David Klech Not Returning To UCLA [to Oregon]

[lagster]

high knees wrote:

don't think it's a UCLA thing at all. I think you have 2 kids of tremendous talent who were over ran and over competed in H.S. (remember Craddock barley competed at all in his H.S. senior season due to repeated injury and Klech underperformed and acutally had to scratch one of his events in the H.S. state meet due to injury after doing the LJ, HJ, 400, 800, 110H, 300h and relays in various combinations in dual meets and many invitationals),

Agree in regards Klech. Even after injury Klech runs the 300H at the State meet and then competes afterwards in some national meets. Got to wonder about that decision.[/quote]

[Smoke]

Oh call me a spoil sport but who cares what event he is best at (it is the 400 hurdles and high jump by the way, 110s are a distant third), what in the hell is happening at UCLA. no sprinters and their top 2 recruits of the last 2 classes were granted releases within the last 3 weeks!
I know someone has the answer, i want to know why no one is willing to say the truth about the program??? If you think it is loyalty, let's really examine that.
Are you loyal because you are quiet and will not air dirty laundry, or are you lyal because you exposed whatever is hidden in the quest to better the program?

[tandfman]

OK, I seem to have missed something important. Once upon a time, if you transferred from one Div I school to another, you lost a year of eligibility absent some extenuating circumstances. I gather from this threat that this is now limited to intra-conference transfers. I'm not totally surprised. In recent years, I've noticed some eligible transfers listed in WTAG that I wondered about.

So now I'm curious. When did this change take place? And what, exactly, is the new rule--do all conferences have this policy or does the loss of eligibility depend on which conference is involved?

[bad hammy]

I'm of the opinion that the 110h talk is a moot point. His most natural event is the 400h.

[paulthefan]

Yes but a historical 13.3 is not a circa 2007 13.3.. so while historically you are right, I stand by my claim. I think this fellow has the tools for 13.3 second 110s.. I dont think that is a terribly big claim in todays event... and lastly if we had reasonable levels of participation in the 110H we would have near 100 guys a year at that level.

Actually Klech is probably worth better than 13.3 but I dont want to really poke the bees nest here...

[gh]

History says you're probably wrong: only about 50 Americans have ever run in the 13.3s over the big hurdles. There were 13 preps running 13.8s last year. A way different event.

[paulthefan]

[quote=guruof track][quote="bad hammy":3etuwl6x]

He is clearly a sub13.3 potential high hurdler and a sub 49 long hurdler.

Potential sub 13.3 hurdler............I HIGHLY disagree with that.

Potenial, yes. Clearly, no.[/quote:3etuwl6x]

The guy ran under 13.8 once over 39 inches, he was usually hovering around 14 flat. Anything is possible, but within the realm of reality thats a far stretch.[/quote:3etuwl6x]

He is a tall athletic kid with good speed.. that gets him to 13.3 ..... any kid with that frame at that age that is at 13.8Hs has the hardware.

[bad hammy]

Question: does a transfer in conference mean sitting out a year AND losing that year of eligibility, or would Klech still have three years left after the one-year vacation?

[gh]

Any chance there were academic issues? i.e. not a good fit (for what ever reason). Is he thinking Stanford or Cal?

A couple of guys on Dyestat, including an administrator of the site, actually "broke" this story a couple weeks ago, and at that time said it was Oregon.

Here's the link to their discussion:
http://talk.dyestat.com/showthread.php?t=63364

See story on front page for more details; transfter inside the conference would mean sitting out a year; outside the conference would not. He says no academic problems and writer even raises question of going to Cal or Stanford.

[krip2nite]

isn't Oregon in the Pac 10 alone with UCLA that mean he would have to sit a year if he transfer within the conference

[guruof track]

[quote=bad hammy]

He is clearly a sub13.3 potential high hurdler and a sub 49 long hurdler.

Potential sub 13.3 hurdler............I HIGHLY disagree with that.

Potenial, yes. Clearly, no.[/quote:3djjjqn8]

The guy ran under 13.8 once over 39 inches, he was usually hovering around 14 flat. Anything is possible, but within the realm of reality thats a far stretch.

[bad hammy]

He is clearly a sub13.3 potential high hurdler and a sub 49 long hurdler.

Potential sub 13.3 hurdler............I HIGHLY disagree with that.

Potenial, yes. Clearly, no.

[guruof track]

Regardless of what happened in HS (That is ancient history) it is hard to imagine that Klech was overworked at UCLA.. does the record support that theory?... Lets hope he can find a place where he can focus, have a positive attitude about training hard, and love the sport.. He is clearly a sub13.3 potential high hurdler and a sub 49 long hurdler.

Potential sub 13.3 hurdler............I HIGHLY disagree with that.

[DaveW]

We are all waiting on pins and needles for more news about this subject. What more can you tell us about this situation. Don't leave me hanging.

[richxx87]

Any chance there were academic issues? i.e. not a good fit (for what ever reason). Is he thinking Stanford or Cal?

A couple of guys on Dyestat, including an administrator of the site, actually "broke" this story a couple weeks ago, and at that time said it was Oregon.

Here's the link to their discussion:
http://talk.dyestat.com/showthread.php?t=63364