Should High School Cross Country Coaches Run with the Team?

I should add that even when I do run with the slower kids, I do get the benefit of running at the same time, but it is more like junk miles, which actually hurt my training because I am too old to run multiple runs per day and still recover.

I ran on a team whose coach did not run with us, but told us to go out and run whatever. The others loved it because they knew all the shortcuts and swimming holes to stop at for a break. As for me, I hated it because they all looked at me strangely when I wanted to do the actual run.

I have to say further that we ran against against a rival school who routinely kicked our butt. their coach ran with them. They almost always made it to State, while we struggled to advance past round 1 of the four level qualifiers.

For those that do not think you should ever run with your dream... how would you answer the questions that came up if a runner was seriously injured miles away from school while you were back waiting for them.. I know you can't be everywhere but if you are out running with them you are certainly closer and making an effort to be out there.

TJ wrote:

For those that do not think you should ever run with your dream... how would you answer the questions that came up if a runner was seriously injured miles away from school while you were back waiting for them.. I know you can't be everywhere but if you are out running with them you are certainly closer and making an effort to be out there.

Run with your dream? Sounds about right for this site, where your dreams come true.

Once again, Flagpole is right.

I think Coaches should run with their athletes because mine doesn't and it feels as though he is putting all the work on us and doesn't do anything himself. I do not think it is fair if the coach does not run with the athletes.

XCgurl13 wrote:

I think Coaches should run with their athletes because mine doesn't and it feels as though he is putting all the work on us and doesn't do anything himself. I do not think it is fair if the coach does not run with the athletes.

Even though I occasionally run with my team I do know a lot of good coaches that do not. Most of which were very good runners themselves. Some don't run at all anymore because they are physically unable to, but they were absolute animals back when they did.

Our assignment is to coach. It's your turn to do the physical work. There is nothing unfair about that. You signed up as a runner on a team. That is your job and not the job of your coach.

I no longer compete, but I did the grind for 30+ years.

About 10 years ago I had a physical job and was running 100+ miles per week while coaching HS XC. One time on a Friday it was a cold rain and I worked outside digging holes. I left work early to start practice and instructed my athletes to go for a run on one of their usual routes. One of them made some sort of snarky remark on how I didn't have to go out in it and get wet. After their 6 mile run I went home and ran my 15 miles in the cold rain in the dark. The next day (Saturday) after their long run of 8-10 miles I joined some friends to do some mountain repeats for a 3-4 hour workout (looking back at that it was excessive but....) running up a 1200 vertical rise road 5 times at a hard effort. I remember it being something like 20 minutes up and 20 down for each repeat.

We then ran long the next day on their day off and met up with them again on Monday for their practice. The same athlete complained about how sore he was to me from Saturday's run. That is when your patience as a coach gets tested.

I don't do those workouts anymore and if I want to sit on my butt in my car while my athletes go for a hard run then that's ok. I'll do my 10-20 miles per week of running or less if I want to with my head held high.

I agree. I run with various groups, as needed. I do not run workouts with them, except pacing intervals for the newest runners. However, I sometimes get snarky comments about me not doing the hard workouts. I simply tell them that I have done my share of them when I was their age and that it is more important that I get times for each instead of being in the back of them where I can't get any times. They didn't understand the first time, but when I did run with them and beat a couple, they stopped the comments. I think they usually just want the coach to suffer with them on every run and don't understand when we "take a day off" to do a different type of coaching. Heck, they even want me to play when we play ultimate or other games. It's not like I am one of the guys, since I am twice their age. They just want me out there with them, having fun and suffering, too.

I just want to offer my perspective here, having been coached by two very different coaches in high school but both ran with the team at least on a semi-regular basis. My first coach ran with the team probably twice a week or so from what I can remember, very possibly less. Most of the time he didn't leave with a group, it was mostly bouncing around checking up with people. Occasionally in summer practices he would run tempos with us, but during the year he would observe, take splits, and adjust the workout if you were going too hard. He hadn't competed for years so any workouts or runs he did were just for the love of the sport. He was all business for the most part -- it was obvious that he wanted to be a coach, not a friend. He still had personal relationships with the guys on the team but he definitely wasn't "one of the guys." We all had a lot of respect for him and it was great seeing his love for the sport, and knowing that he knew how difficult the workouts were. On the flip side some people, in particular some of the girls, didn't like him because he didn't coddle their fragile mentalities.

The next coach was "that guy" that people earlier referred to. He ran with the team most days (girls as often as guys, which was strange) and tried to be "one of the guys" for the most part. He was still racing and did probably half of the workouts with the team for his own fitness. He would leave with a group and do the entire run with them. I think he definitely crossed a line being too personal in some instances. He was extremely personal with the girls team in particular (not in a sexual way) but his neediness to have the girls team like him, and in particular the freshman, was extremely inappropriate. I think a lot of the team lost respect for him every time he used practice time to rehearse his comedy routine with the girls.

Generally, I think a young-middle aged coach should run with the team. However, I think there is a strong correlation between running with the team and being "that guy." Knowing your coach is a serious runner definitely earns trust, and seeing it with your own eyes is even better. The goal of the coach just needs to be in the right place. A coach's job is to make his team faster and anything he does should be done with that purpose in mind. Coaches should not want to be buddies with high schoolers and it's sad if any 30-something guy would want to. If you want to develop a personal relationship with your athletes it should be to improve your team, not for your own personal enjoyment. Hope this input helps.

Two questions:

How old are you?

Have you ever coached a team yourself?

Do you hate girls teams?

Interesting counting...

1. College alumnus

2. No, I was just offering my perspective because I had been coached by the two types of high school coaches that seem to have been identified earlier in the thread

3. No -- allow me to clarify. The coach was eager to get attention from the girls team -- not sexual, but I thought it crossed the line. Certainly a coach should run equally with girls and guys team. My previous post didn't articulate that properly.

A few days with the coach running would be a positive thing, it's most coaches goal to make their athletes enjoy the sport. Being a visible part of the sport will help. Although more than 1-2 days a week would be obsessive, as these are runs where just team-bonding come into place.

Malcolm Sadwell wrote:

Interesting counting...

1. College alumnus

2. No, I was just offering my perspective because I had been coached by the two types of high school coaches that seem to have been identified earlier in the thread

3. No -- allow me to clarify. The coach was eager to get attention from the girls team -- not sexual, but I thought it crossed the line. Certainly a coach should run equally with girls and guys team. My previous post didn't articulate that properly.

I asked about girls teams and coaching because if you were a coach and did not understand that you approach the two genders differently, you would never have a girls team. They need different, possibly more, attention and affirmation than males. males want to compete and conquer. Girls want to compete and socialize. Knowing this and acting accordingly is how coaches succeed with both teams and not just one or the other.

as a high school runner, I found it very beneficial to have a coach run with me as an under class man (freshman/ sophomore). It encouraged me to keep running, learn how to run, and enjoy it. I personally think it is very helpful especially for slower runners

stupid generalizations = stupid coach

Runningiscool wrote:

as a high school runner, I found it very beneficial to have a coach run with me as an under class man (freshman/ sophomore). It encouraged me to keep running, learn how to run, and enjoy it. I personally think it is very helpful especially for slower runners

I coached for a few years at the HS level, I observed an elite XC/distance coach with quite the running resume run alongside his fastest runners as well as the one who was DFL. He turns non athletes into competitive runners year, after year, after year, and most go onto run well into college and afterwards. The dude just gets it. He is beyond respected and admired. It's all in a coaches approach. If he is running for his ego and getting all big time towards the athletes, yeah that's a problem, and there is no place for that. When you run with the team, shouting out splits, encouraging all regardless of talent level, now that's a coach. Somehow that can easily get twisted with the overly sensitive crowd in our society today.

I mainly just want to know if Flagpole is still wound up about this topic... like journaling about it over morning tea, blogging late at night? Inquiring minds want to know!

I’m currently a junior in high school and I’ve been on the team since I was a freshman. I started doing Cross Country in 6th grade but I started doing summer workouts with the high school team when I was entering 8th, so I’ve been running for my coach about four years.

In all that time, I’ve never seen my coach run. I think I saw him jog about 15 meters at a race once when he was going to watch the Varsity finish but nothing more than that. Sometimes he will bring his bike so he can see everybody run in practice but he doesn’t run with us.

I think it’s better that he doesn’t run with us. For one, he’s our coach, not our training buddy. He gives us tips and workouts but he believes our own speed is up to us. It’s not his job to make us run faster, it’s his job to teach us how to run faster. At the end of the day, our individual speed is up to us. If we want to run faster, its our responsibility to put in the work to do it.

He’s not a bad coach. He’s trying to teach us to be responsible for our own actions. His coaching method may seem strange, but it’s helped us to win 3 meets this season, one of which was out of state. Coaching is very important in Cross Country, but when it really comes down to it, you are the only one responsible for your time. Whether your coach runs with you or not isn’t going to change that fact

It’s risky. You might get falsely accused by a crazy blasey.