Why do people find the idea of foreigners in the NCAA so apalling?

Those who hate foreign runners are just ignorant. I think that the NCAA should have controls on this though. My suggestion would be that every US university team would have to have at least one American on the team. The purpose of this would be to save some scholarships for American kids. Who knows, even if that scholarship were given out to an unproven runner, maybe he would be lifted up by his teammates. I can envision a program like Alabama or Oklahoma State (I picked them because they already have many foreign athletes on their XC rosters), giving out the required scholarship to a kid, from their home state, who

maybe wasn't a FL finalist, but has interest to local fans. The Kenyans and other foreigners, being a bit more mature, would probably help him along and improve to national class by the time he is a senior. It just seems the right thing to do to help rise up some of these foreign runners who would otherwise be running in poverty. Americans would learn to start following the foreign runners on their college team and our relationship with the world would improve.

Junot wrote:

[

Yes, and that's fair enough. However, should we be tailoring the system towards the rare late-bloomer? Don't get me wrong, it's always great to see a late-bloomer come on and become competitive --and those are the guys you can't help but cheer for too-- but isn't the late-bloomer more the exception than the rule? Are we displacing any willing and eager kids from the sport of running?[/quote]

I don't think that its that rare to have a freshman come in with 14:30-14:45 5k ability and in 2-3 years be down under 14:10. These are the kids being passed up for the FOB 14:10/29:00 or faster foreigner.

Hayduke wrote:

I don't think that its that rare to have a freshman come in with 14:30-14:45 5k ability and in 2-3 years be down under 14:10. These are the kids being passed up for the FOB 14:10/29:00 or faster foreigner.

How many name-brand schools can claim to have an over-abundance of 14:30 - 14:45 (or better) 5km frosh?

the ncaa does regulate it, it gives men 12.6 and women 18 scholarships to recruit eligible human beings.

Go build a team.

Should we mandate how many throwers and sprinters must be on scholarship too? Many nationally known cross country teams would be up a creek in that case.

Should we mandate how many athletes should be from a certain state?

Should we mandate how many should have blue eyes?

I think it's a matter of connecting at the local level. Instead of persistently relying on foreigners to immedicately impact the program, college coaches could do a better job at scouting and working with high school coaches within their state to develop athletes who can reach the next level. High school coaches more often than not treat their athletes the same way, how can we score points and win now, versus how can we become a developmental mill for the state college programs. And yes, you can still win in high school by developing athletes according to a multi-year plan, you may have to take it down a level to the middle school and club programs to get them on board too. College coaches could facillitate this whole process if they took the time to work with the local/state youth running community.

coaching connection wrote:

College coaches could facillitate this whole process if they took the time to work with the local/state youth running community.

Is this facilitating and working with younger runners an explicit part of most college coaches job mandate?

It is a no-brainer and common practice in other sports. Coaches adivise and/or participate in youth programs (such as ODP in soccer), outright provide offensive or defensive schemes and training programs to high school and club coaches (particularly aau b-ball) in basketball and football, and promote the heck out of, then identify kids, in their own summer camp programs.

It just makes sense to build connections, monitor, and help develop potential future recruits from your state. Why wouldn't you?

It's not that it's appalling in general. It's that we Americans are stunned that we can not even provide enough good athletes within our own borders to fill a roster with winner.s Afterall, it is an American school, and to have your best athletes be non-American....well, it's weird.

Back in the day when Henry Rono was a 25-year old freshman (though, damn, he was fun to watch run ... much funner than a 14:30 guy), it was unfair.

But now that most Kenyans/foreign runners are the same age as American runners, it's up to the U.S. runners to get better.

Foreign athletes are all over college basketball now, but they're not dominating. Why? Because Americans are still the best basketball players. Foreigners can't crack the collegiate football system. Why? The U.S. players are the best.

I'm thinking something is greatly lacking in the junior high/middle school and high school levels as far as coaching and training.

The biggest foreign-dominated college sports is tennis. Nearly every team's roster is full of foreigners. Why? Because the U.S. doesn't produce enough good players. Why is that? Because the junior system/high school system stinks. Would it improve if there were more opportunities for U.S. kids? I'm not sure. Never underestimate the laziness of the couch-laying, Hostess-eating, video game-playing American youth.

I think that the main reason that most people are against foreigners is when they are older. Somebody mentioned Providence, but the vast majority of the athletes that Coach Treacy has brought in have been the same age as any American freshman. One Div. II team in NE has decided to go after some Kenyan athletes, and the reason that people are mad is because their "freshman" graduated from HS in Kenya in '01, '01, and '03. The youngest is 25, and has been running for a club in Kenya for the last several years. Don't call him a freshman. That just gets people more pissed off.

the foreign whites like kujiken, schaff, willis, cragg are coddled and fawned to death. the blacks like sam chelenga, hassan mead, and the mexicans like alberto salazar, german fernandez, are hated and scorned. what else is new. the united states is the most racist nation in the recorded history of the human race.

uncleB wrote:

Racism.

Irish runners, New Zealanders, English, Canadian (white ones) are often treated like adopted sons (or daughters) by US fans.

Africans are not.

To an extent, you're right, but not for the reason I think you're thinking of. The assumption is that Africans are superior because of genetics, geography, and culture. The Irish, NZ'ers, English, Canadians, etc. would be presumed to be more similar in those regards (especially culture and genetics) and this easier to identify with and harder to abstract. The concept of a Kenyan is easy to abstract because they've been so successful, just like the concept of a movie star takes that image and reduces the idea of that star as a person. With non-dominant cultures (in terms of running) that identity isn't ready-made.

whites o.k. wrote:

the foreign whites like kujiken, schaff, willis, cragg are coddled and fawned to death. the blacks like sam chelenga, hassan mead, and the mexicans like alberto salazar, german fernandez, are hated and scorned. what else is new. the united states is the most racist nation in the recorded history of the human race.

Woah...I think Susan is hilarious, wanna destroy Schaff (...in a good way), follow Willis and Cragg as Pro's, cheer Hassan whenever we race, am indifferent to Fernandez, attempt to emulate Salazar (toughness/training--not form...), and generally don't care for Chelenga (goes to Liberty...) though I could really not care much less about what he does as long as he doesn't get citizenship (NO not because I don't want any more 'blacks' in the US, but because I don't want other countries making fun of us for stealing athletes like a few of the Mid. Eastern nations). Hell, I go as far as to say I think Chelenga is pretty damn funny and a likeable guy personality wise! But, I will say this, I dislike the idea that Alabama/UTEP/ACU has with brining over a bunch of guys who can't really speak english (at least not well enough to do an interview like Sam does) and are just here 'till their eligibility is up without really contributing much to the popularity of our sport. You must agree, that Sam can at least do this (so long as commentators don't constantly announce 'this young man from Kenya...' etc.)

...and there I go, rambling a bit. Hopefully I made a few statements in there!

The foreign Providence freshman are typically 20 years old coming in the door.

The US Providence freshman are typically 18 years old coming in the door.

You don't notice the difference? For example, Matt Terry is a sophomore there and he's 19, Julian Matthews is a sophomore there and he's 21.

Two extra years of development are a lot.

Providence, by the way, gets its share of negative sentiment on the foreign issue. It comes with the territory.

la la land wrote:

The foreign Providence freshman are typically 20 years old coming in the door.

Somehow, though, Kelly won NCAA cross when he was 23, as did Smith.

Cullen was 23 as a senior, as was Fagan.

In comparison, Ryan Vail is currently 23, as was Rupp this spring. Let's not even bring the Mormons into the conversation.

Mark Wetmore often makes comments about the injustice of foreigners in the NCAA, yet Barringer is 23, Goucher was 23 when he won NCAA cross, Gorton was 23 for her final track season, and Heinonen was 24 when he helped CU win nationals in 2006.

I'm not seeing the inequity.

whites o.k. wrote:

the foreign whites like kujiken, schaff, willis, cragg are coddled and fawned to death. the blacks like sam chelenga, hassan mead, and the mexicans like alberto salazar, german fernandez, are hated and scorned. what else is new. the united states is the most racist nation in the recorded history of the human race.

God I hope youre kidding....German Fernandez has more fans than runner I can possibly think of, with the possible exception of Hasay. Salazar isnt mexican, Hassan Mead is an american citizen, and I don't think I've ever heard anyone bitch about him being a foreigner.

And "the united states is the most racist nation in the recorded history of the human race." May be the dumbest statement I've read in a LONG time.

OK, so Kelly won as a senior at age 23. That means he was 20 as a freshman when he ran NCAA's.

The first American at the NCAA's this year was Chris Derrick. He's 19 years old (19 years and 42 days) and he's a sophomore. Does that help you at all?

It's an undeniable fact that foreign students in general are a year or two older than US counterparts. You'll find a few exceptions, of course, but the general reality is simply a matter of record. I don't mean to single out Providence, it's true of virtually any college that has international athletes.

Chalanga is a 24 year old junior, McNeil - who finished second - is a 23 year old sophomore from Australia. Barnabas Kirui will be 24 in a week or so and he's a junior.

la la land wrote:

OK, so Kelly won as a senior at age 23. That means he was 20 as a freshman when he ran NCAA's.

The first American at the NCAA's this year was Chris Derrick. He's 19 years old (19 years and 42 days) and he's a sophomore. Does that help you at all?

It's an undeniable fact that foreign students in general are a year or two older than US counterparts. You'll find a few exceptions, of course, but the general reality is simply a matter of record. I don't mean to single out Providence, it's true of virtually any college that has international athletes.

Or, Kelly redshirted at some point (like most everyone else) and was 19 as a true freshman (like most everyone else).

Derrick is young for his grade, which makes what he's doing all the more impressive, but he is not the norm. Most American freshman turn 19 some time during their freshman year.