[Mike Young]

Mike Young on December 10, 2004 at 2:36 pm #10125

I am going to add a “Great Coaches Forum” soon. I need to work some things out but I think it will make a nice addition to the messageboard. I would like to set it up so that each “great” coach will have his own thread. Members can then add to the thread or discus and debate the merits of the particular coaches philosophies. For example, one thread certain to be present will be “Coaching philosophies of Dan Pfaff.” In this thread, we could discuss all matters related to Dan’s training. This is a call to see who should be added to the list of “great” coaches.

ELITETRACK Founder

[Todd Lane]

Todd Lane on December 10, 2004 at 5:48 pm #35463

Tom Tellez, Bud Winters

[burkhalter]

burkhalter on December 10, 2004 at 8:30 pm #35464

John Smith

Don’t see his name thrown around at all for some reason, but he has produced some good ones.

[frit17]

frit17 on December 10, 2004 at 9:39 pm #35465

John Smith the throws coach too. He has a great mind for strength as well as throws.

[Kebba Tolbert]

Kebba Tolbert on January 1, 2005 at 1:25 pm #35466

Boo
Pfaff
Tellez
Councilman (training theory)
Jim Bush (400m)

[coachformerlyknownas]

coachformerlyknownas on January 2, 2005 at 12:43 am #35467

Sad to say that its easier to name those of assumed greatness that are infact, practicing charletons…

If I hear the term “those who have cracked the code” one more time. Interested to see who ends up at the OTC…

[davan]

davan on January 2, 2005 at 3:15 am #35468

Charlie Francis

[alex]

alex on January 2, 2005 at 5:03 am #35469

Clyde Hart, Trevor Graham

[Kebba Tolbert]

Kebba Tolbert on January 2, 2005 at 1:28 pm #35470

super-ranter….. care to elabortate?

[coachformerlyknownas]

coachformerlyknownas on January 3, 2005 at 9:13 am #35471

The wife and I have an on-going argument. She thinks I am too negative. (imagine that)

I respond that she uses the word “amazing” too often, as in something/someone being amazing.

So as to the subject… I am saying one thing primarily. That there are few truly “great” coaches. While 100% of gold medalists are gold medalists….well even that has been proven wrong as seen in the plague of medal “recalls”

Now secondarily, I am tired of hearing the top dog tell us about “those who have broken the code” The concept I get, but many of the examples are flawed.

There’s an old joke about there being no ice for your drink because the person that had the recipe for ice, died.
Again, short of pharmo/chemo impute, the “recipe” for a sub 10 run is far more dependent on the ingredients than the chef…

I have spoken with more than one “code breaker” and walked away, scratching my head as to how they could ever have gotten the results they have. Or do you believe like Bobby, that JJK owes her gold to Chuck Norris’s toy? An over simplification, but…

Just saying that there are few truly “great” coaches in my view and the honor is watered down when the list grows as well as insulting when some weaker players are offered in nomination. I have learned enough about some of the “living legends” that I see no reason to disbelieve that that there are many waiting in the wings who are as good if not seriously better….

[viking]

viking on January 3, 2005 at 11:06 am #35472

I must say that Boo is one of the best. Not only that, he has always been very aproachable when I see him or even to call or email and ask him a question. That is pretty impressive to me. As a high school coach, I find very often college and pro coaches have very little time to talk to you and when they do, they don’t see things from the same area you are coming from. Boo, always makes it so it is usable and attainable.

[dj1291]

dj1291 on January 4, 2005 at 5:55 am #35473

Bill Bowerman and Mark Guthrie

and a shameless nomination from personal interaction ->Sue Humphrey, super nice lady and i think that anytime a woman can gain the respect and command the attention of male athletes she must know her stuff

[dma1973]

dma1973 on January 4, 2005 at 6:09 am #35474

Can I ask what defines a great coach?

The fact I have heard and read most of those coaches programmes and result of athletes is fair.

There is an ongoing debate about who is a great coach.

I guess the general philosophy used could be, in no particular order;

1. Results
2. Consistency in results with individuals and group
3. Technical knowledge
4. Coaching knowledge (communication) the Art of coaching
5. Ability to coach at different levels.

I have met some coaches who are said to be great coaches, but have not been impressed with. And have met coaches who are not great coaches who have impressed me.

I hope that makes sense.

Great coaches from Australia. Personal thoughts

Tudor Bidder and Craig Hilliard are 2 that spring to mind.

[coachformerlyknownas]

coachformerlyknownas on January 4, 2005 at 9:38 am #35475

Sue H.
Not a nice person (multiple interactions)

I sense the hand of a “dolphin” in this…

[CoachKW]

CoachKW on January 4, 2005 at 7:48 pm #35476

Bill Dellinger-one of the most humble and knowledgable coaches I’ve ever met

[Mike Young]

Mike Young on January 6, 2005 at 8:36 am #35477

Taking into account the above suggestions, the criteria DMA listed, available information on the given coaches training methods, and the demographics of the ET messageboard membership (mostly sprint and power people), I suggest we start off with:
1. Dan Pfaff
2. “Boo” Schexnayder
3. Clyde Hart (Guthrie is admittedly heavily influenced by Hart)
4. Tom Tellez
5. Bill Dellinger

Any objections or additions? We can add to the list as needed.

ELITETRACK Founder

[Mike Young]

Mike Young on January 9, 2005 at 9:40 am #35478

See HERE

ELITETRACK Founder

[jumpscoachmike]

jumpscoachmike on February 18, 2005 at 10:16 pm #35479

I don’t think we can, in our right minds, leave out John McDonnell when discussing the greats of track and field coaching.

[Daniel Andrews]

Daniel Andrews on May 23, 2005 at 2:57 pm #35480

I am not certain most great coaches are found at the international or college level, I believe some of the best coaches are at the high school level. I’ve seen a great number of coaches at the college level take exceptional talent and ruin it or not make them any better. The coach that can take a 4:30-4:45 high school miler one year and make him a 10.8-22.3-47.8 runner at 100-200-400 the next is a better coach than a college coach that takes a high school 1:55 800m runner and tries to make him a 3:50 1500m guy in college and only gets a 4:04 1500m out of him.

Alan Webb is one of my favorite most recent examples of this, Michigan was bad for him. If I could recruit great talent and make sure they are the same or only a little worse than when they came to me, should I be considered a great coach? No, great coaching involves taking what you have and making them better regardless of the situation. Most high school coaches have a better eye for talent than college coaches do, it is a matter of situation, High School coaches must recognize what types of abilities a runner has and their drive before training or competition. I can sit and watch a Junior High track meet and tell you all the slower runners that have potential by watching how they run. Most college coaches only look at what kind of times you have and don’t even appreciate what kind of training you have had, how long it took you to mature physically, or even examine flaws in stride mechanics of runners when they recruit them. Even worse some coaches don’t recognize those individuals that have the drive to compete or not. The better coach is willing to take risks with “slower” runners that have drive, talent, and the willingness to learn and listen over the “faster” runners that have less drive, talent, and are unwilling to learn or listen. The way to compare results is how much faster is person relative only to himself from the beginning of a training cycle to the end of the training cycle and that relative improvement to other runners relative improvement for a similiar training cycle, not how fast someones runners are compared to everyone else’s runners.

[Mike Young]

Mike Young on May 24, 2005 at 1:14 pm #35481

Danimal-
Very true however being the devil’s advocate that I am, I’d like to add 2 points. First, it’s much harder to take someone who is already at a very high level (top 10 D1 performer) and make them better than it is to take a beginner into a very good athlete. Second, there is something to be said about not screwing up an athlete. As you so rightly pointed out, many college programs are black holes for great talent. This proves how easy it is to screw up even the most talented of athletes. As such, I think that there really is something to be said for those coaches who can take the very best athletes and keep them at that level. While these coaches aren’t the best they could be a heck of a lot worse.

ELITETRACK Founder

[CoachKW]

CoachKW on May 24, 2005 at 5:53 pm #35482

No doubt Mike! Sometimes a coaches greatness can be measured by knowing when to just get out of an athlete’s way.

One thing we probably would all agree on is that you can’t make chicken soup out of chicken feathers. As coaches, we have a heart for the kid who works his fanny off and just doesn’t get much better. We are intruiged/perplexed by the kid who is just dripping with talent and won’t do anything with it, and we live for the kid who is talented AND works his butt off to get everything out of it.

Our job as coaches is to go to the top of the mountain, look over, and then come back to the athlete and say “this is where we’re going, and this is how we are going to get there.”

RYFP

[Daniel Andrews]

Daniel Andrews on May 25, 2005 at 10:13 am #35483

KW:

I live for the kid who works their butts off. I try to teach them patience, because with that they can develop talent in something, maybe not world class, but maybe a decent DIII runner if they study as hard as they training.

Mike:

I agree, I know the faster the runner gets the less his absolute improvement becomes. I call this the Calculus of Running, it is another one of my oddball theories. So I use relative improvements as much as possibly when comparing runners and training.