect) IF we had a guy who could run 9.8-9.9 100M, but could also good enough to potnetially go to the NFL, why would he risk doing T&F.  As I also inferred, we do have a guy like that in the Class of 2018 who did 10.4 100M as a junior in HS (and yes, there are places in the USA who run Olympic distances....) and was (at least for a while) the #1 indoor 60M junior in the USA.  Finally, IIRC we also have a 7000+ point decathlete/football stud in next year's Freshman class.  IF either or both of them want to try to follow both dreams, will they be allowed to do it?

PS--Lofton's best LJ in HS was ~24 feet, and he was a QB who led his HS team to a 4-4 record.  He wasn't even a starter as a Junior (under Christiansen), with only 12 receptions to his name in 1976.  I was a season ticket holder at that time, and my recollection is that Walsh saw his vstly underutilised potential and turned him into the NFL hall of famer that he became.  Of course, I'm sure it helped Lofton in 1977 to have Darrin Nelson opening up holes in the opposing defenses, too.......