College athletes past and present, what are some things you think college coaches do right, and what do they do wrong?

Training every athlete on a team the same way.

Having the #6-#10 (or whatever number...the slower runners) train as fast as the top guys because "if you want to be as fast as him, you need to train like him."

Disclaimer: this is regarding various college coaches I have observed and/or heard about, not exclusively my own.

There are mistakes a coach can make. The one that bothers me the most is ignoring - or worse - encouraging poor mental health. College is a rough time for anyone, especially athletes who have a lot of stress and have to develop ways to cope with that now that they are on their own. Depression, anxiety, eating disorders and alcoholism to name a few. As a coach you should recognize their mental health as well as their physical because you have to have both to succeed in the *long term.* The sad thing is I don't think some coaches care about the long term health of their athletes because there is always someone else coming in to replace them. Even worse is when the coach blames the athlete for their own downfall. You take credit when the athlete performs well, so be there when they fall.

As far as what a coach can do well - look at the whole person, not just their current race. A good coach will make sure their athlete gets enough support, fuel and rest. These are the simplest things, but get forgotten.

It's about tradeoffs.

You see plenty of praise for the coaches who get their teams close to their running potential, highest level possible. A lot less for the coaches who care about their athletes as individuals, mentor them through as people, care about their academics and career goals, etc.

And some would say that isn't a coach's job, it's their job to place as highly as possible. If that includes pushing athletes out of hard majors, telling them they can't take certain classes, etc, some would say that's all part of a good coach's job. Others would say the opposite. So it's about tradeoffs. When you look at what a coach does "right" or "wrong", that can tell you what his/her priorities are and how they are different from your own.

The Wrong - Having sub-4 milers running the same recovery days/easy runs as the freshman. I specifically remember one run when the whole team ran together as a large group (which was rare) and the All-Americans decided to turn it into a "look how fast I can run on an easy run" show by dropping 5:30s in the first few miles against the coaches instructions of running together as a group.

The Right - Coach forcing me to not run for two months and concentrate solely on academics. I had a rough transition and was not doing well my first semester grade wise/ being injured. I think without the coach stepping in and taking control there would have been a large possibility of me completely failing out within the year. Taking time off of running allowed me to get healthy and get back on track academically.

College coaches in general are on the lowest rung of Hell. They excel at politics, not coaching.

OP, please don't leave us in suspense: what were the things that *you* (and your mates) noticed?

Promoting a culture of "don't be a p****" without understanding the consequences.

90% of athletes who are good enough to be in a quality D1 program have proven they are willing to go the extra mile (so to speak). If anything they need to be taught how to recover, how to do the little things right, how to take an easy day or an easy week. With the "don't be a p****" attitude, kids get hurt, they get overtrained, they don't get better on the large part.

Not being aware of runners' backgrounds.

My first college coach (large, decently successful D1 program [few individual standouts, one top 10 finish at NCAA's, several 15-30 team finishes]) told me he would sit down and talk with my (very well respected) HS coach to talk about my HS training. I didn't expect him to recreate my HS training, just avoid the pitfalls I faced in HS. Needless to say he didn't and he ended up repeating the same mistakes my HS coach made my junior year, leading to overtraining and stagnant times.

Another teammate's mileage was bumped to 65-75 his freshman year. Quite reasonable for most people, but he was doing 30 miles a week in HS. The transition was...tough.

Not recognizing their own weaknesses (aka "getting a big head")

I transferred recently, from said D1 program, to a D3 program where I am running (very) significantly better. The D1 program I left has had several of their worst years recently, and this coach's tenure is less than stellar. However, the few standouts he has coached led him to say, as one of the last remarks he said to me in our departure meeting, that he has no doubts in his coaching abilities and that he "knows" he is one of the best coaches in the country -with a team that hasn't qualified for nats in several years.

Those are just a few, I could go on. If no one reads this, so be it. Was therapeutic for me to write.

Most college coaches assume their athletes won't have running careers after college. In many cases they end up correct because they don't encourage any bit of a life long appreciation for the sport. A college coach who encourages his athletes to compete past college as post collegiates and sets them up to succeed at the sport beyond age 22-23.

I understand that college runners may want to move on and concentrate on families and careers etc but the two aren't mutually exclusive. One should be able to continue to PR well into the mid to late 20s and beyond and also develop a career. It's all about discipline and priorities.

1. Coaches that don't pull the reigns on their athletes and get them to train at the right pace instead of turning every workout into a male organ measuring contest.

2. The most common training mistake I see happens when coaches overemphasize 1 type of training at the expense of the rest. For example, doing a ton of tempo training and long intervals, but neglecting to do any work at race pace or faster.

I coached college at a couple of schools over the past 15 years. One was an exceptionally good program and the other was not. I ran in college for one of the best coaches around, but before I transferred to him I had a mediocre coach. I've been exposed to many, many coaches over the years in different ways. I've learned something - good or bad - from every single one.

I coached at a pair of schools with very solid, stringent, difficult academics. I believe the first priority is academics. I'm always willing to change individual schedules/whatever for academics. I don't necessarily lower athletic expectations, but if a student had a brutal semester with afternoon labs 3 days a week things will obviously have to change. Athletes aren't just machines, so I like to get to know each athlete personally. We had regular individual meetings to discuss how they felt about training, academics and other "soft" areas of getting to know someone. I genuinely care about every single athlete I ever coached. I don't like a couple on a personal level, but that doesn't mean I don't want to see them succeed.

Many coaches have the delusion they alone define teach culture. Yes, they set the tone at practice and expectations beyond, but it's the actual team that defines life outside practice. There's only so much a coach can do for that.

The first school I coached had a solid culture towards success. The athletes rocked their classes, stayed mentally and physically healthy and did the little things in life (most of the time) to be a great team.

The second school was much different. I was only there a couple years (I moved to another part of the country) but I viewed it as a 5-7 years process to right the ship. As I said, the coach sets expectations. There were no expectations when I got there. I had a long term plan of adding expectations, instilling a greater confidence in training and would hopefully see that carry to their culture. I don't like coaching by decree, so that was definitely the last resort. Things were changing, but by no means was the turnaround complete.

In training, there are hundreds of way to get to the end point of top performance. I have a philosophy of what I think (know?) works best for most athletes. But, I'm never afraid to vary for individual development. For example, I believe in aerobic development as the staple for most athletes. For every athlete, this means something different. For MD runners, their aerobic development is usually different than a 10k runner. Some MD runners, thrive best off 10k training, while other 10k runners do best off MD training. I'm never afraid to vary work load and type. Some some athletes, even this doesn't work and you have to go back to the drawing board.

Also, many of these differences and limits are different at various points in an athletes "career". Limits are often seasonal, and an absolute staple of training (often forgotten) is progression. In an ideal world, an athlete should do more from one season to the next, and within the season from one cycle to the next. This progression is individual, and you can't force fitness.

I had an all american 10k runner a while back that couldn't train more than 25 miles a week her first 3 semesters on campus. She was made of glass! So, she did the running she could, cross trained aerobically, and we added in training (strength and other fun things) to address her limiters. As she became stronger, she trained more and progressed massively (hence the AA thing). But, we had to have patience.

We had a huge team. I worked a lot. It's a lifestyle rather than a job, and if you approach it as a 9-5 you'll rarely be successful as a coach. Fun times...

Well you have not given us your thoughts and opinions yet. If you start a thread this is a basic requirement.

Thanks for the informative post.

As someone who is interested in this career path I'm curious what you think the best way to get into college coaching is?

When I ran years ago, my head coach was also a football assistant coach. His primary goal was a head football job. So, he often skipped practice to work on recruits. He also thought he was Mr. Cassanova and loved flirting with the women's teams - on the track, when they babsat for him and his wife, etc. So, when at practice, he spent a lot more time with the women's team. This was the bad stuff - so blatant. He was an awful motivator and really did not give us a great deal of time or care. He did no track and field recruitng, just tried to encourage a few of the football guys to come out who were great practice guys and stunk at meets (same practice and meet speed). I think a big team for us was 17 athletes and to be honest we were not great, especially in a large conference

The good stuff was that, I learned how to manage, coach, put relays together etc and it allowed me to became a decent head college coach in my mid-twenties.

The worst as a coach was having a $48K budget for both the men's women's programs combined and $8K for asst coaches. You want to do so much, but you end up burning out because of the desire to have success in all areas of your program - but you end up not being able to really take care of all your athletes individually and not being able to reach goals and objectives you have for yourself and your teams. Too many schools keep track around just to bring in numbers to schools, but then do not reward the TF/CC teams for these numbers and continually expect the numbers, but not excellence and horrible budgets. You get all you can out of your athletes, but you cannot give enough back to them in dollars, only yourself and great staff people who truly loved track and field.

Rest. Rest. Rest. At no point in my 4 year career as a D1 runner did my coach ever require or even hint that a rest day/days/period of time was ever a good idea. Consequently, said coach squeezed every ounce of talent out of me he could, however, I also got injured more than I should have.

FPierce wrote:

Rest. Rest. Rest. At no point in my 4 year career as a D1 runner did my coach ever require or even hint that a rest day/days/period of time was ever a good idea. Consequently, said coach squeezed every ounce of talent out of me he could, however, I also got injured more than I should have.

Ditto. There was no concept of "easy running" where I ran. Lots of stress fractures/injuries on the team. Meat grinder/pressure cooker program, as are most D1 programs. I learned how NOT to train.

I'd put money on the programs that are the most successful/peak at Nationals, the coaches have a better grasp on "recovery". This isn't just the D1 level, as I believe some of the best true coaches lie in D2/D3/NAIA (more purity to focus on true athlete development, AND more athletes go on to run post-collegiately as well).

I concur with rest, but i think it goes deeper. I completed a college career and then had the opportunity to go to east africa. One thing I learned there is that "there is no such thing as 5000m training, only 5000m training for this person, that person, etc." Individualization of training. Not just experience and ability level, but having a coach who knows which workouts develop ME best as opposed to my teammates. With limited resources and large rosters, this is a challenge, but a necessity. This centers training around the rules of physiology instead of uneducated 24yr old college coaches coaching the way they were coached, perpetuating their own preferences and shortcomings.

This is the difference between maximal training and optimal training which incorporates many of the items mentioned here. "maximizing" training ignores social and academic stress in order to get in another workout. Optimizing training considers the whole athlete.

I wish my coach knew this...actually my school hired a Jamaican 400m runner as the XC coach and I crap you not, this guy walked in and took his 400m training and multiplied it by 20 for an 8K...how many of us do you think made it to conferences healthy? This is corollary, too few college coaches have any training before being given the reigns to control the health, well being and performance of younger athletes. USATF level 1 class is a start, but not what I am talking about.

I'd say there are at least 4 common ways to get into college coaching. There are too many "I got lucky" situations to cover. Some of these have better odds than others at success.

1) High School Coaching: While this isn't necessarily a likely cross-over, you can get experience at the HS level and some college AD/hiring committees will view this as good experience. You can actually make a living while getting experience if you are an ed major. The crossover doesn't happen often, but it does occasionally.

2) GA positions: These are getting harder and harder to come across. Many of them are now "interns" where you get paid 16k for the year without the option of getting your graduate degree. I know many people who came out of this type of position and scored paying jobs, but you will be an indentured servant for at least a year (and probably longer).

3) Assistant jobs: I'll split this into two types... A) Paid. Good luck with this one. You may know someone who can hook you up, but unless you're a connected individual there is not much hope. Without coaching experience it is really hard to get a paying job offering coaching experience. B) Volunteer. Most people I know who got into coaching either did this or the GA/intern route. I recommend a couple ways to narrow the field. First, check programs you know and look for some clues on their web site. If they have almost no coaches listed (ie, if the head track is listed as the assistant cross and you know this team has a huge number of athletes), the XC coach could be starving for help. This is how I got involved. Also, if there are a veritable ton of coaches, the coach could be grateful for any assistance offered. Second, talk to people you know about coaches that may need help. It can be well known someone is in over their head. Finally, get a list of NCAA institutions. There are lists of all NCAA (or NAIA, whatever) schools offering the selected sport. Sometimes the neglected programs you've never heard of offer good opportunity, even if it is to get experience and then move on. Check to see if a coach is filling multiple roles (ie, soccer and track or something). Also, look to see if the contact e-mail isn't from the school. This is a huge red flag, and it does happen. In either case, contact the coach because they could want help or some relief from other tasks.

4) I highly recommend getting a graduate degree. If you go to grad school at a place you've talked to the coach about volunteering, it can work out well. Chances are you'll be working hard for whatever grad degree, but helping at practice a couple days a week can give you a good reference and put your name with some success. It's kind of the GA thought, but you back your way into it. Most schools look highly upon a grad degree regardless of subject. It's one of those hoops to jump through, but it can pay off.

Build a network in whatever you do. Sadly, it's the most useful tool you'll have. Even if you don't know a specific person, you'll be shocked at how incestuous the coaching field is. A call from someone they know can make a difference.

I mentioned it before, but coaching doesn't pay to start, and you're really lucky if it does. You'll probably have to find something in addition.

It's best to learn names, hold a stopwatch and learn how the coach works before even thinking about advising the athletes. If an athlete wants to chat about training, the answer is always "ask what coach blahblahblah thinks". Only start doling out advice and doing more active coaching when you are given the go-ahead to do so. it's what I did in my first gig. I developed a great relationship with the head coach, so he knew my advice was sound. The athletes (in our conversations that didn't end in "go see what the head coach thinks") started to like me as well, and it wasn't long until I was a full fledged addition to the squad. BUT, you have to wait and learn...

You may have to string several of these together. You may start as an intern somewhere, volunteer somewhere else, get a crappy assistant job another place and then 12 years into the process find something you like.

Regardless of the approach, expect to send a lot of e-mails, make a lot of calls, be rejected many times and flat out ignored more. There will be times where you think "what the hell?" on why hiring decisions are made. People far less qualified and competent than you will be hired. It sucks, but move on.

Have fun...

One thing that shocked me, both in my own college experience and now in seeing some of the athletes I coach now (at the HS level) who go on to run in college is how many NCAA programs do little or no strength work.

I ran D3, and my team had no assigned strength routine at all during my 4 years in school. A few guys would do abs for a few minutes, but zero lifting, zero strength work, zero core, zero injury prevention stuff. And as you might guess, our team was full of injury-prone guys who had no strength whatsoever. I did more strength work in high school on a team with 100 kids on it!

Now, this wasn't that surprising, since I ran at a mediocre D3 school. But what really surprised me was when I heard about DI programs—big ones!—with very little in the way of lifting or strength training. If you are a college coach and your JOB is to manage the training of your runners, how could you neglect that?

***

Another unrelated thing that some coaches get wrong is believing that motivation and drive has to come totally from the athletes. While on one hand, you can't "want it" more than your athletes do, you also need to provide a structured program that sets explicit standards, and directs and motivates kids to move in the right direction, training-wise. This helps on two fronts...obviously it helps whip the talented slackers into shape (or boots them off the team), but it also helps reign in overachievers who would otherwise self-destruct and overtrain without adequate supervision.

When you have a really motivated, really talented athlete, your main job is to hold them BACK and PREVENT them from doing stupid stuff.