McMillan advocates cutting on HS XC teams

Underdog Runner wrote:

I'm not saying the cuts should be ridiculous. You could have very lenient cuts, like a 27 minute 5K minimum to make the team. I've seen Cross Country teams put a runner in a race who ran a 57 minute 5K. Honestly, that had to be demoralizing for the kid to be running on the course, on his own for over 20 minutes.

If you run 57 minutes for 5k you're not "running" on the course at all. That's 19 minutes per mile, which is a very leisurely walk from the gun.

I coach middle school. I think I've got two boys that will finish dead last next week at our first race. It's on them. If they get last I'm going to let them know its due to their own laziness. Either they'll shape up or quit. Either is fine.

Cutting slackers or cancers is important. Cutting crap runners is not something I'd advocate.

I agree with McMillan that cutting can be a part of the sport, even at the high school and middle school level.

If there is no threat of not making the team than it is not really a team but an activity club.

Not making your school team is not a death nail for the kids, some respond by working harder and then trying the next year. Our sports world is littered with superstars who failed at a sport at a young age, but had the fire to keep practicing and try again and master the sport.

Distance running is a perfect sport for this to happen because you don't need a team to practice with, you just need the internal fortitude and desire to get out there and do it.

By having a no cut policy, you are mixing in kids who don't care with kids who do, watering down the coaches time and ability to work with the kids who do care, and are telling the kids and others that it isn't a REAL sport (Football, Baseball, Basketball, Soccer, all which cut), but an just another extracurricular activity.

Setting standards helps the kids set goals and strive to achieve them. If they don't have to work for something than they just feel entitled and become lazy.

The bar doesn't have to set real high, just enough to make them earn the priveldge of being a part of the team.

Clearly Not wrote:

Bobby1 wrote:

I measure the success of a high school coach by how many of his runners continue running for their lifetime, not in how many meets his runner win.

That makes you a hobby jogger.

Some of us are competitive athletes.

Ask any high school coach what percent of their athletes go on to become college athletes, of those what percent go on to be college elites, of those what percent go on to become post-collegiate elites.

Most of the kids a high school coach works with will be ordinary runners. Yes, you can get kids to do great things, and you can get exceptional kids to do exceptional things. But the vast majority of them are not going to make a living running. This doesn't make them hobbyjoggers, and it doesn't mean that the bar is set low for them.

If the sport is going to improve overall, high school coaches need to instill a love of running in their kids. Is the motivation going to be extrinsic, because I told you to, or is it going to be intrinsic, because you want to be successful? Which approach will they make them lifelong runners, lifelong fans of the sport? If they only run because they're threatened with cuts, will they run when that threat is gone?

EZ10Miler wrote:

I read the article and I didnt see where he advocated cutting someone for not doing summer workouts. I think the point was that if the kid isn't putting out effort at practice, but still wants to come to races and such, the coach is just wasting his time.

You should have cuts. If it's a no cut sport then there's no value. It's like giving a product away, you devalue what you have so bad that no body will ever pay for it.

This is simply not true with XC. You can have 100 kids on the team but the coveted spots, Varsity, go to the 7 fastest kids. The more kids you have competing for those 7 spots the better your chance of getting a few kids with true talent.

It may take a kid a season or two before they really start to 'get' XC and truly enjoy it. This is what happened to my son. He ended up being the number 1 his senior year and led the team to the highest state finish in about 10 or 12 years. Cuts make no sense in XC except for behavior issues.

Ever see 'The Long Green Line'?

Get real. How many high school kids that get cut are going to train on their own during the school year with hopes of making it the next year? Your attitude might be that if they get cut and don't want to train on their own, then they don't really want to be on the team. Fine, but most high schoolers don't have the discipline to do what it takes on their own during the school year. On the flipside, you can keep them on the team, and they at least have the structured training and are immersed in a running culture and can imagine what the season could have been if only they had done the summer work.

It's a ball sport mentality that cutting kids makes you a REAL sport. Cutting kids who aren't motivated is taking the easy way out. Coaching the motivated is easy. If you're a real coach, you can take kids who have potential but no motivation, show them what it takes, get them a taste of success and get them fired up about the sport. Then they'll do anything you ask them to do and they'll develop.

Should teachers be able to cut the smart kids who don't try from their classes? The best teachers will engage those kids and fire them up.

Don't know how this would work. You have a JV team for the slower kids. In a sport like running if you don't allow a large JV team you cut future varsity runners. Unfortunately running isn't like soccer, basketball, etc. and the order/potential of athletes isn't as established when they enter high school. There are some athletes that clearly won't ever be varsity runners, but cutting the bottom 10% of your team isn't going to do much.

If you cut on summer work ethic even for a talented athlete, as the original pose suggests, I think you also risk a chance for an athlete to improve and grow over time. You never know when a formerly "lazy" athlete is going to get it and get on board with off-season training. Also, I don't know about in other states, but in Oregon it wouldn't be legal to cut an athlete based solely on what they didn't do over the summer (for example a talented athlete that didn't put the work in over the summer).

I read the article and while I don't have it in front of me, my memory is that in context McMillan's statement is a lot milder than some people are making it out to be.

Go Lydiard wrote:

Wasn't his book THE handbook for the worst period of distance running in American history?

Word. Cut McMillian, keep his calculator.

So I see where this is going, you are saying if the kids aren't motivated in cross country it's the coaches fault, and if they aren't motivated in school its the teacher fault. I suppose if they shoot someone it will be societies fault. Anyone one but the kid right. So the kids and parents have no accountability, its always someone else's fault or responsibility. You know where that gets you in the real world don't you?

You are trying to lower the standards so far that everyone can slide by and everyone passes. You know what gives you, a team and society of ordinary to subpar performers and no extraordinary ones.

It is the attitude you describe that has kept me from coaching in high school. I am interested in coaching and not babysitting whiners who don't take accountability.

Running Cross Country is not a right hat kids are guaranteed, its a priveldge that has to be earned. Your version of a cross country team is a scial porject and not a sport.

If a kid isn't motivated to practice enough to make the team, why on earth do you think that will change if he is just GIVEN a spot on the team.

dont take away opportunities wrote:

Cutting kids because they don't do "voluntary" running during the summer is RIDICULOUS. What I have always loved about running is that you aren't dependant on anybody else.

True, it is weird to cut a kid who didn't run during a time when organized practices are against the rules.... However, running as an activity and as a sport are two different things. If you like running because it is a time to be alone then don't join a team. Cross Country and Track are SPORTS. Running is an activity.

Where in my post did I say ANYTHING contrary to your post? If you have 100 kids coming out and they are all trying, by all means, keep them. I said that McMillan stated you cut kids that aren't trying or working the program.

Facts Please wrote:

I read the article and while I don't have it in front of me, my memory is that in context McMillan's statement is a lot milder than some people are making it out to be.

Yes, people have taken it and turned it into a different topic completely.

The problem comes in when you have 1 coach for both the boys and girls cross country but have 100 kids (combined) show-up to be "part" of the team. If I can't cut some and have some performance standards, then I spend my day hearding and baby sitting the ones who aren't motivated (less something happens to them and I get fired and sued) and practically no time to spend with the kids who are motivated and want to improve and excel.

Like I said earlier, under this scenario coaching in high school simply isn't worth it to many people who actualy know the sport and training.

Wow, you're taking my argument down a very slippery slope. You're also presuming to know what the culture of my team is and level of my team's performance just because I have an issue with turning kids away from the sport.

You know what the privilege of cross country is? Learning the value of hard work. You do it, you get better. You don't, and you don't. It's cut and dry, plain and simple. Do you honestly expect that kids who have been brought up in an athletic environment where running is punishment are going to be excited about running for its own sake from the very start?

I didn't say it's a coach's fault if kids aren't motivated when they join the team. I said that it is the coach's job to motivate them. And that means that kids should be allowed to make mistakes and do better the next time, not turned away from the sport because they made a bad choice once.

And here's why on earth I think a kid's motivation can change: because I see it happen with tons of kids every season of every year. It takes a strong coach to establish a culture on a team that can make a positive change in someone's attitudes to help them make themselves great. People have already posted things about themselves or their kids who were not cut from the team and are now active members of the running community.

You run from A to B. The fastest person wins.

Hmmm ask some experts. wrote:

The problem comes in when you have 1 coach for both the boys and girls cross country but have 100 kids (combined) show-up to be "part" of the team. If I can't cut some and have some performance standards, then I spend my day hearding and baby sitting the ones who aren't motivated (less something happens to them and I get fired and sued) and practically no time to spend with the kids who are motivated and want to improve and excel.

Like I said earlier, under this scenario coaching in high school simply isn't worth it to many people who actualy know the sport and training.

You're taking the no-cut position to an absurd extreme. Do you really think that teams who don't cut are populated by 100 kids who have no interest in developing and a permissive coach who is just happy to have them?

You're also talking about two different things. McMillan's point that I took issue with was that he advocated cutting kids who don't do the summer work. You're talking about kids who don't work hard at all, in-season or out. These are very different. There are a lot of kids out there who slack during the summer but work hard once formal practice begins.

I will cut a kid if he don't believe in Jesus even if he is a sub4 milers.

There's the link to the article. Can't believe that y'all are 3 pages into this thread without actually providing a link (took 2 sec to find it). Having the link handy would help keeping some of you on task.

So the issues McMillan brings up are the Evil (slackers) and Participants. How to handle these should be up to the coaches, and each program and maybe to the case by case basis may be different.

Bad apples (breaking team/school rules, being mean to other kids) off the team.

Summer slackers--It's their loss. Yes it can hurt the team, but if they're not in shape and you have some depth, they're the ones who won't make top 5, or all conference, or all state. If their attitude and in-season work ethic is otherwise okay, it's ludicrous to kick them off. And If McMillan actually believes this, then he's sort of a buffoon.

Less talented participants--If you have enough assistant coaches and are reasonably efficient you can have a large team with a variety of talent. A kid running 45 min for 5K, hmmm maybe encourage them to try something else. But what's terrible about a 24 min 27 min kid, perhaps overweight or just not a runner build, on the team?

My kids' team has about 60 or 70 on the roster, with varying degrees of dedication/ability. The coaches do tend to give more attention to the top 15 or 20, but they provide encouragement to all the kids that show up and work at it. For the past several years one of the most popular and inspirational kids was one who has a chronic illness and often struggled to run 22 or 23 min. But he's the one who would get the varsity runners all fired up before the races. It was fun to see. This is a successful program too, with many state top 3 rankings, and some years top 10 regional rankings.

I don't cut, I want numbers because parents are pressuring the district to give me an assistant- I have 40-50 kids per year and one coach (me). I have had more athletes get scholarships in 9 years than all the other sports combined. Anyway- sometimes when you get a kid who shows up out of shape and struggles to run 4 miles at 9:00 per mile you feel like telling him to get lost. But we've developed a system over the years where if a kid is a cancer the team will take care of him. But, we don't have anyone bringing the team down. Everyone has a good attitude and knows their place.