Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #91
    Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

    >It seems we are dragging too many variables into
    >this arguement. I think everyone would agree the
    >NCAA system is not the best way to develop our
    >elites, but we have chosen to make scholastic
    >programs the basis for T&F and XC in this
    >country. Why not? They have money, numbers of
    >athletes, facilities, etc. Schools pay coaches a
    >salary they can (barely) live off of. Alumni
    >loyalty and $ keep programs going. Imagine
    >trying to accomodate the number of HS, NCAA, and
    >open runners in the US with only clubs.

    HS and
    >NCAA programs are great for almost everyone that
    >runs. Almost all HS'ers quit after HS, and again
    >most collegians quit after college. It's always
    >been that way. HS and NCAA meets ARE their
    >running career, and that's what school-affiliated
    >programs should focus on - competition for the
    >athletes that are there. How many of us who
    >didn't have elite talent would trade our HS and
    >NCAA running experience for a 2 meet XC season or
    >track-only running to maximize the potential of
    >the few top athletes at each level? If the
    >scholastic systems are set up to serve only the
    ><1% of athletes who have a shot at the world
    >class level, the vast majority of participants
    >miss out on what should be the pinnacle of their
    >competitive experience.

    If we want to develop
    >world class distance and MD runners most
    >effectively, we have to get away from the
    >scholastic systems for our best athletes. That
    >means no "easy" money to fund teams,
    >facilities, and meets (HS and NCAA). How to do
    >that, I have no idea!

    In the end, the NCAA
    >system works well enough that we continue to use
    >it, but it is becoming harder and harder to
    >compete in an increasingly global sport while
    >piggy-backing of of a system with goals other
    >than world-class development. I don't think the
    >system is broken...we are using the wrong system
    >to develop our best.


    Maybe make it like baseball, where the brightest young stars can jump right into a developmental program (provided by USATF or private sponsor(s)?) while the opportunity for competition for lesser talents would still exist at the college level.

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

      Simply put, you can't
      >do it nor can you admit being wrong. WE'll just
      >leave it at that.

      O.k. let us look at the top frosh talent over the past couple of years - Webb, Brannen, Hall, Ritz. These are the most visible. All were injured as a result of training. IMO - too much training throughout the year.

      Finally you see the light, what WE
      >have been telling you all along.

      WHAT?! You have been telling me? Have you read my posts? I have always said the reason I didn't think cross was appropriate for md runners is that is jeopardized their track season by requiring training that focuses on an additional season which results in an added potential for injury. I have been telling you this all along.

      Did
      >El G develop in the exact same manner as Webb?
      >El G never ran at an American high school nor at
      >an American college. How similar was El G's
      >development through age 20 to Alan Webb's
      >development up to this point? Do WE see the
      >connection between them? Tell US, how can it be
      >"fixed"? Will it?

      No, El G. didn't develop the same as Webb. Ryun didn't either. It doesn't matter how they find out that they have talent it is how they develop the talent once it is discovered.

      The problem with too much competition resulting in nonspecific training begins in h.s. in the US. Excellent 8/15 guys running xc.

      What can be done? As I mentioned before a talent identification system direct to event specific training as early as 11th/12th grade. This would require corporate sponsorship to pay for training and scholarships outside of the NCAA.

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

        Gagliano? Gags? GAG! Now there is a coach not immersed in the convential US system. To lead our talent we need someone who thinks outside the system, not an insider. It is like a corporation that only recruits from within. Our convential systems are obsolete. To move to the new level athletes need to train at a new level with a new approach - more focus fewer races!

        Not the same old system.

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

          Yeah, it takes an EDGY OUTSIDER who takes a HIP and UNCONVENTIONAL approach. Someone who can THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX and establish a new PARADIGM teeming with FRESH SYNERGY!!

          >Gagliano? Gags? GAG! Now there is a coach not
          >immersed in the convential US system. To lead our
          >talent we need someone who thinks outside the
          >system, not an insider. It is like a corporation
          >that only recruits from within. Our convential
          >systems are obsolete. To move to the new level
          >athletes need to train at a new level with a new
          >approach - more focus fewer races!

          Not the
          >same old system.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

            >Yeah, it takes an EDGY OUTSIDER who takes a HIP
            >and UNCONVENTIONAL approach. Someone who can
            >THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX and establish a new
            >PARADIGM teeming with FRESH
            >SYNERGY!!

            Or, we can continue to complain about things not going the way we would like them to while others who are successful with other systems move on to new levels. We can also continue to ignore the suggestions of others who are successfully competing at the world level.

            Why should we do things differently? - we are the United States damnit - we are the most powerful country in the world. We do things the way we have always done them - like it or not! We don't need to change shit! Screw 'em.

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

              Or, we can continue to
              >complain about things not going the way we would
              >like them to while others who are successful with
              >other systems move on to new levels. We can also
              >continue to ignore the suggestions of others who
              >are successfully competing at the world level.
              >

              Why should we do things differently? - we are
              >the United States damnit - we are the most
              >powerful country in the world. We do things the
              >way we have always done them - like it or not! We
              >don't need to change shit! Screw 'em.

              "Blah, blah, blah x 1000."

              You spout the same old stuff but that's apparently all you really do. Yes, you're probably right, but where exactly does talking about it endlessly get us?

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

                In debate when someone makes a point there is an opportunity for a counterpoint.

                I am only RESPONDING to those with alternate views or who are questioning my stance. This site gives us an opportunity to express our opinions and have debate.

                I do feel I have made my point over and over but still there are some who apparently are unclear or confused as to where I stand - so I attempt to clarify.

                While I think the topic is an important one, I am willing to let it go if there isn't anyone who can add anything fresh to the conversation.

                I'm intrigued that so many people feel so strongly about letting things go the way they have been HOPES they will some how improve, rather than being proactive and changing things to create improvement.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

                  Cyril, talk about beating a dead horse. By my count you've made 28 (!) posts in this thread. You're right: it's not a debate, it's a soliloquy.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

                    You do know that there is a difference between being proactive (or simply active) and cranking out rhetoric, don't you?

                    Comment


                    • Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

                      Wow, a thread that started out with a question about the viability of a shorter XC race that has degenerated into another game of Webb hackeysack. It just goes to show you how desperate this country is for a champion runner over 400M!

                      Listen, it doesn't do any good to cite examples of runners who succeeded on a certain training program or who failed on another. For every runner who succeeded, there is another runner who did the same thing and was either injured, burned out, over-trained, under-trained, etc. You can't just adopt someone else's training program and expect the exact same results. That's why it's called coaching. A coach helps figure out the best path for an individual runner.

                      That makes null and void the following assumptions:

                      Your father can't coach you. Maybe he can, maybe he can't.

                      If you are a middle distance runner and you run XC, you'll overtrain and get injured. Boy, talk about a blanket statement!

                      If you are a middle distance runner and you run XC, you'll lose your speed. You mean to tell me that all the XC training is done at 7 minute pace?

                      Webb, Hall and others are washed up. You mean these guys are so debilitated, either physically or mentally, that they can't bounce back after a few months? Listen, if they were 32 years old and trying to come back from an injury or a period of over-training, we might have grounds to suppose they won't "scale the heights" again. These guys are young, not even in their prime yet. Just because they take a wrong turn doesn't mean they can't get back on track. For them, back on track is only a couple of months away.

                      You want to know what's really important in distance running training? Staying motivated and being challenged. Woe to the coach who thinks he can just spit out the latest computerized workouts and hand them to the athlete. The physical and mental strain of two-a-day workouts, plus the weights, etc, requires incredible dedication and focus. Remember that Nike commercial of Joanie getting up early and running out the door into the rain? Having a coach to hold you accountable, to motivate you , to bring variety to the workouts, having other athletes around to train with, have fun with, to challenge you, are all key components in a successful regimen.

                      OK, now who's off track. I say keep XC the way it is. Don't compartmentalize it down for the shorter distance guys. If they or anyone else wants to compete, whether at 100% or 80% intensity, let them reach for the distance. If the milers aren't puting in some miles in the fall anyway, they will pay the price in the spring and summer.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

                        Been a while since I've been on the board and it's not my style to criticize but I've been told that Webb is managed by Ray Flynn. Wasn't he a pretty good miler in his day? So I suppose that the fine people of the T&FN message board know a more appropriate course of action for young Mr. Webb than Flynn? Wouldn't Flynn have some rather well qualified input into Webb's racing schedule and general outline of how he would proceed during a given year? Certainly more than the brilliance that is the T&FN messag board?

                        Doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me but what do I know?

                        Comment


                        • Re: Short Course NCAA Cross Country?

                          Schools are cutting CC and track programs for lack of funding and this whole title 9 crud. Diluting even further is a bad idea.

                          Secondly, long distance training is good for any 1500m and up runner. Example - I went to college with a guy who thought our coach's Lydiard style distance training was ineffective. He ran 3:39 1500m then transferred to another school that focused on speed. He never ran under 3:45 again. That coach left and under the new coach many athletes never ran PRs again despite tons of speedwork. Hmmm... Steve Scott was known to race a lot at any distance and do high volume training. Guess who still holds the AR in the mile?

                          Interesting Article/Interview with Peter Snell on the subject of distance training.
                          http://www.runnersworld.com/home/0,1300 ... -0,00.html

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X