An instant classic: New Mark Wetmore Interview up on homepage

Hardloper wrote:

Blowhardloper wrote:

Mark Wetmore wrote with a condescending tone and I'm not sure why Rojo thought his answers were funny or worth publishing.

I thought it was funny and worth reading - I'm sure at least one or two others did too. Therefore it was worth publishing. Maybe you're on the wrong website.

It seems the heavy majority of people here agree with me, and disagree with you. But good reasoning there.

SMJO wrote:

My name is Steve....... however I don't think I'm missing out on not knowing a thing about Wetmore since he is non-existent on the world stage.

It tells you who Mark Wetmore is right under the quote of the day you just commented on. There has also been a Wetmore thread floating at the top of the boards you are browsing for the last couple days.

Blowhardloper wrote:

It seems the heavy majority of people here agree with me,

You're right. There are three other people who agree with you in this thread, and disagree with me. Case closed, your heavy majority has defeated my reasoning.

A classic, funny interview, on the cusp of NCAA XC Champs and 25 posts only?

Proof that this board is dying.

A few years ago there would have been a lot more interest in the run up to NCAA XC Champs, and higher quality posts.

Hmmm.

Hardloper wrote:

Blowhardloper wrote:

It seems the heavy majority of people here agree with me,

You're right. There are three other people who agree with you in this thread, and disagree with me. Case closed, your heavy majority has defeated my reasoning.

Well, seeing how your reasoning was based on the presumed 'one or two people' who agreed with you...yeah. My reasoning did defeat yours. Maybe you should have finished that community college degree.

Oh, and A Duck shares your opinion, so now you're guilty of stupidity by association.

Very funny. Tells us more about the man than straight answers would. And you know what? Even if it is meant as a dig at the interviewer for asking dumb questions (and most interview questions ARE pretty dumb), it's STILL funny and I'm glad they published it.

Blowhardloper wrote:

Well, seeing how your reasoning was based on the presumed 'one or two people' who agreed with you...yeah. My reasoning did defeat yours. Maybe you should have finished that community college degree.

What? I thought you said I had "good reasoning?" Now you're saying I'm dumb. What changed? I don't get it? Now I feel really sad.

I've never had the impression that Wetmore was interested in a "traditional" interview

ewagedsg wrote:

Very funny. Tells us more about the man than straight answers would. And you know what? Even if it is meant as a dig at the interviewer for asking dumb questions (and most interview questions ARE pretty dumb), it's STILL funny and I'm glad they published it.

Bingo,

I 100% agree with you. You learn about him and we learned long ago not to take our selves too seriously as no matter what 30% of the people would complain.

Hilarious interview. Enjoyed it a lot. Too bad Wetmore did not want to give out a single real fact though, haha.

Hardloper wrote:

endless drivel

Keep it coming, douche.

Agreed. It was a very funny read, whether or not Wetmore was angry or just in a good mood having a laugh could be debated.

I'm usually one to hate on the BosJo, but I don't agree with the people saying the "interview" is bad and giving them a hard time.

I read RwtB a couple times and watched all the interviews with Wetmore I could find and he doesn't come across like the kind of person who would ever clutter his life with negativity. If he though those questions were stupid he wouldn't acknowledge them with a reply.

My take is that he understood that the questions were meant as a joke and he answered them accordingly.

Sure, the "humor" is a bit low, but whatever. The point of the "interview" is that there's people who doubt Wetmore and the Buffs in XC this year and Wetmore, the Buffs, and the BrosJo do not agree with the critics.

No facts, just bad humor. I suspect Wetmore is a frequent poster here.

LetsRun.com wrote:

http://www.letsrun.com/2013/11/legend-mark-wetmore-grows-mark-wetmore-reveals-pre-race-fears/

He answered one question with some honestly. I don't get why you're heralding this -- or even publishing it. He's not Bill Bowerman back from the dead. You don't need Wetmore's comments that badly.

I would have LOVED LOVED LOVED to have run for this guy.

Yeah, this wetmore seems like a major c***. In the grand -- or normal size -- scheme, this site and the creators of it are more important than he is. They reach more people and do more for running. Not that it's about being important, but have some respect you douche. Self-important a-hole.

rojo wrote:

ewagedsg wrote:

Very funny. Tells us more about the man than straight answers would. And you know what? Even if it is meant as a dig at the interviewer for asking dumb questions (and most interview questions ARE pretty dumb), it's STILL funny and I'm glad they published it.

Bingo,

I 100% agree with you. You learn about him and we learned long ago not to take our selves too seriously as no matter what 30% of the people would complain.

Exactly. I'm glad RoWeJo decided to share this response. It shows you/they don't take your/themselves to seriously.

Like others have said most interview questions are stupid, which can be especially apparent if viewed in writing. Wetmore made it even more apparent by answering them literally and/or with sarcasm.