2018 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion

You mean there are people who stand up to racism and cries to return to Nazi genocide in the Bay Area? Oh my God, that's terrible! Keep clutching your pearls as you assault brown people.

Back to the coaching changes please.

Let’s face it, the fact that nobody has made announcements means we’re probably going to see some surprises. Most of the sought after coaches that we assume have turned these jobs down mean we’re all going to continue speculating while the directors in charge make their way down their lists.

UNC- Herbster? Or young guy who doesn’t mind that Meaders tenure could be short lived.

UVA- Reckart

UO and Texas- If its not VanHoy... nobody really has any idea.

ND- Milt

All you need to know about Pat from Samford: I would not feel good if a guy who coached a 1:58 came in and said I will coach you a 1:48 guy. Or The steepler who ran 8:40 as a sophomore compared to the open 3k at Samford, the steepler beats him by one second. Edrick, Edrick I hope you are just helping your drinking buddy.

From Tfrrs- Best season marks

800 1:58.67

1500-3:45

3000-8:41

5000-14:51

10k-29:00 (SR only good guy, pat has not recruited no idea how to recruit)

SChase - 9:16

Texas Best Tfrrs

800-1:48.67

1500- 3:40 (2 guys at 3:40)

3000-DNR

5000- 13:52

10k-29:32

3kSC - 8:40

patwho wrote:

All you need to know about Pat from Samford: I would not feel good if a guy who coached a 1:58 came in and said I will coach you a 1:48 guy. Or The steepler who ran 8:40 as a sophomore compared to the open 3k at Samford, the steepler beats him by one second. Edrick, Edrick I hope you are just helping your drinking buddy.

From Tfrrs- Best season marks

800 1:58.67

1500-3:45

3000-8:41

5000-14:51

10k-29:00 (SR only good guy, pat has not recruited no idea how to recruit)

SChase - 9:16

Texas Best Tfrrs

800-1:48.67

1500- 3:40 (2 guys at 3:40)

3000-DNR

5000- 13:52

10k-29:32

3kSC - 8:40

He's run 3:59/7:57 himself. That's all that matters. If you're fast enough to go sub-4 in the mile, you are automatically going to be a good coach.

yorkie wrote:

patwho wrote:

All you need to know about Pat from Samford: I would not feel good if a guy who coached a 1:58 came in and said I will coach you a 1:48 guy. Or The steepler who ran 8:40 as a sophomore compared to the open 3k at Samford, the steepler beats him by one second. Edrick, Edrick I hope you are just helping your drinking buddy.

From Tfrrs- Best season marks

800 1:58.67

1500-3:45

3000-8:41

5000-14:51

10k-29:00 (SR only good guy, pat has not recruited no idea how to recruit)

SChase - 9:16

Texas Best Tfrrs

800-1:48.67

1500- 3:40 (2 guys at 3:40)

3000-DNR

5000- 13:52

10k-29:32

3kSC - 8:40

He's run 3:59/7:57 himself. That's all that matters. If you're fast enough to go sub-4 in the mile, you are automatically going to be a good coach.

This couldn’t be further from the truth. Just because you were a good runner doesn’t mean you’ll be a good coach. More often then not it’s the total opposite

WRONG!!!! Actually the majority of elite athletes do not make good coaches. The best college coaches are the athletes who were solid but not great, that had to work extremely hard to get everything they could out of their bodies through extreme dedication and becoming students of the event. They have the extreme passion, work ethic, and patience that it takes to be a great college coach! Nothing comes easy or naturally for them. ...

30 Years Coach wrote:

WRONG!!!! Actually the majority of elite athletes do not make good coaches. The best college coaches are the athletes who were solid but not great, that had to work extremely hard to get everything they could out of their bodies through extreme dedication and becoming students of the event. They have the extreme passion, work ethic, and patience that it takes to be a great college coach! Nothing comes easy or naturally for them. ...

Ummm... Ever hear of the GOATEST COACH EVER???

I’ll give you a hint..... His name is Alberto Salazar. I’d say he was pretty good runner.

'If he wanted it easy, he should have stayed at G'Town. You get what you ask for, If I'm the AD at Stanford, "Home of Champions" I'd be asking coaches to stand up as well.'

This is one of the most unintelligent comments I have found on the topic of competitive college coaching. It starts with the fact that competitive college running success for a team isn't easy anywhere. Many teams from Stanford, Gtown, Colorado, Oregon, Princeton, Ole Miss, Syracuse..... have built in advantages ranging from cost, admission standards, available scholarships, facilities....Those combinations are dang near infinite in number as each coach tries to recruit and develop runners. If it was so easy why can't any of them win year in and year out? Oregon seems like it has it all and I think they even missed NCAA XC nationals two years ago. How about Wisconsin? (Well, the current coach has bonked that one).

You think Ohio State with all of it's resources devoted to football has it easy compared to Alabama? Point being even with all the built in advantages of places it is still hard to win in sports. How about Notre Dame football? They seem to have it all but can't win NCAA titles.

I don't think he left Gtown thinking Stanford was an easy gig. He has proven himself to be qualified and highly competent even at Stanford. If he is looking at Notre Dame it might be because he has other priorities in addition to winning NCAA titles. I am sure that his goal is to win NCAA titles but perhaps he wants a few other things that Stanford doesn't provide.

"I'd be asking coaches to stand up as well" is a statement that shows extremely little understanding of the big picture and virtually zero comprehension of what it takes to actually win a championship. Nothing to be ashamed about in winning a title but finishing 4th among 350 teams in the sport is puts you in the top 1.5% of your craft. Highly significant success even with the built in advantages. This because other programs have a different set of advantages.

I hope the statement was a joke because there are a lot of people who think they are experts on this board who either have little knowledge of what they speak about or they have a whole set of other personal issues that prevent them from earning the opportunity that others like Milt have earned.

Wetmore (average runner), Vigil (football player), Gags (heavyset guy), Simmons (average runner) are all excellent coaches. A great runner can be a great coach but so can an ordinary runner.

YOUR WRONG! wrote:

30 Years Coach wrote:

WRONG!!!! Actually the majority of elite athletes do not make good coaches. The best college coaches are the athletes who were solid but not great, that had to work extremely hard to get everything they could out of their bodies through extreme dedication and becoming students of the event. They have the extreme passion, work ethic, and patience that it takes to be a great college coach! Nothing comes easy or naturally for them. ...

Ummm... Ever hear of the GOATEST COACH EVER???

I’ll give you a hint..... His name is Alberto Salazar. I’d say he was pretty good runner.

You prove your point Pat. You were a sub 4 miler, why are your guys slow at Samford? Literally you prove your point, just because you might have run fast does not make you a good coach. Alberto is NOT the greatest coach ever, right there you have lost credability.

The fact that we are talking about Pat on this topic is simply amazing, it is not going to happen this go around Pat, wait ten years and let your results earn you a job at a power 5. Do something, recruit someone, and develop anyone.

I’ve been at a National high school track meet recruiting and one of these young coaches you guys keep talking up, started chatting with me. I kid you not he/she looked me square in the face and said “I have no clue what I’m doing here” . You can take that how you want but just be careful with all this hyping up you all are doing on here. I’ve been a college coach for over 25 years and I can assure you I’m still a student of the sport and will never consider myself an “elite” coach, it is irrelevant.

Whats new? Let us stop the debate on pointless views. Any new news?

I would think the next big drop would be on Monday, when everyone is back from the long holiday break.

Lets discuss how WRONG this thread has been on everything.

WRONG

Who cares about Pat or all these other side topics. Let's stick to Jobs....please!

YOUR WRONG! wrote:

30 Years Coach wrote:

WRONG!!!! Actually the majority of elite athletes do not make good coaches. The best college coaches are the athletes who were solid but not great, that had to work extremely hard to get everything they could out of their bodies through extreme dedication and becoming students of the event. They have the extreme passion, work ethic, and patience that it takes to be a great college coach! Nothing comes easy or naturally for them. ...

Ummm... Ever hear of the GOATEST COACH EVER???

I’ll give you a hint..... His name is Alberto Salazar. I’d say he was pretty good runner.

Didn't realize my little joke/sarcasm would have been take so literally. Fast people can make good coaches, fast people can make bad coaches. Slow/average people can make good coaches, slow people can make bad coaches. It's all how you're willing to learn, apply it, and adapt.

Please back to rumors/updates....

You put way too much thought into that response. MIlt. Hasn’t done a great job of hiring great coaches to be around him. That is what championship Directors need to do, and he pulls his weight by having the distance kids put up points. He will win a national title at Stanford, way before he does at Notre Dame.

The longer I'm around the truly great ones, the more I realize that is exactly how they think. Great post, Coach!

Stopwatch wearer wrote:

I’ve been at a National high school track meet recruiting and one of these young coaches you guys keep talking up, started chatting with me. I kid you not he/she looked me square in the face and said “I have no clue what I’m doing here” . You can take that how you want but just be careful with all this hyping up you all are doing on here. I’ve been a college coach for over 25 years and I can assure you I’m still a student of the sport and will never consider myself an “elite” coach, it is irrelevant.

.

You put way too much thought into that response. MIlt. Hasn’t done a great job of hiring great coaches to be around him. That is what championship Directors need to do, and he pulls his weight by having the distance kids put up points. He will win a national title at Stanford, way before he does at Notre Dame.[/quote]

Are you kidding me? His staff at Stanford is outstanding. The throws coach scored 31 women's points at NCAAs and was just hired at Texas. The sprints coach has turned from having just a few good athletes to a deep solid team with 3 relays at NCAAs. They are one of the fastest improving sprint teams in the NCAA. Baker, who was 5th for 4 points, trains with the sprint coach. Eskind, the jumps coach is outstanding too. Milt's greatest challenge will be keeping his staff there. They scored 35 of their 51 points outside of his events.