Pretty sure coaches with international athletes are still trying to get them to improve and perform at their best. That’s just coaching.
But there are a lot of coaches who want to do it with homegrown talent. And the competition to land homegrown athletes is tougher. You've got fewer universities throwing scholarships at foreign athletes who are also potentially two years older than typical US seniors and significantly faster.
My coach back in the day said he'd accept a foreign athlete on the team with open arms, but wouldn't actively recruit across the pond and use scholarship money to get one.
Nope. We don't give you our information because you people who lie about your kids are major red flags.
Stop making up stories about all of your "fast kids" who get zero response. It's just flat out not true. You have multiple coaches saying they would have responded to the kid so either you're lying or you failed to guide your kid correctly. Just stop it.
I wouldn't dare say which school I coach at because you're so full of it but here's this years recruiting class for us and their scholarships. I'm at a D1 school which is easily in the top 25% of the NCAA (we had a good amount of scholarship come back from graduation this year and all of these girls have significant academic aid to help the costs)
2:16/5:01/10:55/18:28 (45%)
2:19/5:02/10:49/18:18 (50%)
58/2:18/5:11/19:18 (10%)
2:12/4:54/11:11/17:54 (65%)
2:14/4:56/10:57/17:46 (75%)
This will undoubtedly open me up to criticism by somebody so I'll say this: No, we're pretty good. This is how we always spend. I'm good at developing athletes and spending this much money this year isn't going to hurt our long term success because this is what I've always done when the right kids come along. I'm sure Letsrun will pretend to pick it apart without knowing any more information lol.
This seems very accurate and in line with most mid major d1 schools. People ask for college names, any private d1 in ca that is not Stanford will give a 5 min girl… every state school that is a power 5 (and some of them) will happily give a 5 min girl a spot in the team. Public schools may not respond to a 5 min out of state kid any response because they don’t have the funding to give them a competitive scholarship compared to that kids instate schools or any private school in the country. End of story 5 min get you scholarship at almost any prove school that is not in the top 25 at ncaa xc (and has any funding at all).
Obviously a few typos in the above message… I was on a heated rant haha but main message is kids should reach out to the schools that they fit at… 5 min girls get money most places (especially private schools where state residence does not matter) but top 30 teams can’t be bothered with them because they talk to 4.4x girls.
Surprised took someone so long to say this. Crazy to me that some of their coaches are now at big programs with very little demonstrated ability to actually coach.
Surprised took someone so long to say this. Crazy to me that some of their coaches are now at big programs with very little demonstrated ability to actually coach.
In college sports in general being good at recruiting is much more important than being good at actual coaching. Ideally a coach would be good at both but having really good athletes can cover a lot of coaching weaknesses.
Do the right thing. So clarify if this is the right thing or not Mr. High and mighty.
I have a scholarship to give. The best American girl that will accept this scholarship (after shooting the offer to damn near 100 girl) has a 1600 PR of 5:23. I can also give this same scholarship to a girl from the UK that has run 4:30 for 1500m as a documented U18 athlete. I am wrong for going for the better girl from across the pond or is the right thing to do Is give it to the 5:23 girl and hope she runs 5:00 by senior year which is still about 10 seconds slower than the British girl?
lol, this is the most true thing ever posted on this website. those who don’t know don’t get it, but this is the reality. the real problem is how many Americans scoff at perfectly good opportunities, and think they’re worth more than they are. so I’m left with no choice but to sign a far superior international athlete for the same money…
Yes exactly! I’ve been a D1 head coach for 7 years. Started at my crappy program and couldn’t even get a 5:30 girl to look our way. Expensive school but has good merit and was offering good aid packages. We just sucked and not with the allure of a bigger mid major or Power5. So we hit internationals hard and it worked. This opened the door for me to sign Americans since now we had a decent team, kids making first round outdoors and such. Still tough to land a girl who was under 5 or guy under 4:20.
Any non-P5 D1 should and most likely will offer a girl who is under 5:10 something. With my school being expense I offer a good bit more, and it’s still hard. American kids have been brainwashed into thinking they need to go to the P5 school and try to jump on the fast moving train. A 5:10 girl has no business at Alabama or Arkansas they won’t make it and could potentially overtrain(depending on coaches ability to recognize) and end up hurt and on the portal. Some that make it, will have a nice success story but on our side of it we see the 85% who don’t make it and end up on the portal telling you: coach you were right what you told me 2 years ago.
Paul Ereng (gold medalist in Olympics and World Indoors) ran at Univ of Virginia, not Richmond (apologies, I’m referencing an earlier post in this thread)
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
Reason provided:
Clarified why I mentioned this
I have no problem getting faster girls to walk-on. Our standards are about 2:10/4:52/10:25 for small scholarships. 50% would require 2:07/4:45/10:10. We have no problem finding walk-ons who have run 2:14/4:58/10:35. There are hundreds of girls at those numbers who are merely looking for a home. So I don't understand what you are doing.
All the Oregon and Washington girls for example are all old. They use our system to get better and run for their national teams. It gets old and tiresome to hear accents in every interview. The duck team has no community engagement and no Investment of American distance talent. A pipeline for other national teams. You coaches can justify all you want but you have a responsibility to the kids in this country.
Didn't see anyone mention 2:18/5:00/11:00.. (no one cares about XC times when recruiting).
The coach in question said sub 5... no offers... had to walk on...
Sorry, I'm with 'It is time" on this one. I could name 5 schools in my area alone who would give a sub 5 athlete some money... a sub 5 athlete, assuming it wasn't done as a freshman and is now running 5:15... can get some scholarship help and doesn't have to walk on at 'big name' university.
I’m with them… a sub 5 girl can get a scholarship from lots of schools… there are 360+ d1 schools I coach at an ok mid major (top 3rd of d1 xc teams) and I offer sub 5 women lots of money and that is true with most schools in my conference and every school would respond to them and love to have them on the team (like was mentioned earlier if she is not a 5 min freshman/5.15 senior). Also almost any d2 school would offer them tons of money.
One thing that college coaches don’t like is high schools that run tons of miles with super type A coaches… there are some instances where I would actually offer a 5.10 girl from a nowhere school where her soccer coach also coaches track much more money than a 4.55 girl on some every year nxn team.
All the Oregon and Washington girls for example are all old. They use our system to get better and run for their national teams. It gets old and tiresome to hear accents in every interview. The duck team has no community engagement and no Investment of American distance talent. A pipeline for other national teams. You coaches can justify all you want but you have a responsibility to the kids in this country.
I mean, you're right on the money in my opinion. To be devil's advocate: someone else on the thread wrote, "hate the game, not the player."
Those coaches are paid to win; what else can they do if they can't attract talent (Oregon can attract talent though...so I suppose they have no excuse to recruit older, foreign runners. Stanford does, too. E.g., Ky Robinson. Wisco, too. E.g. Aussie runners).
My point it, those coaches job(s) are to win, not built up the U.S. track program; it's self preservation - they're looking out for their own back!
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.