Shalane Flanagan Parts Ways With Coach John Cook

Hmm, I'll agree on 'notoriety', but 'enormity' isn't necessarily a bad thing. See definition 3 below.

e⋅nor⋅mi⋅ty

   /ɪˈnɔrmɪti/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [i-nawr-mi-tee] Show IPA Pronunciation

–noun, plural -ties

1. outrageous or heinous character; atrociousness: the enormity of war crimes.

2. something outrageous or heinous, as an offense: The bombing of the defenseless population was an enormity beyond belief.

3. greatness of size, scope, extent, or influence; immensity: The enormity of such an act of generosity is staggering.

I think we're going to see Flanagan run really well for about 6 months and then slip a little. She won't be reduced to rubble, but she won't be threatening American records every time she steps on the track either.

The Flanagans may have picked up a lot of what Cook taught them, but I doubt they'll be able to execute and adjust to see continued improvement.

When she makes the inevitable jump to the marathon, that is where her not having a real coach will hurt her the most. Unless she picks up someone who knows their way around a Marathon, she'll never be a threat.

diction12 wrote:

Hmm, I'll agree on 'notoriety', but 'enormity' isn't necessarily a bad thing. See definition 3 below.

3. greatness of size, scope, extent, or influence; immensity: The enormity of such an act of generosity is staggering.

Nah. Anything after the second definition is just something the usage panel throws in to acknowledge that language is "evolving."

People can't remember the rules? Then change the rules -- or so the thinking seems to go. Sure doesn't do much for precision, though. In this case, there's an enormous difference between the first two definitions and the third.

closet case wrote:

I'm utterly confused why so many people act as though Shalane dropped Cook as a coach for the sole reason of having her husband coach her full-time. That's not the case! She's stated multiple times in interviews over the past week that she's out there looking for someone new, one that can give her more hands on attention. She's said that her husband is only coaching her in the interim period until she can find a new coach. They've already been asking around and talking to people to try and figure something out that will work. Lastly, she even said something to the effect of, "I respect my marriage too much to have my husband be my permanent coach."

Haven't you ever heard of a cover story? They say these things so that nobody will question why she would dump Cook for someone as green as Edwards. Then when she (as they presume) runs another AR outdoors and is in contention for a medal in Berlin, such questions will just answer themselves and the alleged search will quietly end. It's no coincidence that right after she makes Edwards her agent that *boom* Cook gets jettisoned. Shalane gained a lot of cred by doing and saying all the right things leading up to and through Beijing, in sharp contrast with her attention whore prime US competitor. Now they're both revealed to be prima donnas and, not that they won't still have their myopic diehard fans, will make rooting for Defar, Dibaba, and others a whole lot easier.

I'm just going to say this...

Shouldn't they be allowed to do whatever they want? Are you people really saying that she cannot leave her coach?

If he is not offering anything they believe is worth the 5% to keep him around, why not try it on their own...? Running isn't that mysterious. It isn't like he had secret workouts that made her a bronze medalist. We all know the Coach/Athlete relationship is more about getting an athlete to believe/push/perform than anything else. Cook doesn't have secret spells that they copied.

Steve is a good guy, anyone who has met him knows that. He is not trying to hoodwink Shalane. It was probably her idea. She likes to have him around when she is training. BELIEVE ME, STEVE WOULD RATHER BE BACK AT THE HOTEL DRINKING A BEER.

I think Cook is making this a big drama b/c he looks bad. The fact that he is trying to drive a wedge between a woman and her husband shows how unbelieveably unprofessional he really is.

She can certainly leave her coach, do whatever she wants.

It's how she did it that some have trouble with. It's also why she would do this that others have questioned.

Cook was silent on this for weeks, preferring to say nothing about it. Then she went into her "spin zone" and said things that were unneccessary and simply not true. He's then asked what happened and gave his view. He feels cheated and it's understandable. He's moved on though, certainly isn't driving any wedge in any marriage.

Show me the money wrote:

He's moved on though, certainly isn't driving any wedge in any marriage.

yeah, sure sounds like it...

Another Perspective wrote:

I think Cook is making this a big drama b/c he looks bad. The fact that he is trying to drive a wedge between a woman and her husband shows how unbelieveably unprofessional he really is.

Not picking a dog in this race, but who cares? It's a free country. He can exercise his right to free speech too. Just as they can.

dont believe the hype wrote:

Not picking a dog in this race, but who cares? It's a free country. He can exercise his right to free speech too. Just as they can.

Sure, and he looks like a dick for doing it.

I don't think, I KNOW you are WRONG. Money Talks got it right. I have more to say if anyone is interested.

Please, please, tell us a good story!!!

A. Lactick wrote:

Diction lesson: Cook doesn't deserve notoriety. Notoriety isn't a good thing.

Look it up.

And while you're at it, look up "enormity," lest you think that's a good thing too.

Damn illiterate Web punks.

Being notorious usually has the connotation of being negative, but it isn't necessarily so. Notoriety is simply fame or renown. By definition, the poster was correct. Your connotation may be widely accepted but certainly not forced by the definition. A little tip: when being obnoxious, at least try to be right.

Unlike the French, we don't have an academy to tell us what the rules of our language are, and dictionaries are generally intended to reflect usage rather than propriety (although different dictionaries diverge from that intention to different extents), so I'd be careful about relying on a dictionary's third definition for a word. Recognizing that "notoriety" is often used to mean "fame," and "enormity" is often used to mean "enormousness" (and may very well replace it entirely at some point), I nevertheless would advise a writer to use the words as A. Lactic has indicated unless there is a specific reason to do otherwise (for example, to mirror someone else's usage in a conversation or to comply with certain regional or social preferences). I'd like to think that I wouldn't raise the issue on a thread devoted primarily to gossip and defamatory remarks about runners and their coaches, however.

Many of you claims to know so much, but does anyone know who actually coached her from the "boot" ?

before we get the editors, I meant - claim - ,I'm driving in the dark, so lets not kill me over grammar if you want to know more

tossed over money wrote:

Many of you claims to know so much, but does anyone know who actually coached her from the "boot" ?

Nope. Please, oh please, educate the ignorant masses.

I did.

urgh a music war wrote:

Being notorious usually has the connotation of being negative, but it isn't necessarily so. Notoriety is simply fame or renown. By definition, the poster was correct. Your connotation may be widely accepted but certainly not forced by the definition. A little tip: when being obnoxious, at least try to be right.

Who said anything about "connotation?" I was talking about diction and proper usage.

Everything you said was absolutely correct, but the part about her husband being a control freak. This was not about money or lack of it....Cook was paid. This is about Cook and Shalane's professional differences. Steve and Shalane train together 365 days out of the year. How many days was coach present?