Well, he puts in the work. Gets kids to buy in, that is not easy. But, he needs this, this is about him, the kids are his vehicle. Look at how quickly he jumped on twitter to defend. He wants to be bigger, got that short guy mentality.
Well, he puts in the work. Gets kids to buy in, that is not easy. But, he needs this, this is about him, the kids are his vehicle. Look at how quickly he jumped on twitter to defend. He wants to be bigger, got that short guy mentality.
Many of these posts suck. Love the ones that talk about pushing the children too much when we have games where kids run into each other at full speed or activities where girls are thrown into the air and sometimes not caught.
Look - some of you haven't put the work in to be great. Maybe it's because you don't want it bad enough, you have personal limits (time, effort, etc) that prevent you from being all in, or maybe you're just lazy. You shouldn't knock a guy who gets it done year in and year out just because you're not where you want to be as a coach.
It's a shame that there is a national-level coach who is pretty much an open book regarding training and program development and some in the coaching community punish it.
I have nothing against Coach Soles as a person, but I don't believe that any coach should get a free pass on whether their kids are doing anything at the next level or not. If you've had the type of success that GO has since Soles' arrival than you'd expect to have at least a few kids who have gone off to college and had success at the next level. This hasn't been the case. Personally I would guess that his kids are physiologically fried coming out of his program. I have sat and listened to one of his former runners describe to me a sample week of her training (she was a 12:something 3200m runner who was a soph at the time) and I would guess that she was running upwards of 80 miles per week with a weekly long run and 3 workouts included. If you can survive this workload than you're going to be pretty damn good, BUT I believe there's a progression to be had when looking at the big picture, and that's not being attended to here. My hunch is that when you pour this type of training on an athlete who is still developing physically, you risk long term development (see Mary Cain perhaps?). This is not trying to grill Coach Soles as much as hoping that HS coaches will stop and take a hard look at long term development.
From reading this thread I see a few coaches chiming in supporting his training by saying that the kids are getting a free college education and their HS experience is invaluable... True, true, but lets not try to justify the lack of long term development by digging out nuggets like this. You can do both like many other successful coaches out there do. Just my $.02
You have to wonder if the college coaches will figure it out, do not invest money into these kids because they don't pan out.
I know of a college coach who told a recruit that he does not recruit kids from certain programs because of how hard they train in HS and how little they do in college. Word will get out.
Buyer beware.
What burns kids out is running slower and giving up on the sport. Soles gets them to run fast, set PR’s, and love the sport because their improving. That’s truth right there.
Golden St XC wrote:
I have nothing against Coach Soles as a person, but I don't believe that any coach should get a free pass on whether their kids are doing anything at the next level or not. If you've had the type of success that GO has since Soles' arrival than you'd expect to have at least a few kids who have gone off to college and had success at the next level. This hasn't been the case. Personally I would guess that his kids are physiologically fried coming out of his program. I have sat and listened to one of his former runners describe to me a sample week of her training (she was a 12:something 3200m runner who was a soph at the time) and I would guess that she was running upwards of 80 miles per week with a weekly long run and 3 workouts included. If you can survive this workload than you're going to be pretty damn good, BUT I believe there's a progression to be had when looking at the big picture, and that's not being attended to here. My hunch is that when you pour this type of training on an athlete who is still developing physically, you risk long term development (see Mary Cain perhaps?). This is not trying to grill Coach Soles as much as hoping that HS coaches will stop and take a hard look at long term development.
From reading this thread I see a few coaches chiming in supporting his training by saying that the kids are getting a free college education and their HS experience is invaluable... True, true, but lets not try to justify the lack of long term development by digging out nuggets like this. You can do both like many other successful coaches out there do. Just my $.02
You don’t get it. High School is a different beast compared to college. Those who go on to “do things” in college are incredibly rare. It is tied almost entirely to genetic talent, not how good their high school program was.
Great Oak does have the individual state champion in C.A., they win as a team. It is the individuals that go on to do things in college.
Additionally it’s not the high school coaches job to see they run well in college. You can’t control what gets do and choices they make and training given to them in college. That’s not on them.
You don’t get it wrote:
Golden St XC wrote:
I have nothing against Coach Soles as a person, but I don't believe that any coach should get a free pass on whether their kids are doing anything at the next level or not. If you've had the type of success that GO has since Soles' arrival than you'd expect to have at least a few kids who have gone off to college and had success at the next level. This hasn't been the case. Personally I would guess that his kids are physiologically fried coming out of his program. I have sat and listened to one of his former runners describe to me a sample week of her training (she was a 12:something 3200m runner who was a soph at the time) and I would guess that she was running upwards of 80 miles per week with a weekly long run and 3 workouts included. If you can survive this workload than you're going to be pretty damn good, BUT I believe there's a progression to be had when looking at the big picture, and that's not being attended to here. My hunch is that when you pour this type of training on an athlete who is still developing physically, you risk long term development (see Mary Cain perhaps?). This is not trying to grill Coach Soles as much as hoping that HS coaches will stop and take a hard look at long term development.
From reading this thread I see a few coaches chiming in supporting his training by saying that the kids are getting a free college education and their HS experience is invaluable... True, true, but lets not try to justify the lack of long term development by digging out nuggets like this. You can do both like many other successful coaches out there do. Just my $.02
You don’t get it. High School is a different beast compared to college. Those who go on to “do things” in college are incredibly rare. It is tied almost entirely to genetic talent, not how good their high school program was.
Great Oak does have the individual state champion in C.A., they win as a team. It is the individuals that go on to do things in college.
Additionally it’s not the high school coaches job to see they run well in college. You can’t control what gets do and choices they make and training given to them in college. That’s not on them.
Do you take the same stance in regards to middle schoolers? Would you run the sh.t out of 7th and 8th graders like they do in NY so you can win a championship? If your answer is yes then we will just have to agree to disagree. If your answer is no then why would you run the sh.t out of your 9th-12th graders that are not yet physically mature? I'll tell you why, it's a lack of understanding human development combined with a big ego.
I think Soles is a great coach with a great program, but to think he's the best because of his kids' short term success is very short sighted and is the primary reason a lot of people don't like programs that push their kids to the limit.
Wait, I just pointed out that an average sophomore girl on this team is running 80+ miles a week with three workouts and you're telling me that I don't get it?! Really? You really feel like this is an ideal progression for a hs girl? What is a college coach supposed to do with a girl who's already been running upwards of 90 miles a week in hs? Please enlighten me.
And your logic that good college runners don't come from good teams is ludicrous. Just because you're on a great team doesn't make it harder for you to achieve success at the college level.
I'm not saying that HS coaches shouldn't give HS kids good volumes. I actually believe in running decent mileage in HS. I just feel like there is an obvious progression to be had.
I will also say that i've coached a lot of high level athletes myself so I do understand progression and distance running.
The person who started this thread has gotten exactly what he/she wanted out of it.
Everyone should just go back to their respective corners and give it a rest...
Good argument but the difference being that every middle schooler can run high school. 1 out of 10,000 get to run in college?
We should train accordingly based on age, but most 16 min 5k kids aren’t running in the next level so if they want to train the tail off to run 15:30 and win a state title I think that is their call.
Here’s the difference wrote:
Good argument but the difference being that every middle schooler can run high school. 1 out of 10,000 get to run in college?
We should train accordingly based on age, but most 16 min 5k kids aren’t running in the next level so if they want to train the tail off to run 15:30 and win a state title I think that is their call.
It would suck to constantly hold a fast high school runner back because of what he MIGHT achieve in college. Most high school kids never even run in college anyway, for a variety of reasons.
I have a great amount of respect for Coach Soles and his program. He probably deserves to be on the Mt. Rushmore of HS school coaches, but the top 3 of all time based on success, number of titles and length of success should be:
1. Joe Newton - York
2. Bill Aris - FM (give him a few more years and he’ll be #1)
3. Tom Heath - CBA
Then people like Pat Tyson, Krannicks, Sole, etc. fighting for the last two spots in the top 5.
High Skool wrote:
I have a great amount of respect for Coach Soles and his program. He probably deserves to be on the Mt. Rushmore of HS school coaches, but the top 3 of all time based on success, number of titles and length of success should be:
1. Joe Newton - York
2. Bill Aris - FM (give him a few more years and he’ll be #1)
3. Tom Heath - CBA
Then people like Pat Tyson, Krannicks, Sole, etc. fighting for the last two spots in the top 5.
CBA?
You must be from the east coast.
coach wrote:
silence is golden wrote:
This got a lot of replies, is it really 0?
Who cares? How many all Americans has each responder of this thread coached?
I’ve had two. Won as individuals but never won a league, section or state title as a team.
Check your facts wrote:
All you guys do is name the coaches who win in your area. Do a quick check on Bellarmine and Saint Francis and you’ll see private schools with lots of “financial aid.” Schools without borders and lots of handouts.
You are correct. It is through “financial need.” Amazing how much need there is of a rich Los Gatos or Los Altos family with a star athlete. Now the East Paly football player I could understand.
Here’s the difference wrote:
Good argument but the difference being that every middle schooler can run high school. 1 out of 10,000 get to run in college?
We should train accordingly based on age, but most 16 min 5k kids aren’t running in the next level so if they want to train the tail off to run 15:30 and win a state title I think that is their call.
1 out of 10,000 huh? There are about 500,000 kids running high school XC in the US. Between D1, D2 and D3 there are about 25,000 athletes competing in XC.
That's about 1 in 20 competing in college.
The point is that kids are not in a position to understand the consequences of their actions. They lack the experience to realize what high mileage at a young age can do to one's body in the long term. Winning a state title at the sacrifice of future health doesn't make sense.
Here’s the difference wrote:
Good argument but the difference being that every middle schooler can run high school. 1 out of 10,000 get to run in college?
We should train accordingly based on age, but most 16 min 5k kids aren’t running in the next level so if they want to train the tail off to run 15:30 and win a state title I think that is their call.
Well, you can train your tail off at 17-18 and you can get some good results, most guys are not fully mature at that age. If you train appropriately you just don't know, ask Brian Sell. These win it all now, gotta get to NXN, coaches are flaming kids out early. On the girls side, just developing eating disorders like freckles, hoping one or two workout is about all you can wish for. When you get these big teams, you can run em through the gauntlet, always someone available to step up.
Quick scan on the girls side for fastest girl each year:
Katie Johnson - went to Cornell. Competed for 1 year. Graduated from Cornell.
Shannon Emery - Colorado Mesa. 4 year athlete who was near top of the conference in the 1500.
Ashley Helbig - competed at Dartmouth for 1 year.
Miranda Kewley - competed at ASU for around 2 years. Did well. Even ran 17:xx 5k.
Audrey Wallis - went to South Dakota. Times not as good as before. Not sure if she competed all four years.
Haley Dorris - 3 years at San Francisco before transferring and apparently not running her senior year. She broke 5:00 indoor, 5:04 for 1 mile outdoor. Also ran 17:03. All of this was 2017, so it isn't like she flamed out.
Destiny Collins - Not sure on the knock here. At Texas. She has broken 17:00 indoors, placed top 10 at the NCAA XC regional. 4:52/9:35 indoor and scored in every conference. event she did indoor outdoor this year.
Evelyn Mandel - doing very well at TCU. Still competing. Sub-17 5k. Near top of Big XII. Made NCAA West
prelims.
The only pattern I see is that some of them won't finish or progress at a) rigorous academic institutions or b) second-tier running programs. That is pretty much normal.
The reason I post this is because the comments in this thread are wonderful examples of attribution theory by these HS and college coaches.
HS coaches counting their athletes who went on to be college All-Americans - attribute their collegiate success to you? OK.
College coaches counting athletes that fail to develop against the HS coach - they trained too much, so they couldn't help them anymore. OK.
That is weak.
How about this - control what you can control and do the most in your given time with the athlete. Soles' teams look happy. There is a lot of pride there from coach and athletes. The community loves it. Let's just let good be good and quit attacking it.
Doesn’t matter if you are from Atherton or EPA, nobody is getting school aid in HS for XC/Track. You can take that to the bank. Doesn’t make sense anyway to complain that a “rich” kid from Los Gatos is getting aid to go to a private school. If they are rich, why do they need aid? Remember, we care about running more than the schools do and not nearly as much as the administrators care about their money.
To be honest that’s probably mirrors the industry standard and to see that many (top runners) go on to compete in college is amazing.