Huffins out at Cal

Vanamee wrote:

These athletes you mention could be outliers.

Yeah, Carter was certainly an "outlier".

She basically ran 12.5 and 26.1 in all 4 years of high school!!! - - - Her PR was 12.3

Getting down to 11.33 and 22.79 had to do with coaching.

Period.

I do not believe that Rhuben Williams won "All American" status. As near as I can tell his best NCAA finish was 11th in the shot put in 2004. However, in the Pac-10 Championships that year he was a one man team scoring 17 of the 21 points scored by Cal men throwers.

Bear Cub wrote:

I do not believe that Rhuben Williams won "All American" status. As near as I can tell his best NCAA finish was 11th in the shot put in 2004. However, in the Pac-10 Championships that year he was a one man team scoring 17 of the 21 points scored by Cal men throwers.

True.

He earned "Honorable Mention All-American" honors for that 11th place at NC's his junior year. Think he was injured heading into NC's his senior year cause he threw 63-04 and won the event at the NCAA Regionals.

Well, if that is true . . . then how come Art Venegas, the HEAD COACH AT UCLA who is also a well renown throws coach has only 4 athletes qualified for NCAA\'s in the throws, while CAL has 3?

Please feel free to explain that one.

Venegas no longer coaches the women throwers as he used to...or else you could probably double that number.

Golden Bear wrote:

What's wrong with Jeff Tedford's salary?

Yeah, what's wrong with JT's salary?

Vin Lananna is now making $600,000 per year at Oregon as a track coach, and that's without performance bonuses!

I agree that it had to do with coaching. But so it does with the other sprinters. Thus, show me that a vast majority improved to a amount whereby you could convincingly claim that they couldn't have seem similar improvements under other coaches at other schools, and we'll believe that the Cal coached didn't just get an athlete that was gonna be a star no matter where she went. Those things do happen. Sometimes coaches just "happen upon" athletes.

I agree that "Old Bear" might have been a little harsh on the throwing program at Cal but here are some interesting facts to consider:

1/ In Pac-10 Championship meets since 2004 Cal's male throwers have placed 3rd (Rhuben Wiliams would have placed 4th on his own!!)1st, 4th and this year 9th. Not an encouraging trend but we all should recognize that there are inevitably cycles especially if talent is not deep. Women results have been 8th, 8th 4th and 3rd.

2/ Paul Treinert's Pac-10 title was the first for a male Cal thrower since Dave Porath's double in 1981. Women's last title was the much maligned Ms. Joyce in 2002, prior to her Kim Kesler in 1986 pre Pac-10

3/ In the Cal men's all time top ten in the four throws only John Ludden-7th in the hammer, Ryan Young (unfortunately injured this year)2nd and Jonas Hallgrimsson 3rd in the javelin among current athletes are ranked. The top marks in the shot and discus this year were 1'6" and 6'6" out of the the top ten. Hopefully Ryan will return healthy becasue with Jonas graduatiung the drop from the 10th position to Cal's top would be 20'. Women have several current athletes ranked in their top 10.

4/Don't compare Venegas to Cal's throwing coaches!!! If Cal's men's throwers had a meet against UCLA's, based on 2007 best performances the Bruins would sweep the shot ( Cal's best is 4' behind the 3rd bruin), discus (Cal's best 10' behind)would take 2nd in the hammer and win the jav..score 10, 8, 6 for places 1-3: Cal = 16 UCLA = 80. On the women's side Cal would win 54 / 42.

So how can one evaluate a program? In dual meet terms-which requires depth-conference terms- need a few stars- or regional/national NCAA terms which requires almost international level athletes? Old Bear might have had a few facts wrong about who is going to the NCAAs etc-let's chalk that up to bad eyesight after all he is old!- but there are some interesting challenges ahead for whomever is coaching throws at Cal in the near future. It's probably fair to say that Cal has never enjoyed a reputation as being a throwers' team, so perhaps now is the time to change that.

Go Thrower Bears!

typo alert..in my scoring of the dual meet between Cal and UCLA clearly Cal would have won the javelin and taken second in the hammer, accounting for their 18 points.

my eyesight might be failing but my math is not, Cal would have taken the javelin and a third in the hammer = 16 points!

Sprint coach wrote:

did huffins even coach the sprinters at cal? i dont think he did--i think it was that younger white dude. so, i dunno whose fault it is that they have no sprinters, and i dont know whose credit it is on the improvment of carter...

Yes.

Huffins was the sprint and LJ coach for Antonette Carter. Actually started with Irv Hunt, and then Carter transitioned over to Coach Huffins, I believe.

The "younger white dude" that you refer to is assistant coach, Bryan Fetzer. He had a pretty good coaching stint at Gardner-Webb, where he coached 6 NCAA champions along with 12 All-Americans, including 2000 IAAF world leader in the 55m, Julia O'Neal during his 4 years there.

US Track and Field and Cross Country Coaches Association named California Assistant Coach, Tony Sandoval as the top men's distance coach in the West Region, based on the performances of Kevin Davis, David Torrence, and Giliat Ghebray.

http://calbears.cstv.com/sports/c-otrack/spec-rel/060507aab.html

Congratulations, Tony!

He's gpt a pretty fast female 800 meter run also.

impartial observer wrote:

For the general population, Cal DOES have TOUGH admissions standards. For elite scholarship athletes, these standards DO NOT apply. That's the truth.

Cal can't use academics as an excuse for poor performance. If anything, the school's high reputation helps with recruiting. Honestly, do you think all those FL finalists came to Cal just for the windbag Sandoval? No, they came partially because of the prospects for a Cal degree.

yes, cal does have "tags" for athletes. the number is limited, though (i'm not sure how many). but cal has continually relied on its academic reputation to attract recruits who would otherwise go elsewhere to a better program. ask the alumni who went there because of the program/tony, and who went there because of the school.

there seem to be a lot of cal guys here. for those that think all we're doing is talking sh*t about the bears, wait a couple years. you will too realize that the athletic department allows mediocrity when it comes to track and field. and, that cal has underperformed considering the amount of talent they have. it really is sad for many of the athletes who could thrive with a coach who emphasizes longer distances, and who is not apathetic to creating a strong program. if you create a program, they will come (look at arkansas). but the cal staff seems to have talked themselves into the idea that "if you have a great school, they will come." this is also true. but if they come, they (not just a few) should perform.

I haven't read the whole thread, but a couple of things have caught my eye.

The saying is: "The proof [i.e. test] of the pudding is in the eating."

"The proof is in the pudding" (which appeared in this thread) makes no sense.

"Renown" is a noun! A coach can be "renownED"--but not "well renown." If you mean "well known," why not just say that?

When's someone going to mention the fact that CAL got second at indoor nationals in the DMR... with David Torrence and Kevin Davis as big time players on the team. Those guys WERE NOT studs coming out of high school.

Bear Cub had some interesting analysis...any comments, especially reagrding your comparison to Art's accomplishements.

Not studs?If I remember correctly Torrence ran around 4:10 (Torrence) and Davis 9:05. That ain't bad.

Achilles Tendon blues wrote:

When's someone going to mention the fact that CAL got second at indoor nationals in the DMR... with David Torrence and Kevin Davis as big time players on the team. Those guys WERE NOT studs coming out of high school.

Achilles Tendon blues wrote:

When's someone going to mention the fact that CAL got second at indoor nationals in the DMR... with David Torrence and Kevin Davis as big time players on the team. Those guys WERE NOT studs coming out of high school.

It's true.

Kevin Davis was a 4:17 runner for the 1600m back in high school. He has developed very nicely under Coach Sandoval. And if you know about Kevin's college career, you are well aware that it hasn't been easy - - - he once broke a bone getting hit by a car door. That anchor leg on the DMR against Russell Brown of Stanford was incredible! No one at the Indoor Nats even gave the Bears the time of day, and yet they were runner-up to Stanford in the DMR by 0.17

If it wasn't for that beast from ASU, Aquayo winning Pac-10's all 4 years of his career, Davis would have been more than just "runner-up" at Pac-10's and Regionals this year.

Props to Davis, and props to Caoch Sandoval for developing him into an 8:40 steepler.

Golden Bear wrote:

Props to Davis, and props to Caoch Sandoval for developing him into an 8:40 steepler.

Props to Davis for developing HIMSELF info an 8:40 steepler. No props to Sandoval for failing to develop a distance TEAM.