Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Do college coaches burn out our athletes?

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #46
    Re: Do college coaches burn out our athletes?

    tafnut,

    I see whay you're saying I agree with you to a certain extent. Racing is important, for fun, for learning, experience, etc. I would limit the number of serious/all-out races for a given athlete.

    I agree that injuries are, to some extent, anavoidable. However, you can limit the possiblity of injury and their extent by planning well (obviously). I know that coaches "don't intend" to injur their athletes, however, injury is often incurred from a diet of overracing and poor training. In no way am I suggesting that you are guilty of this, but I've seen many coaches not take responsibility if their athlete goes down.

    Again, I agree that the fun is in laying on the line -- I just wouldn't do it at 3000m week-in and week-out. That's why I love 400s.

    I agree still, that we must push the envelope, I just think the area of dispute is "where".

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Do college coaches burn out our athletes?

      That's cool :-)

      As for the 90% figure - I would imagine that's high, unless you're counting the 'recreational' athletes who are just on the team because there's no cuts whatsoever in most programs.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Do college coaches burn out our athletes?

        "As for the 90% figure - I would imagine that's high"

        I must be high - I meant MORE than 90% do NOT run seriously in college.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Do college coaches burn out our athletes?

          I must be high - I
          >meant MORE than 90% do NOT run seriously in college.

          Since no one else has stepped up to do some digging, it looks like that number may be reasonably accurate.

          From http://www.american-trackandfield.com/n ... ion03.html participation in US high school track is over 900,000.

          From http://www.ncaa.org/library/research/pa ... pation.pdf participation in all 3 NCAA divisions is about 18,400 for girls, and 20,400 for guys.

          40,000 out of 900,000 is less than 10%, however that doesn't take into account NAIA or JuCo numbers, nor the number of foreigners in the NCAA.

          Furthermore, there is also no accounting for those high school track athletes who don't go on to university/college in the first place. Does anyone have US rates for high school to post-secondary enrollement?

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Do college coaches burn out our athletes?

            >A friend of mine back in h.s. was Kinney (now FL) nat. xc champ in
            >early
            >80's. national leader in the 16/32 in track. Went to a D1 school in So.
            >Cal
            >ran great as a frosh (3:43, sub 14, sub 29) and frequently doubled. By
            >his
            >junior year he didn't want anything more to do with the sport. This was a
            >kid
            >with phenomenal potential . . .

            It seems to be quite apparent that he
            >did not.

            Magpie-

            Apparent that he did not what? Have potential? 19 years old and runs sub 14 sub 29. 4:06, 8:48 double in hs. No, he obviously had potential. Unfortunately he was running off of 50-60 miles in hs. and this was increased to 80-90 miles in college. And why? Just getting older, training faster and modest increase in mileage (up to 65-70/wk)he would have improved.

            "Pushing the envelope" is fine. But you must leave room in the envelope for future development. If a frosh 15 guy is running 90 miles a week what will be be doing as a senior? 120? Long-term planning is key. Impatience in search of immediate gratification most often will result in injury.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Do college coaches burn out our athletes?

              Yes, you plan. If you've got two incoming freshman, one who ran 3500mi their senior year and another 1500mi, you'll approach them differently. You're freshmen can run 90mi weeks if they have the appropriate background.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Do college coaches burn out our athletes?

                Trackhead-

                Yes, of course. But your plan must not only consider the past but the future. It should look forward beyond the upcoming couple of seasons and ideally beyond the four years upcoming.

                A kid who has put in very serious miles through 11/12th grade may be better served by easing back a little as a frosh - not on intensity but quantity. Again it would depend on the event, goals and background.

                I do agree each individual should be handled differently. Unfortunatly very often programs are developed to get the most out of the top couple of guys for the upcoming season with little thought to the needs of the others or the future years. The rest are left to try to keep up - same workouts just different splits. It takes alot of planning to work with individuals. Its much easier to put them in the cookie cutter.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Do college coaches burn out our athletes?

                  >>This was a
                  >kid
                  >with phenomenal potential . . .

                  It seems to be
                  >quite apparent that he
                  >did not.

                  Magpie-

                  Apparent that he did not what?
                  >Have potential? 19 years old and runs sub 14 sub 29. 4:06, 8:48 double in hs.
                  >No, he obviously had potential. Unfortunately he was running off of 50-60 miles
                  >in hs. and this was increased to 80-90 miles in college. And why? Just getting
                  >older, training faster and modest increase in mileage (up to 65-70/wk)he would
                  >have improved.

                  There is simply no way that you could know that to a degree any better than gut feeling. It could easily be that he ran his best at 19 years old and that was it -- happens all the time. That was the evident extent of the potential. Running very well at one point in time is not necessarily indication of future success. Quite simply, it is more likely the case that this individual did not have all the tools needed to progress beyond that point. Potential is not measured merely by a set of times and a mileage figure - there is much more to it than raw ability - and it cannot be determined in the absence of actual results.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Do college coaches burn out our athletes?

                    >Trackhead-

                    Yes, of course. But your plan must not only consider the past but
                    >the future. It should look forward beyond the upcoming couple of seasons and
                    >ideally beyond the four years upcoming.

                    I agree completely. I feel that far too few coaches take that into consideration.

                    As far as progressing volume:
                    Age Miles
                    ===========
                    14 1000-1500
                    15 2000-2250
                    16 2500-2750
                    17 3000-3250
                    18 3500-3750
                    19 4000-4250
                    20 4250-4500
                    21 4500-4750
                    22 4750-5000
                    ==============

                    This means that by age 22 this runner will have between 29,500 and 32,000 miles and can handle big blocks of volume (base training in the 130 range) and will be on par with their African counterparts and ready to race. If you're going to be an 800m man, you can level off at 3000-3500mi/yr, or the 4000mi range for 1500m specialists.

                    By keeping overall intensity low (never more that 20% of the week, less than 15% for runners with less than 10,000mi) and minimizing hard surface running, this volume can be achieved and if it were implemented by all of America's coaching, I think you'd see some big changes -- think Hanson's on a national level. But it's just a dream.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Do college coaches burn out our athletes?

                      All this talk about burning athletes out, and them losing interest or becoming disheartened is inane. In my view, they're just weak minded and don't have the internal motivation required to succeed. Track is not just a physical sport, it is highly psychological, and you need both to be a champion. If you lack the latter, it's not the coache's fault, or anyone else's, you're just weak mentally. Try talking about all this doubling and tripling to a decathlete, you think they're going to complain? That's just an excuse for people we think should have succeeded but didn't. They had the physical ability, but not the mental.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Do college coaches burn out our athletes?

                        Bingo.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Do college coaches burn out our athletes?

                          Not to be an unrepentant Darwinist or anything, but isn't burnout and failure an expected part of any process? If every egg laid by a cod actually turned into an adult fish, there wouldn't be any room in the oceans for the water.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Do college coaches burn out our athletes?

                            Interesting point and a great analogy about the cod. I always felt "burnout" was psychological, which is different than overtraining, immune system supression, or injury (from overuse, trauma, or just plain stupidity, like wearing spikes for hurdle work on astroturf).

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Do college coaches burn out our athletes?

                              As an addendum to all this...I've done a good deal of research on the the early history of the sport: the 1870s-80s. I can't recall reading a report on ANY major athlete of the time being injured. They may have skipped competitions or been off due to having a heavy cold, or some other illness, but they simply didn't get injured. And it's obvious why: they trained very, very lightly and (usually) competed relatively few times per year. While 4:30 or 4:40 miles can be run by guys that were (by today's standards) completely "untrained," our collective desire today for far better times results--inevitably--in physical (and emotional) breakdown.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Do college coaches burn out our athletes?

                                Following up on the Cyril/Magpie dialogue: Also in the early '80s I coached a kid whose high school progression was 4:45/4:35/4:17/4:08.3 (2nd Golden West) and 10:15/9:49/9:20/8:57.5 (won Florida Relays). His senior year he ran 45-55 a week very consistently (literally did not miss a day in over a year - his decision).
                                Martin Smith recruited him to U. Virginia - full ride - but then Smith left that summer when Dan McClimonds was killed in a plane crash and Wisconsin hired Smith to replace him. My kid had four different coaches in 5 years at UVA. His first year they immediately jumped him to 85-90 a week and he ran the distance runs (over some tough hills, unlike pancake flat S. Florida where he lived) with guys like Colin Peddie, a 22 year old XC All-American, then got on the track with Ray Brown (1:45) and John Hinton (3:41). He wanted to prove he deserved his scholarship plus he was very competitive. Result? He was constantly injured, ran 3:45 as a freshman and again in a later year, but that was it.
                                Oh, and college coaches had drooled over his potential at Kinney Nationals when they saw how physiologically young he was - in keeping with those big drops along the way in high school times. His junior year, in trying to convey his long-term potential, I blurted to a Miami Herald reporter that he didn't look like he'd gone through puberty. (The kid forgave me.)
                                Since I always appreciated non-intrusive parents, I tried to do the same and deliberately avoided second-guessing his college coaches, but in hindsight I wish I'd spoken up. I was a high school coach who also taught five classes, including four Advanced Placement U.S. History ones, yet I had enough time to know my runners and try to give then appropriate level work-outs. His college coaches, whose only job, full-time, was to coach Track and XC, failed to do that. They took a kid whom I know had at least 3:55 in him and broke him down, physically and mentally. Yeah, I'm still pissed. By the way, they had similar "success" with another fast Florida miler (4:09.3) who went to UVA the year after my kid.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X