Coach Joe Newton post HS success

Before I get smashed about the Gary comment, I was talking cross. I know that he was state champ in the 3200.

You really need to get over yourself. The fact that your user name says, "IM A COACH" in all caps certainly raises some pyschological questions regarding your security. It is obviously important to you that everyone knows you are a coach. Hmmm??? I wonder why?

I think you have completely missed my point in the other thread. I am not on here giving "all knowing" advice. You are! You and I both are can voice opinions without regard to qualifications as everyone's opinion is equal. That said, you made difinitive statements such as, "Always remember that your resume will get you the interview; your personality and your references will get you the job." That is not stated as an opinion, but as fact. You started out okay, but then you became the god of the job search and if I was a betting man, I would guess that you probably just recently were hired at the collegiate level for the first time and you want everyone to know about it. As for me? I will just say, been there done that, and leave it at that.

I'm really tired of people arguing about high school sports. Its just high school!, we need to stop over analyzing things and make sure kids have fun and are healthy and that they're not over racing. You see if you get young ambitious teenagers to become overstressed about running, all the details and physiology involved, of course there going to quit, because it becomes more of a chore than something they love doing. Let kids become more seriuous as they get older, theyy've got the rest of their life to be stressed out.

Whats most important is that kids keep their love of running alive, but I do admit that a lot of those runners may do too much too soon and are burnt out more psychologically than psychologically. These kids are under a lot of pressure to perform well and die to make the varsity squad. If any average high schoolers think their going to train to become a world class athlete, there only going to frustrate themselves, that doesn't happen overnight.The ones who try to do way too much than their capable of handling are usually the first ones to give up.

Patience everybody.

sorry about those typos, meant psychologically than physically.

This debate does come up every few months. The problem is we have no data to reference while we do it. Everyone's comments are speculative.

Someone needs to find out the names of Newton's top 7 going back each year for 10-15 years, and write out their high school, college, and post collegiate pr's so that we can actually see how they've developed.

You can win a cross country title with a 4:15 miler, a 4:20 miler, and 5 other guys between 4:30 and 4:40, but how many of those guys are going to succeed enough for us to hear of them in college? Maybe the 4:15 guy if he really develops, but probably none.

I could do that but I have done it so much I am not going to bother. Joe Newton is bigger than anyone posting here. Hell, his #9 runner from when my kids ran for him has run 2.22 for the marathon and is a coach himself (Jim Akita), as are both of my kids. None of you guys have a clue, none of you know him, and none of you have any real knowledge of how he runs his program. But it is offensive to hear the one poster tell about Newton in his golf cart yelling at people. You have to be a high school runner and one who lost to York. Me, I give up- this thread comes up every few months or so and here it is again.

The important thing to remember is that Mr. Newton gets out all kinds of kids for cross. The freshman squad at York looks very different from the freshmen squad at any other high school. Mr. Newton gets out fat kids, skinny kids and every kind of person in-between. At most schools, overweight kids would never go out for cross for fear of embarrassment or general indolence. Mr. Newton gets them out for the team and helps them live a healthier lifestyle, and gives them self confidence. He stresses a team environment and even the worse kids on the team feel like they contribute, and they do.

That being said, it is unfair to include these kids as "failures" when it comes to competing at the next level. Your argument that York should have the same proportion of “next level” runners as any other high school team is ignorant. A better comparison would be to compare the number of college runners to size of the high school they went to; I think York would have a better proportion then most high schools.

A simple observation would lead you to question why one of the best teams in the nation year in and year out hasn't pumped out a few more quality NCAA guys...

I'm sure he's a great guy and good coach, but you'd think that pumping out state championship after championship you'd get a few more guys popping up on the collegiate radar... shit, when your teams that good, you probably have J.V. guys that would end up being decent collegiately.

again, i'm not knocking the guy, but for whatever reason you can come up with, the original poster is still right... there just hasn't been that many decent collegiate guys out of york considering they're on arguably the best high school team in history.

"" in fact, charlie kern, the distance track coach and product of the system ""

Charlie Kern is not a product of the system. Coach Kern went to HS in Kenmore, NY where he was NYS Mile Champion ( I believe around 4:13 ) in the early 80's.

Why do we rate a high school coach's success on NCAA honors and other post high school achievements? I can't think of this argument being used on a high school coach being evaluated on his kids making it to the NFL or to the Major League in baseball. Those sports brag about kids playing at Division I programs or getting drafted. But we don't praise Newton for getting his kids to participate in college, but we rip him for not getting more All Americans.

So what are you saying,that Newton burns all his runners out and they're done after H.S.? Never read any complaints from his former athletes--why don't you put a positive and real spin on this--he took kids--year in and year out--who were never going to amount to anything athletically, and produced state champions.

Miles make champions.

You are right Buffalo Billy, the Saratoga girls never complained either.

Stop with the "he takes kids who have no athletic ability and would never amount to anything BS"

Every HS program is full of kids like this, all sports included. He gets the same kids as the rest of the HS coaches in this country, only he has decided to run them 100 miles per week and hammer them with speed work so that they can grab a little glory. There are some HS coaches who choose to do it without the risk.

What do these people have in common?

Amy Skieresz

Ryan Wilson

Deena Kastor

They ALL went to the same high school program (Agoura CA).

Joe Newton is a great motivator, very good at taking mediocre talent and getting it to overachieve. But for developing talent to be successful at the next level, Newton is frankly a joke compared to Bill Duley.

One advantage Bob Kennedy had was a high school coach who believed his job was simply to get his athletes to the next level. I wonder if Bob would have even had an international career, let alone achieving anything, if he had been stuck with the York overtraining program.

Coaching is supposed to be about the success of the kids, NOT the outsized ego of the coach.

http://www.dyestatcal.com/news/xc2007/December/31%201992/summ.htm

There's many ways to measure the success of a coach. Most prefer to base it off the tangible achievements that are won or lost over a carreer, and in that case, I don't think anyone would question that Joe Newton is one of the best high school coaches ever.

But there are other elements that come into play rather than winning or losing in the high school realm of coaching athletics. Saftey, responsibility, and development are a few that come to mind.

Developement is what I think is being lost here, and the only true to way to measure many of these secondary responsibilities of a coach are to see the progression of their ability after they have left. In this case, Yorks track record is pretty weak considering they are one of the, if not thee best teams in the country. You can't tell me that almost every other coach in the country from a quality division 1 school who has gotten a york guy is just not as good of a coach as Joe Newton... I refuse to believe that...

So, while i'm sure that he's a fantastic man, a caring coach, and a successfull one, I get the feeling that the price these kids pay for state glory tends to override the developement they need to be successfull at the next, higher level...

No one rips coach K's success, but his NBA guys usually end up sucking... i think its the same analogy here... the system wins, and the system isn't set up to provide a transition to the next level, it's set up to win now...

Some are fine with that... others aren't...

I don't know Joe Newton, but here are a few general comments.

1) Highly successful programs at any level are held to higher standards than other teams. For example, everyone knows every Stanford (or now Oregon) runner that didn't pan out in college, but no one has ever shown me they have a higher percentage than typical. There are all kinds of footlocker finalist types that don't pan out in college, but when you have 10 on your team people notice it more than at the random college that has one every 5 years.

2) Great high school teams are not necessarily made up of guys that anyone is going to notice in college or qualified to be a high profile, Division 1 athlete. How many that criticize York are actually tracking all their guys post-collegiately? Most seem to focus on a lack of Division 1 All-Americans.

3) High school running, and the team environment, is different than the atmosphere in college. At most high schools a lot of runners that could run in college don't. That's not necessarily burnout it is just preference and choice. Many of these athletes continue casual running after high school. Successful high school teams get runners out for the team that wouldn't have come out at most schools. Coaches shouldn't be punished if these athletes don't run in college.

What exactly are some people expecting out of Newton? Multiple All-Americans? Here, look at the top 8 from this year’s 1500 and 5000. I tried my best to find high school pr’s, hopefully they are correct. This is the caliber runner who ends up being a NCAA All-American.

Manzano, Texas – 1:50, 4:06 1600

Ulrey, UNI – 4:09 mile

Bolas, Wisconsin – 4:04.38 1600

Miller, Wisconsin – 4:05.69 1600

See, Ohio St – 4:03.53 1600

Heath, Stanford – 1:52.41, 4:09 1600, 9:06 3200

Brown, Texas – 1:53.74, 4:12 1600

Jager, Wisconsin – 4:05.68 mile, 8:47.59 2 mile

Curtis, Villanova – 1:52.89, 4:07.61 mile, 8:48 2 mile

Pifer, Colorado – 4:05 1600, 8:57 3200

Vaughn, Colorado – 8:45 3200

McNeil, N Ariz – Australian, couldn’t find info

Vail, Oklahoma St – 3:53.64 1500, 8:30 3000

Mead, Minnesota – 8:51.23 2 mile

Neuman, Colorado – 3:54 1500, 8:33 3000

Smyth, Notre Dame – 9:00.98 3200

These guys weren’t 4:20 milers, or even 4:15 milers. They are mostly 4:07/8:55 guys who have some serious innate talent. I posted this to make everyone realize how elite you have to be to make waves at the NCAA level.

How rare is it to find talent like this? Newton has been coaching at York for 47 years. Using Illinois’ all-time lists: (http://www.ihsa.org/activity/trb/records/atop.htm#0X500), we can see York has only had 7 guys in Newton’s 47 years who have ever run faster than 1:52.57, 4:12.68 (1600), or 9:10.56 (3200). One guy from the 70’s, one dude from the 80’s, Baaken and Sage from the 90’s, then 3 guys this decade. That’s it. It’s not like Newton is growing Don Sages on trees and then they flop in college.

Newton wins state championships with depth. Hordes of 4:20-4:40 milers. To criticize him because these guys can’t compete with the 8:50 studs is unfair. So I ask again - what exactly are some people expecting?

Here's that link to all-time Illinois performance list again:

http://www.ihsa.org/activity/trb/records/atop.htm#0X500

First off, I never gave a definition of what a quality collegiate carreer consited off... you automatically asume that it means being an All-American, where as I think it should be judged based upon his improvement as a runner, not based upon the hardware earned. I'm well aware that the chances of making an elite ncaa runner out of a decent highschool runner is slim... no one is doubting that.

But if so many people are moving on to the collegiate system from york, is it that difficult to find some athletes and post thier improvments from highschool...

Or is there anyone here from york that would post their improvements...

giddy wrote:

First off, I never gave a definition of what a quality collegiate carreer consited off... you automatically asume that it means being an All-American, where as I think it should be judged based upon his improvement as a runner, not based upon the hardware earned. I'm well aware that the chances of making an elite ncaa runner out of a decent highschool runner is slim... no one is doubting that.

But if so many people are moving on to the collegiate system from york, is it that difficult to find some athletes and post thier improvments from highschool...

Or is there anyone here from york that would post their improvements...

Improvement as a runner? That's vague. Are you referring to tangible standards like times and distances? And if so, what improvements earn the distinction of being successful? This is ridiculous.

Want one example? Look at Greenliner's post earlier, he mentions a guy named Jim Akita. I don't think Akita ever broke 10 for 3200 in HS. But in college he ran 14:30 for 5k as well 30 and change for 10k. He was also a multiple DIII all-american. And he's run a few marathons in the mid 2:20 range.

Does that qualify as successful?