Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

    >If CC is such good training for milers, name me 5
    >top High School milers in the past 10 years who
    >have improved substancially in college while
    >running CC competitively. Hall? Riley? Webb?
    >Stember? Powell?>

    Riley and Stember did improve substantially in college maybe not to elite status but who are we to say that didn't reach their potential. Webb was hurt after the cross country season. Powell has apparently stopped running altogether. Hall should have been the perfect XC candidate so why he wouldn't run XC I have no idea.

    Why HS elites don't turn out to be elites at the next level is a completely different discussion since it doesn' only pertain to middle distance runners. There are an awful lot of sprinters who don't turn out all that great as well as MD guys. I suppose that's the fault of XC also.

    Why doesn't the 4:10 guy improve? Maybe it's because he had to kill himself in HS to get to that point and just doesn't want to do it anymore. Maybe that's Webb's problem. Who knows?

    Bob Kennedy was a miler for the most part in HS. He won NCAA XC as a freshman and senior and a 1500m title also. Was XC bad for him? The aforementioned Sully has also done pretty well for himself. Did Graham Williamson run as well as he 'should' have based on his junior times? Did he run NCAA XC?

    The point to my argument and apparently a few others is that the position against XC seemingly comes from a 'we have a lot of guys who don't improve in the mile while going from HS to college or from college to open so it must be cross country'. It's a position without proof. There are so many reasons for this phenomena, which has always existed BTW, that it's ludicrous to simply point at one facet and say 'that's the reason'.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

      >The Farm Team does focus on middle distance. Jack
      >Daniels and Vin had little to do with the
      >day-to-day coaching of the FT. It's been all Gags
      >the last 2 years.

      Who then is coaching the MD on a day-to-day? Maybe coaching is the reason it has been all "gags".

      There are several sprinters and longer distance guys on the farm as well as MD guys.

      Anyway, this is off the topic of my proposal - top talent out of h.s. with top proven international coach for 4 years without pressure to earn points for the school. Much different than the "Farm".

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

        Dutra-

        I understand your confusion by the statements you posted. Let me clarify my beliefs. Cross can be o.k. for a miler if they can run it through training that is consistent with focus on spring track. This would mean less extensive miles than are usually run by typical college xc guys. They should also not have pressure to earn points in cc.

        I also don't think that milers or 800 guys should be obligated to run cross. If they recieve a scholarship for track (as would a sprinter) why would they need to run cc? Unfortunately most coaches see a frosh 4:07 miler and think -"great, this kid will really help my cc team. Let's get some summer miles under him and we'll be ready to go in Sept."

        The kid isn't mature enough and entrusts in the coach. Kids like Webb, Hall, Brannen, Ritz love to compete. But, they want to give it their all every race and every training session. Doing this 12 mos. a year is a recipe for disaster. Too much training and competition (whether it be cc, indoors, outdoors, roads two track season whatever) leads to injury. Why increase one's chances for injury by trying to do so much?

        Have you read "Sub 4"? Do you like how Warhurst mentions that he likes to push and pull the kids to find out their limits? He certainly found Webb's limits. This is not an isolated incident. It is just the most visible. This same shit is going on all over the country with coaches concerned not about the kids but about their jobs - points, points, points - cc, indoors outdoors.

        Kids coming out of h.s. with talent need to be nurtured to improved not exploited and burned. That book lays out the problems with our current system. Sure Sullivan is doing well but who can say he wouldn't have done just as well if not better under another system?

        You are passionate about cross, I'm equally as passionate about the problems facing our md runners. No cross isn't the problem. But, an overemphasis on MD runners competing in cross at a high level is a part of the problem.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

          <<No cross isn't the problem. But, an overemphasis on MD runners competing in cross at a high level is a part of the problem.>>

          You still haven't presented any good examples of middle distance runners who've been hurt by cross. Hall killed himself by overtraining. He was doing way more than the coaches asked him to do. Webb wasn't listening to Warhurst. He was talking to his HS coach too much. Brannen had a slight injury. You can't say it was because of cross. Nick Willis certainly hasn't been hurt by Michigan's training program.

          What about all the milers who thrived on collegiate cross: Spivey, Falcon, Holman, Steve Scott, Tim Hacker, Lassiter, Berryhill, McMullen?

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

            >Webb wasn't listening to Warhurst. He was
            >talking to his HS coach too much. Brannen had a
            >slight injury. You can't say it was because of
            >cross. Nick Willis certainly hasn't been hurt by
            >Michigan's training program.

            This is usually where the letsrun types start bashing Ronnie.

            http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read. ... ead=202660

            http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read. ... ead=189120

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

              > This same shit is going on all over the country with coaches concerned not about the kids but about their jobs - points, points, points - cc, indoors outdoors.>>

              What a concept--a coach concerned about his job! I'd say that if you asked an AD (in private, not for public consumption, where you'd get the party line) what he expected of his coaches he'd say "to score as many points and make the school as successful as possible." And, being the competitive types they are, most coaches would be doing that without being asked. Why should a track coach be held up to any different standard than a football or basketball coach?

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

                >"just because they don't improve doesn't mean
                >that you can logically assume that any particular
                >activity has caused their downfall without
                >further proof."

                What kind of proof would
                >satisfy you?

                Something better than "talented young college miler ran cross country, talented young college miler sustained an injury after the cross country season that hurt his track performance, therefore running cross country caused the injury and therefore lack of improvement." How about a better link than "it's what I think"?

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

                  I understand your confusion by the
                  >statements you posted. Let me clarify my beliefs.
                  >Cross can be o.k. for a miler if they can run it
                  >through training that is consistent with focus on
                  >spring track. This would mean less extensive
                  >miles than are usually run by typical college xc
                  >guys. They should also not have pressure to earn
                  >points in cc.

                  I also don't think that milers
                  >or 800 guys should be obligated to run cross. If
                  >they recieve a scholarship for track (as would a
                  >sprinter) why would they need to run cc?
                  >Unfortunately most coaches see a frosh 4:07 miler
                  >and think -"great, this kid will really help my
                  >cc team. Let's get some summer miles under him
                  >and we'll be ready to go in Sept."

                  The kid
                  >isn't mature enough and entrusts in the coach.
                  >Kids like Webb, Hall, Brannen, Ritz love to
                  >compete. But, they want to give it their all
                  >every race and every training session. Doing this
                  >12 mos. a year is a recipe for disaster. Too much
                  >training and competition (whether it be cc,
                  >indoors, outdoors, roads two track season
                  >whatever) leads to injury. Why increase one's
                  >chances for injury by trying to do so much?
                  >

                  Have you read "Sub 4"? Do you like how
                  >Warhurst mentions that he likes to push and pull
                  >the kids to find out their limits? He certainly
                  >found Webb's limits. This is not an isolated
                  >incident. It is just the most visible. This same
                  >shit is going on all over the country with
                  >coaches concerned not about the kids but about
                  >their jobs - points, points, points - cc, indoors
                  >outdoors.

                  Kids coming out of h.s. with talent
                  >need to be nurtured to improved not exploited and
                  >burned. That book lays out the problems with our
                  >current system. Sure Sullivan is doing well but
                  >who can say he wouldn't have done just as well if
                  >not better under another system?

                  You are
                  >passionate about cross, I'm equally as passionate
                  >about the problems facing our md runners. No
                  >cross isn't the problem. But, an overemphasis on
                  >MD runners competing in cross at a high level is
                  >a part of the problem.

                  No MD runners are obligated to run cross country. It is their choice whether or not to sign their name to that scholarship. Your blaming cross country for MD problems is like blaming alcohol for drunkeness. Yeah, one CAN lead to the other in the hands of an irresponsible person, but prohibition isn't the real answer.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

                    Many of the Michigan guys run track in the summer (July-Sept.) so I do not know what you mean by Brannen, etc. running high intensity 80+ mile weeks during this time. In fact, Brannen and Willis have not even run a cross country race yet this year and we are almost into October.

                    Besides, 80+ miles of high intensity is not that much volume for a base phase. You think El Gherrouj is logging easy 50 mile weeks?

                    When you are trying to get the most out of yourself, you are treading a line, and injuries are an inevitable part of that process. I think it would be difficult to find a distance runner at a high level that has never been injured.

                    So you can train hard, and risk fatigue and injury; or you can undertrain and risk mediocrity. Your choice. But if you think 80+ miles from September until November, with a handful of 10 kms is the reason some athletes aren't running well in June, July, or August, then you do not understand middle distance running.

                    Now, if you want to point to indoors, and the strains of that collegiate season, I think there might be something to that.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

                      <<No MD runners are obligated to run
                      cross country. It is their choice whether or not
                      to sign their name to that scholarship.>>

                      True, but the alternative is no scholarship at all. It's not the athlete's fault, not is it the coaches fault.

                      With 12.6 scholarships combined for track and cross country, a coach's hands are tied. To be competive in both sports, a coach doesn't have much of a choice but to only give scholarships to distance kids who agree to do both.

                      While it will probably never happen, there needs to be a change in the system to allow a coaches to recruit kids who's primary focus is to run cross country and to recruit kids who's primary focus is to run track.

                      If I'm not mistaken, it's against NCAA rules for a university to give a kid a track (or even baseball) scholarship to a kids who's also going to play football. If the school recruits a kids to play football and run track, then he uses one of the 85 football scholarships.

                      Ironically, though, the distance kids are screwed. The 800/1500 kid who wants to run only track, or the 5K/10K type of kids who would rather just run cross country, doesn't have a choice. It's all or nothing.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

                        Distance kids are screwed?! Hah! Try telling that to the hundreds of national-class jumpers and throwers who don't get rides because the average college coach is more interested in filling out either his cross country roster or making sure he has enough depth for two or three distance medleys and gives rides to guys waaaay farther down on the high school lists.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

                          Webb's problems were not Webb's fault - he just wanted to compete as best as he could in xc as a frosh and trained to do that, the problems aren't Warhurst's fault - he just wanted Webb to run xc to earn points and help his job (after all that is the way the system works the American way), its not xc's fault - it requires a sound base and intense fall training to be competitive, it's not the fault of Michigan's AD - he wants to have winning XC and track programs to help the school and his job. It is the fault of the system

                          Unfortunately the U.S. middle distance runners are the ones being hurt by the way the system works. The system is a very big reason why we are having trouble developing very promising prep talent into WC competitors. We need to focus on what is the best program for each kid as an individual. Taking into account past performance, personality, psycholgical makeup, past training methods, physical assets, past injuries and short and long term goals.

                          This information can then be used to chart an individual game plan over the long-term (even beyond the 22 years of age of a college senior). Most college coaches don't consider the individual beyond the 4 years they are with the school - unless it is an afterthought and the individual shows signs that they can continue to compete.

                          Only when this happens, putting the individual's needs ahead of the school's needs, will be begin to see athletes "breaking through" on a more regular basis. Nurture instead of exploit and burn.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

                            Dan-

                            I think I have made my point very clearly. Unfortunately you are missing it. Obviously I won't be able to convince you with what I feel is common sense - the more training you do, the more seasons you compete in, the more races you run the greater the liklihood of injury.

                            I am not against xc and more than I am against indoor track or would be against 2-3 outdoor track seasons. I am against too much competition instead of focusing on one highly demanding sport.

                            I know it is very hard if not impossible to change the way things are currently done. And this is most unfortunate because by continuing to do things the way they are currently done we will continue to get the results we have been getting. Obviously something isn't working. I say if it is broken fix it - it won't fix itself!

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

                              Dan-

                              One additional thought as to where we differ in our opinion -

                              Do the benefits of training for and running xc outweigh the risks of injury?

                              I say no, not for middle distance runners. You say yes.

                              To paraphrase Krum - I now realize that a very big part of winning the battle is simply staying healthy and free of injury. Yes indeed!

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

                                Field Guy-

                                Yes, not only is the system screwing up some potentially gifted md runners by obligating them run xc but it is also screwing other track athletes as coaches view md runners as "2-sport athletes" for a "one-sport price".

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X