Collegiate Coaches

There is very little coaching going on at the collegiate level in any sport. Coaches have become recruiters-the majority are better salesman than coaches. They are looking for the microwave athlete, one that has so much talent that even they cannot mess it up. There are maybe 2% of the coaches at the college level who can develop talent. At no time has knowledge been so available to coaches, but they are too lazy to study and learn that each athlete is not the same. Colleges are hiring young coaches and foreign coaches to recruit. It takes wisdom to coach and young coaches do not have the wisdom to develop talent. For most that takes a decade or more.

I agree that there are a lot of runners who had great high school career's that wither in college, but do no just blame the coaches. Although there may be a few bad coaches, there are some great ones as well who have runners get worse. Many of these runners get to college and they start drinking and staying up late and develop poor habits that causes this fall off. Then their confidence get's shaken because they are losing a lot more and it just snow balls.

Yes, many lousy college coaches out there.

But, don't forget the lousy HS coaches who are all about their win loss record and run kids into the ground, these kids get to college and have no where to go but down.

And another thing....How dare these student-athletes change their priorities as they get out and experience the joys and wonders of the larger (outside of home and high school) world!

Get over yourself. Not every 920 2 miler is bound for greatness and not every college coach is terrible.

1RunnerBoy wrote:

How are there so many coaches at the collegiate level, both NCAA and NAIA who are ruining careers of runners with a solid high school career. As a HS coach, I've seen more than enough of these coaches taking a 920 two miler and within one year the athlete is can't even break 10 minutes with the confidence and desire to continue competing coming to an end by their sophomore season. Far to many are taking a one size fits all workout plan including several I've talked with doing four hard sessions per week including a race. You'd never see this happen with football or basketball program regardless of level.

The European club model appears to be far superior to long term improvement, developing talent and keeping younger athletes in the sport than most usa collegiate programs.

You should get out there & show us how easy it is. Oh that's right you don't want to make

yes, because all of those 9:20 guys go to bed on time, get 8+ hours sleep, eat healthy, forego alcohol, and run the amount of mileage and at the correct paces that their college coach tells them.

The ones that do, do just fine, regardless of whether Lydiard, or the football coach is his coach.

No mom and dad to get them to bed and cook for them. No mom and dad to serve as a consequence for making bad decisions.

PS: 2 miles and 8k/10k are 2 different worlds, not every 3200 person can become a 8k/10k person, just like not every fast 100m guy can become a 400 guy.

1RunnerBoy wrote:

How are there so many coaches at the collegiate level, both NCAA and NAIA who are ruining careers of runners with a solid high school career. As a HS coach, I've seen more than enough of these coaches taking a 920 two miler and within one year the athlete is can't even break 10 minutes with the confidence and desire to continue competing coming to an end by their sophomore season. Far to many are taking a one size fits all workout plan including several I've talked with doing four hard sessions per week including a race. You'd never see this happen with football or basketball program regardless of level.

The European club model appears to be far superior to long term improvement, developing talent and keeping younger athletes in the sport than most usa collegiate programs.

College coaches are rated based on performance at nationals and conference. They are not paid to develop athletes.

You are right.

But, just imagine if they were good at developing their athletes, be pretty successful I would imagine.

There is a strong HS distance program in my town that produces its share of middle distance and xc state champions. This is on low to moderate mileage. Although this large school has had success with talented individuals and regularly qualifies teams to the state xc meet, they don't seem to develop average talent and the highest they've placed at state xc is 4th.

You would think their state champions who go on to college would fare well with the introduction of more miles in training, but only one kid in the last 10 years has been able to make the transition without injury and/or giving up running. You can be a 3200 state champion off of 40 mpw but as another poster said it's a big jump to 8k/10k racing and the bump in mpw training required. I think HS coaches are obligated to better prepare their star runners for success in college by at least introducing long runs and getting mileage up to 50-60mpw.

Well, 40 mph might be on the low side for a HS stud guy. I get your point.

But, if you are going to redshirt a frosh guy anyways, it is not such a big deal, you can work up to 60-70 mph during the course of the redshirt and then have four more years to work with. Can't be insecure to be a successful coach.

I think the reason you see a lot of male athletes who do both XC/Track struggle in college is because of the demands while transitioning from 5K to 8K/10K being underestimated. Coming off a sharp senior season in high school with fast 800/mile/2mile times is a much different type of fitness than is required for a competitive 8K/10K. That transition in the Fall can be a struggle for guys both mentally and physically, who don't have that experience to train and race at a higher volume. It can then translate into their off-season and leading up to track, not being as sharp as they might have been coming off a Fall of racing nothing more than 5Ks.

The runners who are patient and buy into that elevated training will see the long term development and success in college. It doesn't always happen freshman or sophomore year for everything to click.

1RunnerBoy wrote:

How are there so many coaches at the collegiate level, both NCAA and NAIA who are ruining careers of runners with a solid high school career. As a HS coach, I've seen more than enough of these coaches taking a 920 two miler and within one year the athlete is can't even break 10 minutes with the confidence and desire to continue competing coming to an end by their sophomore season. Far to many are taking a one size fits all workout plan including several I've talked with doing four hard sessions per week including a race. You'd never see this happen with football or basketball program regardless of level.

The European club model appears to be far superior to long term improvement, developing talent and keeping younger athletes in the sport than most usa collegiate programs.

I think there are many, many more high school coaches that have ruined the running careers of potentially good athletes than college coaches!!

You moronic HS Coaches who think 70+ miles a week for a HS student is appropriate need a touch of reality and education on how to develop an athlete safely.

Speed Doctor wrote:

You moronic HS Coaches who think 70+ miles a week for a HS student is appropriate need a touch of reality and education on how to develop an athlete safely.

Somewhat disagree. Good HS runners with D1 potential should be allowed by senior year to work up to 60-70+ mpw so they can transition to college running.

Also I argue that aerobic development at 70+ mpw with only a couple workouts per week (meet day counts as a workout day) and light strides after easy runs results in less injury than 40 mpw runners who do 3-4 workouts per week.

Given that very few high school athletes are in the sub 14:45 5k range or 8:15 3k range, but plenty of college guys are, it stands to reason that college coaches do develop athletes. But for reasons listed by other posters above a 9:20 3200m runner could go in a lot of different directions in college.

Some run 14:15 or faster and have solid careers. Others hover around mid or low 15 minutes on the track or 26:00 in XC and others quit. More depends on the athlete than the coach.

old jersey wrote:

Well, 40 mph might be on the low side for a HS stud guy. I get your point.

But, if you are going to redshirt a frosh guy anyways, it is not such a big deal, you can work up to 60-70 mph during the course of the redshirt and then have four more years to work with. Can't be insecure to be a successful coach.

You're nothing unless you can run 120 mph on the interstate during your freshman year.

Check your attitude D1. The point I was making is the process does not help the cause. No one said ALL coaches are the problem. Yes, this goes both ways with the runner prioritizing their goals and lifestyle to meet these goals. The reference point is the workouts, keeping up with training options etc.

I've coached at the NCAA D1 and D2 level, now at the D1 HS level. Opted to change since both NCAA programs did not have any resources nor support administratively. Felt I could make a better impression at the HS level.

1RunnerBoy wrote:

I've coached at the NCAA D1 and D2 level, now at the D1 HS level. Opted to change since both NCAA programs did not have any resources nor support administratively. Felt I could make a better impression at the HS level.

Kids come to us with such fvcked up problems (I can't tell you how many kids we have on anti-depressants before they get to us & have at least one kid a year threaten to kill themselves) & we have to spend 40% of our time administrating these days & 50% of our time recruiting so the 10% we have left is nothing but glorified baby sitting for about 40k on average for 60 - 80 hour weeks. Anyone who has the skills do do anything else usually gets the hell out.

Finally someone who is saying exactly what I've been saying for years.The number of coaches at the collegiate level who do not have even a basic US ATF level one certification is astounding.

The number of collegiate cultures who have never taken courses in basic physiology is astounding the number of coaches whose only Qualification for coaching Is that once long ago they ran fast is ridiculous

This is not basketball and mostrunner s will tell you that even in basketball you must that have plays to call

Many of these coaches have noActual coaching ideology, not only do they have no expertise They are glorified recruiters

There is no evaluation system There is no coaches ranking

Our athletic directors are more than happy that someone didn't impregnate anybody's daughter

didn't abuse anyone's son And 6/sports are recovered for the price of one

Track and field is the reason most schools can remain Division I sports

Enough is enough we need to call out some coaches right here right now who absolutely suck!

this has nothing to do with mileage

the coaches are not being hired because they are excellent

they are being hired at the NCAA level because they were listed as volunteer coaches at a big program ran fast or they coached at a terrible school Look at the Univ of Texas new Hire .Really! so no one in the state of Texas at the HS level has proven themselves worthy? This isnt college football /HS football comparison Track and field is a simple evaluation on wether you can develop athletes and guess what very few can !