The hour was hastily approaching midnight, but one of the
world’s fastest men was in no hurry to get to bed. Instead
former UCLA sprinting legend Ato Boldon lounged in a luxurious
office in his native Trinidad, pondering his alma mater’s
19th-place finish at this past month’s NCAA Championships. If
he could offer advice to the world’s top prep sprinters,
would he suggest that they too consider becoming Bruins?
“Honestly I don’t know,” Boldon said after a long
pause. “I would need to be convinced that UCLA’s glory
days were just around the corner, and not some ancient history
likely never to be repeated.” It’s a stinging
indictment of what once was the nation’s premier men’s
sprinting program, but nonetheless a legitimate one. From 1966 to
1996, the Bruins captured seven national championships.
Twenty-fives times during the 30-year time period, UCLA finished in
the top 10 in part thanks to their supremacy in the sprinting
events. But the program last cracked the top 10 in 1998, and since
Boldon graduated in 1996, no male Bruin sprinter or hurdler has
scored a point in an individual event at the NCAA Outdoor
Championships. Exploring what factors caused the sprints to decline
so suddenly provides a glimpse into what it takes to build and
maintain a national caliber squad in men’s track and field.
Furthermore, examining the coaching staff’s efforts to
restore the program’s decaying legacy seems to indicate a new
crop of Bruin sprinters may once again be on the fast track to
success.
A sudden drop off Although Boldon was probably the last
world-class sprinter or hurdler to attend UCLA, the program did not
really begin its slide until after the 1999 season. That year, the
Bruins captured first place in the 4x400m relay at the NCAA Outdoor
Championships, and inked a top five recruiting class. But several
of the gems from that class ““ most notably California state
champion hurdler Trevor Jones and All-American sprinter Warren
Rogers ““ had their collegiate careers end abruptly, stripping
UCLA of two of its most promising young stars. Jones fell victim to
chronic hamstring injuries while Rogers ran into trouble in the
classroom, and was ultimately declared academically ineligible
during his sophomore year. Losing Rogers, an athlete who head coach
Art Venegas once referred to as “one of the most talented
sprinters in the United States,” was particularly crippling.
Rogers ran a 10.34-second 100m and a 20.88-second 200m as a senior
at Los Angeles Junipero Serra High School, and the coaching staff
had anticipated that he would develop into the next great UCLA
sprinter. But after investing a full scholarship in him, they only
had his services for one injury- plagued season before his academic
problems caught up with him. “He was someone coach Venegas
was counting on,” UCLA recruiting director Mike Sondheimer
said. “Losing him hurt a lot.” But given the
Bruins’ track record, the program probably could have endured
without Rogers had it not also lost its long-time sprints and
hurdles coach John Smith the very same year. Widely regarded as the
top sprints coach in the country, Smith had been instrumental in
recruiting and developing future Bruin Olympians like Boldon, Steve
Lewis and Danny Everett, but resigned suddenly in November of 2001
to devote all his coaching efforts to his elite professional
athletes. It was a decision that shocked many within the program,
and left Venegas scrambling to find even a temporary replacement.
“Sometimes a person’s impact is not noticeable until
they’re gone,” Venegas said. “John is a legend in
the sport, and one of the premier coaches in the world. Not having
him anymore was a big loss.” But according to Boldon, who is
part of the stable of sprinters Smith now coaches at the
professional level, it was pressure from within the athletic
department that forced Smith’s sudden resignation.
“There were powers-that-be that were more concerned with what
John was doing with us, his pro track athletes, and how much
publicity he was getting, than what he actually meant to the
program and his performance history,” Boldon said. Smith has
been in Europe coaching since mid-June, and was unavailable for
comment, while Venegas chose not to drudge up the past, stating
only: “Ato is a friend of mine, but his speculation is not of
interest to me.” Regardless of the terms of Smith’s
departure, those close to the team all agree it was devastating for
the program. “What John has done for the UCLA program is
immeasurable,” Boldon said. “He will never be replaced
at that institution.”
Picking up the pieces Lacking sufficient time to conduct a
national search for a new coach, Venegas had little choice but to
settle for what in retrospect looks like more of an interim
solution. He immediately promoted 23-year-old volunteer assistant
coach Derek Loudenback, sacrificing experience for the sake of
continuity. “Derek was just having fun helping out John
Smith, and suddenly he was thrust into the job,” Venegas
said. “He did a wonderful job under the circumstances.”
At the helm of an ailing program barely resembling previous
decades’ talent-laden teams, Loudenback was in an unenviable
position. The loss of Rogers and Jones and a lean recruiting year
in 2001 had left him with a mediocre talent collection, yet he
faced the task of replacing a legend. Predictably the UCLA
sprinters and hurdlers didn’t make a dent at the national
level in Loudenback’s two years on the job. Nonetheless there
were a few bright spots on a smaller scale, most notably sprinter
Mike Lipscomb’s sterling senior year in 2002 and a three-way
Bruin sweep in the 400m hurdles at the NCAA West Regionals in May.
But by and large, Loudenback’s biggest contribution to a
potential UCLA resurgence came on the recruiting trail, where he
took a highly proactive approach. “When Coach Venegas first
took over (in 1999) we thought we could rely on the UCLA name, and
eventually the top-end sprinters would come,” Loudenback
said. “Now we’re a little more determined. We’re
actively searching out the guys that we need to become a powerhouse
again.” The renewed tenacity paid dividends immediately.
Loudenback signed an array of quality sprinters in his first year,
including a pair of state champions ““ Washington’s
Craig Everhart and California’s Matt Bruno. Then in 2003 he
pulled off an even bigger coup, luring Swedish standout Phillip
Nossmy and Texas sprinter Brandon Johnson to Westwood to solidify
the rebuilding process. Securing a commitment from Johnson was
particularly crucial for the program, and not just on account of
his all-world ability. The signing will also help to open a
recruiting pipeline from Westwood to the state of Texas, a national
hotbed for high school track and field and a region dominated
recruiting-wise by the in-state schools. “If Brandon enjoys
his experience, Texas kids might look at us as an option,”
said Venegas, who plans to take his team to the prestigious Texas
Relays next season in part to solidify UCLA’s recruiting ties
to the state. “It’s important that we continue to look
all over the country.” But with only 12.5 available
scholarships, targeting athletes outside California is extremely
difficult for UCLA. While the coaching staff can split scholarships
amongst in-state recruits, those from out of state have to pay
higher fees, and receive only full scholarships. Consequently
signing either an out-of-state or international recruit is quite a
gamble. If UCLA believes opening the doors to Texas is critical to
its resurgence, it can only afford to recruit the best. Turning the
corner? With an updated recruiting philosophy and an influx of
fresh talent, the program seems to be getting back on track, but
questions still abound. UCLA hired former Bruin great Tony Veney as
its new sprints and hurdles coach last month after Loudenback
decided to pursue a career outside of coaching. And while
Veney’s track record is impeccable, whether or not there will
be a smooth handoff remains to be seen. “We think Tony is the
right fit,” Venegas said. “It’s not easy to turn
things around, but we need to take big aggressive steps. We hope
Tony is one of those steps.” But even with a new coach in the
fold, most of the uncertainty centers on the athletes themselves.
The core group of sprinters and hurdlers on next year’s squad
should consist of three returnees: Bruno, Everhart and Jonathan
Williams, and the two newcomers, Johnson and Nossmy. While all five
have the ability to make a mark on the national scene, there are no
guarantees, as UCLA learned first-hand three years ago with Rogers
and Jones. Despite qualifying for the NCAA Outdoor Championships
last season, both Everhart (400m) and Williams (400m hurdles) will
have to shave several 10ths of a second off their personal bests
next season to make more of an impact on the scoreboard in 2004.
Meanwhile, Bruno was hampered by injury all last season, but still
could be one of the best short sprinters on the West Coast if he
can recapture his high school form. But no Bruin is subject to more
questions than Nossmy, who may not ever wear the blue and gold at
all next season. The unofficial junior world record-holder in the
110m hurdles (13.63 seconds), Nossmy could have difficulty
obtaining a visa permitting him to attend college in the United
States due to heightened security in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001
attacks. “We are doing everything we can to get him
here,” Venegas said. “I don’t sweat it. He told
us he wants to come here, and we certainly have a place for him. If
we have to wait until winter quarter starts in January, so be
it.”
A strong foundation Assuming Nossmy finds his way into the
country, the Bruins could be poised to charge to the front of the
collegiate track and field pack once again. But even with
UCLA’s young nucleus in place, the coaching staff is already
looking toward the future. Recognizing the advantages of bringing
in a few sprinters who could attend UCLA on football scholarships,
both Venegas and Veney are working closely with new football coach
Karl Dorrell to recruit athletes who are capable of helping both
programs. “It’s a numbers game,” Venegas said.
“In order to have a balanced program on the track and in the
field, you need a couple football guys. When you only have 12.5
scholarships, not having a football guy count against that is
huge.” It’s a luxury that UCLA did not have during Bob
Toledo’s seven years as UCLA football coach. While many other
national powers supplemented their rosters with a speedy wide
receiver or defensive back, Toledo preferred his premier athletes
to attend spring practice, allowing only his less heralded players
to participate in a second sport. Dorrell, on the other hand, has
met with Venegas multiple times about potential recruits, and the
pair has already secured a pair of two-sport sprinters ““ Long
Beach Poly’s Rodney Van and Anaheim Servite’s Matt
Slater ““ who should provide Veney with great depth in the
future. Venegas and Dorrell are still trying to get a commitment
from Florida’s Xavier Carter, perhaps the top wide receiver
in next year’s senior class and one of the best young
sprinters in the nation. Carter made an unofficial visit to UCLA in
April after running in the Arcadia Invitational, but is still
weighing his options. Adding a premier talent like Carter to next
year’s collection of talent would hasten the sprinting
revival in Westwood, and force UCLA’s high profile alumni
““ like Boldon ““ not to be so impetuous with their
criticism of their alma mater. “We are asking our alumni to
be patient,” Venegas said. “It’s going to take
time to build this program back to greatness.” Greatness may
be a few years away, but respectability ““ that’s
already here.