Yank me Wetmore wrote:
He most definitely is anti foreign. It has nothing to do with using American tax dollars. He would not waste his breath if that was what it was about.
Yeah thats my point!
No one knows how old they are.
If you see the africans running on some d1 teams you know what im talking about.
jokedawg wrote:
I think coaches SHOULD recruit more high class foreign talent.This would improve USA distance running because it would raise the bar for NCAA competition, and get our elites used to racing the best africans before they finish college.However, it would also make it harder to get track scholarships. In the long run, it would be worth it. Can you imagine how good Colorado would be if they recruited kenyans and such??
You my friend, are an idiot.
The "bar" is already plenty high; it's not like making the time of winning NCAAs ten seconds faster because of foreign talent is going to really develop and motive US distance runners. Track in the NCAA, although not completely similiar to NCAA football and basketball, is a stepping stone into professionally running for elites. How many college aged kids are winning the big time races (think Olympics, World Championships)? Few, very few. What is so horrible about the idea of American kids going to college to compete against other American kids AND THEN after college taking on the world? Why do US runners need to experience of international competition in college so bad? There is plenty of American talent right now to push US runners.
"However, it would also make it harder to get track scholarships. In the long run, it would be worth it[/quote]"
What? By making it harder for the best American High School kids to get to the top schools (Colorado for example: 25k a year; a scholarship does help) to train and develop makes no sense in how it will help the US out in the long run. By taking opportunities away from US athletes and giving them to foreignors is not helping US distance runners out in college. There is a time and place for Americans to take on the best, and that is called the Big Leagues (pro).
Difficult to reply to that last idiotic by dirtball because he/she seems to have no clue about the importance of experiencing more competitive situations. It ABSOLUTELY helps American runners.
Yank me Wetmore wrote:
Difficult to reply to that last idiotic by dirtball because he/she seems to have no clue about the importance of experiencing more competitive situations. It ABSOLUTELY helps American runners.
No, foreignors do not "ABSOLUTELY" help US distance runners. For 99% of American college runners, there is enough competition from fellow American college runners to furnish "competitive situations". If a college runner falls into that 1%, then there are plenty of opportunites post NCAA season (summer track/cross country in February) for NCAA/American runners to compete against global competition.
By the way, NCAA coaches in all honesty do not recruit foreignors to increase the level of competition in the NCAA. They do it to secure their job and to work with better talent; basically for their own personal interest.
DirtBall wrote:
They do it to secure their job and to work with better talent; basically for their own personal interest.
In the interest of who or what do you suggest they work? Your fairy-tale idea that the NCAA system exists to produce Olympic level distance runners?
its not any worse than the coaches who use every single scholarship to bring in some kids in from overseas(or 90 percent of them), and leave the assistant coaches to bring in the American kids, whatever they can get, like the scraps.
a ton of coaches do that, so its the same thing.
Wetmore is not doing what he does to make American distance running better either. Wetmore recruits the top Footlocker finalists every year so he can win an NCAA Championship. That is the ONLY reason. He is in a situation where he does not have to recruit foreigners to get a decent athlete. In case you do not understand, he wasn't winning NCAA Championships at Seton Hall. He wouldn't do it at UTEP either. He is in Boulder, CO. If he is so great then I want him to go back to Seton Hall or apply at South Alabama. This way he can win an NCAA Championship there and spread the talent so other people can be the ones working with talent. There is not an unlimited supply of talented guys that want to work hard but he has a good percentage of the top ones.
Good one, champ! wrote:
In the interest of who or what do you suggest they work? Your fairy-tale idea that the NCAA system exists to produce Olympic level distance runners?
The "fairy-tale idea" is that foreign runners are great because they increase the competition. That is NOT why they are bought, I mean brought over here. Coaches who cannot recruit/be successful with American talent alone are the ones recruiting them to help the themselves out.
I was never trying to imply that coaches should have some great underlying interest; only stating that they are not thinking along the same lines as helping out US distance by bringing in foreignors. Another thing I never intended to imply was "the NCAA system exists to produce Olympic level distance runners
What's sad is that this would be a non-issue if it wasn't for the fact that Americans are generally inferior to foreign talent.
Wetmore's All-American scholarships aren't doing jack for American running - he's taking a bunch of top level recruits and making them better, forcing others who can't get that same kind of national-caliber recruiting class to get their runners other places so they can just be COMPETITIVE.
What does Wetmore want - an All American NCAA Championship just so he can show how much better his already talented runners are than other teams'? There's no doubt this guy is a solid coach, but he's not exactly winning with total slouches.
I don't care what kind of coach you are, if the other team has a bunch of guys who ran 9:00 flat in high school and you have the opportunity to get a bunch of guys from across the ocean who also ran 9:00 in high school, why the f*** wouldn't you do it?
exactly, I agree with that point. its what you do with the talent that counts. just cant call one bad and not the other, lets not be hypocrites here. hes done some good things with his talent, and probaly gets as much talent as Wisconsin does. they both do great BUT McDonnell is still the man regardless. He doesnt usually get as much talent as those 2 and Lananna and he does more with it than anyone else in the country. International or American, it doesnt matter, his roster is 1/2 the size of the others and he wins all the time. bottom line lets stop bashing good coaches, lets praise the great ones.
Jim Spivey has said the loss of older faster foreign runners is one of the big reasons for americas decline in distance running, and that he believes competing against the world class foreigners that ran in the NCAA is what got him to understand what it would take to get to that level
I will add this to the discussion... when i was getting my phd from an excellent school, as most others probably experienced in grad school I was one of only a 3 americans in the program (a very, very small %)...
I went to a top 5 school, all of us were given full funding and a generous living stipend... part of what made it excellent is that it drew talent from around the world
if I had just been competing and going to class with americans i would have been cheated... why? because i want to work with the most brillant and learn from them while they learn from me and that means the best from throughout the world - and besides, when I got done with my phd I needed to know what it meant to be on the same stage with everyone in the world and be a competitive researcher with them...
same goes for running... if we want americans to be able to hang with the best they should be running among and training with the best
the world is small place... why shelter the american runners and not make them work to only get recognition unless they can compete with the best
and in my opinion, a coach who thinks like wetmore shouldn't be allowed on a university campus... there is no room for that kind of nationalistic mentality anymore
welcome to the 21st century for gosh sakes
Yeah well if there's "plenty of American talent" out there, then why is East Africa killing us in every distance competition for the past 30-40 years?
Sure, it would reduce the opportunities for a lot of good US runners. But it definitely would seperate the men from the boys: AKA the mottrams from the webbs.
I think we would see much better running from the select few americans who succeed in a tougher college scene.
East Africans are also "blue-collar" guys. I mean, they're about as blue-collar as it gets because they basically are competing for their own livelihood. When Wetmore talks about "building the car from the ground up" I don't see how that excludes foreigners... they've worked to get where they're at just like everyone else.
What difference does it make if he “buys” his 1970 Camero 396 SS from the local dealer or the dealer across town?
What, you think FL finalist are not like ’70 Cameros?
It would be different if he was recruiting 10min 2 milers and finishing in the top 5 at xc Nats (you know “building the engine from the ground up”), but he is not.
(Mark, please insert foot in mouth)
bowery ballroom wrote:
BUT McDonnell is still the man regardless. He doesnt usually get as much talent as those 2 and Lananna and he does more with it than anyone else in the country. International or American, it doesnt matter, his roster is 1/2 the size of the others and he wins all the time. bottom line lets stop bashing good coaches, lets praise the great ones.
WTF?
When was the last time Arkansas won NCs in XC??????
Allistar Criag and Daniel Lincoln and Senceca Lassiter were not talented? What does roster size have to with anything? The Arkansas program has more $ then CU. Look at the facilities.
Wetmore is the man b/c he has had success w/ men and women - McDonnell?. His training is always evolving. Wetmore's pro american comments are awsome.
The OP is moron for not already knowing those kids born in "Germany" were US Army kids. Nice try.
We're NOT talking about professional runners here, and athletes don't get a grant for college to develop as runners. Running is a means to receiving an EDUCATION, and everyone seems to forget that. If, as an athlete, you want to develop into a professional, then you should bypass school altogether, because the college schedule is way too demanding and counterproductive. A college coach's FIRST responsibility is to the athlete as a STUDENT. And seriously, who really cares about running in the grand scheme of things anyway except your fellow narrow-minded ectomorphs? What are you really contributing to society a a guy who runs a 29:10 10k in college?
So the extent that colleges have limited scholarship opportunities paid for with US tax dollars in one fashion or another, I would agree, they should go to US kids. To argue that they should go for acquiring running talent of any nationality is missing the point and disingenuous.
Nice post.
I'm saying as an analogy. If the US had 6 of the top Ethiopian and Kenyans become US citizens and then go on to win world championships and Oly gold, would we all look around and say "Wow- American distance running is BACK!!" No, we'd all know the real deal. Just like with colleges that import their talent. I wouldn't say these schools are great producers or developers of talent, I'd say they are great at recruiting, that's it.
Be careful here. You're actually making sense and you might be accused of being jingoistic.
Ward Churchill Lied wrote:
Nice post.
bs
Top dogs go to school to run. Guys who think they are top dogs go to school to run. those who can't cut it post- collegiate coach or work for a sneaker co.
an undergraduate degree is so overated.
Only one distance runner has skipped school altogether and I haven't seen the results. School as a means for developing seems to have worked for precious pre, salazar, shorter, BK, Williams, Davis, Meb, Abdi, Goucher, Hall, Ritz, Teg.
I'll take Hall, Ritz, Teg over Webb.