How Many Coaches Run with Their Athletes?

My coach is like Coach McGuirk

During track, our assistant coach would run with us on occasion. We didn't mind, because he was awesome. On the other hand, if I had a coach who was with us all the time, I'd probably go nuts.

My high school team never had a problem with "cutting routes" because we were coached to determine what we needed to do for a run that day. If you wanted to do 7, then felt a twinge and turned around early for 5, you were following orders. Hell, if you were tired and only wanted to do 3mi that day, you were invited to do so. Likewise, if the coaches said "Yeah, so-and-so-captain said he was doing the 7miler today" and another guy wanted to go 9, he was welcome to do that too.

Walking? Why would we walk? We liked running, it was fun. We weren't tempted to walk because we were too busy horsing around on our runs- playing tag, talking trash to each other, joking about who got caught with a girl in the basement by their parents, whatever. My point is that we enjoyed training- why would our coaches need to check on us? Hard workouts were another story, of course.

That being said, I don't really have a problem with coaches running with their athletes, per se, only that I don't understand it from a "need to know what they're up to" point of view.

My coach did, but he was in his late 30's and just cruised around at a slow pace while we did our easy/recovery runs.

Probably the same number of coaches who are more concerned with their own training then that of their athletes.

Night Runner wrote:

Probably the same number of coaches who are more concerned with their own training then that of their athletes.

So you can't see any reason for coaches to run with their team? It's the only sport where the coach is NOT in constant visual contact with all his athletes, but you can't see any reason why running with the team would be beneficial? And how does sitting at school while the team runs make the coach 'more concerned for the training of their athletes'? I'm hoping you were just trying to be snarky.

Being a coach would be a heck of a lot easier if all I had to do was sit in the stadium for an hour and wait for kids to get back.

I like the fact that I can get my running in, with the team, since it's a lead-by-example benefit, it lets me keep an eye on any kids who might be tempted to cut runs short, and keep an eye on any special-ed kids who have a tendency to get lost.

It also lets me talk to several groups of athletes during that hour, instead of kicking back at school, twiddling my thumbs and, basically, NOT COACHING.

If you don't run with your kids, a lazy coach can conduct a workout with about ten total minutes of work (five for attendance, five for post-run 'good job' comments). How's that for being 'concerned with the training of their athletes'?

And I think parents are much happier knowing that there is a coach somewhere out there on the run, should something happen to their child, instead of kicking back at school BS'ing with other coaches. Actually, that wouldn't happen, because the other coaches would be, you know, actually coaching their sports at the time.

most of my coaches didn't run with us but coach Farwell at Williams, who ran sub 30 for the archaic distance of six miles back in the early 1970s, did run with us sometimes, particularly on easy runs, and that was a chance for him to talk to some of the slower runners on the team, to provide them some advice, critique their form, and indeed he helped me get through the run on the very first day of practice my freshman year when I showed up out of shape after delivering pizzas all summer and could not keep up at all with the much more talented, better conditioned runners on the team.

Night Runner wrote:

Probably the same number of coaches who are more concerned with their own training then that of their athletes.

I honestly don't get your post. I am sure there are some young coaches out there more concerned with their own traning than the teams, but most coaches that run with their team do it to be a better coach. I used to run with my team quite a bit, alternating who I ran with. It helped me to get to know my runners better and to know how they were training; i.e., going too fast on easy days, going shorter or longer than they were supposed to, etc.

The libility is a great point, and yes, lots of kids will cut the course, stop and waste time then come back. If the coach is out there, you can cut that stuff down.

Im not saying that every XC coach should be able to run a 17 flat 5k, but I think you do need to be out there. You're a coach, not just the guy that writes the work out schedule.

Runnahhhh wrote:

The libility is a great point, and yes, lots of kids will cut the course, stop and waste time then come back. If the coach is out there, you can cut that stuff down.

Im not saying that every XC coach should be able to run a 17 flat 5k, but I think you do need to be out there. You're a coach, not just the guy that writes the work out schedule.

I don't get why there is a set "course" for the kids to run on their easy days and why the kids would be tempted to cut it. I guess it didn't occur to me that my high school team was different in this regard- we'd get told "go run like 4-7 miles easy, do some strides when you get back, check in with us before you take off for the day."

For the high school coaches out there, do you assign a set course for easy days? Do your athletes generally do what is prescribed? I'm genuinely curious here, not trying to be a punk.

I always run with the kids, but I make sure my focus is on getting them a good workout rather than getting myself a good workout.

I have an assistant who is much older and used to be a sub 4 miler. He doesn't run with the kids. He is old and fat, but he is a great coach and has just as much of a connection as any assistant I've had that's run with the kids. Coaches don't have to be young and skinny. Do football coaches have to be good at football to be good coaches? Hell no.

I've known great runners who are terrible coaches and terrible runners who are great coaches.

craigmac4h wrote:

I don't get why there is a set "course" for the kids to run on their easy days and why the kids would be tempted to cut it. I guess it didn't occur to me that my high school team was different in this regard- we'd get told "go run like 4-7 miles easy, do some strides when you get back, check in with us before you take off for the day."

For the high school coaches out there, do you assign a set course for easy days? Do your athletes generally do what is prescribed? I'm genuinely curious here, not trying to be a punk.

I have caught my athletes walking, hiding, playing games, etc. They don't get done what needs to be done on easy days. Well, the slow JV runners don't.

CT coach wrote:

MG could hammer the college kids back then.

mostly true. did you run for sju or another local school?

Coached for 20 years, and ran all of the recovery runs, and long runs with the team. For a long time I ran the hard workouts as well, but the team grew in size, and I slowed so I stopped the running most of the hard days with the team. I believe the kids feel a bond when the coach does the workout with the team.