Many commentators have noted that the US are the "fittest" of the teams in the World Cup. Certainly holding their own with 10 vs. 11 players lends support to that claim.
Anyone know if any of the players were former track standouts? Any guesses what some of these ladies could run a mile in? Sub 5?
I can pretty much guarantee none of these women can run a sub 5 mile. By "fittest" they mean they are able to cover the whole field for 90 minutes (or more like on Sunday) with very few breaks. They have to be quick, but endurance plays into it more than say track speed would. Many of them (especially midfielders) would be above average 5k-10k runners, but even then, a sub 20 5k would be pretty impressive for any of them I think. You also have to consider that most of the US players are carrying quite a lot more muscle and bulk than any good runner would. I would guess their best runner on the whole team could go 5:30-5:45. Some of them would probably have trouble running under 7:30 (goalkeepers most likely).
Amazing athletes and amazing game though- so pumped for Wednesday's semi-final!!!
Honky Lips wrote:
I can pretty much guarantee none of these women can run a sub 5 mile. By "fittest" they mean they are able to cover the whole field for 90 minutes (or more like on Sunday) with very few breaks. They have to be quick, but endurance plays into it more than say track speed would. Many of them (especially midfielders) would be above average 5k-10k runners, but even then, a sub 20 5k would be pretty impressive for any of them I think. You also have to consider that most of the US players are carrying quite a lot more muscle and bulk than any good runner would. I would guess their best runner on the whole team could go 5:30-5:45. Some of them would probably have trouble running under 7:30 (goalkeepers most likely).
Amazing athletes and amazing game though- so pumped for Wednesday's semi-final!!!
Definitely agree with this, except I am sure all of them would be well under 7:00. In high school, I remember a girl on the freshmen soccer team running around 6:40 or something for the mile run in gym. She wasn't even varsity (and my school was no girls' soccer powerhouse), so I'd imagine that saying the national team would all be safely under 7:00 is a very conservative estimate. I wouldn't be shocked if their slowest athlete broke 6, but if I'd have to guess, I'd say 6:15 would be the cutoff.
Honky Lips wrote:
Many of them (especially midfielders) would be above average 5k-10k runners, but even then, a sub 20 5k would be pretty impressive for any of them I think.
Are you serious?
Our collegiate girl's soccer team HAD to run under 20 minutes in a 5km tt every season.
If they can do it, surely national level athletes can do it without hardly breaking a sweat.
I think they would be best at the 400-1600m distances. These are athletes who are trained to basically do interval workouts- short bursts repeatedly for a 90 minute span. They do not run for 90 minutes. More likely, they walk/jog for about 45 minutes, run for around 30 minutes, and run fast for maybe 15 minutes total, with a few of those minutes being sprinting that are spread out throughout the game. Imagine doing a mid-distance workout with a few hard intervals with plenty of rest. That's what a soccer game is.
I would imagine that almost every one of them would be breaking 6:30 for the mile. Most would be under 6:00 and a bunch would probably be 5:30-40.
Throw them in an 800 and I bet the results are a little better. Probably a bunch of 2:20-2:30s.
Of course, this is all opinion based on no facts at all.
6:00 to 6:30 would be the right answer. None of them would break 6 for the mile.
are you all kidding? Given that many of our best young runners were former soccer players(look at Footlocker girl's champs) why is it surprising to think that a few would break 5:00 in the mile? These are elite adult athletes.
I have freshmen girl soccer players come out for track every year who can break 6:00 with no problem on almost no training.
5:00 would be a challenge, but I bet a few would come close to maybe 5:15 or so.
I'd imagine that several would knock out 2:15 800m also.
I used to be lucky enough to watch the Hamm/Foudy/Overbeck national team scrimmage against some local teenage boy club teams.
The women definitely had the leg up on tactics and ball control-- it wasn't even close. However, your typical teenage boy soccer player is a step or two faster than even the women national team players.
Since most of those teenage boys could walk off the soccer field and run 57-60'ish for a quarter and 2:06-2:10 for a half, I'd expect the women to be in the 60-62 and 2:10-2:16 range...
I think that at many high schools, the girls' soccer team would outscore the cross country team in a middle-and-long-distance only track meet. The soccer players used to crush the mile run on the girls' side all through high school, and we had a good cross country team.
4runner wrote:
Since most of those teenage boys could walk off the soccer field and run 57-60'ish for a quarter and 2:06-2:10 for a half, I'd expect the women to be in the 60-62 and 2:10-2:16 range...
Sorry, but your math doesn't add up at all here. A girl running 60-62 or 2:10-2:16 is a lot better than a guy running 57-60 or 2:06-2:10.
There may be some runners that are former soccer players but we need to look at how successful they were/are at each. There is no world class soccer player that became a world class runner or the other way around. Different requirements.
In my teens I was running and playing soccer. I had good endurance for a 14yo guy, was running around 10min for the 3000 and would go as long as 10mi in training runs. However, on the field, this doesn't help a lot. Constant accelerate/stop is way different than Long Distance Running.
dean moriarty wrote:
I think that at many high schools, the girls' soccer team would outscore the cross country team in a middle-and-long-distance only track meet. The soccer players used to crush the mile run on the girls' side all through high school, and we had a good cross country team.
ON THE CONTRARY THIS SOUNDS LIKE YOU HAD A LOUSY GIRLS CROSS COUNTRY TEAM.
I believe there is a lot of running talent in soccer players. I watched a small 5k the other week and some local small, small college soccer kid knocked out a 17:30 in hot weather wearing some mid-calf chino looking pants and clunky training shoes. I'd bet on a low 5 if not sub-5 for one of the national team women.
too close to home wrote:
I'd bet on a low 5 if not sub-5 for one of the national team women.
If anyone of them would be able to go sub 5 then they would not be good soccer players at the same time.
FormerSoccerPlayer wrote:
Sorry, but your math doesn't add up at all here. A girl running 60-62 or 2:10-2:16 is a lot better than a guy running 57-60 or 2:06-2:10.
I'm not talking about any old girl. I'm talking about perhaps the greatest women's soccer team ever.
A bunch of professional women athletes in their twenties had better be better than a run-of-the-mill high school girl.
There may be some runners that are former soccer players but we need to look at how successful they were/are at each. There is no world class soccer player that became a world class runner or the other way around. Different requirements.
First of all, I suspect that Maria Mutola might have something to say about world class soccer player/runner.
Secondly, since when is 60-62 or 2:10-2:16 for a woman "world class?" The women's national team has solid female runners but most of them would be on the bottom end of a DI track team.
These threads are great. Why do so many people here think the best athletes in high school flock to middle distance running? In my high school the track team got the bottom of the barrel and the cross team was even worse. Still, a few guys broke 2 in the 800 meters. Fast forward to adult life. Occasionally, there will be a local road race winner I've never heard of and it's invariably a triathlete or soccer player doing something for fun. Better athletes quite often choose sports other than distance running.
Soccer Coach X wrote:
too close to home wrote:I'd bet on a low 5 if not sub-5 for one of the national team women.
If anyone of them would be able to go sub 5 then they would not be good soccer players at the same time.
Yeah, that'd be impossible.
4runner wrote:
First of all, I suspect that Maria Mutola might have something to say about world class soccer player/runner.
Secondly, since when is 60-62 or 2:10-2:16 for a woman "world class?" The women's national team has solid female runners but most of them would be on the bottom end of a DI track team.
Maria Mutola played soccer as a teen but show me records that she was "very good" or "world class". There is no evidence.
Also, it is all but certain that Mutola is in fact a woman.
They were quite good. And the girls' coach would have liked a few more soccer players to run track, considering one of the former soccer players ran a 4:3something mile and left to run for Stanford.
Even our boys' 4x800 team had a soccer player on it that didn't get much playing time in soccer and didn't run much, either, and he could tough out a 2:02-3.
Most good female high school soccer players are capable of running a competitive track time. Many of the men, as well.
dean moriarty wrote:
Most good female high school soccer players are capable of running a competitive track time. Many of the men, as well.
Those are the 400/800 types though. That makes perfect sense. Decent sprint speed, decent endurance. You need both for a good soccer player.
But a Mile or even 5k is a totally different thing. You won't even find a good 800/1500 kinda runner who is also a good soccer player.