I would assume as far as Suzy goes - you got one side to that story, enough said.
There are some Division I schools who have do have an overall coach and many assistants. Assistants are typically the ones that do the "coaching". Head coaches are normally the organizers, administrators, sometimes they take a handful of athletes - but their responsibilities lie with making the program run smoothly, recruiting, etc.
First...there is a lot of talent on the men's team and they do have the possibility to do well. They are young and will turn around and start running faster regardless of the coach
Second... Nobody is critizing Alford-Sullivan's coaching style or training...sooo everyone hates her but yet---I don't see any complaints because of too many workouts, running to many or too few miles, etc etc.
Third...Is Alford-Sullivan going to hire an assistant distance coach for the men's and/or women's program?
There were so many options. They could of made so many good decisions.
Centrowitz? Torpey?
They were all talked about, but was that ever serious? Somebody dropped the ball.
Actually, I'm not sure if Penn State will really be saving much money. Under the new coaching situation there will be Sullivan as head coach with 5 assistants (one of whom will be another distance coach). They have also created a new position for track program; director of track and field operations. So this will also mean that Beth may not have as much on her plate since this person will deal with travel, recruiting, home meets etc. I think this position is a great addition and with the right assistant coaches the team will get much better.
Where did you hear that one of the 5 assistants will be another distance coach? Can you confirm that detail. Because last I heard, she wants to coach both mens and womens distance. That is why the majority of the alumni are against this. You can't name a single athlete that she has developed. All the success she has had is from the sprints and field events which the assistants handle.
Question?Why do so many people seem to dislike Coach Sullivan so much on this board?
What is the criteria for a coach to be thrashed on this message board?It seems to me if you have any success as a coach you get slandered and bashed on here.I am really pissed & hurt, apparently I have not had enough success as a coach,haha
what are her credentials as a distance coach?
The real Coach Caboose wrote:
Question?Why do so many people seem to dislike Coach Sullivan so much on this board?
What is the criteria for a coach to be thrashed on this message board?It seems to me if you have any success as a coach you get slandered and bashed on here.I am really pissed & hurt, apparently I have not had enough success as a coach,haha
I dont think that it has anything to do with success. However, has there ever been a successful woman coach of men's track and field at the elite D1 level. Or even the second tier? I cannot recall. I know the PSU guys cannot be excited about this. Im sure they are pleading for Harry to stay. PSU does not need a revolution, they need a proven coach that will be able to improve his athletes.
niner wrote:
The real Coach Caboose wrote:Question?Why do so many people seem to dislike Coach Sullivan so much on this board?
What is the criteria for a coach to be thrashed on this message board?It seems to me if you have any success as a coach you get slandered and bashed on here.I am really pissed & hurt, apparently I have not had enough success as a coach,haha
I dont think that it has anything to do with success. However, has there ever been a successful woman coach of men's track and field at the elite D1 level. Or even the second tier? I cannot recall. I know the PSU guys cannot be excited about this. Im sure they are pleading for Harry to stay. PSU does not need a revolution, they need a proven coach that will be able to improve his athletes.
I believe that if the successful men's alumni want us to think that Harry Groves was a completely successful up and up coach that is clearly a misrepresentation.
If you achieved what you wanted when you were at PSU, then of course - he was a highly successful coach, and you were one of "Harry's boys".
If you were permanently injures, or sucked under his training and never heard from again, then he was a rotten coach.
Alford-Sullivan is not, nor will be any different. She will have successes and failures.
Joan Nesbit was a successful and well liked coach for UNC for both men and women. There are others with less of a name or presence.
I'm not exactly sure of the Alumni's role in the hiring process to replace Mr. Groves, but I don't recall ever getting a phone call from my university 20 years later and asking me to be part of the hiring and screening process.
As a guy from the 70s-80s, I'm surprised Groves lasted as long as he did. When I was at PSU, in my opinion, Harry was one of the top 2-3 cross country coaches in the country. He took a lot of guys from descent high school runners to national class runners. Malmo, I don't know what you or Paul Stemmer, Greg Fredricks or Charlie McGuire ran in high school but I saw what he did with guys like John Ziegler, Bruce Baden, Bob Snyder, and Larry Mangan. He had a great story to tell recruits.
Now, I have never met Alford-Sullivan or know much about her, but my worry, especially in today's age of the internet where you can google everything, is that when recruiting distance runners, if she doesn't have success stories to tell, she isn't going to get the recruits. Maybe she does have those stories but if she doesn't, hopefully she will get a distance coach who does, because I would like to see PSU rise again.
As for Groves, I will be there this weekend to congratulate him on his accomplishments and wish him well. Hopefully, I will see some old friends too!
Big Al:
can I ask what years you ran at PSU?
Why is everyone so fired up.
Beth is now more likely to hire an young alum of Penn State to put some of the fire that Haryy Grobes lacke dinto the program. Beth is the Director of the whole shabang now; she understands she can;t coach everything right? The idea that all these 30 year old coaching at these little schools were going to be handed the reind to the entire Penn State program is ridiculous; they're nowhere near ready for that.
And Beth is? She has directed the distance runners on the girls team to the basement of the big ten. 6 Points in distance in Track and 10th place in XC this year. Worse than that, how many of her scholarship distance runners ran in those meets? I agree with the poster who mentioned success as a means to attract top runners. She has had sprinters and throwers carry the load while her distance runners fall apart. It's not hard to see through that.
My obsevation from the sidelines is that she has less support from the alums going in than Martin Smith had on the way out at Oregon. That's not a vote of confidence.
So far not one alum, by name, has stood up and come forward in support of Alford-Sullivan as head coach. Not one.
Athletes she coached at PSU? What about elder members on the team now? What are there comments on the matter?
Why does she need alumni support? She already got the job.
Alumni Support and input is not necessary in the hiring process.
Where do you think scholarship money comes from? Scholarships do not become endowed on their own.
Feel free to chime in alums and current members. What are your thoughts on BAS?
It may not be neccesary in the hiring process but it gives her a bad foot to start off on. At the first sign of blood in the water, most likely as soon as next season, alumni will be calling for her head and second guessing the decision more so than they already are. Penn State has absolutely no excuse for not being a top notch track program, and if Sullivan doesnt deliver soon she will probably not only lose control of the men, but also the women.