Can one runner really destroy the whole team?

A good coach recognizes that different people have different weaknesses and strengths and will coach each athlete differently.

A half-assed coach will lump everyone together and make them all do the same workouts and cite "team unity" as the reason for doing so.

50 Cent wrote:

A good coach recognizes that different people have different weaknesses and strengths and will coach each athlete differently.

A half-assed coach will lump everyone together and make them all do the same workouts and cite "team unity" as the reason for doing so.

Well stated.

50 Cent wrote:

A good coach recognizes that different people have different weaknesses and strengths and will coach each athlete differently.

A half-assed coach will lump everyone together and make them all do the same workouts and cite "team unity" as the reason for doing so.

where the hell did you run? what high school and college teams did you run on? I never had a coach who let the runners 'do their own thing'. That IS a recipe for disaster and a lousy team, to boot.

agree with hello mcfly - recipe for disaster - few things will destroy a team faster - except for maybe a hottie freshman jumping in and out of the sack with all of the guys on the team.

anyone who says that coaches should allow a runner to do his or her own thing has never been on a college team - or is the one who is willing to destroy the entire team for their own selfish benefit.

Am I the only one who thought this was a Marion Jones thread?

I thought it would be an Allison Stokke thread. Or a Jordan Hasay thread. Or a Kosinski thread.

I don't see how a runner doing his own thing would destroy his team. He wouldn't contribute much to the atmosphere, but how would he detract?

On the other hand, really unmotivated athletes can destroy a team.

this sounds like a question for deak and papi deak to answer

Ticktock wrote:

I don't see how a runner doing his own thing would destroy his team. He wouldn't contribute much to the atmosphere, but how would he detract?

On the other hand, really unmotivated athletes can destroy a team.

Had one of the latter. Ruined the team and I came close to quitting as I couldn't change most of the poor attitudes of the others and couldn't get the ship back on course.

Taking a chance on a very talented, but unmotivated runner is a recipe for disaster.

There was a guy who was leaps and bounds better than the rest of us on our team.

Coach let him do distance runs and long runs by himself, but he did the workouts with us.

If we tried to run with him on easy days, it wouldn't be easy days for us but tempos.

As a high school coach, one runner with a bad attitude can ruin a team. I call that pissing in the well. It's worth it to boot a top runner with a crappy attitude to save the rest of the team from adopting the same bad habits.

That said, you can still individualize workouts a bit so that you're coming closer to meeting each athlete's needs- I don't think that ruins team unity.

As a college coach I have a take on this. Ultimately I am responsible for, and held accountable for my athletes actions and performances. There is NO 18 year old kid in this country that knows more about running than I do. I would NEVER have a guy on my team who did his "own" thing. I may train one runner differently - and currently do - but they don't write their workouts until they are seniors or later. Having a rogue on the team always blows up.

one to one wrote:

As a college coach I have a take on this. Ultimately I am responsible for, and held accountable for my athletes actions and performances. There is NO 18 year old kid in this country that knows more about running than I do. I would NEVER have a guy on my team who did his "own" thing. I may train one runner differently - and currently do - but they don't write their workouts until they are seniors or later. Having a rogue on the team always blows up.

This.

You don't let runners "do their own thing". They need to collaborate and talk with the coach to develop an individualized training plan. That's different than letting someone do their own thing.

In high school we had an elite runner on our team who mostly trained on his own and often operated on his own racing schedule(skipped superfluous dual meets) though he was there for all rival meets, big invitationals, and state qualifying meets. It was perfectly fine because he was a likable kid who had a good attitude, and it simply didn't make sense for him to run with us 4:30/9:50 types. He got us the points when it mattered, and it didn't really hurt team chemistry or create "chaos" or anything like that. Sure there are tons of examples like this one. I would welcome the kid with open arms unless his personality was divisive or the team was very close-knit and protective of its identity.

one to one wrote:

There is NO 18 year old kid in this country that knows more about running than I do.

That is a pretty bold statement. I'm not saying you're wrong, I just think there's too many BAD coaches who share your opinion. I had a coach in high school who'd been in the game for over 30 years. He thought running all out tempo runs of 4-8 miles the day before a race was a good idea. Even as a 15 year-old freshman, I knew that he was wrong. He thought he knew more about running than just about anyone on the planet.

Just my two cents.

one to one wrote:

There is NO 18 year old kid in this country that knows more about running than I do.

This is extreme ignorance. Older does not always mean wiser. I am 26 now but knew more about running than many college coaches at 18. I read Lydiard and Daniels since I was in the 8th grade and would read any running book I could get my hands on in high school. My uncle barely missed the Olympics in the 10k and my father was a college coach for many years. I have always been bouncing training ideas off them and they've shared their experience with me. Just because you’re a coach does not make you automatically know more about running than every 18 year old. A good coach is open to new ideas and listens to their athletes. Lydiard always emphasized listening to the athletes and letting them say when a workout has been enough for them.

Can one runner really destroy the whole team?

Well yeah, if he's a suicide bomber.

I think you are all missing the point. There is a difference between a runner on a TEAM doing his "own training on his own" and a runner on a TEAM working with the coach and team to individualize training. You also cannot tell me that in 7 days of running per week that a coach cannot schedule at least 2 or more runs together as a team.

If a runner doesn't believe in the philosophy of the coach and the program at that school, he/she should go to a different school or turn professional and train on his/her own.

runkeller wrote:

I think you are all missing the point. There is a difference between a runner on a TEAM doing his "own training on his own" and a runner on a TEAM working with the coach and team to individualize training. You also cannot tell me that in 7 days of running per week that a coach cannot schedule at least 2 or more runs together as a team.

If a runner doesn't believe in the philosophy of the coach and the program at that school, he/she should go to a different school or turn professional and train on his/her own.

If the kid is running close to a 4 minute mile his training is obviously working, so why would a coach want to change it?