From: norton@cmf.nrl.navy.mil (David Norton)
Subject: Re: RE: Collegiate Problems
Reply-To: norton@cmf.nrl.navy.mil
Organization: Naval Research Lab, Washington, DC
Distribution: w
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 20:05:33 GMT

In article <19JAN93.15293482@amazon.pfc.mit.edu> stek@amazon.pfc.mit.edu  
writes:
[....]
> I don't know how the Penn State system is set up, but can you imagine
> what a blowout it would be if all the University of California
> Teams were lumped in together.  I think that is effectively what is
> now the policy regarding Penn State in the ECCC(C?).

	I believe that the situation is a bit grayer then this portrayal  
of Penn State.  Penn State has about 20 "branch" campuses that offer only  
freshman and sophomore courses.  Students then move to the "main"  
(University Park) campus to finish their degrees.  Additionally, Penn  
State has 2 or three campuses which do grant degrees  (Erie, Harrisburg,  
and grad degrees in Philadelphia).  The UC system, SUNY, and others are  
all independent schools.  

	How do you go about partioning a sytem like Penn State's ( which I  
believe is the only system like this in the country ).  Do you make teams  
of freshmen and sophmores ride as a team?  From the view point of a coach  
who wants to win, this is not overly desirable.  Do you group all of the  
riders together and make them all compete for the limited number of spots  
on the team?  From the rider's view point, this is not desirable as many  
riders never get the chance to race, at least races with field limits, and  
championships.  

	Several years ago, when the coach had more control over the  
situation,  the former approach was taken.  In the past few years, the  
riders have chosen participation rather then stacking the team with elite  
riders, so that more could participate.  [The side benefit to this  
approach has been that the main campus gets more experienced riders as  
branch campus attendees (at least those that haven't dropped out in their  
first two years) move to the main campus.] 

	I think that the riders deserve a lot of credit for standing up to  
the establishment and changing the structure of the team so that more  
could participate (campuses riding separately), and the establishment  
deserves a lot of thanks for doing the college racing thing so long as to  
actually become the establishment.  As always, the struggle goes on  
between the riders and their views, and the coaches and NCCA and their  
views.  The year to year situation at Penn State seems to depend on the  
riders at the various campuses and their desire to participate.  Funny  
thing, without the coaches and NCCA there would be very little college  
racing, and without college riders, there is little need for coaches or  
the NCCA 

Sure UC could put together an incredible team if they combined all  
schools, but look at all of the riders that would not have a chance to  
participate in championships.  Would you like to say "My team won the  
national title" or "I rode in the national title race" (given that you are  
not in the enviable position of being able to say both!).  I think that  
most riders would rather like to say the latter.

> 
> By the way David, I would strongly avoid being between the curb and
> any rider with MIT in their jersey.  Just a friendly hint. :-)
> 
It's really terrific that schools know 'round the world for their  
outstanding academics are gaining a similar reputation in cycling.  I'm  
envious.
 
> Paul Stek
> Stek@pfc.MIT.edu

-dave

BTW - Does anyone know what is going on with the organization of the  
Atlantic Collegiate Cycling Conference - or whatever their current  
designation is?  If anyone from the region is on the net - feel free to  
send mail.  
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.racing