the sport has gotten so big and the times are dropping so often now days. It would be a crime to keep California and Illinois and Texas from the rest of the country. As it would be to keep Alaska and Oregon and Kentucky to themselves.
the sport has gotten so big and the times are dropping so often now days. It would be a crime to keep California and Illinois and Texas from the rest of the country. As it would be to keep Alaska and Oregon and Kentucky to themselves.
WestWould wrote:
the sport has gotten so big and the times are dropping so often now days. It would be a crime to keep California and Illinois and Texas from the rest of the country. As it would be to keep Alaska and Oregon and Kentucky to themselves.
I guess that could be a good argument but aren't we forcing kids to peak at age 18?
Sometimes team sports suck..... wrote:
Crack is wack wrote:
The main reason American public schools sponsor sports is to instill the values that go along with teamwork. If you don’t like that, stick to Club sports.
Sports like xc and wrestling are scored as a collection of individuals. There is no teamwork involved like ball sports. While it is fun to be part of that team, what your teammates do during a race has absolutely no impact on what you do.
While team sports are great to learn all those life lessons, sports like xc, wrestling, tennis, and swimming give kids the opportunity to do a sport where they can be rewarded for their hard work without being dependant on others who may not have the talent or drive they do.
What I found great about running in high school was that I always got to compete and it was up to me how hard I worked whether I was successful. While I worked hard in basketball to be the teams best player, it was impossible to show that when a new coach came in my soph year and wouldn't play me until we got behind. Our team went from winning 80% of our games to winning 40%. I am sure there are thousands of other stories like that why people got into and were successful at running. It offers something a team sport can never do.
We can have all of that without a national championship!
Runner1218 wrote:
You sound like an angry depressive collegiate type that just took his first socialist economics class.
Lighten up.
LOL---Man you are not even close!!!
Peaking wrote:
The problem is after the top 5-8 teams a theory of the teams aren not really that good. There are lots of average kids on this teams filling out their rosters. Tons of average hs runners competing in a “national championship”. It’s stupid for them to fly across the country to race. They just aren’t great runners. Outside of the inequitys of teams from different states, more than 2/3 of the teams probably don’t even peak for this race. It’s a cool event for kids, but I’m guessing very few squads Truly care how they finish. And I’d bet only 5 teams actually train for the course and to peak at the national meet.
A very good statement.
In the meantime we are not letting kids be kids. They have to have a cross country season that goes from mid-August to mid-December and Track & Field goes from mid-December to late July. Gee I guess that leaves only early August to "do something extra to get a competitive advantage over the other 'elites.'"
Where is their play-time?
CNN wrote:
1 Chad Hall WE CA 15:20
2 Craig Forys NE NJ 15:24
3 Steve Murdock NE NY 15:25
4 Hassan Mead MW MN 15:28
5 Matt Tebo WE NM 15:28
6 Benjamin Johnson WE NM 15:31
7 Michael Cybulski WE CA 15:31
8 Matthew Centrowitz NE MD 15:34
9 Girma Mecheso SO GA 15:34
10 Colby Lowe SO TX 15:35
#8.
You are fake news.
Apparently you did pull one up but it would be nice to know what year this was and which "national championship," it was. Remember that when Footlocker first came out it was not even close to a real national championship. In addition I don't think it is now either. Many people on LRC have pointed out that it is "watered down."
My point is that kids train and race all year. Even 25 years should not be doing that.
I also think they are basically "forced," to train all year. The numbers of kids who get injured or
sick and quit too early are legendary. We use athletes we do not develop them.
I have talked to many Olympians about the "using athletes rather than developing them," that has been going on in America since the 1960s (if not before).
Note that other countries fund and help their athletes to have long careers. That is why we sometimes see older athletes from Europe and Africa post medals in multiple Olympic games even into their 30s. If an American medals in the games it's most often when they are in their early 20s and they do it once.
Prefontaine complained about training in poverty and not being able to get to the good competition.
We also have a system where a lot of great kids cannot even get into a 4 year college. They have to go the JUCO route to even get there. How many of those guys and gals would have medaled for us?
THE SOLUTION:
Some countries fund their athletes thru having them in the Army. This goes back to Kip Keino in the 1960s. America could do the same. In fact hopefully we have started that trend.
For the most part a 28 year old athlete is going to be a better athlete than a 19 year old.
We do not need nationals for kids. We need programs to keep our top athletes in the sport beyond age 18. (Remember too that colleges are cutting back on CC and T&F.)
The Army, Navy, Marines, or Air Force could provide basic living expenses for athletes and their families. They do it in Europe. I'm not sure what they are doing in Africa but what a culture for winning they have there! But I do not recommend starving people to death just to win.
Hi Folks!
FL and NXN are awesome and inspiring. We should be thankful they exist. I love the posters who are experts on Europe and what they do there. I'm living and running in the EU so hate to tell you we have similar competitions for HS kids. Just more mud, sand and hills-though Oregon this year was close. Each country hosts thier own team for a European championship at the U20 level which is equivalent to US HS. You make the team by doing well in a national competition, get selected then compete with the others for your country against the other European teams. The main difference is everyone on the team deserves to compete at the EU level. I don't get how they form the teams in the US. Just cuz you go to a big program you can be an average runner you get to be part of NXN just for being top 7, while a better runner down the street who is part of a weaker school gets left home. That's a little crazy. At least all the FL kids earn thier spot.
fromEURwithlove wrote:
Hi Folks!
FL and NXN are awesome and inspiring. We should be thankful they exist. I love the posters who are experts on Europe and what they do there. I'm living and running in the EU so hate to tell you we have similar competitions for HS kids. Just more mud, sand and hills-though Oregon this year was close. Each country hosts thier own team for a European championship at the U20 level which is equivalent to US HS. You make the team by doing well in a national competition, get selected then compete with the others for your country against the other European teams. The main difference is everyone on the team deserves to compete at the EU level. I don't get how they form the teams in the US. Just cuz you go to a big program you can be an average runner you get to be part of NXN just for being top 7, while a better runner down the street who is part of a weaker school gets left home. That's a little crazy. At least all the FL kids earn thier spot.
Apparently you did not read my entire post.
The problem is that we focus too much on advancing extremely young kids in their running but do very little for many athletes ages 18-22, and especially ignore talented individuals after 24. Unless you are in the top 1% you have next to no chance to have a long career. In fact some of those 1% struggle. Witness the homelessness of a recent American gold medalist long jumper named Tia Bartoletta!
I gave you a solution~~~please pass it on to those in authority!!!
MikeDitka85DaBears wrote:
I have talked to many Olympians about the "using athletes rather than developing them," that has been going on in America since the 1960s (if not before).
Note that other countries fund and help their athletes to have long careers. That is why we sometimes see older athletes from Europe and Africa post medals in multiple Olympic games even into their 30s. If an American medals in the games it's most often when they are in their early 20s and they do it once.
Prefontaine complained about training in poverty and not being able to get to the good competition.
We also have a system where a lot of great kids cannot even get into a 4 year college. They have to go the JUCO route to even get there. How many of those guys and gals would have medaled for us?
THE SOLUTION:
Some countries fund their athletes thru having them in the Army. This goes back to Kip Keino in the 1960s. America could do the same. In fact hopefully we have started that trend.
For the most part a 28 year old athlete is going to be a better athlete than a 19 year old.
We do not need nationals for kids. We need programs to keep our top athletes in the sport beyond age 18. (Remember too that colleges are cutting back on CC and T&F.)
The Army, Navy, Marines, or Air Force could provide basic living expenses for athletes and their families. They do it in Europe. I'm not sure what they are doing in Africa but what a culture for winning they have there! But I do not recommend starving people to death just to win.
Please read the above again, talk to former Olympians, get informed and take action!!!
fromEURwithlove wrote:
Hi Folks!
FL and NXN are awesome and inspiring. We should be thankful they exist. I love the posters who are experts on Europe and what they do there. I'm living and running in the EU so hate to tell you we have similar competitions for HS kids. Just more mud, sand and hills-though Oregon this year was close. Each country hosts thier own team for a European championship at the U20 level which is equivalent to US HS. You make the team by doing well in a national competition, get selected then compete with the others for your country against the other European teams. The main difference is everyone on the team deserves to compete at the EU level. I don't get how they form the teams in the US. Just cuz you go to a big program you can be an average runner you get to be part of NXN just for being top 7, while a better runner down the street who is part of a weaker school gets left home. That's a little crazy. At least all the FL kids earn thier spot.
You might have similar competitions in Europe, however there is INCENTIVE to go on and compete in Europe and Africa. There isn't in America. Having nationals is not the answer.
Having more fully funded college teams, and support for a high percentage of our top kids after
high school could be done by the military. Other countries especially in your Europe do exactly that.
In addition the SATs and other tests prevent great kids from competing at four-year colleges. They have to go the JUCO route which has never been a solution.
You are now 17, sorry son your done!!!
fromEURwithlove wrote:
Hi Folks!
FL and NXN are awesome and inspiring. We should be thankful they exist. I love the posters who are experts on Europe and what they do there. I'm living and running in the EU so hate to tell you we have similar competitions for HS kids. Just more mud, sand and hills-though Oregon this year was close. Each country hosts thier own team for a European championship at the U20 level which is equivalent to US HS. You make the team by doing well in a national competition, get selected then compete with the others for your country against the other European teams. The main difference is everyone on the team deserves to compete at the EU level. I don't get how they form the teams in the US. Just cuz you go to a big program you can be an average runner you get to be part of NXN just for being top 7, while a better runner down the street who is part of a weaker school gets left home. That's a little crazy. At least all the FL kids earn thier spot.
In addition there is a club system in Britain that we do not have in America. Heck you probably do not have to attend a secondary school to compete in your country. You can just run and live in your parents basement.
MikeDitka85DaBears wrote:
I have talked to many Olympians about the "using athletes rather than developing them," that has been going on in America since the 1960s (if not before).
Note that other countries fund and help their athletes to have long careers. That is why we sometimes see older athletes from Europe and Africa post medals in multiple Olympic games even into their 30s. If an American medals in the games it's most often when they are in their early 20s and they do it once.
Prefontaine complained about training in poverty and not being able to get to the good competition.
We also have a system where a lot of great kids cannot even get into a 4 year college. They have to go the JUCO route to even get there. How many of those guys and gals would have medaled for us?
THE SOLUTION:
Some countries fund their athletes thru having them in the Army. This goes back to Kip Keino in the 1960s. America could do the same. In fact hopefully we have started that trend.
For the most part a 28 year old athlete is going to be a better athlete than a 19 year old.
We do not need nationals for kids. We need programs to keep our top athletes in the sport beyond age 18. (Remember too that colleges are cutting back on CC and T&F.)
The Army, Navy, Marines, or Air Force could provide basic living expenses for athletes and their families. They do it in Europe. I'm not sure what they are doing in Africa but what a culture for winning they have there! But I do not recommend starving people to death just to win.
You are right in that I do not know all there is to know about the European and African systems.
I am aware though that those countries produce older athletes to compete in international meets.
By the way your announcers are the worst English speakers on the planet. They also tend to be homers. That is terrible for the advancement of "Athletics."
MikeDitka85DaBears wrote:
I have talked to many Olympians about the "using athletes rather than developing them," that has been going on in America since the 1960s (if not before).
Note that other countries fund and help their athletes to have long careers. That is why we sometimes see older athletes from Europe and Africa post medals in multiple Olympic games even into their 30s. If an American medals in the games it's most often when they are in their early 20s and they do it once.
Prefontaine complained about training in poverty and not being able to get to the good competition.
We also have a system where a lot of great kids cannot even get into a 4 year college. They have to go the JUCO route to even get there. How many of those guys and gals would have medaled for us?
THE SOLUTION:
Some countries fund their athletes thru having them in the Army. This goes back to Kip Keino in the 1960s. America could do the same. In fact hopefully we have started that trend.
For the most part a 28 year old athlete is going to be a better athlete than a 19 year old.
We do not need nationals for kids. We need programs to keep our top athletes in the sport beyond age 18. (Remember too that colleges are cutting back on CC and T&F.)
The Army, Navy, Marines, or Air Force could provide basic living expenses for athletes and their families. They do it in Europe. I'm not sure what they are doing in Africa but what a culture for winning they have there! But I do not recommend starving people to death just to win.
THE END
Emma Coburn to miss Olympic Trials after breaking ankle in Suzhou
Jakob on Oly 1500- “Walk in the park if I don’t get injured or sick”
NY Times: Treadmill desks might really be worth it. Does anyone use one?
VALBY has graduated (w/ honors) from Florida, will she go to grad school??
Narve Nordas (3.34.11) crushed Filip Ingebrigtsen (3:38.91) on Tuesday