Why do so many HS coaches treat XC and Track as primarily team sports

Dennis Reynolds wrote:

Dennis Reynolds wrote:

Cross country is a team sport with that team score being of the upmost importance, how you do as an individual only matters in how you helped your team.

Before someone corrects me, obvious exception is when you qualify for postseason meets individually because you are on a bad team.

I'm certainly not going to correct you. You were spot on the first time around!

I'm going to assume that you are not a coach and don't spend a lot of time with kids this age. When I first began coaching, I thought a lot like you, but I also told myself that the athlete, especially a senior, should have some say in the decision. First coaching track we had a 4x8 qualify for the state meet along with a miler who was on the relay. First day of the state meet we qualified out of prelims to the finals in the relay. Without saying anything, the miler comes to me and says he will let the officials know he is scratching the mile. Why, I asked. For the team, he responded. A few years later, same situation with a kid who did run the prelim and qualify the mile and the relay. I gave him the option of not running the relay and just focusing on the mile. He wouldn't hear of it. Relay team medaled, he didn't in the mile, and he never regretted the decision. In 16 years I have never had a kid choose the individual event over the relay if both had the same chance of making state finals.

As far as cross in concerned, I agree with the earlier comment. Cross is the ultimate team sport, and if you think differently, you don't understand the sport.

American sport are uniquely coach driven.

Sure some events are justifiably team, but it also take shte pressure off individual achievement - which is hte base of T&F.

In High School its worse - the kids have a narrow window of opportunity, yet the coach is there for many, many years. So the coach focuses on coach.

No easier way to hide coaching inadequacies than to lump everyones' performance into a team competition.

because its more fun when you have people to run with, hang out with, etc. In the UK, the club system goes even beyond college. I'd rather be doing a long run with 8 other people most weeks, even if it means I sit around at a meet for 5 or 6 hours most weeks.

"Cross is the ultimate team sport,..."

Have you ever asked yourself why?

Cross country is the ultimate team sport because it almost never asks an individual to sacrifice anything for the team. I guess in a race of 2 or 3 hundred there might be a stud or two that can't go for broke trying to win because if they don't finish top 5 their team will not win. Everyone else must do their individual best and that will help the team the most.

Track the best have to double/quadruple for points. Basketball individual stats mean nothing on a winning team. Quarter backs just keep handing off if its working. And so on...

39uj9-4h-9f wrote:

"Cross is the ultimate team sport,..."

Have you ever asked yourself why?

Cross country is the ultimate team sport because it almost never asks an individual to sacrifice anything for the team. I guess in a race of 2 or 3 hundred there might be a stud or two that can't go for broke trying to win because if they don't finish top 5 their team will not win. Everyone else must do their individual best and that will help the team the most.

Track the best have to double/quadruple for points. Basketball individual stats mean nothing on a winning team. Quarter backs just keep handing off if its working. And so on...

You do not understand pack running in cross country. This past year, our top three sacrificed individual glory for the good of the team by pack running for well over half the race. If they didn't buy into the concept, the team fails. Our number one might have been able to qualify individually, but through some sacrifice, our team qualified.

In track, team success is dependent upon individual success, so I don't really know how you could sacrifice the individual for the team. Winning or placing in as many events as possible at the state championship is in the best interest of both the team and the individual. If I'm a 1600m runner, my coach wants me to win the 1600m "for the team". I also want to win the 1600m for myself. The goals of the team and the individual match. If we're going to win a state championship, we need individuals to do well.

The story you provide isn't really an example of a coach putting the team over the individual. It's just an example of bad coaching. It would have been in the best interest of the team for the girl to make it to states and score points. The coach wasn't putting the team over the individual by choosing a strategy that prevented this from occurring. The coach's decision was not in the best interest of the individual or the team.

Oftenrunning52 wrote:

You do not understand pack running in cross country. This past year, our top three sacrificed individual glory for the good of the team by pack running for well over half the race. If they didn't buy into the concept, the team fails. Our number one might have been able to qualify individually, but through some sacrifice, our team qualified.

I guess I don't understand pack running in cross country either. Could you explain? Are the slower guys somehow able to run faster when the faster guys run slower? If so, is there some physiological basis for the phenomena, or is it just plain magic?

High School Socialism wrote:

I saw a girl last year fail to qualify for the state meet in any individual event, when she had the best 2 mile time in the state, because the school coach required her to run the 4 x 800, 1600 and 800 at the regional meet before the 3200 because he was trying to meet a conference rival. She only qualified for the State meet in the 4 x 800 as a result (they finished 3rd in the State meet), when fresh she could have been 3200 meet State champion. Unfortunately that was her senior year as well.

This coach did not put his team first. If she had won the 3200, that's 10 points for the team. Instead they got 6 points in the 4x800. He shouldn't have put her on the 4x800.

However, I would have to think that the best girl in the state could at least qualify for state in the 3200 even after running those other three events. Maybe the girl had just fizzled out.

"As far as cross in concerned, I agree with the earlier comment. Cross is the ultimate team sport, and if you think differently, you don't understand the sport."

Explain to me how xc, where they do give awards to the person that actually you know WINS the race, is more of a team sport than football or basketball where there are only team is awarded for a win.

XC is both a team and individual sport, and it's awarded as such. It operates on both levels.

As far as "pack running" how your #1 staying back and getting 6th instead of 1st helps your team is baffling.

JackOfAss wrote:

"As far as cross in concerned, I agree with the earlier comment. Cross is the ultimate team sport, and if you think differently, you don't understand the sport."

Explain to me how xc, where they do give awards to the person that actually you know WINS the race, is more of a team sport than football or basketball where there are only team is awarded for a win.

XC is both a team and individual sport, and it's awarded as such. It operates on both levels.

As far as "pack running" how your #1 staying back and getting 6th instead of 1st helps your team is baffling.

If your #1 sacrifices a few points (probably won't even be 5 in the case you outlined because there will probably be some individuals up there) and is able to pull the other runners along for higher places, that will obviously help the team. Some runners do much better when they run with their teammates.

How is it more of a team sport than basketball? Well, I'm not sure I agree, but here is a thought. One basketball player could have a great day and carry the team even though a few others aren't doing well. If only one runner does well, you're shot. On the basketball court, not everyone counts. In XC, everyone counts (at least the scoring five). If one goes down in flames, the team goes down in flames.

Nice try but at the end of the game, even if one guy scores EVERY point the team wins. Michael Jordan didn't win the NBA championship, The Bulls did.

XC exits on both levels, basketball does not.

JackOfAss wrote:

Nice try but at the end of the game, even if one guy scores EVERY point the team wins. Michael Jordan didn't win the NBA championship, The Bulls did.

XC exits on both levels, basketball does not.

Funny, the point you are making suggests that basketball isn't much of a team sport. No matter how good a runner does, he/she cannot make a team win. It takes everyone. A single basketball player could be enough to propel the team to a victory (well, you need four others on the court, but if one is good enough, it just might win). A true team sport takes all of the pieces functioning well to win.

And don't tell me that Michael Jordan didn't win. What about the championship MVP? Isn't that a win? There are rewards in basketball as well. They might not give medals for the top scorer each night, but that's an accolade on its own.

Most sports reward both teams and individuals. They just do it differently.

i don't understand either wrote:

Oftenrunning52 wrote:

You do not understand pack running in cross country. This past year, our top three sacrificed individual glory for the good of the team by pack running for well over half the race. If they didn't buy into the concept, the team fails. Our number one might have been able to qualify individually, but through some sacrifice, our team qualified.

I guess I don't understand pack running in cross country either. Could you explain? Are the slower guys somehow able to run faster when the faster guys run slower? If so, is there some physiological basis for the phenomena, or is it just plain magic?

Conduct the following experiment: go out and race by yourself a course. Then go race that same course with a group of guys that you know that are faster than you. I can nearly guarantee that you will run faster with the group. You will be less likely to ease up when the going gets tough. This is certainly true of inexperienced or young runners. Part of it is most certainly mental. A small part might be physical. None of it is magic, even if it might feel like that. Then there is the math, which has been explained in a few other posts. The bulk of the field is concentrated around your number four, five and six. If you can get that group to run fifteen seconds faster, each guy might pick up ten spots. If you slow the top three down by maybe fifteen seconds to accomplish this, they may only lose a spot or two a guy (runners are certainly more spread out up front than in the bell curve). It takes some trust to accomplish this, but I have seen it work. Seven guys running as individuals one year nearly finished last at sectionals. Same basic group the following year was top twelve at state running as a pack. Training stayed the same, but the race philosophy changed.

Oftenrunning52 wrote:

Conduct the following experiment: go out and race by yourself a course. Then go race that same course with a group of guys that you know that are faster than you. I can nearly guarantee that you will run faster with the group.

Your experiment has nothing to do with the issue at hand. Sure, I'll run faster with other people. But I will never be running alone during an XC race whether I'm running with my teammates or not. There are hundreds of people in the race.

Ask Dan Marino about that.

"Winning" an award for most yards, or MVP is not the same as the person that actually wins the NCAA XC race.

Those awards are given post event, but they are not what anyone goes into the game desiring; they want THE TEAM to win the SB etc.. In XC the goal of every runner is to cross the line before the other.

i don't understand either wrote:

Oftenrunning52 wrote:

Conduct the following experiment: go out and race by yourself a course. Then go race that same course with a group of guys that you know that are faster than you. I can nearly guarantee that you will run faster with the group.

Your experiment has nothing to do with the issue at hand. Sure, I'll run faster with other people. But I will never be running alone during an XC race whether I'm running with my teammates or not. There are hundreds of people in the race.

Yeah I dont get that at alllllll. Maybe the next year the team did better because the competition was different. Maybe you guys ran smarter (i.e didnt go out too fast.)

As a runner or as a coach when the gun goes off I want my guys running to beat everyone on the course.

i don't understand either wrote:

Oftenrunning52 wrote:

Conduct the following experiment: go out and race by yourself a course. Then go race that same course with a group of guys that you know that are faster than you. I can nearly guarantee that you will run faster with the group.

Your experiment has nothing to do with the issue at hand. Sure, I'll run faster with other people. But I will never be running alone during an XC race whether I'm running with my teammates or not. There are hundreds of people in the race.

How many of those hundreds do you actually know? Very few. As a young, inexperienced runner, you assume that those hundreds of guys are better than you and there is no way you can beat them. But if your teammates are there, helping control the pace, encouraging you, you are not a lone in a sea of nameless runners, but you are a member of a pack of teammates running for a single purpose.

Maybe this is better. Few people have the ability to conjure intrinsic motivation to achieve a goal. Those people are special and usually are the lead runners. Most people can be extrinsic ally motivated to achieve a goal. A kid might not believe he can run a certain time, but if six other guys believe it, then he gains confidence in the ability to achieve that goal. Pack running in cross allows for that fourth, fifth, or sixth guy on the team to believe that he has a goal that is achievable. It also means that others are relying on him to help achieve that goal. Again, you can disagree with me all you want, but I have seen it work. This is not pie in the sky, hippie coach talk, even if it does sound like it.

[

Maybe this is better. Few people have the ability to conjure intrinsic motivation to achieve a goal. Those people are special and usually are the lead runners. Most people can be extrinsic ally motivated to achieve a goal. A kid might not believe he can run a certain time, but if six other guys believe it, then he gains confidence in the ability to achieve that goal. Pack running in cross allows for that fourth, fifth, or sixth guy on the team to believe that he has a goal that is achievable. It also means that others are relying on him to help achieve that goal. Again, you can disagree with me all you want, but I have seen it work. This is not pie in the sky, hippie coach talk, even if it does sound like it.[/quote]

Utter drivel.