This is great news, sort of. Well, since I'm probably in the third of my life, I just going to unload some of this baggage for my flight. As a former track coach in the area, I could not help but notice a clear, demographic line between cross-country and track and field teams. White kids participate in cross country in greater numbers than black kids. This is no knock on the cross country, just the business of cross country. This cross country only crap is just another way to discriminate. Sprinting, as an American event has always been a strength, but systematic, copy cat moves like this weakened USA dominance because there is reluctant support on this soil. Anyway, I don't want to project more bitterness than I already am...Anyway, good luck with the Kenyans, Somalians, and Mexicans in the Olympics.
Not to start a race argument, but why don't more black kids run cross country? It works both ways. Why don't more white kids run youth track?
In any case, for colleges this is a financial problem and not a race problem. Track teams, especially at the collegiate level, are VERY VERY expensive and bring almost nothing to a university. They are money pits plain and simple. You can't just field sprinters, you need a track (not all colleges have them - life does), pits, hurdles, very pricey mats, poles, implements, lots of coaches, lots of athletes (uniforms, food, travel, and more), and depending on the division, more scholarships. Cross country teams can get by on one coach and a van at this level. The addition of any XC/track team (heck, any sport!) to any college should be celebrated during these times especially when it may translate to the opportunity for more Georgia athletes to compete at the next level.
: say whatever you want, justify it anyway you can, XC only is racial preference. In the your first paragraph, you almost supported my argument. I didn't expect a through, honest discussion.
Minority participation in cross country is a topic that deserves its own thread. However, in the case of adding collegiate cross country it comes down to $$ and gender equity. Starting a women's xc program is about the least expensive sport that can be added and it helps balance the numbers to meet Title 9 requirements.
There are actually several historically black colleges that offer cross country, but do not have track and field teams. Spelman College in Atlanta is an example that comes to mind. Though I don't know the specifics of their athletic program, perhaps this supports the argument that this is an economic decision made by colleges.
USC has a track team but no XC team. A darn good track team as well!
hmmm...so Life College is participating in a conspiracy to keep the black man down...because they're offering XC as a sport? What do you do - go around counting how many blacks are participating in a particular activity & then just allege racism if there aren't enough blacks? Are water polo & equestrian also racist sports? I don't see a lot of black girls playing college volleyball - is that racist as well? Does it work the other way though, i.e. college basketball & football? I bet not..
Why can't we just be excited that Life is bringing in an XC team and creating more opportunities for more athletes to compete on the next level? It shouldn't be deemed racist just because there aren't that many African Americans competing in the sport, no one is keeping them from competing. Hopefully the team will be diverse and there will be no more talk on this issue. By the way in the college ranks there aren't too many white guys winning XC championships.