Hansons Brooks Future

Jellema has not left yet.

Has anyone ever left and had good things to say about the program?

How much misinformation, intentional or otherwise, has been spewed on this thread?

You shouldn't run for them if you can't respect them. If you have a problem with Kevin and Keith and what they're doing then you have a problem with yourself.

The Hansons are targets of misinformation.

In 2005 there was more than one thread about the bros, cancelling the womens program.

In 2006 there were threads about Brooks and Hansons parting ways.

These things obviously never happened. So why did someone waste their time to type lies? Because this is an open forum where every athlete that wasn't good enough can make stuff up. I am still waiting for someone to post their name.

Runningart2004 wrote:

I've been following the Hansons Team since day 1.

They were a team without Brian Sell before...they'll be one again.

Hansons are two dudes in Michigan who wanted to help guys get to the trials. They have had more OT Marathoners than any group since the GBTC and they'll continue to produce lots of sub 2:20 guys and a few 2:15 or faster.

Sub 2:20 is still a pretty damn good time and will crack the top 20 list most years (save for trials years) and Hansons will have 4 or 5 guys up there, sometimes more.

Alan

This was definitely the sense I got of them when I first heard of them: helping guys make the trials (2:15-2:20 standard). This meant they had a few guys like Morgan and O'Brian who ran 2:15 and made the WC team, and it meant they had a ton of guys running 2:18-2:21. Sell seemed like a total fluke; an undiscovered talent who did basically the same program as everyone else (plus an extra 30 or so mpw, but same general workout structure) yet ran 5 minutes faster.

But now they're saying they'll only take guys who have already run sub-2:19. Hmmmm, by definition they can't really help people get to the trials if they only take people who are already good enough to get to the trials in the first place.

I would say they are appropriately changing their focus based on the needs of the times. In 2000 US marathoning was in a dismal state where even seeing sub-2:20 performances was unusual (check out marathoning in the UK these days, if you want a sense of what that feels like). So we needed a group to just get 30-40 guys solidly under 2:22, and moreover create a media presence inspiring tons of other guys all over the country reading about them to also get under 2:22.

Now however that is not the problem; we have tons of local marathons all over the country being won by Americans in 2:19-2:22. What we need now is to take the guys who are running 2:18's on their own and put them into a situation where 2:15 after just 2 years in the program is the minimum expectation and 2:10 performances come about somewhat systematically. And so the Hansons will, if they can, do just that.

If they can't do that they'll disband. I hope that doesn't happen though.

Runningart2004 wrote:

I've been following the Hansons Team since day 1.

They were a team without Brian Sell before...they'll be one again.

Hansons are two dudes in Michigan who wanted to help guys get to the trials. They have had more OT Marathoners than any group since the GBTC and they'll continue to produce lots of sub 2:20 guys and a few 2:15 or faster.

Sub 2:20 is still a pretty damn good time and will crack the top 20 list most years (save for trials years) and Hansons will have 4 or 5 guys up there, sometimes more.

Alan

I disagree here, I don't think the Hanson's will do that well outside of Brian Sell. The guy saved a team of 2:20 guys. Who cares about running 2:20 anyway??

Don Calabrese wrote:

The Hansons are targets of misinformation.

Ain't that the truth. Has any of the dozens of rumours that have been started here about what's going to happen with the program EVER turned out to be true?

You may think that former athlets who do not respect Kevin and Keith are just bitter but that does not explain why current athletes feel the same way.

How about we let the current athletes speak for themselves, rather than allowing anonymous message board trolls that responsibility?

The current athletes are speaking for themselves and yes on an anonymous message board.

disagree here wrote:

Runningart2004 wrote:

I've been following the Hansons Team since day 1.

They were a team without Brian Sell before...they'll be one again.

Hansons are two dudes in Michigan who wanted to help guys get to the trials. They have had more OT Marathoners than any group since the GBTC and they'll continue to produce lots of sub 2:20 guys and a few 2:15 or faster.

Sub 2:20 is still a pretty damn good time and will crack the top 20 list most years (save for trials years) and Hansons will have 4 or 5 guys up there, sometimes more.

Alan

I disagree here, I don't think the Hanson's will do that well outside of Brian Sell. The guy saved a team of 2:20 guys. Who cares about running 2:20 anyway??

Check the Track and Field News list of top performances if you want to know who cares about running 2:20. 2:20 is still "elite" in this country.

Alan

phonetag wrote:

The current athletes are speaking for themselves and yes on an anonymous message board.

Bullshit, you're talking out your ass. Put up or shut up.

disagree here wrote:

Runningart2004 wrote:

I've been following the Hansons Team since day 1.

They were a team without Brian Sell before...they'll be one again.

Hansons are two dudes in Michigan who wanted to help guys get to the trials. They have had more OT Marathoners than any group since the GBTC and they'll continue to produce lots of sub 2:20 guys and a few 2:15 or faster.

Sub 2:20 is still a pretty damn good time and will crack the top 20 list most years (save for trials years) and Hansons will have 4 or 5 guys up there, sometimes more.

Alan

I disagree here, I don't think the Hanson's will do that well outside of Brian Sell. The guy saved a team of 2:20 guys. Who cares about running 2:20 anyway??

You are an idiot! running a sub 2:20 marathon is a huge accomplishment. Hansons is great for the sport and your punk-a!$ is not. You need to stop running, join a gym and lift weights while grunting with your new haircut and fake bake tan.

I think te ne addition os Wisconsin alum Christian Wagner, Hansons will have a great year even with retirement. That kid had pottential

Christian will be gone after his first year's contract is up.

Wrong you are! 2:20 is huge for an individual, but in the long run what does it do for the runner who is on Hanson's, nothing. What does it do for Hanson's, plenty! Volume exposure with more jersey's bunch together and therefore the name Brooks being seen by more and more people. Marketing 101, nothing more.

I am not on Hanson's and my opinion is not personal, one way or the other. If I happened to "coincidentally" break 2:20 12 years ago and could have been on Hanson's, what would I have done, gone from 2:19:08 to 2:10? That's not likely. Having the talent to break 2:20 is not having the talent to run 2:10. Argue, name call, do whatever you can to disagree, it won't change my life.

Years ago good runners didn't run 2:16 over and over and then suddenly run 2:10. If I'm wrong, then it should be easy to name a dozen, at least. Mark Messler and Don Johns are to very good Michigan runners who trained hard and ran 2:13 and 2:15 respectively. Don never ran 2:10, but besides Brian, he was way better than any runner other runner on the Hanson's team, including Kyle, Clint, Chad, etc....all reached close to their best and never improved. They aren't 2:10-2:12 marathoners and never could be.

I've read this on Letsrun by more than one poster, so it isn't just me. Personally, I find it pretty simplistic and are confused over posters bickering about a sub 2:20. That is no man's land and will get you nowhere. If you can't substantially improve in 4-5 years "after 4 years of college", then accept the fact that you gave it a shot and move on.

Again, argue, call me names and all that typical Letsrun rhetoric, it only shows your running IQ, or lack of.

By the way, Hanson's is great for the sport and gave it even more exposure, but it doesn't change their level of talent on the men's side, which is Brian and ??????????????

Whatever happend to Trent Briney? Kid was 4th at the Trials and ran 2:12... That's a success story right there, given his running pedigree, but a one-hit wonder?

Not quite buddy. You talk about other people's "running IQ", and then make a statement like this:

"Don never ran 2:10, but besides Brian, he was way better than any runner other runner on the Hanson's team"

Didn't Don Johns debut at Grandma's in '91 at 2:14:57, and never improve upon that? There's nothing wrong with that, he was very talented, winning Grandma's in '94 around 2:18, and taking 12th at the '92 Trials in 2:19, but to say he was way better than any Hanson's runner besides Brian...I don't see how you can make the argument. Clint and Trent both have faster PR's, and placed higher at the Trials (Clint twice). His PR is only marginally faster than the 5 other Hanson's that have run in the 2:15's (Morgan having almost as fast of a debut). Hanson's have also had 5 athletes besides Brian selected for the World Championships Marathon, I could be wrong but I don't believe Johns ever competed at the International level. Not to mention Morgan coming back 9 weeks after World's and placing 13th in what was arguably the most competitive Men's Trials field ever assembled. Was he "on par" with most of the Hanson's athletes, absolutely, was he way better??? Certainly not.

I was told by K that if Sell ran a 150 mile week, he

could/would run 100 of them at sub 6 minute mile pace.

I would like to know if that is true, and whether the other

guys could handle a similar week

I once watched 8 of them run 8 times 800 in 2:15 with a 1

minute recovery ( indoors ). Briney ran the workout.