So who is it going to be insider???
So who is it going to be insider???
I have heard from a second hand source that the final three candidates are John Hayes, Kevin Sullivan and Jason Vigilante - very solid pool of potentially good coaches.
If Clayton is going to try to create an SEC type team based more on sprints than distance, I think that is ultimately a doomed philosophy at Michigan and suggests his tenure there will be limited. I don't know anything about Sullivan's coaching capabilities, but I am strongly in favor of bringing a Michigan guy in to lead the program. He seems like a really decent person and has had a lot of success in his own running, obviously. I would like to see him return to Michigan, but I would like it to be in a situation that is more likely to be successful in the long term.
If I were an AD, I'd be reluctant to hire Kevin unless Karen was coming along as well. Long distance marriages don't work that well.
Why not the best candidate? This whole "Michigan Man" is a load of crap. Why limit yourself? How has it worked for the football program?
If those candidates are in the running, why didn't they keep Gibby, he was doing a wonderful job.
zfk wrote:
I have heard from a second hand source that the final three candidates are John Hayes, Kevin Sullivan and Jason Vigilante - very solid pool of potentially good coaches.
I thought Hayes was going to Tennessee ?!
I'm all for hiring people with strong past athletic success, but seriously- has Johnny Hayes really done anything since winning marathon gold in London?
Another Option wrote:
If Clayton is going to try to create an SEC type team based more on sprints than distance, I think that is ultimately a doomed philosophy at Michigan and suggests his tenure there will be limited. I don't know anything about Sullivan's coaching capabilities, but I am strongly in favor of bringing a Michigan guy in to lead the program. He seems like a really decent person and has had a lot of success in his own running, obviously. I would like to see him return to Michigan, but I would like it to be in a situation that is more likely to be successful in the long term.
Dont think JC is trying to build an SEC type program. He knows the B1G very well. My take is he is trying to build a balanced team. Having 40% of your roster dedicated to distance is not balanced
letsthrow wrote:
...Having 40% of your roster dedicated to distance is not balanced
It's not a problem to have 40% of your roster be distance oriented, it's a problem to be paying for 40% or have that much counting against your 12.6. You can have some very good walk-ons that are on academic money that you aren't paying for, be on the team as long as their GPA is high enough to not count against the limit. Not sure of the numbers now, but it was something like you have to have been in the top 15% of your graduating class and/or be above 3.5. Might have changed since I last checked, but those are the guys you really want for distance, a "developer" with a high GPA that lands him as much academic money as possible who wants to be on your team for free.
Michigan doesn't give out any academic aid. It can be a difficult sell. You're either on athletic aid or you're on nothing. They get walk-ons because "it's Michigan." I don't think people understand how difficult it is to recruit to these high academically oriented public schools.
This is wrong. Michigan does give academic aid and several runners are on it. They can get one or the other but not both.
Actually some of their runners do receive "academic aid". Someone told me erin finn was an example of this.
I can't imagine that Erin is not on a full ride or close to it, she should be.
NOTSURE wrote:
I can't imagine that Erin is not on a full ride or close to it, she should be.
academic or need based
And yes would think she should have a significant athletic shollie
Jesse James wrote:
Michigan doesn't give out any academic aid. It can be a difficult sell. You're either on athletic aid or you're on nothing. They get walk-ons because "it's Michigan." I don't think people understand how difficult it is to recruit to these high academically oriented public schools.
Give me a break. Distance runners are smart. They are not sprinters.
It's easy to get kids interested. If Harvard can field a solid mens and womens team, there's no reason Michigan can't.
It's a heck of a lot easier to recruit generally smart kids to places they want to go and parents want them to go, then academic mediocre places, even if you have the money to give.
For example, many times you'll get 9:10 type kids who will walk on at a Michigan versus take 60-80% at a mid-major.
Give me a break. Distance runners are smart. They are not sprinters.
It's easy to get kids interested. If Harvard can field a solid mens and womens team, there's no reason Michigan can't.
It's a heck of a lot easier to recruit generally smart kids to places they want to go and parents want them to go, then academic mediocre places, even if you have the money to give.
For example, many times you'll get 9:10 type kids who will walk on at a Michigan versus take 60-80% at a mid-major.[/quote]
Just because Harvard can field a solid team doesn't necessarily mean Michigan can. UM is not even close to in the same league for undergrad academically as Harvard. Some STEM majors are comparable, but still not nearly the comprehensive deep education you'd get at Harvard. I was also led to believe that title 9 imposes restrictions on the non-revenue generating male sports at UM due to the mandated equivalence of roster spots between male/female sports. The AD is always going to give more roster spots for non-academically exempt athletes to sports which generate revenue (and lots of it at UM): it's simply business. UM's shorter semesters mean that some years close to 50% of the time spent on campus for the academic year there will be snow on the ground. This is simply not a draw for runners, obviously Harvard and other successful distance schools have this as well, but it acts to diminish any advantage UM might have as a more established "big name" national sports program.
To be fair wrote:
UM's shorter semesters mean that some years close to 50% of the time spent on campus for the academic year there will be snow on the ground. This is simply not a draw for runners, obviously Harvard and other successful distance schools have this as well, but it acts to diminish any advantage UM might have as a more established "big name" national sports program.
Agree with all the other points you made; however, the math on the % of the year with snow is simply flawed. We do not get snow until Jan most years (4 months of academic year over at that point) and it never lasts past March 1. Typically we have 2-3 months where snow is on the ground and the academic year is 8 months. Now this year was different for sure, but it was not normal. Snow/rain/wind/weather did not to seem to slow Sully, Willis, Brannen, etc down...
I believe Kevin Sullivan will be next coach
It's done. Open the flood gates!