I go to a mid-major D1 school that has had some good teams in the past as well as some good runners (All Americans, etc.). There was someone on the team who ran for a season and then quit because he didn't agree with the coaches coaching style. He ran some track meets in the spring and was faster than everyone who as actually on the team (and he was training on his own). How common is this/anyone else have stories about this?
Our number one runner at NCAA's one year at the Big 10 school I ran for quit during the spring his freshman year although he kept running. He was unwilling to be coached and only wanted to run 5 miles hard in the morning and 5 miles hard in the afternoon like he did in high school when he ran 8:49 indoors.
He went back home and eventually ran 13:50 his senior year for UCLA and won the West regional cross meet once but that was about it.
However he wasn't among the fastest track runners that spring. He came back and ran 9:30 for 2 miles in the first indoor meet. He wanted to leave probably once he went home to California for winter break and his heart wasn't in it.
Not bad
how good is this guy?
Especially if he is not getting $$ I could easily see it. Coaches are hung up on the team bs, and many runners want no part of it. Coaches need to do what is best for each runner and let the stupid points fall where they fall.
Maybe it's because most coaches understand that they also have a responsibility to the university (their employer) to field a successful team. That is the main reason they are hired. Why do you think universities give runners scholarship money? It is so that athlete promotes the University with their results, and their contribution to the success of the team. It is about public relations, donors, alumni, and there really isn't anything wrong with that. Maybe it's different on the DIII level where it is more about the athlete experience. Once you give the athlete a scholarship, there are certain responsibilities that an athlete assumes in regards to their contribution to team results. If an athlete doesn't like that, they are better off doing their own thing.
it's not bs wrote:
Maybe it's because most coaches understand that they also have a responsibility to the university (their employer) to field a successful team. That is the main reason they are hired. Why do you think universities give runners scholarship money? It is so that athlete promotes the University with their results, and their contribution to the success of the team. It is about public relations, donors, alumni, and there really isn't anything wrong with that. Maybe it's different on the DIII level where it is more about the athlete experience. Once you give the athlete a scholarship, there are certain responsibilities that an athlete assumes in regards to their contribution to team results. If an athlete doesn't like that, they are better off doing their own thing.
I think you missed the point. It sounds like the guy just wanted to do his own style of training. That has nothing to do with contributing or not contributing to team results. What's the big deal? Why don't more coaches individualize training? Especially in this guy's case where what he is doing is clearly working.
You could even say that it is the coach who is not contributing to the team results by not letting the fastest runner remain on the team.
it's not bs wrote:
Maybe it's because most coaches understand that they also have a responsibility to the university (their employer) to field a successful team. That is the main reason they are hired. Why do you think universities give runners scholarship money? It is so that athlete promotes the University with their results, and their contribution to the success of the team. It is about public relations, donors, alumni, and there really isn't anything wrong with that. Maybe it's different on the DIII level where it is more about the athlete experience. Once you give the athlete a scholarship, there are certain responsibilities that an athlete assumes in regards to their contribution to team results. If an athlete doesn't like that, they are better off doing their own thing.
Did you respond to the wrong thread? Because the above has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
worst poster wrote:
Coaches are hung up on the team bs, and many runners want no part of it. Coaches need to do what is best for each runner and let the stupid points fall where they fall.
I was responding to the quote from this reply from worst poster. As a college coach myself it just struck a nerve as if trying to have a good showing as a team doesn't really matter.
Also, I don't have a problem with individualization of workouts and mileage. Personally, I individual things with my athletes all the time. However, I wouldn't just let an athlete walk in and demand that they do the workouts they did in high school or else. That sounds like a toxic relationship between athlete and coach that would lead to more problems.
A coach should have a relationship with the athlete that includes input from BOTH sides. If the athlete is just going to do their own thing regardless of what the coach says then why even be a part of the program? Best to just go and run on your own.