It's interesting to see how much of the publicity on Let's Run for the RMDS focuses on Broe, Flanagan, Slattery, Hudson, etc. But from a coaching standpoint, I'm most interested in hearing Weich, Johnson, and Hudson. Listening to the experience of the pros will definitely be enlightening, but it seems like the real "stars" of the clinic are the coaches that'll be speaking.
What makes Weich such a good coach? He has had some success for a couple year and has a head to think he is the greatest. I can name many high school coaches in COlorado that were better than he has ever been. Ex- Coach Yassi at Poudre High scholl. He won 3 womens tilts and 2 mens as well as the national high school girls cc title with 6 of his runners under 18 minutes. That team would destroy Smoky Hill any year. He also sent upteam kids on to D1 and All-American Status.
I wasn't aware of any CO team winning the "national high school cc title." Arguably, Saratoga Springs won the first-ever national title this past fall to go along with their 10 or so selections by the Harrier magazine as the nation's #1. I've followed hs xc for years and didn't think a CO team had ever been selected #1. When was Poudre #1? Six girls under 18. That's impressive, but was it on a legit course. Nothing personal, but I take 5k xc times with a grain of salt.
Weich has been successful, that's hard to argue. I have no doubt that there are many others in CO that would be qualified to speak, including the Western and Adams coaches. XC and track in CO are both thriving, so it seems like a lot of good things must be happening in regards to coaching.
My original point was that if the RMDS is directed primarily towards coaches, that I think the actual people doing the coaching would be of greatest interest. But they are probably trying to attract coaches, aspiring runners, fans of the sport, etc. And regardless of their target market, Broe, Flanagan, etc. have a bigger name than Weich and Johnson.
I agree with you that the coaches might have the most to say about things. But really, when you get to the level of Broe, Sullivan, Flanagan, you know what you're talking about. I'm willing to bet that Sully and Broe have approximately equal input into their training along with their coach. And it probably does the coaches good to hear from the athletes and what their experiences have been in terms of good coaching, bad coaching, etc.
Good point. I just don't think that there is always a corelation with being an elite athlete and being able to coach or even articulate the in's and out's of a successful program. And my posts are not at all intended to be knock on any of the elites invited to this particular clinic. Thinking about it, isn't Sullivan an assistant coach at Michigan?
Coaching wrote: "Iagree with you that the coaches might have the most to say about things. But really, when you get to the level of Broe, Sullivan, Flanagan, you know what you're talking about. I'm willing to bet that Sully and Broe have approximately equal input into their training along with their coach. And it probably does the coaches good to hear from the athletes and what their experiences have been in terms of good coaching, bad coaching, etc."
Your post got me to thinking about my own competitive running career and how I was coached. I was a national class runner in high school and arguably the top distance runner in my state my senior year. I was recruited by a lot of D1 colleges and ended up going to a major university on a full scholarship. I had (relatively) decent success as a runner in college, but no where near the level I had anticipated when I graduated from high school.
In looking back on my career I am filled with a lot of frustration and disappointment with how my running career ended. I was either hurt or sick during most of my college career. My problems began within 3 months of beginning college. By the time I was a senior I was totally burnt out and sick of running.
In no uncertain terms I can lay the blame for my failure at the feet of my college coach. NEVER were the athletes consulted in the planning of workouts and racing schedules. The head coach was a number cruncher and had no feel for the sport. He loved interval/track workouts, year round. Including during the winter.
By contrast, my high school coach was a runner himself (good, but not great). He was avid student of Lydiard and others at the time. EVERY day he and I would sit and talk about how I was feeling relative to the preceeding workouts form the prior day(s). I felt like my input was listened to and incorporated into his workout schedules. Mind you I was but one runner of many that this guy had to coach at the same time. Somehow he devised workout schedules and racing calenders that made my HS a powerhouse on the state level.
In retrospect, I know I chose my college based primarily on academic reputation. However, the running programs at the school prior to my arrival had been doing well and appeared to be on the rise. My major mistake was getting to know the assistant coach during the recruiting process rather than the head coach. By the time I figured out that the assistant coach's role with the team was essentially the "recruiter" and NOT as a COACH it was too late.
You would certainly recognize the name of the college attended. If I were to mention it you would realize how much talent that school got over the years and how little they had to show for it in terms of national rankings/results. It's pretty disheartening to look back on all the talent that was essentially wasted/ruined by a "coach" that could not coach.
My college "coach" has since retired and not surprisingly his replacement took the talent he inherited and lifted the entire program to a much, much higher level of achievement.
The bottom line for me it that the coach, regardless of the talent level of his athletes, would be a MUCH better coach if he/she learns to assimilate his athletes' input into his/her workout and racing plans. You do NOT have to be an elite level runner to know the type of workouts you best respond to and which ones tear you down set you back.
I only wish that I knew back then what I know now.
Poudre won the national title in 1994 in Phildephia, PA
It was a legit course and legit times. Check the records and call Poudre. 6 girls went from that team to DI schools.
I'd like to see proof of this claim? The Bonnenberger's and Briana Stott-Mesick ran in college, for sure, but all 6? All six under 18:00? Not even Saratoga of this year can claim that!!
My wife ran for Poudre (so don't think I'm naive on this subject) and I 've been coaching in CO for 11 years. I remember those mid 90's Poudre teams being very solid, but according to the Harrier they did not rank in the top five in the country that year!
Reymeyer Twins led the team. I will get stats this afternoon. 6 under 18 though. My wife was on those teams so I am a very good sorce.
Sounds like an awesome team, no arguments here. But what "national championship" did they win in Philly? Was it a USATF title? Impressive, nonetheless, but not the same as winning a national high school xc title. This was the first year of a "true" national championship in high school x-country (NTN). Even in this case a few top teams chose not to participate.
Marc Bloom, editor of the Harrier, has done a pretty darn good job of evaluating the top teams year in and year out and if they were one of the very top in '94, I can't believe he would overlook their accomplishments.
I'm not intending to knock your wife's team by any means, sounds like one of CO's best ever, but claiming they won a national high school championship might be a stretch.