Should slow kids be kicked of high school cross country teams ?

i also don't understand the need to "cut" runners. even for TF, way our running teams tended to work we trained as a team, and then some point in the week we had run-offs or a selection posted. or the coach pulled you aside and prepared you for an unusual assignment, 4x8, shuttle hurdle, or you're not sprint relay that week. so at least early in the year you would have more TF people practicing than you needed. there was no cut. they just don't make the meet. this is how XC or TF usually works on up to college. if there is attrition it's usually natural and implicit. someone not making meets quits showing up for hours of daily practice a week. XC we tended to have too few people to worry about anything other than whether the best JV guy was varsity or JV that week. there is no need to cut anyone that situation because it's we don't have enough to score so why would we turn anyone away unless we want to make sure that happens all season. the normal hope would be more show up not let's send people away.

is it people are just in the mood to be cruel or shed people who, as i suggest, might end up surprising you in 4 years?

Even if this is a troll post I can't be bothered. Easy answer is no. Many kids who've never ran before start out incredibly slow their freshmen years, after that some are able to develop into quick runners while others are not. Even for those who don't develop well, having more kids on the team creates a more competitive environment that aids in team culture and pushes everyone harder to make it onto varsity. On the other hand, there are some who develop incredibly well. This is the case of my high school team. Our current school record holder in the 1600 and league cross country course started out his freshmen year running around 22 minutes on the league course and brought that time down to low 15 minutes. Additionally another kid who ran 21 minutes on that course last year has now brought it down to 17 minutes making him the second/third fastest on our team. Had he been kicked off our team would be horrendous this year (it already isn't that great but having less runners would make it much worse).

Even if you're an a-hole HS coach who only cares about having a fast team, slow runners have fast friends. I've had slow kids with fast siblings. I've had kids who run 30 minutes as freshman and end up sub-17 senior year. I have a lot of other reasons for allowing anyone who is willing to follow team rules join, but I think it makes sense even for the "winning is everything" coach.

We have about 75 boys and 75 girls tryout. We have 2 coaches for each sex. It is very difficult to hold meaningful workouts with 75 boys who range in time from 15:00-25:00. Keeping those slow guys is a disservice to the fast ones. One on one time is very important. Running well requires more than just having a bunch of guys going for a run everyday. When we do a long run of 11 miles around town, it becomes a safety issue. We typically cut about 15 boys each year. We travel about 45 of the 60.

Very well said.

XC usually ends up fairly self-selecting at our HS. Very few "slow" runners continue on to JR or SR year, but they gave it a go. I just wish more of the other sports mediocre participants, who are decent runners, would give running a real try. Often times they would/or do have a better experience and get more recognition for their efforts.

Why stop there? Perhaps the slow kids should be financially penalized for being weak. And then sent off to some leper colony or work camp?

Keeping as many runners as you can has a ton of value. On my team in high school there was a kid who was was not close to breaking 20 as a freshman, but developed into a mid-pack d3 runner. He also helped the team bridge a gap from a great but underachieving class a year ahead of him and a few strong classes behind him by organizing summer runs and frankly dragging a future state champ out on runs when he didn't want to.

Leaving 2 kids on the team ?

While I could maybe see the logic in your reasoning for your specific situation, you have to realize that maybe 1% (probably generous) of high school programs have 150 kids out.

The problem is you don't know who will be fast. 12 months ago a 13 year old boy joins my group. He ran a 3k race on the track in October in 13:31. This weekend 17:26 for 5k. Include everyone!

I agree. Cuts aren't appropriate at mist schools. My state has 400 high schools. Only about 25 teams have the necessity to do it.

That isn't a problem. Having more kids than can be coached means no kids ever reach theor potential. So you are sacrificing the great runners for a mediocre one. I guarantee any team that had cuts is an elite team.

there is probably a number where it's not really feasible to have any more. every program has different sources and space to work with. I coach by myself, for example. THat is boys, girls varsity and modified. 4 teams. by myself. I haven't had to cut, but believe there is a number where I'd say no more.

A couple people here have mentioned self-selection, and this is a great point. An organized coach can manage pretty big numbers, as long as they lay out responsibilities, goals, workouts, etc., and the team can follow. If those slow kids can follow along and get the job done fairly independently, there is room for them. If they aren't doing their work and getting in the way, becoming a distraction, maybe they can't stay around. But at that point, they have made the decision and it's on them.

For the most part, I think there is room for kids who can follow the bouncing ball. Self motivated, responsible kids.

Ummm my group does ok.

Age 13-14 sees drastic declines in sports participation as ability comes to determine spots on teams, but this is bad both for the health of the general population and for elite levels. It's bad for the health of the general population because most teens become sedentary and are headed toward obesity, which is now 35% of the adult population. It's bad for the elite levels because talent identification ends before physical maturity and you miss out on many great potential athletes who didn't get an early start or were not physically ready to compete with others and so were cut or discouraged from sports before their time. In non-skill sports in particular, like running, the best will often emerge in the course of high school or even college or the pros, so you're losing out on many of the best. How was Alan Webb on the youth xc/track circuit? He was no Cole Hocker or Ryan Deak. But by sophomore year, Webb was a 4:06 class record holder.

Get the word out early that your program is a competitive sport - not a weight loss program, a drop-in fitness class, or free after school care. I don't think that having a performance standard to make the team is unreasonable. A kid should be able to run 2-3 miles without stopping or display the ability to run a sub 10 minute mile on Day 1. As another poster stated, it is very difficult to coach a large group of disparate talent and the danger comes when the least fit kids start walking, goofing off, and begin dragging down their friends who were doing the work.

I do cut kids for poor work ethic and attendance issues. You cannot allow that cancer to spread and no ball sports coach would tolerate it. XC/TF should not be treated as a haven for kids that can't make it in other sports.

Do you make cuts. I said that any team that makes cuts is elite. I didn't comment on team that don't cut. Some are good but most are not. How many coaches do.you have and how many coaches? Ask any D1 coach what the best runner/coach ratio is.

Well said