Wetmore makes me sick

growapair wrote:

Turns out your hard earned tax dollars ARE being used for the development of foreign talent afterall! In fact, the insidious bastards have spread this policy throughout almost every department on campus including: Chemistry, Math, Engineering, Biochemistry, Phisology, Physics....The list goes on and on!!! All over campus foreign talent is being recruited, nutured, developed and all at YOUR expense!! They are receiving private research grants (though as you have so eloquently pointed out these foundations are, at least in part, subsidized by tax deductable donations from persons such as yourself), federal and state research grants, scholarships, internships, research assistantships, teaching assistanships, housing stipends....And ALL of this money could be going to less qualified American students if we can only get the word out!

Hey, growabrain, for you to insinuate that I, in no way, support grants for foreign STUDENTS who make massive contributions in the way of cultivating new technology, boosting productivity, and creating jobs shows what a dipshit you are. Nice attempt at the bait and switch. And you think you are so clever. Foreign athletes leave nothing near the legacy of foreign academicians and students. Why don't you stay on topic, disingenuous asshole? Certainly you can be more creative than this, since you have demonstrated what a brilliant debater and tax guru you are.

Overreaction - this flocast is not the only reason people come to that conclusion. What got me was that he claims to build from the ground up while people coaching foreign athletes are not. Wetmore has no clue about this as he sits in one of the most famous distance running towns in the US that recruits itself. I know that he says he has been fortunate or lucky or whatever he said. He has been but he acts as if no one is developing athletes like he is. I happen to disagree. He is a great coach in a great place to coach and has had success. There are many other great coaches that have not been as fortunate as he has been by where they coach or who they coach. There are great DI, DII, DIII, NAIA, high school and post-collegiate. I just think Wetmore thinks that he is more than he really is. Here is a very important question - would this conversation be happening if Mark Wetmore were still at Seton Hall? No, it would not because except for a few guys from Jersey, no one would know who Mark Wetmore was even though he is and still would be a great coach.

It just seems to me that Mark Wetmore tried to make himself bigger than his athletes. They would be successful if they were at Wisconsin, Oregon, UCLA, Portland State or a number of other programs.

GB, do not assume that every foreign athlete (or even the majority) come here running sub 14, sub 3:45. Some coaches try to level the playing field when it is not possible to recruit the quality that Wetmore has. Why are you so angry and bitter in every post? Don't say that you are not because a constant use of "idiot", "moron", etc. shows it in your last bunch of posts.

Is it because you continue to have no argument. You just want people to give scholarships to Americans. Ok, I got that. You think (very incorrectly I may add) that foreign athletes hurt American distance running.

I appreciate the response. Although I agree with what you said about coaching at CU, from what I've read about him (or listened to on flocast) I haven't seen that arrogant or whiny side of Wetmore.

Ha ha wrote:

GB, do not assume that every foreign athlete (or even the majority) come here running sub 14, sub 3:45. Some coaches try to level the playing field when it is not possible to recruit the quality that Wetmore has. Why are you so angry and bitter in every post? Don't say that you are not because a constant use of "idiot", "moron", etc. shows it in your last bunch of posts.

I'm not bitter in every post, but when some fukkhead like growabrain comes on here condescending by hurling insults INITIALLY while trying to make shallow, disingenuous points that are easily dissected, I'm going to react.

Yes, I do indeed want more coaches to give ATHLETIC scholarships to American kids, but I am glad that we give monies to develop international intellectual talent as well, particularly when it contributes to the well-being of the American economy, which, by and large, foreign athletes do not. Sure, they make anecdotal contributions, but nothing on the scale of some Indian engineer, for example.

For those of you who don't feel like reading 10 pages of garbage, let's recap the argument.

- Flocast interviews Mark Wetmore for probably 2 hours.

- They put up a couple minute sound byte that seems like an interesting story.

- In the clip Wetmore states his opinion and an explanation that he believes in making up his team with American talent. He gives his idea of a respectful coaching style. (i.e.

- People watch the clip and become offended that he recruits Americans only and comes off as whiny.

- Somebody is so offended that they start a thread saying "Wetmore makes me sick".

At this juncture it is important to state the definition of whining.

whining- to snivel or complain in a peevish, self-pitying way.

To me, the only "whining" that occurred was "Wetmore makes me sick"

Wetmore was in no way self-pitying or complaining. He was explaining how he coaches HIS team. There are plenty of programs that recruit and use foreign talent, but CU is not one of them. I can almost guarantee you one thing: All coaches would recruit American talent if they could get it. Do you really think that Mick Byrne (Iona) or Ray Treacy (Providence) or Bob Braman (Florida State) or Joe Walker (Alabama) got into college coaching so they could recruit and coach foreigners? NO

But schools like Oregon, CU, Wisconsin get a lot of the top talent. I guarantee you that any one of the above coached would gladly take the athletes on CU's roster, but they can't get them! The fact is there will always be international athletes in the NCAA, but not at CU.

Now comes the 'well good coaches should be able to turn 4.20/9.30 high school runners into great collegians.' While this may be true for some, even a great percentage of Footlocker Finalist disappear in college. So look back and see how Wetmore takes top high school kids and makes them into top college kids. That is incredibly harder to do than you might think. He also has coached the other end of the spectrum by getting a lot out of guys who were 4.20/9.30 guys and making them into great runners.

As for the argument about funding international students to do research at American universities, it is apples to oranges. The scientists who do the research are doing it for a university (yes this part is similar to kids running for a university) And when discoveries or breakthroughs are made it is headlined by the university's name (i.e. 'Research at Cal Tech shows...', 'A new study at M.I.T. found that...' etc.) This is a different case because science is an international field of study; The NCAA is an American institution that is not necessarily contributing to the progress of a cooperative global advancement of knowledge.

Finally I wish most of you saw the hypocrisy in your feelings. Why was there so much excitement when Ryan Hall broke the American Record for the half-marathon? Why was there so much excitement when Shalane Flanagan broke the American record? Because it's exciting to see AMERICANS competing on the world level. Well, without coaches who were dedicated to developing American talent (Shalane was not a superstar in high school and Hall sat out a year at Stanford) these people might not have believed they could compete with the Africans. It takes a coach that believes Americans are can compete on a world level for an athlete to believe it.

Ha ha wrote:

It just seems to me that Mark Wetmore tried to make himself bigger than his athletes. They would be successful if they were at Wisconsin, Oregon, UCLA, Portland State or a number of other programs.

The guy wears jeans and a 2 dollar flannel shirt around, how is he making himself out to be "bigger than his athletes?

He seems like a pretty humble guy actually to me, but it is possible that you just don't like his style or his aura which is not his, but your own fault for misinterpretting him based on things like flocsts.

Ha ha wrote:

They would be successful if they were at Wisconsin, Oregon, UCLA, Portland State or a number of other programs.

But they're not at those other places because they WANT to be coached by Wetmore. It is THEIR talent and I'm sure they felt like CU and Mark Wetmore were the best way to make them better. Do you think that so many amazing kids would continue to go there if Wetmore was arrogant, whiny, took credit for their exploits, and was the person you think he is?

Do you think that so many amazing kids would continue to go there if Wetmore was arrogant, whiny, took credit for their exploits, and was the person you think he is?

Yes, they do. It is a great place to train and Wetmore is a very good coach. Wetmore says he build kids from the ground up. He has but so has many other coaches. The kids he gets now are GREAT when they get there. That is arrogant to think that HE is building them up when they are already very good. That is placing more of the reason they are great on him than on the kids. If you don't think that is arrogant then taht is fine. I do. That is taking credit for something that is not really the reason. Many coaches do this. Maybe it is an insecurity and they want to feel more responsible for success than they really are.

One more thing - when someone takes a 9:20 kid out of Colorado, please remember that the race was likely run in Colorado Spring, Denver or some other place at high altitude. Those times would be a lot faster if they were run in Cali.

I think I am done with this argument. We can agree to disagree and not consistently call people idiot. We are changing no minds here and some people no matter what they learn will never accept foreign athletes into the NCAA system. I think it is a shame. I guess I am very adament about it because I had foreign teammates in college. Before that I thought the same thing about foreign athletes. I think that unless you truly humanize them you will never understand. When you have them as teammates you realize that they are usually kicking butt in school as well as teaching their teammates what hard work on the track is. They are usually good or usually become good for the same reasons some Americans become good - they work hard. Just like Americans - some work hard, some don't.

At the school I went to in undergrad I can tell you that even with Mark Wetmore our team would not have been good. The school does not attract great distance runners. I can also tell you that our coach was very good. Wetmore, like many coaches, makes people better. He cannot make people that do not have talent all of a sudden turn great.

Ok, far too long already. Have a great day - even you GB!

Ha ha, I don't really know what your issue is with me, unless you are also posting under growabrain. Have I attacked you personally in some way? I actually think you make a good argument here, but you overstate the degree to which Wetmore has all of the circumstances in place, under which no coach could possibly fail.

Is Boulder a distance running mecca? Yes, but CU sucked at cross country prior to Wetmore's arrival. Quiller couldn't get it done, Troy couldn't get it done, and I can't remember some of the other guys. The fact that it's Boulder does not make it a slam dunk that you will have success. Palo Alto was also a very good place to train with almost ideal conditions, and name me one kid that wouldn't want the Stanford pedigree over CU or Oregon. But, Lananna brought distance success there, despite this favorable backdrop.

Yes, Wetmore does get some 9:20 kids from altitude like Vaughn, Harkrader, Schoolmeester, etc. But VERY few kids run 9:20 in Colorado. It's not like 10 kids run that time every year. Back when I was running, 9:30 would win the state meet, and 9:40 would score. But I do think that a 9:30 kid at altitude is about the best kept secret, because they are 9:10 kids at low altitude in disguise.

Wetmore does have an advantage NOW, because he has BUILT a reputation. No, he would not have as much success at Seton Hall (can't imagine anyone would want to go to school in New jersey, much less live there), but, on the other hand, kids, by and large, would much rather get an Ivy league degree at the likes of a Stanford, or Dartmouth, or CAL. Boulder is a great place to train no doubt, but the fact that Wetmore has consistent success and WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS with only AMERICANS adds to his mystique. That alone, would sell me, as a top prep athlete, on just about any program, except for a school in New jersey :)

Golden Buffalo wrote:

But, Lananna brought distance success there, despite this favorable backdrop.

What I meant to say was that no one, prior to Lananna had great success at Stanford, even given its reputation.

I have to admit I appreciate Wetmore's championships with US kids. I don't think his analogy is all that great, but on the other hand, he has stated in other interviews that he's lucky to have the talent he has - he has said he'd cut himself if he were to come out for his team. It didn't sound all that whiny.

hey,

where is this video..?

i cant find it..

on the homepage i see a mark plaatjes video only

you cna see the other videos of mark wetmore too from this page.

Dear Mr. Golden Buffalo --

Hello. I have a few things to point ot with your statements, sir.

- Your 9:20 Colorado boys were really as follows -- Harkrader was a footlocker finalist, Vaughn ran 8:48 for 3200 and Schoolmeester was a footlocker finalist. Non of those work for the 9:20 example, though it was a good attempt at the thing they call deception.

- Mr. Wetmore 'built' his current reputation through a book that has generated a cult-like following of the school.

- It shouldn't matter what the nationality of the runners on a team are. When you state that Wetmore using explicitly Americans would sell you on the school, you are just telling us that you are racially prejudice toward some people. And don't try to say it's not that, because that is what racial prejudice is, an attitude or belief toward a person or group of people that is tied to an over-generalized belief. Your over-generalized belief being that no foreigners, who run in the NCAA, stick around to help society. Granted these are just your words so far, not action so by defintion you are not, yet, a racist. Lucky you.

-The point that people keep bringing up about Wetmore being arrogant... I would agree with. Having met the man, myth and ledgend I would say he is arrogant and a... not-so nice person. But that's just based on how he treats me and my coaches. I don't really like how he condescends runners and coaches. He treats you as if you should be honored to be in his presence.

This arrogance sadly rubs off on some of the athletes too. They act like others are priviledged to be around them...

-In closing, Wetmore is a great coach who is somewhat over-hyped because of a book that was written almost a decade ago. He knows he's a great coach and will tell you about it and his athletes will agree and argue on his behalf. Colorado is one of the top 5 most talented team based on their current roster in the NCAA, for XC. And GB will soon be calling me an idiot...

)))))))) Mark Wetmore is still one of the very few elite coaches who has WON the NCAA XC championship with nothing but American distance runners, many of whom were Colorado kids. And as for the idiot comment, nice attempt to elevate your own importance at my expense through diversion, but the FACT is that I have only hurled expletive insults at "growabrain," because of his rudimentary atttempt to condescend to me initially, followed by his use of the terms idiot and moron, which were completely unnecessary, by the way. Enjoy.

the colour yellow wrote:

Your over-generalized belief being that no foreigners, who run in the NCAA, stick around to help society. Granted these are just your words so far, not action so by defintion you are not, yet, a racist. Lucky you.

By the way, this is so totally and utterly false, that I'm not quite sure how to respond. Where did I ever say that NO foreign athletes make a contribution to American society after they are done? I simply said that international students that come on academic scholarships (which I am FULLY in support of) make a far greater contribution than athletes. Man, where did you get your debating skills?

Look, my goal on here is not to get people to like me. Nor is it to try to convince anyone that Wetmore isn't arrogant or a whiner. Nor is it to convince anyone that he is the greatest coach that ever lived. I actually find many of the contrarian views on here nothing if not interesting. But what MOST of you lack is the benefit of having grwon up competing among the top high school runners in Colorado like I did. Back in the mid to late 80s, as a 9:30-something runner (which would just about win state in those days), you would not consider going to CU unless you had undying loyalty toward the school since you were a kid, like I did. Why? Because it was a place to go get destroyed as a distance runner. The only runner of that era who I can remember (he was a few years ahead of me), was Chuck Trujillo, who posted some stellar times but then got a series of injuries he could not overcome. Not until Wetmore arrived, did the program start to develop into a nationally competitive program. Sure, Boulder was a distance mecca, but Adams St. did a much better job of developing distance talent than CU prior to Wetmore's arrival. Now Wetmore has enjoyed so much success that he practically has kids beating on his door to get a chance, and he simply doesn't have the time or inclination to give them his ear. Why carry out an utterly useless conversation with a potential recruit that has no chance of running for CU? It is a waste of Wetmore and the athlete's time.

As for all of these jaded attempts to reduce this to a racial argument with names like "the colour yellow," they are shallow and misguided. Many of us who respect Wetmore for his commitment to American athletes have a great deal of respect for the accomplishments of international athletes. I have a great friend to this day from Lebanon who competed in the US and was trying for the Lebanese national marathon record at one point. And, yes, I have learned a great deal from him. I also hope we continue to underwrite education of scientists and engineers from overseas who would enhance our economic and technological endeavors. But I very much stand by my support of American distance runners. Collegiate running is the best development pool we have at this time, since our government doesn't support gifted athletes as many of the European atletic commissions do.

Speaking of trying to make shallow, disingenuous points that are easily dissected:

Golden Buffalo said:

"Again, how many top American runners are offered scholarship money to universities overseas? It's slim pickings, trust me."

This "point" is irrelevant and totally off-base. At overseas universities, athletics are not regularly affiliated in any way with universities. Runners in Europe (with minor exceptions in the UK) do not run for their university, but for their club. Rarely do they receive money to run for their club. It wouldn't make any sense for a European university to recruit American runners to run for their "team" BECAUSE NO SUCH TEAM EXISTS!

Yes, I understand this, but did I not just say that the governments, particularly in Europe, do a good job of subsidizing development programs for athletes, for which we have no real counterpart in the US, save for collegiate athletic scholarships? Back when I was referring to scholarships overseas MANY pages ago, I was trying to make a POINT. Me thinks that you are one of these other posters that I replied to recently posting under a diferent name since you felt the need to go back about five pages to pull out something utterly worthless to make a frivolous point.

logician wrote:

I can almost guarantee you one thing: All coaches would recruit American talent if they could get it. Do you really think that Mick Byrne (Iona) or Ray Treacy (Providence) or Bob Braman (Florida State) or Joe Walker (Alabama) got into college coaching so they could recruit and coach foreigners? NO

Yeah, I'm sure that Mick Byrne and Ray Treacy think that it is a really bad thing to be coaching foreigners. After all, they both came to the U.S. as foreign college athletes, and look at what a disaster that has been for them and for their college programs. Furthermore, I'm sure that when Kim Smith went to the Olympics in 2004, Treacy thought, "I sure didn't get into college coaching so that I could coach some foreigner."