In the men's 4x400-meter relay, Rice finished 6th in the faster second section (3:26.59) ... but slower that all three of the first erstwhile slower section ...so places 9th overall.

Not seen on the video was an apparent collision during one of the handoffs -- there was crowd noise "Ooooh!!" Did that perhaps slow down the Owls? (Rice & Charlotte finished, respectively, 11.47 and 13.58 seconds behind the section's 5th place team (LaTech / 3:15.12).)

(WKU won with a meet- and facility-record of 3:04.50.)

Rice finishes 7th in the conference meet.

Final Men's team leaderboard:

1 - Charlotte 155
2 - Mid. Tenn. State 117
3 - UTSA 100
4 - Western Kentucky 99
5 - Southern Miss. 93
6 - UTEP 75
7 - Rice 62
8 - North Texas 53
9 - Louisiana Tech 47
10 - FIU 18

(05-12-2019 11:55 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-12-2019 11:40 AM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  Our inability to do anything in the sprints on the men’s side kills us.

FBO or WRC, or anybody more knowledgeable than I am, would there be any benefit to working with football to recruit some RBs or DBs or WRs with exceptional speed and having them run sprints as well? I've been a proponent, at least conceptually, of emphasizing multi-sports athletes in recruiting, and making solid commitments to then that they could participate in multiple sports, as a way of improving the quality of our football recruiting. I still think the ability to add maybe 2 or 3 better athletes each year outweighs whatever benefit might be imparted in off-season football training, but I must admit that I don't know if there are really enough multi-sport athletes left to make a difference in track. The high schools have pretty much forced specialization in one sport on lots of kids, with which I totally disagree.

Confession: My roommate was a baseball player when half the baseball team were football players, and it was a pretty good team until the then football coach/AD took steps to end the practice, so my judgement is not exactly objective. And being a rugby coach may have pushed me even more in that direction. My friend, Sir Ian McGeechan, coach and head of rugby for Scotland for several years, was a huge proponent of having kids play multiple sports, and that may have influenced me as well.

It seems like they've tried but it didn't work out. There was that Stafford kid (Montgomery) who was a good sprinter/jumper and I think he got a high finish in the TJ last year despite not practicing at all but then he was hurt the whole football season and didn't compete in either sport in 2018-19.

I disagree with WRC about our inability to recruit sprinters to Rice. I think more now than ever (with The Rice Investment), it should be easier to recruit sprinters, and in general, they are much more sturdy or less injury-prone than distance runners. If the Rice Investment means a sprinter who can score points at the conference meet can get into Rice on a quarter scholarship - but they basically are getting a full ride on tuition, then why wouldn't a kid would want to come to Rice? Plus if you look at our conference, it's much easier to score points in the 100, 200 & 400 (and hurdles) than anything from the 800 on up. A lot of that is because UTEP, MTSU and maybe Charlotte seem to have a lot of foreign middle-distance and distance runners.

Either way, the women had a strong effort and considering they barely scored in the distance events (compared to how they normally do), they certainly have a chance to win the conference next year. That's assuming Hannah Jackson returns for her senior season, and knowing the epidemic of graduate transfers, that might be an incorrect assumption to make.

Since I was the PA announcer for the meet, I saw everything, but was unable to post. There's so much to tell, particularly in response to the posts, above. But, I'm tired and will get around to it later.

Hannah Jackson will be back.

(05-12-2019 03:42 PM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  Hannah Jackson will be back.

Yay!! Great news!

(05-12-2019 03:42 PM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  Since I was the PA announcer for the meet, I saw everything, but was unable to post. There's so much to tell, particularly in response to the posts, above. But, I'm tired and will get around to it later.

I look forward to your Paul Harveyesque post.

I will add more later, but wanted to highlight Michelle Fokam. She had won the long jump on Saturday, for the 2nd straight year, but was the underdog in the triple jump against Danielle Spence (Jamaica) of USTA, coached by former Rice All-American Kareem Streete-Thompson. Spence had defeated Fokam at the C-USA Indoor Championship, and was the conference leader in the outdoor triple jump.

Fokam took the lead in the preliminary rounds, which permitted her to jump last in the final 3 rounds. Spence, jumping 8th (next-to-last), had trouble in rounds 4 and 5, but then uncorked a lifetime best in the 6th and final round to suddenly take the lead, and, apparently, the victory.

Michelle had only a minute to gather herself, because her next jump was the last of the competition. She proceeded to go down the runway and have her lifetime best to win the triple jump. Totally clutch!

So, in the past two outdoor championships, she has four wins (2 in the long jump and 2 in the triple jump).

(05-12-2019 07:29 PM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  I will add more later, but wanted to highlight Michelle Fokam. She had won the long jump on Saturday, for the 2nd straight year, but was the underdog in the triple jump against Danielle Spence (Jamaica) of USTA, coached by former Rice All-American Kareem Streete-Thompson. Spence had defeated Fokam at the C-USA Indoor Championship, and was the conference leader in the outdoor triple jump.

Fokam took the lead in the preliminary rounds, which permitted her to jump last in the final 3 rounds. Spence, jumping 8th (next-to-last), had trouble in rounds 4 and 5, but then uncorked a lifetime best in the 6th and final round to suddenly take the lead, and, apparently, the victory.

Michelle had only a minute to gather herself, because her next jump was the last of the competition. She proceeded to go down the runway and have her lifetime best to win the triple jump. Totally clutch!

So, in the past two outdoor championships, she has four wins (2 in the long jump and 2 in the triple jump).

This sounds straight out of Hollywood! She must be beside herself with that performance. Well done!

(05-12-2019 07:53 PM)franklyconfused Wrote:  

(05-12-2019 07:29 PM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  I will add more later, but wanted to highlight Michelle Fokam. She had won the long jump on Saturday, for the 2nd straight year, but was the underdog in the triple jump against Danielle Spence (Jamaica) of USTA, coached by former Rice All-American Kareem Streete-Thompson. Spence had defeated Fokam at the C-USA Indoor Championship, and was the conference leader in the outdoor triple jump.
Fokam took the lead in the preliminary rounds, which permitted her to jump last in the final 3 rounds. Spence, jumping 8th (next-to-last), had trouble in rounds 4 and 5, but then uncorked a lifetime best in the 6th and final round to suddenly take the lead, and, apparently, the victory.
Michelle had only a minute to gather herself, because her next jump was the last of the competition. She proceeded to go down the runway and have her lifetime best to win the triple jump. Totally clutch!
So, in the past two outdoor championships, she has four wins (2 in the long jump and 2 in the triple jump).

This sounds straight out of Hollywood! She must be beside herself with that performance. Well done!

Congrats, Michelle, well done.

https://twitter.com/RiceTFXC/status/1127...53856?s=19

Interview with Rice women's coach Jim Bevan and Hannah Jackson.

Thanks, WRC, for keeping us informed.

(05-12-2019 11:55 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-12-2019 11:40 AM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  Our inability to do anything in the sprints on the men’s side kills us.

FBO or WRC, or anybody more knowledgeable than I am, would there be any benefit to working with football to recruit some RBs or DBs or WRs with exceptional speed and having them run sprints as well? I've been a proponent, at least conceptually, of emphasizing multi-sports athletes in recruiting, and making solid commitments to then that they could participate in multiple sports, as a way of improving the quality of our football recruiting. I still think the ability to add maybe 2 or 3 better athletes each year outweighs whatever benefit might be imparted in off-season football training, but I must admit that I don't know if there are really enough multi-sport athletes left to make a difference in track. The high schools have pretty much forced specialization in one sport on lots of kids, with which I totally disagree.

Confession: My roommate was a baseball player when half the baseball team were football players, and it was a pretty good team until the then football coach/AD took steps to end the practice, so my judgement is not exactly objective. And being a rugby coach may have pushed me even more in that direction. My friend, Sir Ian McGeechan, coach and head of rugby for Scotland for several years, was a huge proponent of having kids play multiple sports, and that may have influenced me as well.

Once football has them, they won't let them go. Additionally, very few football players could pee a drop in our conference in the sprints (the #14 guy in C-USA ran 10.58 in the 100 meters this season). George Nyakwol is an exception - in the triple jump. He can score in a good triple jump conference, with only minimal practice. He's unique, however.

What track and field needs is more athletes, but the administration refuses to budge on its limit. The University of Houston, to give one example, has over 50 freshmen on its men's and women's track teams. Rice's teams are allotted 12 - total. Depth is crucial in this sport, because you have to create a cross country team from those same numbers. Add up 50 for 4 years = 200 versus 24 for Rice. You don't think that makes a difference, especially when there are injuries, for example?

It takes 9 to run cross country. 7 must run at the conference meet because of displacement, and you need 2 extra in case of injuries or redshirting. Then, for outdoor track and field, there are 21 events at a conference meet. Now, with more numbers, we aren't restricted to skipping all sprints and jumps in order to concentrate on multis, throws and distance. At a conference meet, it's NUMBERS that make the difference. I'm amazed that Coach Bevan can do so well, but it's easier with 18 scholarships, than with 12.6 for the guys.

I realize that this may not address all of the issues, but slots may be the biggest one.

(05-18-2019 05:04 PM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  

(05-12-2019 11:55 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-12-2019 11:40 AM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  Our inability to do anything in the sprints on the men’s side kills us.

FBO or WRC, or anybody more knowledgeable than I am, would there be any benefit to working with football to recruit some RBs or DBs or WRs with exceptional speed and having them run sprints as well? I've been a proponent, at least conceptually, of emphasizing multi-sports athletes in recruiting, and making solid commitments to then that they could participate in multiple sports, as a way of improving the quality of our football recruiting. I still think the ability to add maybe 2 or 3 better athletes each year outweighs whatever benefit might be imparted in off-season football training, but I must admit that I don't know if there are really enough multi-sport athletes left to make a difference in track. The high schools have pretty much forced specialization in one sport on lots of kids, with which I totally disagree.

Confession: My roommate was a baseball player when half the baseball team were football players, and it was a pretty good team until the then football coach/AD took steps to end the practice, so my judgement is not exactly objective. And being a rugby coach may have pushed me even more in that direction. My friend, Sir Ian McGeechan, coach and head of rugby for Scotland for several years, was a huge proponent of having kids play multiple sports, and that may have influenced me as well.

Once football has them, they won't let them go. Additionally, very few football players could pee a drop in our conference in the sprints (the #14 guy in C-USA ran 10.58 in the 100 meters this season). George Nyakwol is an exception - in the triple jump. He can score in a good triple jump conference, with only minimal practice. He's unique, however.

What track and field needs is more athletes, but the administration refuses to budge on its limit. The University of Houston, to give one example, has over 50 freshmen on its men's and women's track teams. Rice's teams are allotted 12 - total. Depth is crucial in this sport, because you have to create a cross country team from those same numbers. Add up 50 for 4 years = 200 versus 24 for Rice. You don't think that makes a difference, especially when there are injuries, for example?

It takes 9 to run cross country. 7 must run at the conference meet because of displacement, and you need 2 extra in case of injuries or redshirting. Then, for outdoor track and field, there are 21 events at a conference meet. Now, with more numbers, we aren't restricted to skipping all sprints and jumps in order to concentrate on multis, throws and distance. At a conference meet, it's NUMBERS that make the difference. I'm amazed that Coach Bevan can do so well, but it's easier with 18 scholarships, than with 12.6 for the guys.

I realize that this may not address all of the issues, but slots may be the biggest one.

So I count 36 guys currently on the Men’s T&F roster... Are you saying that in recruiting, the administration allows for the 9 XC runners (probably 3 per year when accounting for attrition) plus an additional 6 T&F only? Or 6 total?

The roster includes walk-ons --> real ones, unlike the fake walk-ons ("preferred walk-ons") that football gets. Those in track and field actually apply and get accepted on their own.

(05-18-2019 05:04 PM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  What track and field needs is more athletes, but the administration refuses to budge on its limit. The University of Houston, to give one example, has over 50 freshmen on its men's and women's track teams. Rice's teams are allotted 12 - total. Depth is crucial in this sport, because you have to create a cross country team from those same numbers. Add up 50 for 4 years = 200 versus 24 for Rice. You don't think that makes a difference, especially when there are injuries, for example?

It takes 9 to run cross country. 7 must run at the conference meet because of displacement, and you need 2 extra in case of injuries or redshirting. Then, for outdoor track and field, there are 21 events at a conference meet. Now, with more numbers, we aren't restricted to skipping all sprints and jumps in order to concentrate on multis, throws and distance. At a conference meet, it's NUMBERS that make the difference. I'm amazed that Coach Bevan can do so well, but it's easier with 18 scholarships, than with 12.6 for the guys.

I realize that this may not address all of the issues, but slots may be the biggest one.

Not disputing any of the above, just wondering how UH gets so many walkons. It's obviously a big school but it certainly used to be the case that UH didn't have any more walkons than Rice did, nor did Illinois (where I spent a grad year after Rice). Maybe things have changed in the last 30 years (ha) but I was never aware of any college intentionally recruiting/accepting a super large number of walkons and trying to develop kids therefrom to legitimately compete at the Div. I level, which is what I presume you are saying UH is doing now? Or are larger numbers of kids basically just recruiting themselves to UH because their coaches are well known?

Anyway, your larger point is absolutely on target. In my opinion, Rice should be giving Coaches Warren and Bevan the same number of automatic admits for walkons that Ivy League schools are giving their XC/T&F programs. The sport has a lot of academically bright kids but with our acceptance rate plummeting to single digits now, we can't rely on a steady supply of them getting through and dropping into our coaches' laps.