Consider this an offshoot of the "add a shorter race?" thread. Looking at all the arguments that were advanced there--10K excludes shorter-distance runners, 10K leads to more injuries, 10K isn't conducive to short-distance training, 10K isn't as fan-friendly, etc,. etc.--let me pose this question: would the sport be better served (at the NCAA level) if instead of inserting a second shorter-distance race it went to a shorter distance period?
Not 4K, of course, but how about 8K, or 7K? That's not going to prepare collegians for the IAAF's 12K version, but last I heard, that wasn't the purpose of collegiate sport anyway. If it got more people invovled from farther down in the spectrum, wouldn't that actually be a good thing? In the spring, most teams don't have more than a couple of guys who run the 10, so why should the whole fall be geared towards it?
It seems clear to me that part of the Arkansas success in cross comes from avoiding the 10K like the plague unless they have to, and who am I to argue w/ John McDonnell?
Just a thought.
Not 4K, of course, but how about 8K, or 7K? That's not going to prepare collegians for the IAAF's 12K version, but last I heard, that wasn't the purpose of collegiate sport anyway. If it got more people invovled from farther down in the spectrum, wouldn't that actually be a good thing? In the spring, most teams don't have more than a couple of guys who run the 10, so why should the whole fall be geared towards it?
It seems clear to me that part of the Arkansas success in cross comes from avoiding the 10K like the plague unless they have to, and who am I to argue w/ John McDonnell?
Just a thought.
Comment