Interesting thoughts. I see this thing from both sides - as an American who's married to a Kenyan runner who's en route to becoming an American (another debate entirely, I know). She's at the gym, and I've got nothing to do at the moment, so I'll try to articulate some of my thoughts and reactions.
In trying to address these issues, I think it's important to break things down and try to answer several different questions instead of trying to lump it all together and treat it with a single prescription.
Here are some questions that I'd love to hear people's thoughts on - especially guys like Tony or the Hansons.
1. What does the sport, as it exists in America right now, want from these foreign athletes as their part of this "overall promotion" of the sport?
It's easy to single these guys out, because, for the most part, they are sort of anonymous and interchangeable. At the pre-race pasta dinner they're often huddled at a table together, and the "fly in, fly out" approach doesn't provide for much community interaction.
Of course the language barrier is huge - though the Kenyans are probably the best on this count; the Ethiopians and Eastern Europeans are usually much worse. In many cases, they're willing to do more than just run, but they're probably not going to suggest ideas, so race directors need to ask.
What, aside from running fast, can these guys do to contribute to the sport?
2. What about race directors and elite coordinators (remembering that these are often different individuals with very different roles at the races)?
I've noticed an increase in the number of races offering separate American-only money, but this seems to have backfired in many cases.
Now, instead of having to go out hard and trying to finish in the top-5 or whatever, the American runners let the Africans go from the gun and just sit back and race each other. At a recent race I saw an American get outkicked by a naturalized US citizen from Africa - thinking "I'll still get the US $$$." The truth came out at the awards ceremony when the guy observed "I'd have beaten him if I knew he was American." Seems like a problem in attitude.
3. What about the American athletes?
Here's where I see something of a challenge.
Unfortunately, it seems like many of our top runners are more interested in training than racing. I understand about the need to balance the two, but I think many American athletes would see a "circuit" as an invitation to over racing.
A few weeks ago I ran into a very solid American runner at one of my wife's races - I assumed he was there to run. When I asked about this, he said "Oh, no, I'm not racing right now - I'm putting in mileage and will do a little racing indoors and probably run the 10k at Stanford." This is a guy who might well have beaten the Kenyans in the field at that race, but instead he's getting ready for the Stanford meet next spring - and doing this at the advice of his coach.
If an athlete feels that he or she needs 4 months of base training, 3 weeks of taper, a then 3 weeks of recovery to go chase the "B" standard at Stanford, then that's a person who's more interest in training than racing anyway, and structural changes to the sport probably won't change that mentality.
I don't necessarily advocate the "race of the week" approach used by some of the foreign athletes, but American runners need to be ready to race, or the ideas Tony suggests won't do much at all.
Anyway, not the most coherent thing I've ever written, but would love to hear others' thoughts on this stuff - it is an interesting topic and one deserving of more discussion.