Bullshit that there are three others with five or six championships between them over the last two decades. Give me a break. Why don't you just provide the list and the years for everyone's edification? Lananna would be the only other one besides Wetmore. Gerard and Smith won it ONCE. And yes, Kudos to Smith for doing it with in-state guys. That is impressive.
smith one two, idiot.
Ha ha, I never joined this board to argue that Wetmore was a good coach or that he wasn't a whiner. I merely praised him for his effort to support American kids exclusively, when no one else of significance is willing to do it. But, to the extent that, not only does Wetmore do this, but he also WINS championships with them, he is a coach unparalleled by any except for Lananna, who is the only other guy to win multiple championships with all American kids over the last 25 years. And just look where Lananna is now. ha ha.
First of all, you mean WON, don't you idiot? Secondly, I believe he didn't have all Americans in his scoring five both times, but I could be wrong.
Besides, idiot, I said multiple championships in the last TWENTY years in my original question. Smith won his first in 1985. Idiot.
Ha ha wrote:
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.
Where can you quote Wetmore as "being arrogant and a whiny baby thinking that he does more with less than anyone else." After reading far too many posts on this thread I was expecting to see a very different flocast. In one, he actually mentions how lucky he has been at CU.
Here ya go, Fella.....as I said: Smith 2 championships, Lanana 3 championships, Gerrard 1 Championships...that's three guys with 5 or 6 between them. and AS I SAID, you history buff (pun intended) Smith won two...his first one was with five guys from the STATE OF WISCONSIN.
1985...Wisconsin Martin Smith 67 Arkansas 104 Marquette
1986... Arkansas John McDonnell 69 Dartmouth 141 Arizona
1987... Arkansas John McDonnell 87 Dartmouth 119 Virginia
1988... Wisconsin Martin Smith 105 Northern Ariz. 160 Iowa St.
1989... Iowa St. Bill Bergan 54 Oregon 72 Navy
1990.. Arkansas John McDonnell 68 Iowa St. 96 Tennessee
1991... Arkansas John McDonnell 52 Iowa St. 114 Arizona
1992...Arkansas John McDonnell 46 Wisconsin 87 Indiana
1993... Arkansas John McDonnell 31 Brigham Young 153 Lehigh
1994... Iowa St. Bill Bergan 65 Colorado 88 Arkansas
1995 Arkansas John McDonnell 100 Northern Ariz. 142 Iowa St.
1996.. Stanford Vin Lananna 46 Arkansas 74 Arizona
1997 Stanford Vin Lananna 53 Arkansas 56 Furman
1998.. Arkansas John McDonnell 97 Stanford 114 Kansas
1999. Arkansas John McDonnell 58 Wisconsin 185 Indiana
2000..Arkansas John McDonnell 83 Colorado 94 Iowa St.
2001.. Colorado Mark Wetmore 90 Stanford 91 Furman
2002.. Stanford Vin Lananna 47 Wisconsin 107 Indiana St.
2003... Stanford Andrew Gerard 24 Wisconsin 174 UNI
2004... Colorado Mark Wetmore 90 Wisconsin 94 Indiana St.
2005... Wisconsin Jerry Schumacher 37 Arkansas 105 Indiana St.
OOOOOOHHHH good technicality comeback. You are a moron.
His first one was in 1985, so you missed the 20 year window. So that leaves Lananna, who you were late to the party with, and Wetmore as the only multiple winners in the last 20 years. Besides, I'm not sure Smith had only American guys both years.
also note that Lanana had 4 second place trophies in the same time period....
He did. You are not sure of anything ....
Yes, and Lananna is revered as being possibly the greatest coach ever, for which he has been rewarded with running an historic program under the auspices of Nike. Idiot. Nothing you have said undermines the point I am trying to make. But, since you are so well versed in tax code, I guess you have instant credibility where it concerns everything else.
one thing i find funny about this thread and wetmore
wetmore and everyone here talks about buying kenyans...
let me ask you guys something, who do you think is more expensive to buy...
a fast american who grew up in the states and will almost certainly have yuppy parents and feels entitled because he has actually run faster than 4:20 in the mile...
or some fast kenyan who is eating three pieces of rice every day and lives in a house made of sticks and mud...
hmmmm... seems to me the kenyan would take just about anything as long as it involved him coming to the states and being able to get an education
no one is debating whether Wetmore is a good coach. He is. He is doing his job extremely well. I think the debate was whether or not he is whiny. Nobody has accused Lanana as being whiny. Maybe he chose to use American kids, maybe it was circumstance...either way he wasn't out there vocalizing about it.
And your private donations...where ever you CHOOSE to make them or not make them, despite what they do for you as a write off, would hardly be considered "tax dollars" by those on this message board and to state over and over again that your hard earned tax dollars are subsidizing the foreign hordes gathering in the hinterlands is inflammatory and misleading.
Jackass.
Golden Buffalo wrote:
... he is a coach unparalleled by any except for Lananna...
He's a great coach, no argument here. But that statement might be a little over the top. I hope you can admit that a good coach should be successful in Boulder... climate, altitude, well-known running locale, etc. It's an entirely different discussion, but I'd argue that the coach at Adams State is as good as Wetmore and deserves to be in any discussion about top collegiate coaches. He's done a lot with much less talent and with many kids that CU probably never recruited.
Yes, my rhetoric is so inflammatory, that I'm sure I will be prevented from continuing to contribute to this message board. No, dickhead, it is a fact that both state monies and private grants, which are encouraged via the FEDERAL tax code, subsidize education for many athletes. It IS tax money, and many of us would prefer to see it go to American kids, whose parents have contributed to the government's coffers all of these years.
And exactly how many flocast interviews were done of Lananna back in the day for him to be perceived as whining? Oh, wait, the technology didn't really exist back then, and neither did letsrun. As for Wetmore, I actually really have no idea just how good of a coach he is. But I admire him for sticking to his guns, when most others lack the integrity not to just go off and be bought by the highest bidder.
Dipshit.
overreaction wrote:
He's a great coach, no argument here. But that statement might be a little over the top. I hope you can admit that a good coach should be successful in Boulder... climate, altitude, well-known running locale, etc. It's an entirely different discussion, but I'd argue that the coach at Adams State is as good as Wetmore and deserves to be in any discussion about top collegiate coaches. He's done a lot with much less talent and with many kids that CU probably never recruited.
Actually. I agree with you. I was just merely trying to make a point for all the naysayers just how rare it is for a coach to WIN with nothing but Americans. Speaking of Adams, Vigil might have been the greates coach ever. There's a guy that won championships with Americans, Coloradans no less, and he was a master at turning average guys into semi-elite by the time they were done.
I will leave you one, last very troubling though GB. I did some top secret research and I found a great evil being perpetrated on you and the unsuspecting, tax-paying (or donation making), law abiding citizens of the Great State of Colorado:
Turns out your hard earned tax dollars ARE being used for the development of foreign talent afterall! In fact, the insidious bastards have spread this policy throughout almost every department on campus including: Chemistry, Math, Engineering, Biochemistry, Phisology, Physics....The list goes on and on!!! All over campus foreign talent is being recruited, nutured, developed and all at YOUR expense!! They are receiving private research grants (though as you have so eloquently pointed out these foundations are, at least in part, subsidized by tax deductable donations from persons such as yourself), federal and state research grants, scholarships, internships, research assistantships, teaching assistanships, housing stipends....And ALL of this money could be going to less qualified American students if we can only get the word out!
sorry about the typos including thought, physiology, etc...in my great haste to get the word to you as quickly as possible, I forgot to double check my typing...whew!
growapair wrote:
Turns out your hard earned tax dollars ARE being used for the development of foreign talent afterall! In fact, the insidious bastards have spread this policy throughout almost every department on campus including: Chemistry, Math, Engineering, Biochemistry, Phisology, Physics....The list goes on and on!!! All over campus foreign talent is being recruited, nutured, developed and all at YOUR expense!! They are receiving private research grants (though as you have so eloquently pointed out these foundations are, at least in part, subsidized by tax deductable donations from persons such as yourself), federal and state research grants, scholarships, internships, research assistantships, teaching assistanships, housing stipends....And ALL of this money could be going to less qualified American students if we can only get the word out!
Not the point I'm making dipshit. Talk about a red herring as someone (you?) tried to point out earlier. There's a huge difference between developing foreign athletes and merely foreign students, who make no contribution athletically. These foreign STUDENTS typically stick around and contribute to the growth of technology and productivity-enhancing capital investment, which in turn tends to create jobs and generate infinitely more tax revenue over the long-haul. Foreign athletes, by and large, are not the cream of the crop academically and will not make these same contributions.
Nope, this argument is about developing American distance talent, while also giving these kids an opportunity to become doctors and engineers and scientists themselves. Why all the digression? You were disingenuous in your argument that in no way do tax dollars underwrite athletic scholarships, and now you are trying to smear the argument, which is one about athletics, not academics.