Wetmore is a Jerk

I'm the jerk.

Ever notice how no one ever talks about those coaches with mediocre teams with no injuries?

"Flee, my friend, into thy solitude: I see thee stung all over by the

poisonous flies. Flee thither, where a rough, strong breeze bloweth!

Flee into thy solitude! Thou hast lived too closely to the small and

the pitiable. Flee from their invisible vengeance! Towards thee they

have nothing but vengeance.

Raise no longer an arm against them! Innumerable are they, and it is

not thy lot to be a fly-flap.

Innumerable are the small and pitiable ones; and of many a proud

structure, rain-drops and weeds have been the ruin.

Thou art not stone; but already hast thou become hollow by the

numerous drops. Thou wilt yet break and burst by the numerous drops.

Exhausted I see thee, by poisonous flies; bleeding I see thee, and

torn at a hundred spots; and thy pride will not even upbraid.

Blood they would have from thee in all innocence; blood their

bloodless souls crave for- and they sting, therefore, in all

innocence."

Considering the interviews I've read with Ritz over the last couple of years I highly doubt that Wetmore's comment would have any kind of negative impact on him. He seems pretty secure in himself to me. What's more, do you think that Wetmore and Ritz haven't had this conversation before? Of course they have. As for calling Wetmore the most over-rated coach in the game I think you're are incorrect as well. He's had numerous successes over the years and while I expect you to harp on the injuries you really need to realize that inorder to be the best, one must train really, really hard. Sometime's this results in injury - it just does...Have you not ever had a running related injury?

Monty

he is a successful jerk. And it's funny how most of his present and past runners stick-up for him. Maybe they know what you obviously don't, and that is that he cares for his athletes.

Jammer wrote:

This is the most self-serving statement I have heard in ages. This is a guy (Wetmore) who has a history of injuring his best athletes (anyone see the last great hope Goucher lately?).

Wetmore is the most over-rated coach in the game - and he seems like a prick.

Mr. Goucher was injured in HS also dickwad.

Monty,

Are you the ole' canuck Monty? If so, good to see you around, and I hope all is well.

I agree. Not that I advise running to injury.. I don't at all... But, anyone who has never had a running injury has not run to their limit of how hard they can go.

Seems he was able to overcome his HS injury, however, not his postcollegiate one. Strange how that works isn't it?

you're right, moving those damn rocks while landscaping has really done him in. I told Wetmore not to have him doing rock moving two days in one week. Note the sarcasm.

1. And it's funny how most of his present and past runners stick-up for him.

____________________________________________________________________________________

This really isn't true. The "past runners" that get any press will not want to stir things up. If you knew the majority of the runners, you would find that he has a lower approval rating than does George Dubya.

never ever criticize CU in any way again. i shit you not asshole. . .

Shouldn't you give credit to Nietzsche.

Mark told you not to respond to anything on this board. What ARE you thinking?

Wow, another thread bashing a coach. Never seen that before. To all the naysayers, and coach bashers:

1. Is there a distance coach you really respect the methods of? If so, who?

2. Why does it seem that if a runner has success, it is the result of the athlete not the coach, but if the athelte fails, then it is always the coach's fault?

Ex: Goucher wins NCAA = I knew he could do it. Goucher injured = Wetmore doesn't have a clue.

Stuff happens, get over it. Training is not an exact science, if it was we'd all just do the same thing. Sometimes stuff works for one guy and not another. Sometimes it results in great performances from one, and another guy gets injured from it. You get the point.

Just curious.

30 Seconds wrote:

Shouldn't you give credit to Nietzsche.

Yes, forgive me.

THUS SPAKE ZARATHUSTRA

The Flies in the Market-Place

- Friedrich Nietzsche

1. Is there a distance coach you really respect the methods of? If so, who?

McDonnell, Vigil, Gagliano

2. Why does it seem that if a runner has success, it is the result of the athlete not the coach, but if the athelte fails, then it is always the coach's fault?

Read my post. I said Wetmore was a jerk for criticizing his athletes in a public forum and that he was overrated b/c he hasn't really delivered when it counts with all of the talent he has recruited. We tend to forget that this kid (Ritz) is only 19 years old. Does he really need to read an article in the newpaper and on the web that says in so many words "that stupid kid doesn't listen when I tell him to be patient" I know I would be a little po'd if my coach was doing that.

I also think he's overrated b/c he hasn't had any athlete successfully transition from the college system to the grand prix circuit - a transition that requires a complete shift in the periodization of the athlete (tough stuff).

Wetmore's also a publicity hound who doesn't EVER miss a chance to get his name in the news. He is almost as bad a Chris Carmichael (one of LA's advisors). I suspect there will be a Wetmore coaching services website some day so that he can cash in on his "success".

something weird about all you guys who get so pissed off when a person involved with running "cashes in."

And the program is a success. You think they should be better, good for you.

If you think they can't be better sad for you.

As far as cashing in goes, a coach has to have something good to offer. For ordinary people, Wetmore has some valuable info. But, as was said a few posts back, he has yet to get one true contender yet...and, according to his system, it doesn't solely rest on talent, but, on several factors. He's gotten talent, but, seems to have other excuses (factors) to blame.

This reminds me of Herb Elliot. Lydiard said his grandmother could have coached him to a gold medal. The same is true of Ritz. Wetmore is more of an impediment to Ritz's success than an aide.

runner wrote:

something weird about all you guys who get so pissed off when a person involved with running "cashes in."

And the program is a success. You think they should be better, good for you.

I've often wondered about this, what is the problem with "cashing in"? As far as I am concerned, it is called "putting food on the table". My college coach was a great coach, runner and had an MBA. Ulitmately, he grew tired of driving his 15 year old Toyota pickup and had to support a family, so he quit coaching and put the MBA to work.

Just because you have had bad experiences with Wetmore does not mean that the rest of us who really know him well have.I also think it's funny that you claim to know a "majority" of the former CU runners. You're developing a really bad reputation among past and present CU runners, and I doubt they would share anything with you, knowingly.

Buffy wrote:

This really isn't true. The "past runners" that get any press will not want to stir things up. If you knew the majority of the runners, you would find that he has a lower approval rating than does George Dubya.

"He is almost as bad as a Chris Carmichael."

Yeah, shit, I'd hate to be as bad as a Chris Carmichael. Rebound from an accident that ends my pro career by coaching someone to 5 straight Tour de France victories. Man, that would suck ass. Even contemplating it makes me reach for the hemlock.