2012 Olympics: Swimming

Phelps as anchor? Going into the relay, all you knew is that he died in the 400 IM and swam slower than he did at Trials, and you're going to have him anchor? I'm glad Phelps split well, but that's pure hindsight. Don't sell Agnel's split too short, a 46.7 in jammers isn't all that much slower than Lezak's split in a full-body cheating suit. It was a risky move that backfired, complicated by the fact that Troy is the head US coach. Hindsight is wonderful, but everyone here acting like they know so much more than some of the best coaches in the world is just plain ridiculous, and a little sad. All we need is some belching and beer to complete the picture. Having Grevers on the relay would almost certainly not made any difference. On paper the Australians should have crushed everybody, but relays have their own magic. Sheesh, the French swam a great relay -- and so did the US by the way -- time to give them credit rather than just bash a coaching decision. You can’t say that Greevers wouldn’t have made a difference. It’s not like Agnel was going to split a 46.74 automatically no matter what the situation was. France’s 3rd leg was closing on Jones in the end and Angel knew he was faster than Lochte so he had to be very confident going in. Before the relay I thought that Greevers should have replaced Cullen Jones and I still think that we would have had a better shot at winning even though Cullen split a 47.60. Greevers could have gone faster in the finals with a more aggressive relay exchange than prelims and the adrenaline of finals. If Lochte had a bigger lead going in then maybe Agnel takes his first 50 out too fast and doesn’t have enough to close in the end. Lochte knew he was 2nd and drifted into the wall a little so he was actually a little faster than 47.74. The outcome depends on the situation. You can’t tell me that the rest of Australia’s relay wasn’t affected mentally by Magnussen’s led off. They must have been shocked and I believe it affected everyone’s swims on that team after seeing that which is why they missed the podium completely. It’s wrong to say the coaches made a mistake but it’s also wrong to say that Greevers wouldn’t have made a difference. You have to admit, this relay team might not have been the best 4. But you can’t criticize the coaches decision because the fact is, we will never know what could have been. It could have been better. It could have been worse. Who knows? Would Jason Lezak have split a 46.06 in Beijing if the French weren’t talking trash and Phelps wasn’t going for 8 golds? Probably not. Like I said before, it’s all situational. I agree with Chris though, the French out raced the US and you have to give them credit. They deserve it.

Phelps as anchor? Going into the relay, all you knew is that he died in the 400 IM and swam slower than he did at Trials, and you're going to have him anchor? I'm glad Phelps split well, but that's pure hindsight. Don't sell Agnel's split too short, a 46.7 in jammers isn't all that much slower than Lezak's split in a full-body cheating suit. It was a risky move that backfired, complicated by the fact that Troy is the head US coach. Hindsight is wonderful, but everyone here acting like they know so much more than some of the best coaches in the world is just plain ridiculous, and a little sad. All we need is some belching and beer to complete the picture. Having Grevers on the relay would almost certainly not made any difference. On paper the Australians should have crushed everybody, but relays have their own magic. Sheesh, the French swam a great relay -- and so did the US by the way -- time to give them credit rather than just bash a coaching decision. You can’t say that Greevers wouldn’t have made a difference. It’s not like Agnel was going to split a 46.74 automatically no matter what the situation was. France’s 3rd leg was closing on Jones in the end and Angel knew he was faster than Lochte so he had to be very confident going in. Before the relay I thought that Greevers should have replaced Cullen Jones and I still think that we would have had a better shot at winning even though Cullen split a 47.60. Greevers could have gone faster in the finals with a more aggressive relay exchange than prelims and the adrenaline of finals. If Lochte had a bigger lead going in then maybe Agnel takes his first 50 out too fast and doesn’t have enough to close in the end. Lochte knew he was 2nd and drifted into the wall a little so he was actually a little faster than 47.74. The outcome depends on the situation. You can’t tell me that the rest of Australia’s relay wasn’t affected mentally by Magnussen’s led off. They must have been shocked and I believe it affected everyone’s swims on that team after seeing that which is why they missed the podium completely. It’s wrong to say the coaches made a mistake but it’s also wrong to say that Greevers wouldn’t have made a difference. You have to admit, this relay team might not have been the best 4. But you can’t criticize the coaches decision because the fact is, we will never know what could have been. It could have been better. It could have been worse. Who knows? Would Jason Lezak have split a 46.06 in Beijing if the French weren’t talking trash and Phelps wasn’t going for 8 golds? Probably not. Like I said before, it’s all situational. I agree with Chris though, the French out raced the US and you have to give them credit. They deserve it.