Both the men's and women's teams have been losing to Cal State East Bay, Pomona-Pitzer, UC Santa Cruz, Claremont Mudd-Scripss, Concordia University Irvine, Stanislaus State, Chico State, Biola, Cal State East Bay, Fresno Pacific, UCSD, Salt Lake College and The Masters - often multiple times - this season:

https://timerhub.com/get_web_index.php?page=redcaptiming.com/2022/bronco/
https://s3.amazonaws.com/sidearm.sites/calberk.sidearmsports.com/documents/2022/9/17/UCR_Invite_Women_s_Results__2022.09.17_.pdf
https://calbears.com/documents/2022/9/6/USF_Invite_Results__9.3.2022_.pdf

I'm actually a huge fan of the direction Coach Johnson and Coach Mo are taking the track and field program with an emphasis on throws and sprints. It's awesome to see that program competitive within the Pac12 and relevant nationally again. But I don't get how small walk-on only programs and schools no one has ever heard of are beating us in XC? Is there something I'm not thinking of that would explain this or can anyone offer more insight?

Think the xc recruiting since coach Davis left has been subpar and last year was practically nonexistent! There a couple of distance recruits that have committed to Cal for next year.

BayAreaClubCoach said:

---

I'm actually a huge fan of the direction Coach Johnson and Coach Mo are taking the track and field program with an emphasis on throws and sprints. It's awesome to see that program competitive within the Pac12 and relevant nationally again. But I don't get how small walk-on only programs and schools no one has ever heard of are beating us in XC? Is there something I'm not thinking of that would explain this or can anyone offer more insight?

---

I think that you're missing the fact that the Cal teams have been suffering from sickness and injury.

For example, Cal's top 2 men's runners came into the Bronco Invite coming back from sickness and their #3 guy had to sit out because of it.

The only thing that matters is being healthy for the Pac-12's this Friday at UC Riverside.

It will be aired on the Pac-12 Network.

FYI: Coach Bobby Lockhart knows what he's doing. His coaching bio will tell you as much.

The guy was at OK State turning them into a distance powerhouse over 10 years with NCAA Titles in 2009, 2010, and 2012, not too mention two more top 3 finishes in 2011 and 2013. Coach Lockhard was also a highly decorated prep phenom and named "Nike Athlete of the Year".

Now... is he getting the scholarship money to recruit who he wants to come to Cal?

That's a whole nother question.

Well that would be the insight I was looking for :-). Coach Lockhart's resume is clearly impeccable…that's just why I was hoping we weren't getting beat by local non scholarship teams in his 4th year. I haven't paid close enough attention to the program to know who has been sick and injured. But I have paid close enough attention to the Pac12 to know the Arizona schools and USC are getting beat by those same programs…& Cal. So hoping we can get healthy enough by this weekend to beat another program that hasn't abandoned their distance squad. Thanks for the intel!

No worries.

"Cal Junkie" is far closer to the Cal distance programs than I am. He probably has a lot more insight into the roster than I do.

So, in addition to losing to D2 and D3 teams, the men's XC team just finished 9th out of 9 at the Pac 12 meet, the women were 10th out of 12. The men's top finisher was 56th, the women's was 69th.This is the meet they were apparently building towards?

I don't want to disparage the efforts of our student athletes, but I've said it before here, I just can't fathom how the XC teams can continually perform at this level given all the inherent advantages Cal possesses. Cal could and should be a draw for California cross country recruits (and potential coaches), even if the team is not funded at the levels of a Colorado, Oregon, or Stanford. Great academics, great campus, in-state tuition for CA residents with no or minimal scholarship funds, perfect running weather year round, great areas to run all throughout the East Bay, access to good facilities in Edwards track and the athletic training center.

It seems like year after year, Cal is being out-performed by schools with far less resources and mostly, if not all, walk on athletes whose HS PRs are far behind Cal's runners.

No one doubts Lockhart's resume and Cal seems to recruit decently, my scan of the rosters shows some pretty good high school PRs for most if not all of the runners. So can someone tell me why Cal can't break into the upper echelon of the Pac in cross country?

MarylandBear said:

---

It seems like year after year, Cal is being out-performed by schools with far less resources and mostly, if not all, walk on athletes whose HS PRs are far behind Cal's runners.

No one doubts Lockhart's resume and Cal seems to recruit decently, my scan of the rosters shows some pretty good high school PRs for most if not all of the runners. So can someone tell me why Cal can't break into the upper echelon of the Pac in cross country?

---

Like I said above, you should ask Cal Junkie for his opinion.
He's a lot closer to the program than I am.

I would also suggest that the recruits that are on the current Cal roster may not be as talented as you have assumed them to be coming out of high school. The women's squad saw numerous PR's on the season (4) at Pac-12's, and yet they still finished in 10th place.

I don't know what to say. Our men were 5th overall, we don't really have anyone right now, lost a lot of firepower in the pandemic which may have also happened to Cal. I know their restrictions were brutal and the coaches were not able to do much.

Still, our women just won this meet over HOKA Aggies, Sacramento Racing Association Elite, the Impalas (they did not bring everyone), Peninsula Distance Club (they did not bring everyone). We have won five straight meets in a row and are racing the Pacific Association and Western Regional USATF Championships in San Francisco on Nov 20th and the USATF National Club Cross Country Championships, also in San Francisco this year, on Dec. 10th.

Only two out of our top six women ran in college (one NCAA D3, the other at an Ivy). The top six averaged sub-5:40-mile pace. I'm willing to bet they would be in the top 25 or better at the D1 NCAA meet.

So that's all I've got to say about that.

2022 Matt Yeo Memorial Aggies XC Open

4.2 Miles

October 29, 2022

Official Results

Note: There will be a 24 hour protest period for this race. The period starts at

WOMEN'S RESULTS

PLACE
BIB#
FIRST NAME
LAST NAME
AGE
TEAM
TIME
1
127
Kayla
Knapp
27
Pennisula DC 339
22:38.6
2
293
Julia
Sizek
31
Strawberry Cyn 384
22:51.3
3
296
Jonah
Weeks
32
SRA Elite 465
22:58.6
4
53
Annie
Dear
31
Hoka Aggies RC 111
23:06.3
5
155
Gillian
Meeks
24
SRA Elite 465
23:09.0
6
294
Megan
Gentes
27
Strawberry Cyn 384
23:20.0
7
194
Liza
Reichert
35
Hoka Aggies RC 111
23:25.7
8
143
Ally
Markovich
27
Strawberry Cyn 384
23:29.8
9
236
Annie
Taylor
25
Pennisula DC 339
23:30.4
10
152
Camille
Matonis
29
Impala Racing 115
23:30.5
11
9
Lucy
Andrews
30
Oakland TC 656
23:49.0
12
313
Danielle
Damenichelli
35
SRA Elite 465
23:57.1
13
5
Amanda
Alvarado
25
SRA Elite 465
24:00.0
14
117
Madeleine
Johnson
20
Strawberry Cyn 384
24:05.0
15
253
Amanda
Wiggenhorn
26
West Vly TC 110
24:08.3
16
80
Sarah
Gayer
22
Pennisula DC 339
24:10.6
17
50
Kimberly
Dardine
29
Strawberry Cyn 384
24:14.7
18
299
Lauren
Misenti
32
SRA Elite 465
24:19.7
19
306
Nora
Pizzella
24
Hoka Aggies RC 111
24:21.6
20
24
Brianna
Bourne
23
Pennisula DC 339
24:24.4
21
121
Anna
Kacius
29
Impala Racing 115
24:26.2
22
259
Georgia
Wright-Simmons
32
Impala Racing 115
24:40.4
23
110
Maya
Hope
35
Strawberry Cyn 384
24:47.4
24
14
Megan
Barrett
32
Santa Cruz TC 137
24:57.7
25
156
Carmen
Mejia
27
Pennisula DC 339
25:05.5
26
221
Connie
Shieh
34
Oakland TC 656
25:09.6
27
263
Lindy
Zeng
26
West Vly TC 110
25:10.0
28
179
Elizabeth
Ordeman
23
Hoka Aggies RC 111
25:15.8
29
57
Emma
Dohner
29
Hoka Aggies RC 111
25:19.2

When I looked at the men's roster there looks to be some talent there, perhaps not the Newbury Park 8:40 3200 type runners that end up at NAU, Colorado or Stanford, but CA state meet competitors. I understand the Pac 12 is hyper competitive, but the men's roster at the very least compares favorably to the non-power 5 type teams Cal currently is behind - Santa Claras, Cal Poly SLOs, etc. There may even be college club XC programs that could beat Cal right now.

To me the problem seems to be the development of the talent, as opposed to recruiting.

If Lockhart is as good at developing young runners as his resume would suggest, I would suspect Cal would not be finishing last in the conference. Either way, this kind of result should be absolutely unacceptable at a school like Cal with all the advantages it enjoys.

I suppose you don't have to look too far to find a club coach who seems to be pretty good at developing runners (apparently including some who are very inexperienced with racing at a high level) without all the advantages of a major college sporting department behind him.

NCAA Western Regional about to kick off at 10 AM for the Women and 11 AM for the Men at UW.

Here is the results link:

NCAA DI West XC 2022---RESULTS (rtspt.com)

DiabloWags said:

---

NCAA Western Regional about to kick off at 10 AM for the Women and 11 AM for the Men at UW.

Here is the results link:

NCAA DI West XC 2022---RESULTS (rtspt.com)

---

Wonder if Garrett MacQuiddy our top runner will run today (didn't in the Pac-12 'ship). Not that it will make much diiff though.

Cal women came in #23 out of 35 teams. 100-103-124-158-189(192)(207)

Cal men came in #21 out of 31 teams. 104-116-121-135-142(150)(164)

Thanks for posting. Disappointing season...........................

OBear073akaSMFan said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

NCAA Western Regional about to kick off at 10 AM for the Women and 11 AM for the Men at UW.

Here is the results link:

NCAA DI West XC 2022---RESULTS (rtspt.com)

---

Wonder if Garrett MacQuiddy our top runner will run today (didn't in the Pac-12 'ship). Not that it will make much diiff though.

---

MacQuiddy ran.
Was 2.5 minutes off the lead runner and was the 6th Cal runner across the line (150)
Our best runner was sophomore Ethan Bersley who was 2 minutes off the lead pace, finishing 104.

MarylandBear said:

---

When I looked at the men's roster there looks to be some talent there, perhaps not the Newbury Park 8:40 3200 type runners that end up at NAU, Colorado or Stanford, but CA state meet competitors. I understand the Pac 12 is hyper competitive, but the men's roster at the very least compares favorably to the non-power 5 type teams Cal currently is behind - Santa Claras, Cal Poly SLOs, etc. There may even be college club XC programs that could beat Cal right now.

To me the problem seems to be the development of the talent, as opposed to recruiting.

If Lockhart is as good at developing young runners as his resume would suggest, I would suspect Cal would not be finishing last in the conference. Either way, this kind of result should be absolutely unacceptable at a school like Cal with all the advantages it enjoys.

I suppose you don't have to look too far to find a club coach who seems to be pretty good at developing runners (apparently including some who are very inexperienced with racing at a high level) without all the advantages of a major college sporting department behind him.

---

Just to clarify - the other women were not inexperienced, but were mostly 12:30 3200 runners in high school, so not on the college radar. (One was 11:30-18:45, but still not fast enough for college at Cal). They developed over several years, beyond the NCAA timeline, so I don't know if this would have happened in 1-2 years.

However I think one can take a reasonably well developed high school runner and have them in near-peak form in two years of college.

Cal seems to prefer NCAA-branded coaches. But - keep an eye on our women at USATF Club Cross Country Nationals next month in San Francisco. Should be very interesting.

It seems all NCAA programs prefer NCAA branded coaches…I tried to get in a while back but it was explained to me that typically the head coach and admin don't want to have to take the time being the full time coach's training wheels. Teaching NCAA rules, guiding them through the recruiting process, mentoring about fund raising etc. I can't imagine those are that complicated/time consuming, but alas, every time I've tried, I've been told I either have to start as a volunteer, a GA, or see if some DIII or Juco will hire me. No thanks.

Back to the topic…is it too late to go get Coach Houlihan back? This is about the state she took the team over in last time…

BayAreaClubCoach said:

---

Back to the topic…is it too late to go get Coach Houlihan back? This is about the state she took the team over in last time…

---

Is it Houlihan or Chas Davis? Heard Chas was the recruiter of many if out Athletics. Bottomline think xc and dustance has been de-emphasized by our coaches (IMO).

The reality is that under the current regime thing will only get worse. Funding has been pulled, although budgets haven't been reduced- but WHY in the world would you travel to a meet just to get clobbered… and plain and simple the team has more fun partying than running. Time to celebrate the track team EVERYONE complained about for so long as it's the one that is performing well. Losing to several D2 teams will be the norm for xc…. just be glad San Jose State XC is still the worst in the Bay Area

BayAreaClubCoach said:

---

It seems all NCAA programs prefer NCAA branded coaches…I tried to get in a while back but it was explained to me that typically the head coach and admin don't want to have to take the time being the full time coach's training wheels. Teaching NCAA rules, guiding them through the recruiting process, mentoring about fund raising etc. I can't imagine those are that complicated/time consuming, but alas, every time I've tried, I've been told I either have to start as a volunteer, a GA, or see if some DIII or Juco will hire me. No thanks.

Back to the topic…is it too late to go get Coach Houlihan back? This is about the state she took the team over in last time…

---

There is some truth to that 'training wheels' element. I was an assistant at 2006 NAIA men's team/individual champion (XC) Virginia Intermont in 2006-07, so I have a little college experience, but NAIA is different than the NCAA. Still, I was pretty caught up on things like eligibility, driving the van, travel budgeting/meals, recruiting dos and don'ts, and some other aspects. There is an NCAA rules handbook, learn that well and perhaps that can be an asset. As for recruiting - fish in a barrel for me. All kinds of high school distance runners come to Cal as freshmen and develop far beyond their high school coaches expectations. They would send me kids in a heartbeat.

Cal does not have a distance team culture. I would make strides to correct that. We need to be going after the top half of the PAC 12 conference in cross country - it IS a competitive season after all - and fast distance runners will help you in a (scoring) track meet. Another point about track is, many NCAA meets are geared towards snaring individual performances (times/places) that ultimately qualify you for higher rung meets - i.e. conference, NCAA Regionals and the NCAA National Championships.

Carl, I'm pretty sure they would have hired you by now if they were interested. Best advice I can offer is to keep SC beating them at the open meets, all comers, and xc club races. Another thought is to reach out to Pete Cushman who is the Bronco director and get your team of colleged aged men and women on the same starting line as Cal, show them who's boss like.

Cal tries to be all things to all athletes and in the past has tried to run a "balanced" program with all events being supported with coaching and money. But the fact of the matter is that this program is not fully-funded, has never been fully-funded - - - and lacks legacy alums (with money) that support the program. Those people have largely passed away.

Cal can only make some "noise" and score points at the conference level if they avoid the "balanced" event model and "specialize" in an event like the throws.

They have a world class throws coach in Mo Saatara.
They are literally able to recruit on an international level and attract U20 throwers.
This is clearly where the money is going.

College is very expensive these days.

If you are a prep distance runner that finished on ( or near ) the podium at the CIF State Meet, why would you go to a school that doesnt offer you much in the way of financial support? Moreover, if youre the head XC coach of just such a program, how do you go about selling a teenager (and their parents) on the Cal program without offering much more than an admission slot and paying for books?

DiabloWags said:

---

Cal tries to be all things to all athletes and in the past has tried to run a "balanced" program with all events being supported with coaching and money. But the fact of the matter is that this program is not fully-funded, has never been fully-funded - - - and lacks legacy alums (with money) that support the program. Those people have largely passed away.

Cal can only make some "noise" and score points at the conference level if they avoid the "balanced" event model and "specialize" in an event like the throws.

They have a world class throws coach in Mo Saatara.
They are literally able to recruit on an international level and attract U20 throwers.
This is clearly where the money is going.

College is very expensive these days.

If you are a prep distance runner that finished on ( or near ) the podium at the CIF State Meet, why would you go to a school that doesnt offer you much in the way of financial support? Moreover, if youre the head XC coach of just such a program, how do you go about selling a teenager (and their parents) on the Cal program without offering much more than an admission slot and paying for books?

---

I thought the Maxwell Family gave a lot of money to track and field.

juarezbear said:

---

I thought the Maxwell Family gave a lot of money to track and field.

---

That would be an incorrect assumption.
To my knowledge, they've (Jennifer) given to the Cal Athletic Department, but not to T&F.

DiabloWags said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

I thought the Maxwell Family gave a lot of money to track and field.

---

That would be an incorrect assumption.
To my knowledge, they've (Jennifer) given to the Cal Athletic Department, but not to T&F.

---

Good to know and thanks.

juarezbear said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

juarezbear said:

---

I thought the Maxwell Family gave a lot of money to track and field.

---

That would be an incorrect assumption.
To my knowledge, they've (Jennifer) given to the Cal Athletic Department, but not to T&F.

---

Good to know and thanks.

---

Check your mailbox.

Eastbayglider said:

---

Carl, I'm pretty sure they would have hired you by now if they were interested. Best advice I can offer is to keep SC beating them at the open meets, all comers, and xc club races. Another thought is to reach out to Pete Cushman who is the Bronco director and get your team of colleged aged men and women on the same starting line as Cal, show them who's boss like.

---

Yes, I'm aware of that. I think, regardless of results, Cal isn't interested in me - that's OK I will support the program as best as I can. We run association races, so we haven't been compelled to run in the Santa Clara Bronco Invite. Pete is a great colleague, wrote me a wonderful reference letter.

The lack of financial support doesn't concern me as much. I am confident I can beat a lot of teams wit 9:10-20 guys and 11:10-20 girls out of high school who get no scholarship money, but that's neither here nor there. Secondly, I agree - they SHOULD put their money into the throws and sprints. Those contingents are earning the lion's share of the points at national meets and placing their teams in the top 20 in rankings, which is a smashing success.

When Houlihan was coaching and Davis was recruiting, I knew of plenty of sub 9:10/10:40 athletes I worked with who walked on…and faster kids who barely got any schollie. Although you could argue some of those athletes "should have done better" they were getting some of those teams to natty's & some of those kids to AA off of what had to be very little money if I'm adding it up right (I was able to get a pretty good idea who was on what based on what the kids said).

BayAreaClubCoach said:

---

When Houlihan was coaching and Davis was recruiting, I knew of plenty of sub 9:10/10:40 athletes I worked with who walked on…and faster kids who barely got any schollie. Although you could argue some of those athletes "should have done better" they were getting some of those teams to natty's & some of those kids to AA off of what had to be very little money if I'm adding it up right (I was able to get a pretty good idea who was on what based on what the kids said).

---

I have no "skin" in this game, but it appears that you are pointing fingers at the coaching?
Is that the bottom line???

Who were these 9:10/10:40 athletes that "walked" on?
I'm curious.

Does anyone have any insight as to why Houlihan left? As others have said the program seemed to be in a better state when she was coaching.

FWIW I was recently listening to a podcast with former Stanford coach Chris Miltenberg who said his key to recruiting was to identify runners who were passionate about competing and winning. Of course that goes without saying, but he went on to say there were no shortage of runners who were well qualified athletically and academically for Stanford, but that 95% of them were more interested in just attending Stanford as opposed to really wanting to compete at the highest levels. You had to really have a desire to be great to get an offer, and that once you get a critical mass of like minded runners, combined with coaches who can develop athletes, a winning culture builds itself.

Not interested in lavishing praise on Stanford but Cal could learn something from that approach. If it is true that the distance running culture at Cal is lacking, maybe the program needs to look at more than just PRs when recruiting athletes. Obviously Stanford XC is in a far different place than Cal but the same general approach could apply to Cal as well.

Also, can someone could please explain the economics of college XC to me? I understand that Cal doesn't have a lot of scholarship money, but doesn't that apply to 85-90% of college programs? And if that is true, I would imagine that simply offering help getting into Cal would still be a huge draw (for the right student athletes), especially for California families who would be paying in-state tuition (as opposed to getting a small scholarship at a much more expensive private school). Plenty of less-attractive schools with similar if not worse resources are doing well in the sport; even the service academies with their unique situation (and obstacles) have managed to build good XC programs.

For starters, the Cal XC Program has no scholarship money.
Athletic scholarships are on the Track & Field side only; and T&F is only partially funded.

This ain't true. Sorry Charlie. Distances do have scholarship. Especially for anyone who could impact at the NCAA level. Track is funded near full with 10 men and 16 women - 2 off what's allowed. The distances are allocated a few on the womens side and a couple on the mens side

Eastbayglider said:

---

This ain't true. Sorry Charlie.

---

You're funny.

MarylandBear said:

---

Also, can someone could please explain the economics of college XC to me? I understand that Cal doesn't have a lot of scholarship money, but doesn't that apply to 85-90% of college programs?

---

You're forgetting that CAL is supporting a total of 28 sports.
Teams with winning XC programs (such as OK State) have half that number.

Cowboys Finish Runner-Up in Tie-Breaking Fashion, Cowgirls Secure First Team Trophy in Program History at NCAA Cross Country Championships - Oklahoma State University Athletics (okstate.com)

We're one of the biggest universities in the world. We have the backing of the 4th largest economy in the world….. We at one point paid millions to two different football head coaches… and you think because we don't support a few sports is why we don't have full funding for xc and track? We're at these levels because nobody cares who matters. That's the reason.

Do yourself a favor and stop lashing out at someone that was associated with the T&F program from 2005 - 2010 and who is trying to help you understand the finances of Cal's IAD.

The Cal Athletics Department continues to run massive annual deficits, that have been covered for years by the Chancellor. They've ranged between $10 - $25 million dollars each year.

The current Athletic Dept budget is around $100 million. 20% of that went to servicing the Stadium and SAHP debt. Half of that ($238 Million) was recently "relieved" by Chancellor Christ and now falls on the central campus given her position that the seismic retrofit of Memorial should have never been the burden of the Cal IAD in the first place.

Revenue sports like Football and Basketball subsidize the rest of the sports programs at Cal. That's a fact.

Some non-revenue Olympic Sports like Rugby, Swimming, and Water Polo have enjoyed large endowments via strong alumni relationships and legacy donors. That's how the $18 Million dollar "Legends" aquatic facility got built. Not a penny came from Cal.

Cal T&F does not enjoy such financial support from alums.

In fact, a recent former head coach shunned involvement and fund-raising activity by alums because his (excuse) was that he didnt want "outsiders" telling him what to do. Meanwhile, facilities at Edwards Field are in dire need of an upgrade, especially given the fact that we're hosting Pac-12's soon. For example, we're talking about the track needing to be resurfaced and a new throwing cage. It's probably time for a new pole vault pit too. The last one was purchased via donations. - - - Dont even get me started on a much needed seismic retrofit. Have you been to Edwards lately? Notice that the east side of the stadium has been cordoned off? How about chunks of concrete missing?

Money doesnt fall from trees and the fact that California is the 4th largest economy in the world has no bearing on Cal's IAD budget. If it did, then maybe the state legislature would approve out of state recruits to only pay in-state tuition, like ASU, UofA, WSU, and UW do.

About 15 years ago, I was invited to a Cal Track & Field Banquet at the Claremont Country Club hosted by Cal Hall of Famer Monte Upshaw who passed away in 2017. Monte was trying to raise awareness of just how poorly the track and field program was funded. In his presentation, one of the slides showed Cal second to last in the Pac-10 in total budget. I cant remember if the number was $1.7 million or $1.3 million. It was one of those. In any event, that was 3 Cal athletic directors ago and I dont see anything changing anytime soon.

A few years later in 2010, Cal AD Sandy Barbour wanted to cut 4 sports, including highly expensive Baseball. While we can debate whether or not she went about this in the wrong manner, especially given Title IX issues which are problematic . . . the fact remains that Cal simply could no longer support all of these teams that they were supporting.
The writing was on the wall 12 YEARS AGO.

If coaches and the Cal Administration fail to raise money to support our current number of 28 teams, I have a strong feeling that AD Knowlton will have to revisit considering making actual intercollegiate sports team cuts, and not just roster downsizing. They've already done that.

FYI: UCLA has 21 teams