lol yes^
lol yes^
let's understand the rules of the game:
1. you sign with a school, not a coach. The paper you sign says that in black and white. If you choose the place because of the coach, then that is your choice, but you've been warned in writing of the rules and the consequences.
2. the transfer rules in ALL sports require you to sit out a year. In football and basketball a student-athlete doesn't have the option of being "released" except in emergency situations.
3. The "release" is actually a 1 time transfer EXCEPTION. Therefore being eligible to compete right away is the EXCEPTION, not the rule. Therefore NOT BEING RELEASED doesn't make the coach or school the bad guy, they are simply following the rules.
Imagine if Duke, or UCONN could simply scour the ALL conference, or ALL tournament lists for the star players on mid majors and fill their rosters with these players in basketball, or LSU and ALABAMA in football. It would be anarchy.
Every kid has every right to seek greener pasteurs. But there is a consequence.
Maine and Montana State busted their butts in recruiting, and developed these kids. If Oklahoma loved them so much, they could have recruited them and matched the scholarships when they were coming out of HS. Or if the kids loved Oklahoma so much they could have called the coach and asked to walk on. Neither of those things happened. Now Maine and MSU have the star that THEY recruited and THEY developled walk away. I tip my hat to those schools for being nice guys and releasing them. But now they are left without their star with only days before school starts. No ability to replace them.
There are rules to the game. You don't like them, then go NAIA, go NJCAA or go PRO. Otherwise, everyone enters the game knowing the rules.
Choosing your school wisely is a BIG RESPONSIBILITY. If you want to CHASE the big scholarship, no problem. But if you don't like it once you're there, just be prepared to sit out a year.
Pat is a great runner and a good person... to argue that he is being "100% self centered" is basically a give away that you don't know him. And Dale Kennedy is the salt of the freaking earth. He would never hold a runner back if they wanted to make a change, for any reason. Dale is in coaching for all of the right reasons, and he is a great role model in life.
He is also an excellent coach. Let us not forget that Pat didn't break 4:20 in high school, but he broke 4:00 after 2.5 years training with Kennedy. A lot of runners who were not recruited by bigger programs have gone close to 4 minutes in Kennedy's program: Mike Fiest, Miguel Galeana, Lyle Weese, Kevin Clary, Ned Miller, to name a few. He has an impressive, sustained record of developing unknown 4:25 milers that no one else recruited.
Best of luck to Pat and Dale... they are both going to keep on doing good things.
compliance wrote:
let's understand the rules of the game:
I think everyone understands the rules. My point is that the rules are unfair.
Athletes are required to be loyal by a punitive rule created by the schools and coaches. Coaches are free to leave whenever they want and immediately coach against their old teams. Schools and coaches are also free to drop athletes from scholarship or a team. The people who create the rules require loyalty from athletes but none from themselves. That's unfair.
from montana wrote:
InWyo wrote:How far did you think Pat could have gotten under Dale Kennedy at Bozeman? I was surprised that he went to Montana in the first place. If you are a X-C skier, go to Bozeman, but a running talent like Pat, you need a better training environment and he needs to be surrounded by some more talent. If I were Kennedy, I would have released him in a heart beat as well.
he wen to montana state because he is from the billings area and he was only a 4:24ish miler in high school
I am aware. I went to college in Montana and actually beat him in a 5k in billings. I think he had to go instate because of relaxed academic requirements for instate vs. out of state students. He had some performances that should have raised a few eyebrows at bigger/better schools (like his simplot games 2 mile race).
What's good for the goose wrote:
I think everyone understands the rules. My point is that the rules are unfair.
Athletes are required to be loyal by a punitive rule created by the schools and coaches. Coaches are free to leave whenever they want and immediately coach against their old teams. Schools and coaches are also free to drop athletes from scholarship or a team. The people who create the rules require loyalty from athletes but none from themselves. That's unfair.
I would not go to a school where a coach has not granted a release, and would seek a written agreement to release prior to signing.
Compliance,
You are right that it would be crazy if the powers could easily scoop up talent from lesser programs, but there are big differences between scholarships for the football and basketball vs track/XC. All football and basketball scholarships are full ride. If a particular person isn't getting a full ride, that's the coach's decision but it still counts as a scholarship. Contrast that with track/xc where coaches have to split 12.6 scholarships among the entire team and you can see that a transfer in track/xc can make a big financial difference for the athlete (not paying vs paying) but for the revenue sport athlete it's financially neutral.
As for Casey and Masters "screwing" their teammates, I think you have it wrong. Neither Montana nor Maine is a powerhouse or a contender for an NCAA spot in XC or the DMR to my knowledge. They may take a few points with them come championship meets, but no team should be relying on one guy to win a meet. They will be improving their own experience much more than they will be harming that of their teammates.
I have met and competed against the Brojos. Everyone knows Rojo is a college coach and most know that their dad held an appointed position under Bush 43. Given the Republican tilt of the site, I'm surprised to see them emphasize the collective over the individual. That's a very Democratic point of view and certainly would not be shared by the current crop of presidential contenders. If everyone maximizes their own well-being without regard for others, the total collective well-being of society also is maximized. Right? Right?
As a Mainer thie points from the brojos annoyed me a bit. This is the very same website that claims US born runners don't have what it takes, yet in the same breath claims trying to be your best is "100% self centered"? Might I also point out that the homepage quote is about Kara Goucher leaving her training program to train with better athletes better coaching etc. and praises her line of thinking...
Give me a break! I don't know much about Casey but in Masters' case he shattered school records ages ago and whilst he owes his coach a big thank you his development will be limited in Orono and heaven forbid he want to go somewhere that would provide training partners that might help him find a podium spot at NCAAs.
We may have a few decent Runners from Maine but most schools out of New England don't recruit based on potential (save for William and Mary and sometimes Stanford based on the success of Lane and Luchini).
Whether they have to sit out a year is somewhat of a non issue (they both might benefit) but to infer or imply that they are being selfish or self centered in wanting to be the best they can be is utterly ridiculous.
I wish both athletes the best of luck in taking their careers to the next level!
InWyo wrote:
How far did you think Pat could have gotten under Dale Kennedy at Bozeman? I was surprised that he went to Montana in the first place. If you are a X-C skier, go to Bozeman, but a running talent like Pat, you need a better training environment and he needs to be surrounded by some more talent. If I were Kennedy, I would have released him in a heart beat as well.
I don't know the sitution involving Casey, but I think Kennedy and Weese have a lot to offer and have done great things with Patrick. I myself went from a 9:35/4:25 3200/1600 HS runner to a 14:01 5k under Kennedy. Bozeman is a great place to train, the winters make you tough and the altitude makes you strong.
Speaking of Luchini, I Googled him after reading this thread just to see what he's up to these days. I was pretty surprised to see this.
He was a 4:17 miler in high schooler. I was in the race he ran that in. he went under 4:20 3 times.
He did have offers to go to other schools, but he wanted to stay in Montana.
It's the Olympic year, and with him only having one more year after this, it is time for him to think about himself. He has little big race experience compared to the guys he will be facing. Oklahoma will give him that chance to mature and tune up his skills.
I've raced Casey since the 7th grade, so 9+ years now, and will be saddened to see him go. But it is for his best. He has a shot of making it pro, and he has to hone and tune his skills. He will be a dangerous professional miler/1500m runner.
Athletes should be able to run for whatever program they want. If you do really well in school and get into Princeton, go there. Don't just go t XXX-State because Princeton already has a bunch of good students. You get a better education at a better academic institution. No one complains about ivy league schools hogging all the brains. If you want to be a better runner, go to a better running program. Deciding on a college is one of the biggest decisions you make in your life (whether you are a runner or not). To make that decision at 17 or 18 is pretty tough. If after a year or 2 you think you have made the wrong choice, why not remedy that mistake.
As for sitting out... if the school is no longer paying you to run for them, they shouldn't have any control over what you can/cannot do. It doesn’t work like that with a real job. Once the paychecks stop coming in, you can go get another job without a waiting period. If they want athletes to sit out, then they should have to pay the transfers tuition at the new school.
then you all should write the NCAA and tell them that you don't want the new legislation that allows for multi year or 4 year scholarships to be signed out of high school. No way you can sign a 4 year scholarship, but then think you can transfer without recourse.
if a kid wants to come to a coach, like an adult, at the very beginning of a school year and inform them that they want to transfer for the following year, then that is fine. but all too often the kids are immature and won't talk to the coach because they are afraid of the reaction. the hide their dissatisfaction. they explore other options secretly and even illegally. their parents explore options outside of the rules.
all the while, the coach is unaware and carrying on with recruiting in a normal fashion. Then at some point, when the kid has secured his future elsewhere, they then approach the coach to ask about a transfer. by that point, it is too late for a coach to do an adequate job of recruiting to replace the student-athlete.
if you want kids to be able to transfer at any time without consequence, then you will also have to allow for the coach to recruit to replace every kid on their roster every year. and you'd be PISSED if the coach called YOU into the office and said "I think you should transfer, because I found a kid as good or better than you who will come here for less money."
there has to be some control over the process.
and while it has been stated that coaches can just cut any scholarship for any reason, that just simply is incorrect. the kid is well protected against such a thing by existing rules and appeals process.
I can't comment on Casey, but in Riley' case he appears to have legitimate reasons for leaving Maine and his coach. Being involved in the track world in Maine, I can tell you that the coach there doesn't recruit. They have/had a sub 4:00 miler and they brought in zero distance recruits this past fall?!?! I know the year before they brought in a number of the top Maine high schoolers for the first time in years, but word is that all of that recruiting was done by an assistant distance coach who got fed up and left. There is a high school kid from a small Maine town who was a Footlocker all-american (first Mainer since Ben True)and it doesn't appear that UMaine even contacted him.
It's also worth noting that UMaine actually had one of their better cross teams in quite awhile (a good showing at their conference meet, I think only a few points out of first?) but then the coach only took Riley to NCAA regionals. I've got to think it finally reached a breaking point with the guy. It's got to be tough going to big meets alone and seeing other programs that are actually teams with a number of guys racing together and supporting each other.
I don't think he's abandoning teammates, as a number of them have left the program in the past year as well, and I believe he was promised a release at anytime he wanted one.
There's always more to any story than you hear, and there might be more to this one too, but I do know not all is well at UMaine for cross and track.
How good could Oklahoma's DMR be?
compliance wrote:if a kid wants to come to a coach, like an adult, at the very beginning of a school year and inform them that they want to transfer for the following year, then that is fine. but all too often the kids are immature and won't talk to the coach because they are afraid of the reaction. the hide their dissatisfaction. they explore other options secretly and even illegally. their parents explore options outside of the rules.
all the while, the coach is unaware and carrying on with recruiting in a normal fashion. Then at some point, when the kid has secured his future elsewhere, they then approach the coach to ask about a transfer. by that point, it is too late for a coach to do an adequate job of recruiting to replace the student-athlete.
Unlike coaches, I suppose, who always tell their athletes that they are looking for a new job, and never "explore other options secretly," and never bail on a program after it's too late for the athletes they recruited to go somewhere else?
Who do you think constantly models exactly the kind of behavior you are condemning? College coaches, that's who.
but the student-athlete, when signing the NLI and scholarship, is not signing an NLI or scholarship to be coached by some one in particular. They are signing a scholarship to be able to attend a University at a discounted rate in exchange for their performance. it says so right on the NLI.
the coach also signs a contract with the school, and they are bound by the terms of that contract. if it includes buyouts or penalties, then the coach has a choice to make when leaving. just as the kid has a choice to make when deciding to transfer.
the coaches don't sign a contract with the kid, and the kid doesn't sign a contract with the coach.
if one purchases a car because of the salesman instead of the quality of the vehicle, then that was an unwise choice.
equating coaches to athletes is not a fair comparison. coaches don't get paid upfront regardless of how they perform. student-athletes do.
compliance wrote:
coaches don't get paid upfront regardless of how they perform. student-athletes do.
Huh?
Here's a great article about Casey from today's Helena (MT) Independent Record. Jesse Zentz, former Big Sky Conference indoor mile champ, is the author. He landed a good interview yesterday with Casey.
A couple of us went on an easy run with him last spring between indoor and outdoor season - a super nice guy.
Jon Biles wrote:
I don't know the sitution involving Casey, but I think Kennedy and Weese have a lot to offer and have done great things with Patrick. I myself went from a 9:35/4:25 3200/1600 HS runner to a 14:01 5k under Kennedy. Bozeman is a great place to train, the winters make you tough and the altitude makes you strong.
Jon makes a good point about Lyle Weese joining the coaching staff at MSU. Weese is a great addition to the staff as a coach. He is also back in serious training, so he clearly can be a great training partner for top collegiate runners.