After Woodbridge it’s obvious. 4 runners under 14, and their “5th runner”, Dan Appleford is recovering from illness and did not run in the sweepstakes. He ran sub 9 in the 3200 at Arcadia last year. They are strong at 6 and 7 too. While we are at it, let’s also declare the Young brothers, Lex, Leo and Nico the greatest sibling trio in prep distance running history.
100% yes. No other team is even close
yes and yes wrote:
100% yes. No other team is even close
I’d argue that Nico is one of the top 5 most touted prep runners ever, and Leo may be better. Mind blowing🤯
Wise Old Man wrote:
yes and yes wrote:
100% yes. No other team is even close
I’d argue that Nico is one of the top 5 most touted prep runners ever, and Leo may be better. Mind blowing🤯
This team has single handedly changed what it means to be good. There is a new standard of excellence in American high school running. It’s really a good thing. Hopefully more programs will start striving for these types of times.
That is a silly statement. Thousands of programs strive to be their best. But no other program has ever come close to having this much talent.
Marty the thong wrote:
That is a silly statement. Thousands of programs strive to be their best. But no other program has ever come close to having this much talent.
I’m definitely not saying their better because of any particular virtues of the program. Two families are the core of the team. However, it’s is smoky the best prep team ever and the Youngs, who I don’t know, have the best three children to ever run hs distance in the USA. Of that there is no doubt.
Marty the thong wrote:
That is a silly statement. Thousands of programs strive to be their best. But no other program has ever come close to having this much talent.
This is a prime example of what I’m talking about. You call it a silly statement. And dismiss it.
Calling it talent is a cop out.
It’s more than that. It’s coaching. They’ve got a coach that’s convinced his team that a 4:20 mile or a sub 16:00 5k just isn’t that fast. So the team strives for better.
The rest of the country argues back and says he’s wrong. Most coaches think 4:20 and sub 16:00 is great. Consequently that’s where most programs stall out.
Marty the thong wrote:
That is a silly statement. Thousands of programs strive to be their best. But no other program has ever come close to having this much talent.
I’ll put it another way. Why do so many runners get significantly faster as college freshman? So many go from being high 15s for 5k in high school to being low to mid 14s as college freshman.
Is it because they’ve all of the sudden become more talented?
Or, have they adjusted their expectations and risen to the level of the competition?
yes and yes wrote:
Marty the thong wrote:
That is a silly statement. Thousands of programs strive to be their best. But no other program has ever come close to having this much talent.
I’ll put it another way. Why do so many runners get significantly faster as college freshman? So many go from being high 15s for 5k in high school to being low to mid 14s as college freshman.
Is it because they’ve all of the sudden become more talented?
Or, have they adjusted their expectations and risen to the level of the competition?
It is because they are running 70mpw instead of 50. And they can do that since they have 4 years of training under them instead of one...
So how much of the team doesn't break 420? That isn't that fast so why isn't the whole team running it?
It's the spikes.
yes and yes wrote:
Marty the thong wrote:
That is a silly statement. Thousands of programs strive to be their best. But no other program has ever come close to having this much talent.
This is a prime example of what I’m talking about. You call it a silly statement. And dismiss it.
Calling it talent is a cop out.
It’s more than that. It’s coaching. They’ve got a coach that’s convinced his team that a 4:20 mile or a sub 16:00 5k just isn’t that fast. So the team strives for better.
The rest of the country argues back and says he’s wrong. Most coaches think 4:20 and sub 16:00 is great. Consequently that’s where most programs stall out.
Ah that was my problem. I thought 1:50 was fast, so that's why I never broke it. God I'm such a silly goose.
fkkfkfkfkf wrote:
yes and yes wrote:
I’ll put it another way. Why do so many runners get significantly faster as college freshman? So many go from being high 15s for 5k in high school to being low to mid 14s as college freshman.
Is it because they’ve all of the sudden become more talented?
Or, have they adjusted their expectations and risen to the level of the competition?
It is because they are running 70mpw instead of 50. And they can do that since they have 4 years of training under them instead of one...
So how much of the team doesn't break 420? That isn't that fast so why isn't the whole team running it?
The have 1 more year of training not 4. Also your 70 vs 50 is a guess.
While you focus on making excuses for not running fast. They focus on doing what it takes to run faster.
Their program has a different definition of good and it shows.
yes and yes wrote:
fkkfkfkfkf wrote:
It is because they are running 70mpw instead of 50. And they can do that since they have 4 years of training under them instead of one...
So how much of the team doesn't break 420? That isn't that fast so why isn't the whole team running it?
The have 1 more year of training not 4. Also your 70 vs 50 is a guess.
While you focus on making excuses for not running fast. They focus on doing what it takes to run faster.
Their program has a different definition of good and it shows.
No clue how you came up with the idea they had 4 more years of training. There is no way anyone get 10 has that poor of reading comprehension. Or are you one of the people on this board who thinks 100>400?
And again why is the rest of the team slow? Hw come they aren't rolling out 30 420 milers and 1445 5k guys? After all those are slow time and should be easy to coach anyone up to... Why does the coach let them make excuses for being slow.
fkkfkfkfkf wrote:
yes and yes wrote:
The have 1 more year of training not 4. Also your 70 vs 50 is a guess.
While you focus on making excuses for not running fast. They focus on doing what it takes to run faster.
Their program has a different definition of good and it shows.
No clue how you came up with the idea they had 4 more years of training. There is no way anyone get 10 has that poor of reading comprehension. Or are you one of the people on this board who thinks 100>400?
And again why is the rest of the team slow? Hw come they aren't rolling out 30 420 milers and 1445 5k guys? After all those are slow time and should be easy to coach anyone up to... Why does the coach let them make excuses for being slow.
Coach Brosnan is one of the best distance coaches in the country. I'm talking all levels, Pro, College, High School. Amazing what he is doing
fkkfkfkfkf wrote:
yes and yes wrote:
The have 1 more year of training not 4. Also your 70 vs 50 is a guess.
While you focus on making excuses for not running fast. They focus on doing what it takes to run faster.
Their program has a different definition of good and it shows.
No clue how you came up with the idea they had 4 more years of training. There is no way anyone get 10 has that poor of reading comprehension. Or are you one of the people on this board who thinks 100>400?
And again why is the rest of the team slow? Hw come they aren't rolling out 30 420 milers and 1445 5k guys? After all those are slow time and should be easy to coach anyone up to... Why does the coach let them make excuses for being slow.
That’s just it. The rest of the team isn’t slow! Their top 10 is faster than most good team’s number one. They complete at a different level. They aren’t shooting for 4:20 and sub 16:00
4:20 and sub 16:00 isn’t that fast. Sorry that hurts your feelings.
fkkfkfkfkf wrote:
yes and yes wrote:
The have 1 more year of training not 4. Also your 70 vs 50 is a guess.
While you focus on making excuses for not running fast. They focus on doing what it takes to run faster.
Their program has a different definition of good and it shows.
No clue how you came up with the idea they had 4 more years of training. There is no way anyone get 10 has that poor of reading comprehension. Or are you one of the people on this board who thinks 100>400?
And again why is the rest of the team slow? Hw come they aren't rolling out 30 420 milers and 1445 5k guys? After all those are slow time and should be easy to coach anyone up to... Why does the coach let them make excuses for being slow.
The 'rest of the team' isn't actually slow. Their 13th guy in the 1600 ran 4:28 last year. That doesn't include a 9:27 3200 guy so really he was 14th. Their 15th guy ran a 10:00 3200. 16th guy was a sophomore who ran 4:43. The remaining guys were Freshman. So their slowest non-Freshman was a 4:43 sophomore. They only had 1 Junior or Senior who didn't run 4:28 or faster (or sub 9:30). He was the 10:00 kid who went from 11:26 and 5:15 as a Soph to 10:00 and 4:41 as a SR.
fkkfkfkfkf wrote:
yes and yes wrote:
The have 1 more year of training not 4. Also your 70 vs 50 is a guess.
While you focus on making excuses for not running fast. They focus on doing what it takes to run faster.
Their program has a different definition of good and it shows.
No clue how you came up with the idea they had 4 more years of training. There is no way anyone get 10 has that poor of reading comprehension. Or are you one of the people on this board who thinks 100>400?
And again why is the rest of the team slow? Hw come they aren't rolling out 30 420 milers and 1445 5k guys? After all those are slow time and should be easy to coach anyone up to... Why does the coach let them make excuses for being slow.
By the way my reading comprehension is fine. Look at what you wrote you dick.
“It is because they are running 70mpw instead of 50. And they can do that since they have 4 years of training under them instead of one...”
c7runner7 wrote:
fkkfkfkfkf wrote:
No clue how you came up with the idea they had 4 more years of training. There is no way anyone get 10 has that poor of reading comprehension. Or are you one of the people on this board who thinks 100>400?
And again why is the rest of the team slow? Hw come they aren't rolling out 30 420 milers and 1445 5k guys? After all those are slow time and should be easy to coach anyone up to... Why does the coach let them make excuses for being slow.
The 'rest of the team' isn't actually slow. Their 13th guy in the 1600 ran 4:28 last year. That doesn't include a 9:27 3200 guy so really he was 14th. Their 15th guy ran a 10:00 3200. 16th guy was a sophomore who ran 4:43. The remaining guys were Freshman. So their slowest non-Freshman was a 4:43 sophomore. They only had 1 Junior or Senior who didn't run 4:28 or faster (or sub 9:30). He was the 10:00 kid who went from 11:26 and 5:15 as a Soph to 10:00 and 4:41 as a SR.
Those times ARE slow according to their coach.
Let it Rupp wrote:
yes and yes wrote:
This is a prime example of what I’m talking about. You call it a silly statement. And dismiss it.
Calling it talent is a cop out.
It’s more than that. It’s coaching. They’ve got a coach that’s convinced his team that a 4:20 mile or a sub 16:00 5k just isn’t that fast. So the team strives for better.
The rest of the country argues back and says he’s wrong. Most coaches think 4:20 and sub 16:00 is great. Consequently that’s where most programs stall out.
Ah that was my problem. I thought 1:50 was fast, so that's why I never broke it. God I'm such a silly goose.
You do think 1:50 is fast. As evidenced by your humble brag.
Please tell me I’m wrong.
John Kimball wrote:
c7runner7 wrote:
The 'rest of the team' isn't actually slow. Their 13th guy in the 1600 ran 4:28 last year. That doesn't include a 9:27 3200 guy so really he was 14th. Their 15th guy ran a 10:00 3200. 16th guy was a sophomore who ran 4:43. The remaining guys were Freshman. So their slowest non-Freshman was a 4:43 sophomore. They only had 1 Junior or Senior who didn't run 4:28 or faster (or sub 9:30). He was the 10:00 kid who went from 11:26 and 5:15 as a Soph to 10:00 and 4:41 as a SR.
Those times ARE slow according to their coach.
Yes, and they have many more kids that run faster. Coincidence?