Go to about 5:10 in the video, commentator talks about how the pace is "starting to take its toll" on Barraza right before he falls. Sorry Magness fans, unless you want to say the commentator is wrong too, it does seem like Barraza did not leave enough for the last lap.
not true at all wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
"Fatigue as always plays a role, but it's a necessary evil."
Care to explain what this means? It does makes sense that without evil fatigue distance running would be dominated by sprinters.
How dumb do you have to be to not understand that you should be fatigued on the last lap? But there's a difference between being so tired that you are slowing down a lot (Barraza) and being tired but still able to speed up and sprint.
Fahy was trying to close in 57 second 400 pace (he ended up running a 66 for a 420m lap including a fall). If he was fresh and tried to run that on his first lap, it would have been no problem. But trying to run that speed on the last lap of the race is tough.
I guess you're saying that because being fatigued hinders the ability to clear barriers the athletes need to run a perfect pace? That's kind of tough to accomplish. What did Jager do wrong when he fell and ruined his chance to go under 8:00.
rare wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qf5BQfTCriwGo to about 5:10 in the video, commentator talks about how the pace is "starting to take its toll" on Barraza right before he falls. Sorry Magness fans, unless you want to say the commentator is wrong too, it does seem like Barraza did not leave enough for the last lap.
Dwight starts saying that like 2:30 into the race and keeps repeating it despite splits saying otherwise.
Again, how is Michalski different?
Dwight Stones is the paramount of distance running expertise.
Evidence #598 this weekends NCAA distance race announcing.
In this same race, Dwight wasn’t even able to understand that the first lap split is faster in the steeple not because athletes are going out hard but that there aren’t any barriers in the first 200+ meters!
This year Dwight couldn’t understand why they had to jump a barrier within the first 50 meters.
how many athletes did Magness have at the NCAA champs ?
Everybody must get slammed.
Howmanyqualifiedtoncaas wrote:
how many athletes did Magness have at the NCAA champs ?
Magness didn't even have any men at regionals. Top times for Houston distance men this year:
800 - 1:50.79
1500 - 3:52.48
5k - 14:41.79
10k - nobody ran it
steeple - nobody ran it
women's distance was just as ugly.
Why do people continue to consider Magness a good coach?
titfortat wrote:
Not exactly... wrote:
He wasn't slammed because his guy fell. He was slammed because his guy ran terrible tactics and went out way too hard leading to him blowing up over the last lap. The two falls today weren't the result of poor tactics.
All three runners fell because they were too tired. Not surprised by the double standard as people love to hate on Magness for no reason.
You are correct sir.
SDSU Aztec wrote:
I guess you're saying that because being fatigued hinders the ability to clear barriers the athletes need to run a perfect pace? That's kind of tough to accomplish. What did Jager do wrong when he fell and ruined his chance to go under 8:00.
What did Jager's coach do wrong when Jager felled and missed his chance to break 8:00? I gots to know!
titfortat wrote:
rare wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qf5BQfTCriwGo to about 5:10 in the video, commentator talks about how the pace is "starting to take its toll" on Barraza right before he falls. Sorry Magness fans, unless you want to say the commentator is wrong too, it does seem like Barraza did not leave enough for the last lap.
Dwight starts saying that like 2:30 into the race and keeps repeating it despite splits saying otherwise.
Again, how is Michalski different?
It was the other guy on the broadcast with the comment I’m referring to. I never said Michalski was any different.
Predictably, Magness and his fans go for the commentator being wrong instead of admitting poor strategy.
Exactly what it is wrote:
titfortat wrote:
All three runners fell because they were too tired. Not surprised by the double standard as people love to hate on Magness for no reason.
You are correct sir.
You are incorrect. The runners in 2019 didn't fall because they were too tired. How can you be "too tired" but also closing in sub 60 pace? They were pressing and going TOO FAST. They were too focused on going fast and not focused enough on executing proper technique. It's a very common thing that happens in all events, and in all sports.
Bio Dome wrote:
Magness is a TUE cheat just like Carl Lewis
Both went to Dr. Brown in Houston. What do you know?
There is a crucial aspect of the discussion that you fail to mention...the athletes he coaches and their respective levels of talent. From what I can recall, not many of them ran exceptionally fast in high school. Obviously that is not to say that they don’t have talent, but a collegiate program doesn’t just blossom into a powerhouse in a few years; there are ups and downs, as there are in nearly all processes worth patience. And didn’t he coach a superstar a couple years back?? I know that’s only a sample size of 1, but cmon you’ve got to look at things more pragmatically.
Hating on magness for something as trivial as this makes hating on Wetmore for not producing sub 14 guys at Seton Hall seem more sane.
In summary, you are a fool.
less than zero wrote:
Howmanyqualifiedtoncaas wrote:
how many athletes did Magness have at the NCAA champs ?
Magness didn't even have any men at regionals. Top times for Houston distance men this year:
800 - 1:50.79
1500 - 3:52.48
5k - 14:41.79
10k - nobody ran it
steeple - nobody ran it
women's distance was just as ugly.
Why do people continue to consider Magness a good coach?
Former post being in response to this lunacy.
The steeple for both men and wom\n are el weak. Nobody from those fields will continue professionally. It was like watching an AAU meet.
El stupido wrote:
There is a crucial aspect of the discussion that you fail to mention...the athletes he coaches and their respective levels of talent. From what I can recall, not many of them ran exceptionally fast in high school. Obviously that is not to say that they don’t have talent, but a collegiate program doesn’t just blossom into a powerhouse in a few years; there are ups and downs, as there are in nearly all processes worth patience. And didn’t he coach a superstar a couple years back?? I know that’s only a sample size of 1, but cmon you’ve got to look at things more pragmatically.
Hating on magness for something as trivial as this makes hating on Wetmore for not producing sub 14 guys at Seton Hall seem more sane.
In summary, you are a fool.
A huge part of the coach's job is to recruit. If he doesn't have enough talent on his team, it's his own fault. He's been there since 2012, he's had plenty of time build to a strong team.
He actually has some pretty talented guys on his team. They just don't develop. He makes his 400/800 runner (49/1:53 in high school) do cross country and the kid got slower this year in the 800. His top 5k runner this year (14:41 ran a 15:19 legit 5k in XC in high school. That's horrible development for a guy who stayed 5 years.
Magness is constantly telling people how smart he is. He does podcasts, has a twitter comment about everything, and writes books that just regurgitate decades old science. For someone as arrogant as Magness, it's fair for us to criticize his lack of results. All I'm saying is produce some results before asking me to spend 30 dollars on your book.
He did just coach one of the best steeplechasers in the NCAA (the kid who fell at nationals) but wasn't able to use that success to bring in more steeplechasers. If you're not able to bring in strong recruiting classes after that, then you are a terrible, horrible, crappy recruiter.
fake news alert wrote:
El stupido wrote:
There is a crucial aspect of the discussion that you fail to mention...the athletes he coaches and their respective levels of talent. From what I can recall, not many of them ran exceptionally fast in high school. Obviously that is not to say that they don’t have talent, but a collegiate program doesn’t just blossom into a powerhouse in a few years; there are ups and downs, as there are in nearly all processes worth patience. And didn’t he coach a superstar a couple years back?? I know that’s only a sample size of 1, but cmon you’ve got to look at things more pragmatically.
Hating on magness for something as trivial as this makes hating on Wetmore for not producing sub 14 guys at Seton Hall seem more sane.
In summary, you are a fool.
A huge part of the coach's job is to recruit. If he doesn't have enough talent on his team, it's his own fault. He's been there since 2012, he's had plenty of time build to a strong team.
He actually has some pretty talented guys on his team. They just don't develop. He makes his 400/800 runner (49/1:53 in high school) do cross country and the kid got slower this year in the 800. His top 5k runner this year (14:41 ran a 15:19 legit 5k in XC in high school. That's horrible development for a guy who stayed 5 years.
Magness is constantly telling people how smart he is. He does podcasts, has a twitter comment about everything, and writes books that just regurgitate decades old science. For someone as arrogant as Magness, it's fair for us to criticize his lack of results. All I'm saying is produce some results before asking me to spend 30 dollars on your book.
He did just coach one of the best steeplechasers in the NCAA (the kid who fell at nationals) but wasn't able to use that success to bring in more steeplechasers. If you're not able to bring in strong recruiting classes after that, then you are a terrible, horrible, crappy recruiter.
any ncaa champions? any national champions at the pro level roads and/or track?