Inside The Allegations Against Former UW Track Coach (WBUR Radio Show)

Dril wrote:

wow. That’s terrible logic. I’m guessing you are a UW grad? The vast majority of women interacting with Harvey Weinstein weren’t r@ped. Does that make it okay for the 5% that were?

That is most likely a terrible analogy but fair given your statement. It’s a stupid point. How many people does a murderer need to kill to be a murderer? A majority?

The point is per the WBUR story metcalf comes off as a bipolar maniac. You can’t go around screaming at people, even if only occasionally and expect to keep your job.

THIS is the real world we speak of. Your coach is a b@st@rd. And in no other setting would he be able to keep a position if power while simultaneously being an unstable maniac. Sorry he wasn’t an absolute serial killer and hurt 51% of you directly.

Notsonotso wrote:

Kettle wrote:

Nobody saying it but me - and all the histrionics here refuse to reply to me so I'll keep saying it for visibility sake

The VAST majority of athletes under Metcalf were/are not pushing for him to be fired / resign.

-meaning a vocal minority is leading this charge

-evident in the articles provided, the vocal athletes have psychological issues (anxiety attacks, anorexia, etc)

These psychological weaklings got a ton of people fired. Go tell Pat Licari and his family or Jason Drake and his family how happy you are about what you accomplished you little sharts.

You aren't seeing the bigger picture here...Metcalf being fired isn't about the complaints, or how many people complained, or if they have issues or not, or how many athletes hated him or loved him. The complaints existed for a LONG time (not just this year) but action wasn't taken at that time. The reason why this happened was because the team wasn't performing well and Metcalf wasn't recruiting well anymore. The complaints were just an excuse for UW to be able to get Metcalf out the door.

retribution wrote:

Luv2Run wrote:

Also, I curious about why none of the athletes took advantage of the anonymous surveys.

All that said, I tend to believe the athletes.

Easy - the surveys are anonymous, but the coach gets to read them straight with the names redacted. I didn't go to UW, but I heard this directly from my coach (who was encouraging us to submit them by telling us that he did actually read them all!).

Depending on what the athlete says, name redaction does nothing to anonymize them. To have any real impact, the feedback will have to be specific, meaning that the coach will surely know who wrote it and perhaps punish them for it if they retain their job. So... unless you are sure that what you're going to say in your anonymous feedback is enough as a standalone to get someone fired, then you might be a bit hesitant to go in with any great honesty.

What comes around wrote:

I just don't get where people think they can talk to kids in any way and maintain a high profile job. There are thousands of coaches who would love to coach at the University of Washington. If Metcalf can't communicate with today's kids in a way that helps them prosper, the University has every reason to send him packing. He won a Championship 10 years ago, which is amazing, but it doesn't guarantee him future employment. If wasn't such a consistent jerk to kids, he would still be in that position and he has no one to blame but himself. If you engender a culture of negativity and distrust, don't be surprised when it comes back to you.

I also find it interesting that he cites that this was the way he was coached. I would assume that he is referencing Mike Johnson, the distance coach for UW when Metcalf was there. He had a reputation for flying of the handle and screaming at runners, which lost him the job back in the 90s...

Outraged wrote:

Dril wrote:

wow. That’s terrible logic. I’m guessing you are a UW grad? The vast majority of women interacting with Harvey Weinstein weren’t r@ped. Does that make it okay for the 5% that were?

That is most likely a terrible analogy but fair given your statement. It’s a stupid point. How many people does a murderer need to kill to be a murderer? A majority?

The point is per the WBUR story metcalf comes off as a bipolar maniac. You can’t go around screaming at people, even if only occasionally and expect to keep your job.

THIS is the real world we speak of. Your coach is a b@st@rd. And in no other setting would he be able to keep a position if power while simultaneously being an unstable maniac. Sorry he wasn’t an absolute serial killer and hurt 51% of you directly.

I'm gonna need you to sit down and actually try to process this with logic rather than emotion.

Call people stupid all you want, but "abuse" in the context it's being used here is subjective. If 99% of people experience the same behavior from him and aren't cowering in the corner like an abused dog at the shelter, then clearly the victims here are the issue. You want to compare this to murder? Where when a murder occurs there is objectively a dead body afterwards? Then you get to call people stupid?

Look, I'm not saying he was some saint. I'm saying it is a coaching style that is abrasive and some thrive on it, others turn into puddles of tears. When the vast exception is the group that can't handle life (one of these chicks was having mental breakdowns, for christs sake - do you really want HER setting the rules?), then it should be their responsibility to leave of their own accord and let the emotionally stable people get on with their lives.

John Utah wrote:

What comes around wrote:

I just don't get where people think they can talk to kids in any way and maintain a high profile job. There are thousands of coaches who would love to coach at the University of Washington. If Metcalf can't communicate with today's kids in a way that helps them prosper, the University has every reason to send him packing. He won a Championship 10 years ago, which is amazing, but it doesn't guarantee him future employment. If wasn't such a consistent jerk to kids, he would still be in that position and he has no one to blame but himself. If you engender a culture of negativity and distrust, don't be surprised when it comes back to you.

I also find it interesting that he cites that this was the way he was coached. I would assume that he is referencing Mike Johnson, the distance coach for UW when Metcalf was there. He had a reputation for flying of the handle and screaming at runners, which lost him the job back in the 90s...

That's fine, I don't necessarily disagree, but how do you think football, baseball and basketball coaches talk to their d1 athletes? Should they all be fired or is running different and if so why?

Here is UT's coach who has won multiple national championships at two schools.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Is6xa3UlTYs

Luv2Run wrote:

John Utah wrote:

That's fine, I don't necessarily disagree, but how do you think football, baseball and basketball coaches talk to their d1 athletes? Should they all be fired or is running different and if so why?

Here is UT's coach who has won multiple national championships at two schools.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Is6xa3UlTYs

I watched the clip. Did you see the commentary from the coach in between the rant? He admits that he acts unprofessionally and that he often takes his own failures out on his players. Sorry, but that is BS.

The rant is even nuts. He yells at the guys and then says it is all his fault and that he failed them. Well then why is he yelling at them?

Oh, and the graphic about winning their next 10 and the Big12 title makes it sound like that was the changing point or had some magic effect. I will call BS on that. We will never know, but Texas always has a good team and likely would have won the conference title without that rant. Even during the video one of the guys looks down. I am guessing that the players at some point tuned out.

Luv2Run wrote:

If you think calling a runner a "fat lesbian" is appropriate then you might as well not read further.

We need to get rid of this idea that abrasive coaching works. First it seems like a risky proposition and one that could lead to far more damage than benefit. Being a transformational coach (I loved that one of the runners mentioned it) is a far better way to go IMHO (and those of many others).

I talked with a coach (in another sport) who had a reputation as an abusive coach. He admits that he was. He realized that that is not the way to do it. He became even more successful. Look at Grep Popovich and Steve Kerr. Even coaches with nasty reputations often behind the scenes are not abusive.

Also, I do not think coaches should generally not be talking about an athlete to other athletes. I can see situations where that is appropriate like asking other athletes if someone is doing okay, but the coach certainly should not be making fun of the athlete or sharing information with the other athletes. Talking about a person behind their backs is not professional.

rojo wrote:

John Utah wrote:

I don't necessarily disagree, but this is how it is in D1 baseball, football, etc. Why is there is double standard for track? Why is this rant ok in baseball but not in track?

Who said you can't rant in track? My boss at Cornell would do something like that at least once a year and he was coach of the year year after year.

Personally, I think a lot of coaches purposely "go off" at least once a year. It seemed to me that he liked to go crazy in January to try to get the guys focused. Maybe they didn't work hard over winter break but there was a pattern.

But there is a big difference in showing the athletes that winning is very important and that you care - which is what this Texas coach did and my boss did - and calling an individual a fat lesbian. " We suck, we must do better. Losing isn't acceptable" is a lot different than talking about someone's sexual orientation.

As for the assistants, I feel bad for them as well. They are in a really tough spot. Obviously, you can't look the other way on certain things but if they go to the AD with minor concerns, they will look like power hungry rats. Isn't that what happened at Texas?

John Utah wrote:

Luv2Run wrote:

I watched the clip. Did you see the commentary from the coach in between the rant? He admits that he acts unprofessionally and that he often takes his own failures out on his players. Sorry, but that is BS.

The rant is even nuts. He yells at the guys and then says it is all his fault and that he failed them. Well then why is he yelling at them?

Oh, and the graphic about winning their next 10 and the Big12 title makes it sound like that was the changing point or had some magic effect. I will call BS on that. We will never know, but Texas always has a good team and likely would have won the conference title without that rant. Even during the video one of the guys looks down. I am guessing that the players at some point tuned out.

I don't necessarily disagree, but this is how it is in D1 baseball, football, etc. Why is there is double standard for track? Why is this rant ok in baseball but not in track?

Dril wrote:

Notsonotso wrote:

[quote]UW Alum wrote:

They both recruited very well, which always had people thinking major success was just around the corner, but it rarely happened.

He DIDN'T recruit well this year. Pretty much none of the top runners who went on officials this year ended up there and there were many top runners that UW reached out to that didn't even want to go on a visit and waste an official there. The running community is really a small one and although UW is saying that they didn't know what was going on, pretty much all of the top HS runners (at least in WA and NW area) had heard the stories.

How naive are you? They aren’t just stories. It so happens he was canned this year for exactly the reason you point out. He stopped recruiting well. You can be a b@st@rd as much as you want as long as you have results.

It’s a Machiavellian world. Prepare your children. And check your ivory tower principles at the door.