cat not in the HAT wrote:
Bear Down wrote:
Goldstein had a couple head to heads with Fitzgerald from the Flyers in that feeder system. Goldstein lost in the 1600 by a half second and beat him by 4 seconds in the 800 in the same meet. Fitzgerald ran 4:08 for the 1600 in high school which is 6 seconds faster than Goldstein's PR. So Fitzgerald's coach is better I guess.
You can find individual stories of stud youth runners that didn't turn out, but I would bet if you asked every high school coach, would you rather take your chances with a class of six runners who all broke 5:00 for 1600 in 8th grade or six who are total unknowns, they would all take the six breaking 5:00. That is a once in a life time class.
What’s your point? You forgot Goldstein ran 9:00 and way faster then Fitzgerald in Coss country. So your beef with coach Brosnan is just personal and seems like jealousy.
I started this thread because it seems to be the topic most talked about in regards to Newbury Park and I think it’s interesting. I fall on the side of the kids, but understand others fall on the side of the coach. I was hoping to hear arguments, takes, data that I haven’t heard before. The truth is, it’s really somewhere in the middle and we should be debating percentages.
This topic may hit a bit too close to home for you. It seems you feel any argument on the side of the kids is a personal attack on the coach. Are the opinions on the side of the coach personal attacks on the kids? Do you have some beef with those kids?
The majority of the responses claiming the kids are the reason for the success seem like rational arguments with data. You may not like the argument or think the data isn’t valid, but it’s not an attack on the coach.
Might be a good idea to take a break from the boards if opinions that don’t match yours come across as personal attacks.