Why do the Badgers always seem to underperform at nationals? 1st at Big10s, but finished nationals with 464 points? Similar situation in 2019. What gives, are they peaking too early ?
Why do the Badgers always seem to underperform at nationals? 1st at Big10s, but finished nationals with 464 points? Similar situation in 2019. What gives, are they peaking too early ?
It's Mick's fault!
I stand corrected. Miss the Jerry days when they could actually perform.
Concrete running just can’t compare to Farm boy running.
Ideally the farm man is a town and city citizen as well and able to live out the Washingtonian ideal with erudition, ability, service and a smile for the sake of the constituencies of the Union.
Not just Wisconsin, the entire Big 10 was pathetic.
Michigan St was 17th, Wisconsin 18th, Indiana 26th, and Purdue 29th. The highest placing Big 10 athlete was Michigan's Devin Meyrer in 24th. Michigan got screwed by not being allowed as a team. They would have placed higher than any of the other Big 10 teams. At least the Michigan State women did well
Big 10 basketball is following the same example as the Big 10 XC teams and is even more pathetic.
It's culture. Mick has proven throughout his career he has the ability to coach high-caliber athletes, but the culture of that team has changed significantly from the teams of the '80s, '90s, and '00s. Madison is just not the type of environment you can get away with partial focus, there are tons of distractions, and recent teams have allowed failure to become an acceptable option.
You'll likely continue to see competitive individuals and Big 10 titles, but don't expect an XC podium finish in the foreseeable future.
Servant Leader wrote:
It's culture. Mick has proven throughout his career he has the ability to coach high-caliber athletes, but the culture of that team has changed significantly from the teams of the '80s, '90s, and '00s. Madison is just not the type of environment you can get away with partial focus, there are tons of distractions, and recent teams have allowed failure to become an acceptable option.
You'll likely continue to see competitive individuals and Big 10 titles, but don't expect an XC podium finish in the foreseeable future.
seems like there's some truth to this ^^^
Servant Leader wrote:
It's culture. Mick has proven throughout his career he has the ability to coach high-caliber athletes, but the culture of that team has changed significantly from the teams of the '80s, '90s, and '00s. Madison is just not the type of environment you can get away with partial focus, there are tons of distractions, and recent teams have allowed failure to become an acceptable option.
You'll likely continue to see competitive individuals and Big 10 titles, but don't expect an XC podium finish in the foreseeable future.
*the ability to recruit high-caliber and overseas athletes (just like at Iona)
Mick has not shown the ability to develop midwest runners in the same way that Jerry had. He has shown an increasing dependency on bringing over the top Aus/GB runners in order to keep the team relevant, which is a shame given what Jerry built there with homegrown talent and smart training. The 2011 team that won NCAAs was still Jerry's guys at the core, since then their ability to perform as team speaks for itself, Big-10 streak broken and NCAA appearance streak broken.
Arguably the two most prolific runners to come out of the program under Mick, Moh Ahmed and Oliver Hoare, improved tremendously since leaving his tutelage.
Wisco will continue to bring in top recruits because the school is incredible and because of Jerry's history. Looking at the talent that goes in and the results that Mick is able to produce seems to indicate he's not capable of developing athletes...just that he's not totally destroying already world class talents (Moh, Oliver, Morgan), which could be related to their national team obligations saving them from the over-training and lack of any evidence-based training structure; again, the injuries and inconsistent performances speak for themselves.
Mick's a darn good recruiter, Mick is not a good coach...sometimes that's all it takes to keep a job in the NCAA
been there, ran that wrote:
Servant Leader wrote:
It's culture. Mick has proven throughout his career he has the ability to coach high-caliber athletes, but the culture of that team has changed significantly from the teams of the '80s, '90s, and '00s. Madison is just not the type of environment you can get away with partial focus, there are tons of distractions, and recent teams have allowed failure to become an acceptable option.
You'll likely continue to see competitive individuals and Big 10 titles, but don't expect an XC podium finish in the foreseeable future.
*the ability to recruit high-caliber and overseas athletes (just like at Iona)
Mick has not shown the ability to develop midwest runners in the same way that Jerry had. He has shown an increasing dependency on bringing over the top Aus/GB runners in order to keep the team relevant, which is a shame given what Jerry built there with homegrown talent and smart training. The 2011 team that won NCAAs was still Jerry's guys at the core, since then their ability to perform as team speaks for itself, Big-10 streak broken and NCAA appearance streak broken.
Arguably the two most prolific runners to come out of the program under Mick, Moh Ahmed and Oliver Hoare, improved tremendously since leaving his tutelage.
Wisco will continue to bring in top recruits because the school is incredible and because of Jerry's history. Looking at the talent that goes in and the results that Mick is able to produce seems to indicate he's not capable of developing athletes...just that he's not totally destroying already world class talents (Moh, Oliver, Morgan), which could be related to their national team obligations saving them from the over-training and lack of any evidence-based training structure; again, the injuries and inconsistent performances speak for themselves.
Mick's a darn good recruiter, Mick is not a good coach...sometimes that's all it takes to keep a job in the NCAA
Let's not forget about McClimon, Nuttycomb, or Smith before Jerry took over.
https://imgflip.com/i/52zp8mbeen there, ran that wrote: bringing over the top Aus/GB runners in order to keep the team relevant, which is
[...]
Mick's a darn good recruiter, Mick is not a good coach...sometimes that's all it takes to keep a job in the NCAA
I'm a huge Jerry fan, but you know they won the '05 cross title with two foreign athletes in their top five, right?
Plenty of Australians have come through the NCAA system in the past, they're not guaranteed NCAA champions, and Mick was able to guide two in recent years to multiple titles (Hoare & McDonald). Similarly, Monson developed successfully over the course of her career and she's a homegrown talent. He may not be on Jerry's level, but his individual athlete accomplishments have to be acknowledged.
That said, beyond recruiting and individual talent development, the great coaches build a culture that leads to repeated success year over year as new athletes cycle through. This is the magic that was lost when Mick took over, he was obsessed with doing things his way and lamented the idea of continuing his predecessor's traditions. The fabric has continued to erode over the last decade, and we're left wishing for a return to the glory days where podium finishes were nearly a given.
Almost a Martin Smith at Oregon scenario, but with a much less influential and dissenting alumni.
Badger, Badger, Badger wrote:
been there, ran that wrote:
*the ability to recruit high-caliber and overseas athletes (just like at Iona)
Mick has not shown the ability to develop midwest runners in the same way that Jerry had. He has shown an increasing dependency on bringing over the top Aus/GB runners in order to keep the team relevant, which is a shame given what Jerry built there with homegrown talent and smart training. The 2011 team that won NCAAs was still Jerry's guys at the core, since then their ability to perform as team speaks for itself, Big-10 streak broken and NCAA appearance streak broken.
Arguably the two most prolific runners to come out of the program under Mick, Moh Ahmed and Oliver Hoare, improved tremendously since leaving his tutelage.
Wisco will continue to bring in top recruits because the school is incredible and because of Jerry's history. Looking at the talent that goes in and the results that Mick is able to produce seems to indicate he's not capable of developing athletes...just that he's not totally destroying already world class talents (Moh, Oliver, Morgan), which could be related to their national team obligations saving them from the over-training and lack of any evidence-based training structure; again, the injuries and inconsistent performances speak for themselves.
Mick's a darn good recruiter, Mick is not a good coach...sometimes that's all it takes to keep a job in the NCAA
Let's not forget about McClimon, Nuttycomb, or Smith before Jerry took over.
Good point. Jerry was excellent at UW, but the history of quality goes back a long way.
Little10 wrote:
Not just Wisconsin, the entire Big 10 was pathetic.
Michigan St was 17th, Wisconsin 18th, Indiana 26th, and Purdue 29th. The highest placing Big 10 athlete was Michigan's Devin Meyrer in 24th. Michigan got screwed by not being allowed as a team. They would have placed higher than any of the other Big 10 teams. At least the Michigan State women did well
Big 10 basketball is following the same example as the Big 10 XC teams and is even more pathetic.
Michigan did not belong at this meet. They lost to Syracuse earlier in the Month. Syracuse finished 31st at Nationals. DFL
Servant Leader wrote:
I'm a huge Jerry fan, but you know they won the '05 cross title with two foreign athletes in their top five, right?
Plenty of Australians have come through the NCAA system in the past, they're not guaranteed NCAA champions, and Mick was able to guide two in recent years to multiple titles (Hoare & McDonald). Similarly, Monson developed successfully over the course of her career and she's a homegrown talent. He may not be on Jerry's level, but his individual athlete accomplishments have to be acknowledged.
That said, beyond recruiting and individual talent development, the great coaches build a culture that leads to repeated success year over year as new athletes cycle through. This is the magic that was lost when Mick took over, he was obsessed with doing things his way and lamented the idea of continuing his predecessor's traditions. The fabric has continued to erode over the last decade, and we're left wishing for a return to the glory days where podium finishes were nearly a given.
Almost a Martin Smith at Oregon scenario, but with a much less influential and dissenting alumni.
Not coached by Mick...
Overall, Wisco is suffering now due to "branding" and location. If I'm a top 10 FL or NXN stud, I'd be looking at other schools with a much better environment and location to improve my running while also offering a quality education. If I'm Mormon, of cou
Ultimately, Wisco and other similar programs need to counter Mike Smith and NAU. What could've another program offered Nico Young to bypass NAU? I don't know the answer. If there is no answer, then NAU will keep recruting the "Nico Young" or "Brady Hostey" of that year's top recruits.
Servant Leader wrote:
I'm a huge Jerry fan, but you know they won the '05 cross title with two foreign athletes in their top five, right?
Plenty of Australians have come through the NCAA system in the past, they're not guaranteed NCAA champions, and Mick was able to guide two in recent years to multiple titles (Hoare & McDonald). Similarly, Monson developed successfully over the course of her career and she's a homegrown talent. He may not be on Jerry's level, but his individual athlete accomplishments have to be acknowledged.
That said, beyond recruiting and individual talent development, the great coaches build a culture that leads to repeated success year over year as new athletes cycle through. This is the magic that was lost when Mick took over, he was obsessed with doing things his way and lamented the idea of continuing his predecessor's traditions. The fabric has continued to erode over the last decade, and we're left wishing for a return to the glory days where podium finishes were nearly a given.
Almost a Martin Smith at Oregon scenario, but with a much less influential and dissenting alumni.
Very well aware there were two non-US runners in the top 5 that year :)
Allow me to re-emphasize where I say "increasingly reliant". It's the trend of the last 10 years that's concerning, very little in terms of development of other athletes. There are many roadmaps to success in NCAA XC as demonstrated by variance in the composition of the winning teams. My point is that Wisco has the resources, the program history, the college atmosphere, and the academics to be a contender without relying solely on foreign talent like a Tulsa or Iona (which don't have a fraction of those elements); however, Mick doesn't seem to be able to make it work otherwise.
I really don't think you can attribute Hoare and McDonald's success to Mick, both international-level talents coming in. Hoare in particularly has improved significantly since moving on from Mick (3:32 indoors this year). Again, he recruited top level talent, they produced some good results while at UW, you can't criticize Mick for that but to lend him credit for their success might not be appropriate.
Time will tell, but I'm not holding my breath that Wisco will be better off in 5-years than they are now.
Wisconsin is a great school with great history but we’re starting to see a shift away from the traditional running powerhouses as more schools are competitive nowadays. I know these championships didn’t have the normal selection process, but can you imagine UNC Charlotte, Gonzaga, Furman, Duke, Butler, Ole miss, Utah state, SUU, or Tulsa making NCAAs 20 years ago?
The fields are so much deeper than before and while some schools like nau, Stanford, Colorado will always be able to draw amazing recruits, it leaves a gap to the “middle class” teams. The rich get richer, the poor get richer, the mid teams don’t really get much.
It seems the best way to be a consistent top 5 program is to be elite academically or located at altitude. Wisconsin is a good school but not elite.
You can also cheat the system by going with foreigners. Technically not cheating but kinda like having a ringer. It would be more fun to me to develop us born runners.
In the end though be elite or altitude
I’m a D2 female runner. Our coach explicitly told us not to visit LetsRun forums.
Great interview with Steve Cram - says Jakob has no chance of WRs this year
Guys between age of 45 and 55 do you think about death or does it seem far away
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion
RENATO can you talk about the preparation of Emile Cairess 2:06
adizero Road to Records with Yomif Kejelcha, Agnes Ngetich, Hobbs Kessler & many more is Saturday