You ought to take a position at one of the teams then and show everyone what results you could present. I know there are numerous NCAA coaches on this forum from D3 and no facilities to top tier Division 1 T&F and I think all would be interested in seeing how radically different things would be.
If you don’t believe me than I’d encourage you to do some investigating as to what the sprint programs look like at some different institutions.
for example, one D-1 program has their sprinters run suicides thinking that this drill will enhance turnover. I almost vomit as I share this with you.
Sure, Pitt’s program sucks. Arkansas did a ton of intensive tempo though and their guys cleared up the medals at plenty of NCAA meets. LSU uses intensive tempo AND overspeed AND specific weights and they continually put up world class people in every sprinting and hurdle event. They took at guy who ran track through his life from 10.5 to 9.8 in 4 years.
Please don’t make the mistake of including me in an alleged group of individuals whose reality is limited to books and dvds.
I coach for a living.
I don’t deny that. I think there are numerous great coaches who still don’t necessarily get results all the time. John Smith hasn’t gotten a new guy to 9.8 in how long? And he has had the horses for sure… Point is, things aren’t that simple and if learning and applying things CONSISTENTLY was so easy, everyone could do it. The point of this thread and my comments in it is to help explain what kind of products I, and probably many others, would find useful (something topical to our performane levels). This isn’t a thread about your experience or your team.
Don’t forget that there’s a galaxy between running sub 10.0 and running sub 10.5. It doesn’t take demographic statistics to differentiate between those groups.
for example, I worked with a Caucasian LJ/100m runner when I coached at the high school level (he wa 23 at the time) and over the course of 3 months I took him from 10.5 mid to 10.4 mid (all FAT, I can’t remember the exact times) simply by adjusting his programming. I don’t think he had the potential to run sub 10.0, however.
Incidentally, if you’re referring to only this last round of pro day times, I’ve since found out that one of the seven I trained was timed between 4.36 and 4.39 by two different NFL teams; but remember, with all of these hand times, whose to say what anyone is actually running.
-
That is great, where is he now? Where has the programming taken him? Again, we’re looking for things that will allow for continued progress and help lead us through these plateaus and difficulties. You telling us you took a guy with a crappy program and changed a couple things and he went a little faster doesn’t exactly help, at all, integrate Charlie’s charts and plans to our levels.
-
I am sure numerous other teams and athletes could say the same, but I want to look at context. When everyone was being timed in the same fashion, what did they run, simple as that.