Where does USATF make their money (currently and in this hypothetical program)?
From TV beoadcasting revenue share kicked back from IAAF from their share from Oly Games rights and WCs. of course some of the money might need to re-allocated from failed programs and bloated staff. As well, better results will increase the take as the vast majority of TV revenues come from the US networks. Better US Teams = more viewer share = more interest.
The number of coaches, pre-qualified via written exams, would not be large initially but could expand with success. You might start top down- for example say that the first level is unfunded but the incentive becomes to qualify for the next two levels- and later the funding for the first when it becomes available.
You are absolutely on spot with this. It is remarkable to consider the fact that the hiring personal are unable to decipher the technical know how of the applicant; but rather, only capable of making determinations based upon his/her social skills, appearance, credentials (what ever those mean) and what the hiring personnel may or may not have been told by fellow staff members or 3rd party individuals who ,due to the existing situation, may be entirely unreliable in their capacity to know right from left.
Exactly!!! Well, I’m not here to take sides but I feel as though I can jump in and speak on this issue because I’m an athlete who is currently in the trenches coaching myself due to the fact that despite all the “certified” coaches that are here in the states, I have yet to find one coach that knows how to build a solid sprinter from the ground up. I do know about John Smith and others but due to the scarcity of the good coaches the price to be coached by one of these gurus is WAY out of my price range. Put it this way; I could pay a mortgage with the amount of money these few good coaches command.
Anyhow, James Smith is absolutely correct in his thinking and I think he is doing a wonderful thing by calling out the huge flaws in the system. For people who want to bash Mr. Smiths ideas it’s of no suprise to me because now coaches would actually haft to produce a before and after result to get paid instead of just recruiting the best and getting paid!
Sadly, however, the system as we know it is not designed to produce elite athletes, nor is it designed to truly enlighten man and if any joe smow thinks he is going to change this I’m telling you right now there are powerful well connected men who will stop you.
More or less, the system is about producing worker bees and to control the thinking of mankind; the sports aspect is there to produce additional revenue and to provide school spirit. A school could care less if a student goes 9.9 which is why standout athletes receive no financial compensation and to add insult to injury the school will use that athletes face to recruit new athletes and sell merchandise.
So, at the end of the day, the best we can do; as far as the athletes and the good coaches is to take care and look out for each other. It’s the only way we can get what we need/want and at the same time further human athletic excellence.
~100m001~
Is the way forward to try to educate the person who does the hiring in 10 sports (is that even possible?) or to educate the guy in one sport who is applying via the credentials he needs- often an MA of some kind?
Again, with all the NCAA is already funding and the precarious position of the non revenue producing sports, the education needs to be funded and produced by the USATF.
If you raise the cost, and, perhaps, the liability issues for the NCAA for Track, what do you suppose the outcome will be?
Will they cover this extra cost by cutting the number of scholarships?
The competitive results the track team gets may have nothing to do with how successful a hire the AD considers the track coach. The AD has a lot more going on than that. In a lot of cases, I think, the issue is not that the AD is trying to hire a great on-the-track coach but just can’t figure out how to do it.
There are coaches who don’t win, but will last forever, because they are a great fit for what the university wants, and there are coaches who are great at winning but who would last about 20 minutes at a university. I am sure a few of the latter are on this board, and I am not an exception.
If you try to educate the ADs on how to pick a winning track coach, you will often be forcing knowledge upon them that they don’t want, rather than helping them gain knowledge that they do want.
Well, given the situation at present I would wager that the number of ‘properly’ informed applicants outweighs the number of ‘properly’ informed hiring personnel by, somewhere in the vicinity of, the power of 10…
…and we all seem to be agreeing on the current state of affairs; so where does that leave us…
A little birdy tells me that the number of scholarships would remain intact in favor of cutting the coaches budget and stunting the growth of his/her salary.
My guess is that the allowed number of scholarships would remain intact, but a lot of teams would cut the number of scholarships that they actually offer.
lol one of the funniest videos I have seen in a while… maybe that is why the Soviet men were no good in the short sprints, shotput, etc.
You are so right!!! Uaa I HATE this party mentality and why do schools even permit people to do this? I knew lots of people in various NCAA schools who were on track and football teams and every one of my contacts would tell me the athletes would booz and party up on the weekends. Guys have the house party’s, and the girls would go to the night clubs in the city dressed like street walkers.
Out of all my contacts my X GF disappointed me the most as in HS she ran 11.8 FAT 60y 7.0 and when she got to collage she got worse and pretty much stayed in the 12.6 range.
Basically, what did her in was the club/house party’s on the weekends with the track team, the poor dining hall food and finally the PISS poor training despite all the square footage of training facility’s at this D1 school…
Geez, this is coast to coast this whole epidemic of collage kids gone wild which is why people like dr laura schlessinger don’t even recommend you send your kids to collage anymore as the system changes them so much for the WORSE!!
Haven’t you heard of Bondarchuk? As far as short sprints I would submit that the African male has 8% more muscle then the Caucasoid due to genetics so this factor and maybe others probably give the African male the athletic edge.
Yeah, Bondarchuck was awesome in the hammer, probably the most technique dependent and least relevant event in track. Not to say he doesn’t have something to offer, but it sure doesn’t indicate they knew more than ‘the West’ in the sprints or most prevalent throwing events (ie shotput). Their best sprinter didn’t even do the same training as what was promoted by most.
Where are the Russian Wariners, Menneas, Wells, etc.? Even without the Americans, Wells won the 100m in 1980 in the Russki’s backyard…
African males???who where when…kenians, tanzanians, ethipians, southafricans, libyan egyptian, algerian, tunisian and many others…where are they more muscled???SOME west africans have more muscle maybe, but, fast sprinters?(except for some nigerians???)
Japanese are faster than russians…so??
CF and other what is the recommendation for coaches in the US to apprentice to gain an understanding of how to prepare athletes for power speed disciplines such as the sprints throws and team sports? Or any other route for that matter…
Try to go where the top sprinters are being produced.
“Produced” requires some interpretation. I would look at which schools/coaches are getting the most impressive progressions form their people. Effective recruiting is more often the key at the NCAA D-1 level.
So currently the two best would be A&M with Vince Anderson coaching the sprints and LSU with Shaver there? Do any NCAA programs at any division produce consistent all americans and improvements from high school using CFTS?
While Vince has done an outstanding job, how much have his athletes progressed since arriving ad what do the curves look like? He will tell you directly that he recruits well and then doesn’t do anything to screw his kids up.
Much of Dennis’ program is derived from Loren Seagrave. I think in the past his athletes have shown more improvement during their time with him, but that this was because many had more room to grow. As he has gotten more developed athletes, I’m not sure that this rings quite as true any longer.
As for the question regarding which programs have been influenced by the CFTS, I think that is very much a mystery for a myriad of reason.
Who do you feel the best coaches in north america or even europe are for that matter then athletics coach?