CU investigation finds body composition testing negatively impacted a "significant number" of athletes but Wetmore keeps his job

Elite wrote:

Wise Old Man wrote:

Being held accountable and setting goals, expectations and demanding excellence does not equal a toxic environment. You can have a rigorous program, but one that is supportive. Being supportive doesn’t mean anything goes. I don’t know what really goes on at CU, but I’m saying that you can have an accomplished program that few or none would accuse of being toxic. It’s possible and should be the goal.

Every competitive XC program is going to have someone say it is a toxic environment. When only 7 make the squad to win a National Championship and there are 10-20 others who want their spot, guess what happens? When Henes decides to run certain girls at Regionals and different girls at Nationals, do you really think the girls left off that team are happy? Don't be so naive to think all the other athletes are just happy to be cheerleaders.

Wise Old Man wrote:

I just read the report. It is very damning. Honestly, the reporting in RW is not the issue, it is the report itself.

This is from the executive summary:

"3. The Inquiry Team developed substantial information to conclude that for a significant
number of student-athletes who participated in this process, the CU Boulder T&F/CC
program had an unhealthy environment. The student-athletes (primarily from the women’s
team) who reported an unhealthy environment identified the following conditions as contributing to the team’s culture: cliquish, sink or swim, cutthroat, where student-athletes were pitted against each other, emotionally damaging, a meat grinder, isolated, with no sense of community and very little mentoring or support. This unhealthy environment contributed to an overall poor experience for approximately half of the members of the women’s team who participated in this
inquiry."

In defense of the coaches, it is clear that the witness list is NOT a truly representative sample, but basically based on connections to connections from witness #1. So hard to know what to make of it all, but if you read the report it is pretty awful and I cannot imagine this report will not have a chilling effect for athletes and parents considering CU in the near future, especially the women.

Fast_rabbit wrote:

Buffalo soldier wrote:

The sample was NOT representative of the body. The young lady that complained essentially hand picked a small group of women that had complaints about the coaches. Imagine they did it the other way - picked a group out of people that had no complaints. If they went through every woman that ran for CU and only picked supporters of the coaches then it would have been more representative than this small group of complainers.

in the end, a female distance runner is THE most dangerous athlete to coach. They have the highest rate of mental disorders and are the biggest risk to any coaches career. They tend to think of themselves as heroes when they attack coaches.

You clearly don’t understand how women are treated if you say “a female distance runner is THE most dangerous athlete to coach”. You have it backwards. The coaches are not at risk of the female athlete if the athlete is treated with respect - the athlete herself is always at risk of being mistreated. It is so frustrating to be treated differently than male colleagues doing the exact same thing or worse and still being treated as less than just because you are a woman. And this doesn’t just go for sports, it goes on everywhere. So, when your sport is something you care about and get joy out of, it is infuriating to deal with the same sexism in something that is supposed to bring strength.

Fast_rabbit wrote:

You clearly don’t understand how women are treated if you say “a female distance runner is THE most dangerous athlete to coach”. You have it backwards. The coaches are not at risk of the female athlete if the athlete is treated with respect - the athlete herself is always at risk of being mistreated. It is so frustrating to be treated differently than male colleagues doing the exact same thing or worse and still being treated as less than just because you are a woman. And this doesn’t just go for sports, it goes on everywhere. So, when your sport is something you care about and get joy out of, it is infuriating to deal with the same sexism in something that is supposed to bring strength.

I know this reply won’t fix your mind or how you think, as I believe you are beyond repair if you truly believe a mistreated woman is at fault here, but hopefully this gives you some perspective before you decide to share your opinions on things you know nothing about.

Elite wrote:

Here's what I don't understand: Kids go to CU, Oregon, Stanford, NAU, etc. because the goal is to become an elite athlete with Olympic aspirations. To get there, they have to be dialed into everything. Body composition is a massive part of this, and that doesn't mean being "skinny". As someone mentioned earlier about the 330 pound lineman, how is that different from telling the distance runner that they need to work on their body composition?

Don't tell me body weight isn't an important part of being an elite athlete. When you have bloody papers on tracks because the Norwegians prick their ears for every workout, that tells you that the details matter. If an athlete can't handle that, then there are a million other schools they can attend where being a top level distance runner isn't the most important thing. They can also join running clubs if they want to keep going. Not everyone is cut out to be an elite runner, so parents and their kids need to make the right choice and not ruin things for the ones who know what they want and know what they are getting into.

Fast_rabbit wrote:

Buffalo soldier wrote:

The sample was NOT representative of the body. The young lady that complained essentially hand picked a small group of women that had complaints about the coaches. Imagine they did it the other way - picked a group out of people that had no complaints. If they went through every woman that ran for CU and only picked supporters of the coaches then it would have been more representative than this small group of complainers.

in the end, a female distance runner is THE most dangerous athlete to coach. They have the highest rate of mental disorders and are the biggest risk to any coaches career. They tend to think of themselves as heroes when they attack coaches.

You clearly don’t understand how women are treated if you say “a female distance runner is THE most dangerous athlete to coach”. You have it backwards. The coaches are not at risk of the female athlete if the athlete is treated with respect - the athlete herself is always at risk of being mistreated. It is so frustrating to be treated differently than male colleagues doing the exact same thing or worse and still being treated as less than just because you are a woman. And this doesn’t just go for sports, it goes on everywhere. So, when your sport is something you care about and get joy out of, it is infuriating to deal with the same sexism in something that is supposed to bring strength.

I know this reply won’t fix your mind or how you think, as I believe you are beyond repair if you truly believe a mistreated woman is at fault here, but hopefully this gives you some perspective before you decide to share your opinions on things you know nothing about.

First Post Here wrote:

This is my first post in the thread, but I have read through and kind of agree with "Elite" that most high-level programs are going to have at least one or two athletes that feel it is toxic. It doesn't mean it is toxic, mind you, but that they feel out of place or uncomfortable in the group.

I ran for a high-level program in the late 90s and remember feeling VERY out of place my freshman year of XC. I didn't have any close friends on the team yet, the training was much harder than anything I'd done in HS, and the older guys were still trying to figure out which younger guys were going to stick around for the long haul. It wasn't that anyone was mean, but that people were not overly friendly like they might be at a youth group or fraternity. It wasn't until late in the season that I really felt included on the team. By that time, I had run in the top 7 for a few meets (did not run conference that year) and was contributing to workouts. I had proven myself as a team member and worker. Guess what? 2 guys from my recruiting class left the team that year. Not for social reasons or because it was toxic, but because they realized they didn't want to run in college. One was injury prone and decided it was time to move on. The other just wanted to do other things like join a frat. No one was angry, but that is common with young runners and sometimes a few months of "getting to know" each other is needed at the higher level programs to figure out who is going to stick around, who is going to contribute, who is going to leave...

As I got older and took on a leadership roll, I was always working with younger guys who had problems or complaints with the program. 99% of the time it boiled down to not wanting to put in the work, or lingering injuries that were just totally aggravating for the kids. When injured, you can feel very isolated from your teammates. Even if everyone understands that you're injured, there is a sense of "okay, this person cannot help us this season and will not be in the van." D1 programs, especially P5/uber-competitive programs, are not social clubs. They are there to win championships and break records. There is NO ROOM for abuse of any kind - let me be clear - but sometimes people have their feelings hurt in competitive environments. More so for kids who are used to being the best. It can be especially hard for them.

If a member of a very competitive team is not performing to their own expectations, or is experiencing injury, many will put their frustrations on the coaching staff or the other runners. I saw it myself as a runner, and I even saw it on my daughter's HS soccer team this Spring.

Now throw in the increasingly ever-present element of "I must be a victim" and you very well could get a situation like what we have here. I have only read the RW articles and this thread, so I don't know everything in the report. If the majority of those complaining are lower-tier runners or perpetually injured, I would think twice before damning the coaching staff... and I don't even like Wetmore all that much after meeting him a few times (not that he'd care at all about me).

joedlrt wrote:

Wise Old Man wrote:

I just read the report. It is very damning. Honestly, the reporting in RW is not the issue, it is the report itself.

This is from the executive summary:

"3. The Inquiry Team developed substantial information to conclude that for a significant
number of student-athletes who participated in this process, the CU Boulder T&F/CC
program had an unhealthy environment. The student-athletes (primarily from the women’s
team) who reported an unhealthy environment identified the following conditions as contributing to the team’s culture: cliquish, sink or swim, cutthroat, where student-athletes were pitted against each other, emotionally damaging, a meat grinder, isolated, with no sense of community and very little mentoring or support. This unhealthy environment contributed to an overall poor experience for approximately half of the members of the women’s team who participated in this
inquiry."

In defense of the coaches, it is clear that the witness list is NOT a truly representative sample, but basically based on connections to connections from witness #1. So hard to know what to make of it all, but if you read the report it is pretty awful and I cannot imagine this report will not have a chilling effect for athletes and parents considering CU in the near future, especially the women.

You know what won’t make them hesitant? The world champions that have come out of the women’s program. They offer their athletes every resource available to make a world class runner. Just because some lack the maturity to handle voluntary body composition testing doesn’t mean it doesn’t lack merit as a training tool. Some kids just want to participate, others aspire to become professionals. While it may not appeal to your sensibilities (D3 athletics), doesn’t mean others don’t have higher aspirations. A number of their athletes have gone on to have long, incredibly productive careers. That is not something one typically associates with a “meat grinder”.