There were 38 college club runners, presumably most with NCAA eligibility, entered into the PA USATF Championship yesterday. It was a pretty muddy course so times were off but six of those finished in top 40.
No, the Kenyan distance runners are just getting caught the most. That doesn't mean they are doping more than other countries. There are a lot of drugs that acheive similar things with different detection times and costs.
Maybe. The thing is, you don't exactly know that. How would you even tell if it was only Kenyans getting caught? And bear in mind, there are a LOT of Kenyan runners. There could be large numbers of Kenyans not getting caught also.
“There are athletes where they could go to [an agency like] Rosa, they’re maybe only getting a $7,000 or $8,000 professional contract, which is tiny,” says New Mexico coach Darren Gauson. “Or you can come here, get a degree, get your full cost of attendance plus your $12,000-$13,000 in room and board, you’re going to the training table and getting all your food paid for.”
It sounds kind of ridiculous. The funny part of the Letsrun article is schools are paying recruiting companies $25,000 a year to find prospective Kenyans, plus all the other expenses. You could justify it if it was a revenue generating sport like football, but I can't believe schools are spending money like this all for the purpose of building a better cross country/track team. Whether a team places top 4 at nationals or doesn't even make the meet makes essentially no difference to the school's reputation/prestige due to how niche the sport is. Absolutely no real benefit from the school's perspective besides managing egos of the athletics department. If an international athlete wants to come here and contacts a coach on their own, then that's one thing, but why get into some kind of Kenyan recruiting arms race just for cross country?
There are schools paying A LOT more than that for access to the very best of those recruits.
This is a fantastic thread and I 100% with the overall sentiment here.
Every attempt to justify the hoard of internationals has been thoroughly debunked.
If something isn't done, many schools will soon have 17 Kenyans on their roster and zero Americans.
I think everyone can agree that would be entirely unacceptable. I think most fans would even agree that a 50-50 split is even inappropriate.
That's catastrophizing. The Midwest Regional was loaded with Kenyans at the front. I think about half of the first thirty men had Kenyan looking names. But there were 199 finishers and beyond the first thirty or so no one had a Kenyan sounding name. In the Mid Atlantic Regional maybe I missed someone but there were 197 finishers and no one's name looked Kenyan.
There really are just a handful of NCAA schools that take cross country really seriously and it seems likely those schools might bring in more Kenyans in the future. But most schools don't take cross country all that seriously. Do you think DePaul or Duquesne have the resources or desire to recruit a dozen Kenyans?
The number of opportunities for college cross country "lost" to US kids because there are a few dozen Kenyans in the NCAA now is quite small. Maybe your chance for a scholarship to New Mexico or Oklahoma State went to a Kenyan. If you were good enough for those schools to consider you there are many other D1 schools that will be interested.
Nearly every region was dominated by Kenyans that are clearly doping.
You want us to believe that there are 100 "CLEAN" college aged Kenyans now in the NCAA that are better than all but a few American college aged kids? When American pro runners are now performing better than Kenyans in nearly every distance event on the track? And a lot of Kenya's best young athletes stay in Kenya and are on pro contracts, so we are supposed to believe that Kenya has 200 young clean athletes that are all better then everyone but the top 5 or 6 Americans.
It's beyond belief. And it's ruining the sport. They are dirty and it is making our sport lose fans in mass numbers.
Doping in college sport is very easy. What has Kenyan got to do with it? Heaven forbid: a US athlete would also take a forbidden tablet, or inject, for the same reasons as a Kenyan.
This is a fantastic thread and I 100% with the overall sentiment here.
Every attempt to justify the hoard of internationals has been thoroughly debunked.
If something isn't done, many schools will soon have 17 Kenyans on their roster and zero Americans.
I think everyone can agree that would be entirely unacceptable. I think most fans would even agree that a 50-50 split is even inappropriate.
That's catastrophizing. The Midwest Regional was loaded with Kenyans at the front. I think about half of the first thirty men had Kenyan looking names. But there were 199 finishers and beyond the first thirty or so no one had a Kenyan sounding name. In the Mid Atlantic Regional maybe I missed someone but there were 197 finishers and no one's name looked Kenyan.
There really are just a handful of NCAA schools that take cross country really seriously and it seems likely those schools might bring in more Kenyans in the future. But most schools don't take cross country all that seriously. Do you think DePaul or Duquesne have the resources or desire to recruit a dozen Kenyans?
The number of opportunities for college cross country "lost" to US kids because there are a few dozen Kenyans in the NCAA now is quite small. Maybe your chance for a scholarship to New Mexico or Oklahoma State went to a Kenyan. If you were good enough for those schools to consider you there are many other D1 schools that will be interested.
It's not just Kenyans, it's all international students that are a problem. You have to realize 2 things.
1. A large portion of those non-Kenyan sounding names are still international athletes. In your cherry-picked region, 4 of Villanova's top 7 are international from Australia. Even Princeton is beginning to recruit a lot more internationally.
2. There are so many big schools that are focusing on Kenyans and internationals that it forces other schools to go that route because there's no chance at a national qualifier otherwise. They are forcing the hand of small schools.
We are at the tipping point now, especially with the big increase in scholarship limits. Within the next 2-3 years, the number of international athletes is going to increase exponentially. Anyone with a shred of common sense can see this.
Agreed, anytime you bring in money like from the NIL, then start recruiting 27 year old kenyans, it's a recipe for doping and scandal. Money starts to take over and the better you do, the more money you can make via the NIL deals, it's not good.
I agree with a previous comment that the two things that need to be done are age limits and limit of foreigners on a team. Depending on where you set those two things then the outcome will differ.
For age limits - This goes for US athletes and foreigners. If an older runner wants to run in college they can go D3 or D2. That would be their option and their choice.
For number of foreigners - I think 2-3 should be the absolute limit per team for XC and maybe up to 5 total for track.
This sounds kind of random but these two changes would keep some sanity in college athletics/XC/TF. I kind of believe in supporting my community and too many foreigners goes against this.
The sport will look a bit more like it was 5-50 years ago. Not sure the current environment looks better.
What's wrong with IA state trying to get the best Iowa, Midwest, US athletes or OK state and others doing similar. The sport will be just as good and probably more legitimate.
Can you help to explain the difference in XC compared to other NCAA sports? International students in basketball are everywhere. Don't hear that complaint.
Because international athletes are competing that automatically means they're doping?
Or could it be that one is afraid of a bit of competition, and instead need to find a fact-less conclusion such as doping?
The NCAA has evolved. I suggest you evolve beyond your closed-minded approach that is subtly racist.
The influx of internationals is a problem in all sports, and is going to get a lot worse in TRACK now that men's teams JUST increased from 12.6 scholarships to 45 scholarships. The vast majority of those additional scholarships are going to end up with international people.
Nobody honestly believes more Americans are going to buy ESPN+ or Flotrack subscriptions to watch the top 5 Americans struggle against 25-30 year old Kenyans that are doping.
High school track meets have more fans in attendance than college meets because fans are actually invested in the athletes.
This is just the logical conclusion of pro sports pipelines being tied to education. The two systems should never have been this intertwined.
Scholarships should never have ever been involved at this level to begin with.
I think the Kenyan bump created by the new recruiting services is not going to last. Why?! Numbers and track points.
1. Lots of the all international teams will stay that way. Iona, Iowa State, OSU, New Mexico. They have all been this way for a long time. They care about XC and usually it is the strongest sport at the school.
2. These other SEC, ACC, Big 12, ACC, Mountain West schools will stop importing internationals for distance. They can’t score on the track! When some of these conference you need to be world class to get 6 points in the 5k. Easier to go get some high jumpers! If there are 10-15 Kenyans in the conference why get more?
3. I think the flood gates have opened, it is going to be more and more international heavy in all events until the NCAA eventually dies
Easy with the "Racist" accusations. It isn't about race, and never has been. I do believe the NCAA needs a comprehensive drug testing program, and not just for X-C/Track, but for all sports. With regard to Kenyans competing in the NCAA, that's not the problem. The problem lies with coaches who are loading their programs with Kenyan and non-Kenyan international runners to win. The U.S. collegiate system (NCAA) provides both an educational and athletic environment for all athletes, and there's nothing wrong with that, just so as it's fair and balanced. I think an 80/20 roster split American to foreign is reasonable, unless there are not enough Americans to cover the 80%. The priority has to be the development of up and coming U.S. talent. You can call it a "Nationalist" view, but we are in the U.S., and should give the American athletes the priority. If I were in Kenya, Spain, Peru, etc...... I would have no problem abiding by these rules which give priority to the home country.
At this point some NCAA programs aren’t really developing athletes, they’re assembling rosters. Instead of building runners over four years, they rely heavily on older, already-developed international athletes who arrive with near professional resumes. It creates a situation where the “coaching” is basically just plugging in finished products and collecting results. Plenty of coaches across the country hate this dynamic because it undermines what NCAA cross country should be about, identifying talent, developing it, and building a team. When a program stacks mature athletes who are physically and competitively way beyond the typical 18- to 22-year-old American system, it changes the sport and makes the playing field feel fundamentally uneven. These coaches are snakes and not good for the sport one bit!
At this point some NCAA programs aren’t really developing athletes, they’re assembling rosters. Instead of building runners over four years, they rely heavily on older, already-developed international athletes who arrive with near professional resumes. It creates a situation where the “coaching” is basically just plugging in finished products and collecting results. Plenty of coaches across the country hate this dynamic because it undermines what NCAA cross country should be about, identifying talent, developing it, and building a team. When a program stacks mature athletes who are physically and competitively way beyond the typical 18- to 22-year-old American system, it changes the sport and makes the playing field feel fundamentally uneven. These coaches are snakes and not good for the sport one bit!
Will Palmer has a history of athletes taking EPO. Not a good look for Valby 🤔
I think the Kenyan bump created by the new recruiting services is not going to last. Why?! Numbers and track points.
1. Lots of the all international teams will stay that way. Iona, Iowa State, OSU, New Mexico. They have all been this way for a long time. They care about XC and usually it is the strongest sport at the school.
2. These other SEC, ACC, Big 12, ACC, Mountain West schools will stop importing internationals for distance. They can’t score on the track! When some of these conference you need to be world class to get 6 points in the 5k. Easier to go get some high jumpers! If there are 10-15 Kenyans in the conference why get more?
3. I think the flood gates have opened, it is going to be more and more international heavy in all events until the NCAA eventually dies
Soon in the SEC you have to be world class to score any points in any event. This problem spiral and get worse every year unless action is taken to stop it.
Already you have random teams like Tulane and Tulsa and EKU that are going predominately international with distance programs. Those aren't even Power 4 schools and they are still spending tons of money on foreign distance runners.
Even the Ivy League athletes are going to have a really big foreign population. We've already seen it - Maia Ramsden, Trippas the Olympian from Princeton, Guttormeson the Pole Vaulter from Princeton that won a a couple NCAA titles. Kovacs the NCAA bronze medalist in the 1500 from Princeton. Mena Scatchard from Princeton NCAA runner up in the indoor mile. Ikeji the NCAA champion in the hammer a couple years ago from Harvard and Great Britain. And they don't even have scholarships!
No, the Kenyan distance runners are just getting caught the most. That doesn't mean they are doping more than other countries. There are a lot of drugs that acheive similar things with different detection times and costs.
Maybe. The thing is, you don't exactly know that. How would you even tell if it was only Kenyans getting caught? And bear in mind, there are a LOT of Kenyan runners. There could be large numbers of Kenyans not getting caught also.
It may be more accurate if I remove the word "just." They could be doping more. We only see what we see. The rest is speculation. It does seem the East Africans are built to run, and if drugs didn't exist I think we'd see them winning gold medals, but that's only my opinion.
I agree with a previous comment that the two things that need to be done are age limits and limit of foreigners on a team. Depending on where you set those two things then the outcome will differ.
For age limits - This goes for US athletes and foreigners. If an older runner wants to run in college they can go D3 or D2. That would be their option and their choice.
For number of foreigners - I think 2-3 should be the absolute limit per team for XC and maybe up to 5 total for track.
This sounds kind of random but these two changes would keep some sanity in college athletics/XC/TF. I kind of believe in supporting my community and too many foreigners goes against this.
The sport will look a bit more like it was 5-50 years ago. Not sure the current environment looks better.
What's wrong with IA state trying to get the best Iowa, Midwest, US athletes or OK state and others doing similar. The sport will be just as good and probably more legitimate.
I wholesale reject this notion that Americans can’t compete with foreign athletes (if age restrictions are put in place). American is exceptional - take your safe space elsewhere.
At this point some NCAA programs aren’t really developing athletes, they’re assembling rosters. Instead of building runners over four years, they rely heavily on older, already-developed international athletes who arrive with near professional resumes. It creates a situation where the “coaching” is basically just plugging in finished products and collecting results. Plenty of coaches across the country hate this dynamic because it undermines what NCAA cross country should be about, identifying talent, developing it, and building a team. When a program stacks mature athletes who are physically and competitively way beyond the typical 18- to 22-year-old American system, it changes the sport and makes the playing field feel fundamentally uneven. These coaches are snakes and not good for the sport one bit!