Is U.S. distance running being stunted by scholarships going to foreign athletes?

Always a touchy subject on here. I don't know if any Oly athletes are going to be denied due to foreign athletes taking scholarship money, however, I do think it's bad for the sport and hurts participation.

My personal experience was this: There were two guys on my team that went to run div1. Seeing them come back, with all their college gear and such was a huge motovation to the rest of us. Most of us had very little, if any, dealings with college. I don't know if anyone of my team mates or me had parents with a college degree. Seeing those guys "make it' was BIG.

When it's perceived that XC & track are sports that only foreign athletes excel in, then US kids turn to other things. When it comes time to cut a sport and the local college team is mostly foreign it becomes every more easy to cut. Cut enough mid-level college programs and you begin to choke the sport out.

While it might not be the deathnell- it ain't helping.

The answer is yes. I have seen my fair share of 9:20-9:45 2 miles turn into some really good distance runners, in fact even make some Olympic trials. Some people develop alot later or didn't take it as serious in high school but were still very talented runners.

So yes it does hurt but what can you do about it?

Speaking from personal experience, I ran a hair under 9:34 for the 3200 in high school at an elevation of 5300 feet above sea level after running only two days a week the summer before my senior year (I was a late bloomer who didn't run at all until junior year in track). I don't know what that's worth as far as a conversion to sea level(a general rule of thumb is 2 seconds for every minute), but I know it's worth something, because I have yet to see a high altitude guy go to sea level and not improve his PR drastically.

So what's my point? I attracted a scant level of interest from some Rocky Mountain schools, but no $$$ to speak of. So when I walked on in college, I was not on the coach's radar screen. I was, unbeknownst to me, anemic all through college and my performances suffered. No one cared because they had no vested interest in me. After college, I finally found out that my serum ferritin was ridiculously low, so I started supplementing with iron and training HARD to "make up" for lost time. In the end, I got myself into 29:30 shape for 10k, but sustained a career ending injury because of my haste and disdain for coaches. So, the moral of my story I guess is that I may have benefited from a scholarship given to someone else (the schools that showed interest but offered no $$$ had accomplished foreign athletes) if for no other reason than the coach would have had an investment in me to figure out what was wrong, get it corrected, and develop me correctly.

I seriously doubt I would have ever been an internationally competitive athlete (I lacked raw footspeed), but if I was able to run a 9:15ish sea level 3200 on the scant level of training I actually did in high school , I would think I had some potential. I don't know that US distance running is being "stunted" by the international competition for domestic scholarships, but mine is an anecdotal story where it may have played a role.

You have seen your share of 9:20-9:45 2 milers turn into really good distance runners. OK, then how does that hurt the sport with foreign athletes. Would they have been better if foreign athletes were not there? I doubt it. Foreign athletes only help the sport and the experience of the athletes on their team. Sorry to all of the 10 minute 3200m runners that think that they deserve money. I know people develop at different times. That still does not warrant a 10 min 3200m guy getting a scholarship. Competition makes competitive people better. If you are not competitive then you would never be that good anyway!!

Ziggy Zaggy wrote:

Sorry to all of the 10 minute 3200m runners that think that they deserve money. I know people develop at different times. That still does not warrant a 10 min 3200m guy getting a scholarship.

I don't think that is entirely the point. I think the colleges have some responsibility to help grow the sport. I know others will say the coach is only there to win championships. But if the sport continues to die in the US then we'll never be competative. Remember you have to at least get them running before they win Boston.

How bad off would we be today if Ritz, Goucher, Webb, etc.. decided to play soccer or stick with swimming? Or worse yet- become do nothing skateboarders??

The US needs to develop a HUGE base of runners before it can get back to international respectibility. Developing more underdeveloped HSers is better than chasing them off.

not impressed with u of o wrote:

And yes, restricting athletic scholarships to those born in the United States would be a form of discrimination.

How is this discrimination?

right on.If there were more foreigners, the best americans would get better comp. We need more schools like Iona to beat Oregon and Stanford. And fire up Colorado and Wisco.

trollism wrote:

There aren't that many foreign athletes in the NCAA that any American with a bit of talent can't get a scholoship.

I would imagine not that many future Olympians are missing out because of a foreign athletes.

no. I ran against many fine foreigners in the NAIA back int the 70s, and the competition helped me to 'raise my game' to a higher level. I was a walk on who eventually got tuition and books; but that was it. The desire has to be there, from the heart, scholarship or no scholarship.

The sport is not dying from a participation standpoint so there is no worry on that. It is dying because USATF absolutely sucks. Back to the original point - coaches bringing in foreign athletes does not hurt the sport. They do it in swimming and the US is the best swimming country in the world. It is the nature of people to find an excuse as to why they were not a better runner. I didn't have an opportunity because of foreign athletes is an excuse that only someone that would not be successful anyway would bring.

Wild Oscar wrote:

"Why do people on this board have to be so freaking rude?"

Because you are using the handle Oscar Wilde.

They can make our sport a foreign only sport all they want, jut the next time a school gives the XC team and men's track the ax, don't look for much sympathy.

Now my REAL feeling about sports is that the US should adopt the European model and not even tie the sports to the schools. Adopt the club system and you open up the sport to many more athletes, foreign and domestic.

ForestGump71 wrote:

Wild Oscar wrote:

"Why do people on this board have to be so freaking rude?"

Because you are using the handle Oscar Wilde.

So what's your point?

In truth foreign athletes are actually much more expensive than that of domestic athletes. How many Kenyans do you think come on part scholarship?

Giving more money to domestic athletes would simply water down the talent pool.

And the US system is NOT working for international athletes. How many kenyans and ethiopian NCAA students are medalling at major championships for their country?... not many... Off the top of my head Lagat and Meb come to mind as the most recent successful post grad distance athletes.

Also it seems like its a gamble picking up kenyans, you never really know if you are getting the star athlete you expected.

yeah, but even their 2nd tier guys are 4:07 milers or 14:10 5k guys...

And your point is? The ncaa still isnt developing these athletes into world class competitors... and I would have to assume that their second tier athletes are faster than that

I realize it is a tight race this week, but can I get a second on dumb thread of the week?

I think when you don't develop everyone as much as you can, you bring the whole community down. So, yeah, I think that helping the 9:45 3200 get to 9:00 min would help. He'll never be an Olympian, but he certainly pushed the 8:50 guys who pushed the 8:40 guys, and so on.