Cajun Men Struggle To 4th Place Track Finish

[VObserver]

Yes; some of Tim LeMaire's runners. Competitive in the conference, but even then we lacked depth.

I can remember several years in which we scored more points in the javelin alone than we scored on the track in the conference meet, and those were years we were finishing in the top 3. When you say 'a proud distance program' I think of WKU, FIU or USA in the SBC.

UL had a 'proud javelin tradition' and 'a proud jumpers tradition'. ... events in which it was common for UL to place 4 to 6 performers in the top 8 at the conference meet.

[spearchucker]

We dominated all field events in the early-mid 90's. We scored consistently high #'s of points in the shot and discus; flat-out owned the javelin; with the exception of a here and there (b/c of A-State) we did exceptionally well in the vault; always did well in the LJ; TJ was owned for years; high jump...duh..

Then, at this time, we also dominated the running events as well...heck, in 94 we went 1,2 in the 100, 200, 1, 3, & 4 in the 110's, won the 4 X 100. This dominance began well before then, approximately 1990 and continued from through 1996.

[VObserver]

Which pretty well coincides with what I said. .. Bob Cole's teams were strong everywhere but distance; Charles Lancon continued strong in the field, with a gradual drop-off on the track.

[GetTheFacts1st]

I think Coles runners were evenly balanced and scored more than in the field. I rememer seeing them go 844 in the steeple, 403-405 in the mile, a national runner up there, guys named McDonnald, Hopkins, Nolan et al. 149's in the 800. XC championshiips galore. That would be dominating one would think. Most distance records are those guys'.

The runners of the last 10-15-20 years couldn't even stay with those guys even during warmups......except whitfield.

[GetTheFacts1st]

ALL AMERICANS

Cole Track--- 31
Lancon --- 16
Booth --- 0
Veazey --- 0

Lancon Field--- 12
Cole --- 10
Booth --- 6
Veazey --- 3


Cole Distance--- 5
Lancon --- 0
Booth --- 0
Veazey --- 0

[CajunNation]

Whoever is criticizing our track coach is way off base and must have one heck of an axe to grind.

There is no doubt that the program is on the right track, and it is sure to get a big boost from the new locker room/office building being built.

I see the future of Cajun Track very bright indeed.

[VObserver]

_ Whoever is criticizing our track coach is way off base and must have one heck of an axe to grind.

There is no doubt that the program is on the right track, and it is sure to get a big boost from the new locker room/office building being built.

I see the future of Cajun Track very bright indeed. _

I think Charlie and Pat have done a pretty good job. I agree that it is harder for them [given their background as HS coaches] to recruit high profile kids than it would have been for Boo, had he been hired; but they have done an excellent job of coaching the kids they have, especially in the field events.

[RaginRunner]

_ I am a Boo fan, too; but there is no denying that Charlie and Pat have done a pretty decent job of making the Cajuns competitive. We aren't there yet, but we ARE light years ahead of where we were three years ago.

With Boo, in fairness, you would have had the same thing we have now, except our field event people would have been better, so instead of coming out of the field with 80+ points, we'd have come out with around 100... better, but not earthshattering, and still not much on the track. _

Great point about the field athletes being better, but the track athletes would be better as well. When your at a school like UL, where the athletes' talents are usually marginal, working hard and training is severely important. There isn't enough hard work nor training being done as far as the track events go. All you have to do is stop by one of the practices and you'll see exactly what I mean! The key to UL track being good isn't the kids because there's plenty of talent. The key is working harder than everyone else because we don't have the quality of athletes as other programs. Plain and simple!!!!!!

[VObserver]

_ Great point about the field athletes being better, but the track athletes would be better as well. When your at a school like UL, where the athletes' talents are usually marginal, working hard and training is severely important. There isn't enough hard work nor training being done as far as the track events go. All you have to do is stop by one of the practices and you'll see exactly what I mean! The key to UL track being good isn't the kids because there's plenty of talent. The key is working harder than everyone else because we don't have the quality of athletes as other programs. Plain and simple!!!!!! _

I'm not so sure the track event guys would have been much better. Remember Boo is a jumps coach. I'll give you that it is likely that his long jumpers would have helped out in the sprints. Part of what you say about hard work is true, as well.... BUT the biggest limitation is that a school like UL [and many more prosperous ones as well] does not have the resources necessary to fund 4 highly competent coaches, and it takes at least that number.... Throws, Jumps, Sprints/Hurdles and Distance are all very different animals, and most coaches specialize in one area, or at most two. Given the nature of the athletes in this area that we can likely get to attend UL, having a Jumps/Throws staff makes MUCH more sense than having one that specializes in Sprints/Distance.

Witness our really poor performances under Lance Veazey, a good Sprints/Hurdles coach with no clue about Jumps/Throws/Distance. We had a good flat Jumps coach for a while under Veazey, and it showed, but our throws fell through the floor.

Our athlete base in Louisiana dictates that you MUST concentrate on technique/strength events in order to win consistantly; hence the jumps/vault/throws/hurdles must be the backbone of your team and the focus of your efforts.

[GetTheFacts1st]

The schools that finished ahead of UL at the Sun Belt meet have no more than TWO competent coaches each. I was there in the cold and saw them. Except for the jumps, most of our field points came from athletes coached by volunteers and not by paid coaches. So back to my point about wasted spending and a suggestion that major adjustments still need to be made. For long-term success building, adjustments mean revitalizing a dormant distance program (I'll believe that when I see it) with a long overdue and courageous coaching change there and hiring a paid throws coach who can communicate new-age techniques to today's youth. Stepping outside a tunnel-vision ancient UL family for these will bring added credibility on the recruiting trail and will support building a tradition of athlete development once they arrive. I doubt either will change, however, so let the yawning continue.

[VObserver]

_ The schools that finished ahead of UL at the Sun Belt meet have no more than TWO competent coaches each. I was there in the cold and saw them. Except for the jumps, most of our field points came from athletes coached by volunteers and not by paid coaches. So back to my point about wasted spending and a suggestion that major adjustments still need to be made. For long-term success building, adjustments mean revitalizing a dormant distance program (I'll believe that when I see it) with a long overdue and courageous coaching change there and hiring a paid throws coach who can communicate new-age techniques to today's youth. Stepping outside a tunnel-vision ancient UL family for these will bring added credibility on the recruiting trail and will support building a tradition of athlete development once they arrive. I doubt either will change, however, so let the yawning continue. _

Is Pat not coaching javelin?

[GetTheFacts1st]

OK, you win.

1 Paid field coach = two events
2 Volunteers = ten

Is that a good investment of tax dollars?