Wetmore makes me sick

Golden Buffalo wrote: He recruits AMERICANS exclusively and still wins national championships with them. Very few coaches can say that.

Great. Now, name me one coach that has WON nationals with nothing but American kids in the last few years. There may be one, but I can't think of it. Oh, and Wetmore has done it more than once. Now name me another coach that has done it more than once with nothing but Americans in the last 20 years. Seriously.

Wow, I just watched the flocast and it seems like many people are overreacting and making many assumptions from a very short, relatively mild interview.

Did the detractors watch the other Wetmore flocast where he mentions how much talent he's had and how lucky he feels?

You know, these are all moot points until someone can name me another coach who has won the national championship in cross more than once in the last two decades with nothing but AMERICAN kids. Would someone please step up to the plate? Name ONE coach who has done this in recent memory. Otherwise, shut the hell up and go away with your meritless arguments.

Golden Buffalo, have you read one thing anyone else has said? You either have no reading comprehension ability, you haven't read anything written or you just refuse to think about what anyone else says. I don't get it!

Maybe I missed something but I NEVER recall reading about anyone doubting Adolph, I mean Herr Wetmores ability to coach. We are saying that he gets great talent, he is bad mouthing other programs for his own recruiting purposes and several other points. No one has said he can't coach.

On the contrary, we all say he is a good coach but a whiner. I agree with one of the other people that said he is whining in order to make recruits not want to attend some other top ranked programs with good coaches. It is all part of recruiting. I hope he realizes that this opens him up to negative recruiting.

I like what he had to say. I really like what he is doing with his team. Also, thats the thing about it, its his team, he is the coach, he does the recruiting, trains them and helps the kids along the path of college running. Do all of this runners succeed, no. Like he said in his first interview on flocast though, if you can make it on this team for 4 or 5 years you have succeeded and you are probably more of a runner than me.

I don't mind recruiting foreign runners, but when you buy 5 and 6 kenyans who are already national caliber athletes, how hard is it to be the top team in the country.

I have no vested interest in this argument and at nine pages it seems to have created quite a pissing match between both sides; however, after just watching the video clip, I don't see any whining. He makes his analogy and then briefly mentions not wanting to buy a team. What's the big deal? Why the Nazi reference? If you don't think there is anything wrong with UTEP, Abilene Christian, etc. relying entirely on African runners, that's fine. But you should also admit that some of these programs are not relying on good coaching, but simply having better talent than the next team. And there shouldn't be anything wrong with those that respect someone who has avoided recruiting foreign athletes.

I seriously think too many people are making way too much from a very mild interview. Man, reading these posts I was expecting a very different interview.

Martin Smith

Golden Buffalo wrote:

Great. Now, name me one coach that has WON nationals with nothing but American kids in the last few years. There may be one, but I can't think of it. Oh, and Wetmore has done it more than once. Now name me another coach that has done it more than once with nothing but Americans in the last 20 years. Seriously.

Mark Wetmore sees having foreignors on a NCAA team as "buying" the talent. He does not respect that. He does not consider himself "buying" American talent; rather "building" these American runners up after selling his program. American runners have plenty of options when it comes to choosing a school while most foreign athletes do not. In Mark's eyes, the American recruits are generally less developed and not as fast as foreignors when entering their freshman year. And that is how he considers himself to be "building" them up.

Whether you agree with this or not, this is what I believe he is saying in his interview. The bottom line is that it is his program and he can do whatever he wants.

what about 5 or 6 Kenyans that are national caliber already and still can't win anything *cough *cough Alabama

overreaction wrote:

If you don't think there is anything wrong with UTEP, Abilene Christian, etc. relying entirely on African runners, that's fine. But you should also admit that some of these programs are not relying on good coaching, but simply having better talent than the next team.

Except that Wetmore's top 5 came to college with PR's better than or comparable to UTEP's top 5.

What you don't understand, Fella, is that track sholarships are not funded by your hard earned tax dollar. First of all many of the schools you and your like criticize are private. Secondly, even most of those that are public do not fund their scholarships through tax dollars...and certainly not through federal tax dollars....Do so real research and you might learn something about the federal income tax system. So, if trach and cross country scholarships are not funded by federal tax dollars, should the college coach recruit ONLY in state kids??? slipperly slope, Fella.

And the 'job' of the college coach is not to develop 9:00 US two milers into 8:00 3,000m runners so that people like you can get all warm and fuzzy thinking they are 'developing' US distance runners to compete on the world stage. The job of the college coach, at least at most competitive Division I programs, as defined by the athletic departments, is to win conference and national championships while operating within the rules. To do so, you get the absolute best talent you can, nuture it and go after the championships. If you choose not to take the absolute best talent (with qualifying academic acheivement, age, etc etc within the rules) and you do not win championships, you have chosen not to compete, not to win and should give up your job. Mark Wetmore has done his job and he done so choosing not to utilize international athletes. Good for him. It is working for him and he is doing his job. But so are Jerry Schumacher (internationals Antony Ford and Simon Bairu) and John McDonnell and every other coach that recruits the most talented qualified athletes he or she can to his or her university in pursuit of championships. Those who chose not to and fail should look for other jobs.

growapair wrote:

What you don't understand, Fella, is that track sholarships are not funded by your hard earned tax dollar. First of all many of the schools you and your like criticize are private. Secondly, even most of those that are public do not fund their scholarships through tax dollars...and certainly not through federal tax dollars....Do so real research and you might learn something about the federal income tax system. So, if trach and cross country scholarships are not funded by federal tax dollars, should the college coach recruit ONLY in state kids??? slipperly slope, Fella.

Jesus, how many times do we have to go over this? What you have written is NOT true in its TOTALITY, but to the extent that it is true that MOST scholarships don't come from federal tax dollars, they come from private grant money and state tax revenue. Now, guess what? As a private donor, I get a generous TAX WRITE-OFF when I give $$$ to my alma mater. That is a huge incentive for giving. So, in essence, it is half a dozen of one or six of the other. I give to support a cause and to alleviate my TAX BURDEN. So, really, scholarships DO come from a from of tax revenue. But apparently you have done REAL research and know the ins and outs of the tax system so you can perpetuate your ignorance online.

And I am proud of Mark Wetmore for using this money on AMERICAN kids and WINNING national championships while he is at it. Many universities recruit the blue chip kids, both domestic and foreign, and they still don't win championships. Wetmore is neither whining, nor is he anything less than a fantastic coach. Oh, and as for your comment about recruiting primarily "in-state" kids, Wetmore does quite a bit of that. My guess is that Wetmore does more with kids from Colorado than Schumacher does with kids from Wisconsin or Smith and Lananna have done with kids from Oregon and McDonnell has done with kids from Arkansas.

Golden Buffalo wrote:

Great. Now, name me one coach that has WON nationals with nothing but American kids in the last few years. There may be one, but I can't think of it. Oh, and Wetmore has done it more than once. Now name me another coach that has done it more than once with nothing but Americans in the last 20 years. Seriously.

Stanford....

Yes, I was thinking that Lananna might be the only other multiple winner, but I couldn't remember if he had any foreign guys in his scoring five. So they are both in elite company. Almost everyone reveres Lananna, and he has just about the best job and highest salary (in its totality) of any coach out there because of this recognition, and deservedly so. What about Wetmore?

Andy Gerrard, Vin Lanana

You are an idiot...

Uh, fella, you are late to the party with Lananna, and show me where Gerard was a MULTIPLE WINNER. Oh, and dipshit, did you not realize that private grants are a form of tax revenue in that they alleviate one's tax burden? It's a slippery slope when you put yourself out there online isn't it, fella?

and Martin Smith while at Wisconsin....there is three others with 5 or 6 championships between them. Speaking of no respect...Martin Smith one an NCAA CHAMPIONSHIP WITH FIVE KIDS FROM WISCONSIN!! Why are you not all over his nuts GB???!!!

Golden Buffalo keeps trying to state the case for Wetmore being a good coach. Too bad he is arguing with himself as no one has claimed he is not a good coach.

We can argue about Wetmore being arrogant and a whiny baby thinking that he does more with less than anyone else. He also is so far removed from his Seton Hall days that he doesn't remember what it is like to recruit at a place that doesn't sell itself.