lol no hes gonna retire at wisco
lol no hes gonna retire at wisco
Carolina is not Stanford. If those guys transfer then they are fools. Stanford will likely find a better coach.
I think we have a clear top three for the Stanford job:
1) Jerry Schumacher - Rumors that Jerry wants back into the college game. I think Stanford would welcome him with
open arms, and make him a very good offer.
2) Joe Franklin - Joe is a proven winner at UNM. Has proven that he can win with excellent talent. He is looking for a better
coaching situation. And Stanford might be the perfect place for him.
3) Mike Maguire - He has the ability to recruit and develop talent. He gets the most out of his athletes. It's no secret that he is
looking to leave Ann Arbor.
FWIW...
I was in the exact position Andrea is in a few years back (except at a lower profile school). I unwittingly accepted an XC position and the track coach was on a very hot seat.
Had a good first year, but AD made it clear once he fired the director that a) I would not be considered and b) the new head coach would have full control of his new staff.
The AD will absolutely allow Milt to hire whoever he want. He has to feel good about his staff.
Don't feel to bed for Andrea. She will land on her feet. She may have to settle for a non P5 gig for less money, but she will have a much easier time than most unrenewed coaches.
Chis is going to have to get HIGH POWERED LAWN MOWER in Chapel Hill ;-)
Jerry’s son is on Stanford’s roster. A dad coaching his son’s team to a national championship is an appealing story.
The McGorty family is from VA and they have a history with Mitt. Brandon will be a Tar Heel. Lane is from Raleigh, NC. If he'll travel across the US to be coached by Mitt, he'll surely will transfer to be 15 miles from home.
By the way, this is NC State's worst nightmare in terms of recruiting. UNC will be a top XC and distance program in a couple of years. As the Stanford coach, Mitt has done a great job in recruiting the top talent in NC (Thomas Graham, Nevada Mareno, and Connor Lane). Just imagine what he'll be able to do when he doesn't have to convince parents and athletes to move across the country.
In addition, a UNC education and degree is a good one to have.
Potential replacements for Milt wrote:
Here are the best/most realistic candidates in my mind and why or why not they might be interested.
Andy & Maurice Powell - Stanford Alums. But just got to Washington last year and might not be ready to make that change right now. I would also think they could have gone in 2012 had they wanted to but didn’t show any interest.
Mike Smith - Could he have any more success at NAU than he’s already had? That kind of success is not sustainable so he could head to Stanford to put himself in a position to compete for Championships year after year. However he seems to fit the NAU/Flagstaff culture and is probably tested like a King there. That along with academic standards being much lower at NAU makes recruiting a little easier.
Joe Franklin - Probably wants out of UNM now that his program’s funding is being slashed. But Stanford’s academic model doesn’t fit his strategy of recruiting foreigners.
Ed Eyestone - Has made BYU a consistent distance power and since becoming director has seen an improvement in other event groups. Maybe a fun way to end his career? But most likely a BYU lifer.
Jerry Schumacher- someone else mentioned this and I actually wouldn’t be shocked by it. If he wants to get back into the college game, this is a great opportunity. Timing is bad though with the Olympics just one year away.
Michelle Eisenreich - Was associate head coach at Stanford for a few years before taking the head women’s job at Princeton. Also has director experience at Brown. Obviously knows how to handle the academic rigors for the students. But hasn’t done anything spectacular with the team at Princeton and Stanford can probably attract a more accomplished candidate.
A few others that seem less likely to me but could be possibilities are Jon Gondack at Penn State, Beth Alford Sullivan at Tennessee, Mike McGuire at Michigan, Diljeet Taylor at BYU, Tonja Buford Bailey who has head coach experience at Illinois and Texas, and Martin Smith at Iowa State.
It's Diljeet's job to lose. You heard it before first
Transferring from Oregon to Washington in some circumstances makes sense. Washington is a better school. Transferring from Stanford to UNC does not make sense in any capacity.
LTCM wrote:
Transferring from Oregon to Washington in some circumstances makes sense. Washington is a better school. Transferring from Stanford to UNC does not make sense in any capacity.
True
It will interesting to see what the boots on the ground will do in Palo Ato. Lets just be honest, Milt did it for the money. Argue as much as you want.....
I can't let the kind words for Brooks Johnson stand. He actually forced women to weigh themselves before practice, and according to a number of outstanding male alumni I have spoken with personally, didn't know what he was talking about in terms of training middle and long distance training. The runners who succeeded during his era did it in spite of him. But this is all moot, because based on the little I know (admittedly) about A.D. politics on The Farm these days, there isn't the chance of a snowball in hell of his returning.
UNCProud wrote:
The McGorty family is from VA and they have a history with Mitt. Brandon will be a Tar Heel. Lane is from Raleigh, NC. If he'll travel across the US to be coached by Mitt, he'll surely will transfer to be 15 miles from home.
By the way, this is NC State's worst nightmare in terms of recruiting. UNC will be a top XC and distance program in a couple of years. As the Stanford coach, Mitt has done a great job in recruiting the top talent in NC (Thomas Graham, Nevada Mareno, and Connor Lane). Just imagine what he'll be able to do when he doesn't have to convince parents and athletes to move across the country.
In addition, a UNC education and degree is a good one to have.
Um, you do realize he was recruiting them to attend STANFORD. They wanted to go to STANFORD, he was not the main draw. He will not have it that easy at UNC. That would be a step down both academically and athletically.
LTCM wrote:
Transferring from Oregon to Washington in some circumstances makes sense. Washington is a better school. Transferring from Stanford to UNC does not make sense in any capacity.
Milt did all he was going to accomplish at Stanford. His men's and women's teams did as well or better than the major sports at Stanford. A lot of high school sub 9:00 and sub 8:50 guys never do anything in college so you can recruit 10 of them and maybe 1 becomes great. Stanford is expensive, difficult to get into and can be academically challenging depending on one's major.
Now was a good time for him to leave. The team reached a high water mark last year and did well this year considering who they had remaining after last year's graduations.
least coaster??? wrote:
UNCProud wrote:
The McGorty family is from VA and they have a history with Mitt. Brandon will be a Tar Heel. Lane is from Raleigh, NC. If he'll travel across the US to be coached by Mitt, he'll surely will transfer to be 15 miles from home.
By the way, this is NC State's worst nightmare in terms of recruiting. UNC will be a top XC and distance program in a couple of years. As the Stanford coach, Mitt has done a great job in recruiting the top talent in NC (Thomas Graham, Nevada Mareno, and Connor Lane). Just imagine what he'll be able to do when he doesn't have to convince parents and athletes to move across the country.
In addition, a UNC education and degree is a good one to have.
Um, you do realize he was recruiting them to attend STANFORD. They wanted to go to STANFORD, he was not the main draw. He will not have it that easy at UNC. That would be a step down both academically and athletically.
UNC is a fine school - a top 5 public university - but leaving a top 3 university that is an incubator for tech and VC for it would be incredibly short sighted. Going from Oregon to UW is a trade up academically; going from Stanford to UNC is an exponential step down in terms of academics and more importantly opportunity and exposure.
Been there/done that wrote:
FWIW...
I was in the exact position Andrea is in a few years back (except at a lower profile school). I unwittingly accepted an XC position and the track coach was on a very hot seat.
Had a good first year, but AD made it clear once he fired the director that a) I would not be considered and b) the new head coach would have full control of his new staff.
The AD will absolutely allow Milt to hire whoever he want. He has to feel good about his staff.
Don't feel to bed for Andrea. She will land on her feet. She may have to settle for a non P5 gig for less money, but she will have a much easier time than most unrenewed coaches.
You forget she’s an overhyped female coach, anything less than P5 is beneath her and she wouldn’t sniff at it. She knows the way this works and will be at a P5 next year. Dijeeter doesn’t have the experience to be a contender for Stanford please stop overhyping these women.
spokane xc wrote:
least coaster??? wrote:
Um, you do realize he was recruiting them to attend STANFORD. They wanted to go to STANFORD, he was not the main draw. He will not have it that easy at UNC. That would be a step down both academically and athletically.
UNC is a fine school - a top 5 public university - but leaving a top 3 university that is an incubator for tech and VC for it would be incredibly short sighted. Going from Oregon to UW is a trade up academically; going from Stanford to UNC is an exponential step down in terms of academics and more importantly opportunity and exposure.
Try to see things from his perspective, not yours (maybe not possible if you happen to suffer from NPD as so many here do.) Milt is a track coach, not an aspiring entrepreneur. Most of the athletes at Stanford don't take advantage of those opportunities either (some of them do.) I think Milt is making a good move for himself and for his family. The Bay Area is a cold, competitive place, don't let all the habitual virtue signalling fool you.
When there is nothing left to accomplish wrote:
A lot of high school sub 9:00 and sub 8:50 guys never do anything in college so you can recruit 10 of them and maybe 1 becomes great.
This ridiculous sentiment seems to be taken as gospel on this site. Believe it or not, there have been coaches who could take in 10 sub 9:00 guys and have at least 7 of them work out and do something significant to help the team. The other three, while unfortunate, sometimes just don't work out for a variety of reasons-it's called life.
When you have a coach who only gets 1 out 10 to make it, that is classified under one thing, bad coaching. I was in a program, with a great coach, who year in and year out would get the most out of his blue-chip athletes, and occasionally would make a walk on into a world beater! So when I see it stated on here that it's just normal that only 1 out of 10 will actually do something I have to call BS. Not sure how that has become such an accepted fact. If there is a program where that is happening, then the coach should be called out and HS coaches should not send athletes to him/her. If that is what was happening or anything like the "stock piling of talent/throw a handful at a wall, you only need 7 of them to stick mentality", at Stanford under CM, then he or any other coach should be labeled for what they are, and that is a not very skilled coach.
Crusty Ol' Hawg wrote:
When there is nothing left to accomplish wrote:
A lot of high school sub 9:00 and sub 8:50 guys never do anything in college so you can recruit 10 of them and maybe 1 becomes great.
This ridiculous sentiment seems to be taken as gospel on this site. Believe it or not, there have been coaches who could take in 10 sub 9:00 guys and have at least 7 of them work out and do something significant to help the team. The other three, while unfortunate, sometimes just don't work out for a variety of reasons-it's called life.
When you have a coach who only gets 1 out 10 to make it, that is classified under one thing, bad coaching. I was in a program, with a great coach, who year in and year out would get the most out of his blue-chip athletes, and occasionally would make a walk on into a world beater! So when I see it stated on here that it's just normal that only 1 out of 10 will actually do something I have to call BS. Not sure how that has become such an accepted fact. If there is a program where that is happening, then the coach should be called out and HS coaches should not send athletes to him/her. If that is what was happening or anything like the "stock piling of talent/throw a handful at a wall, you only need 7 of them to stick mentality", at Stanford under CM, then he or any other coach should be labeled for what they are, and that is a not very skilled coach.
That "sentiment" is based on actual statistics. We're talking about the team winning or getting on the podium at NCAA D1 track and field. The only two recent programs with multiple men placing high in distance events are NAU and BYU, and Stanford did better than both of them in the 5k final. You should also try to read and understand what was said - in general you're lucky if 1 in 10 becomes great, not just at Stanford. Stanford had 2 do well this year.
Are you kidding, he had two do well? With the recruits he has gotten over the 7 years they should have been killing it, total failure.
And Ratcliffe is a junior, just completed his first outdoor season under Milt, that is not a good thing, he has underperformed in a big way.