It's not a contractual matter; it's a matter of what role one has at the university. I've been a professor for a very long time and there are always circumstances that come up wherein a student might want to major in my discipline--which would be good for the department, good for the college, etc.--yet if I think it would be the wrong major for that person, I'll suggest maybe another path would be better to take--always with the student's long term interests in mind. I may be foolish, but I take the student-athlete duality seriously, and I think athletic coaches are preparing their athletes for life after college (the best coaches view themselves as teachers). And when they have someone who shows promise as a professional runner, or at least a great interest in trying, I think the coach's position carries the responsibility of trying to further that end. Wetmore, for example, has said something along these lines many times. In his Flotrack interview today (see the link below), Andy Powell said the same thing. I'd be flabbergasted if Dave Smith doesn't hold the same view. But of all the college coaches I know, Wetmore does perhaps the best job at developing aerobic capacity, and thus the prospects for long term success.
Mr. Obvious wrote:
Montesquieu wrote:Wetmore has an appointment at the university that carries with it the obligation to help in preparing his charges for post-graduate life. So, it's not a question of anyone's saying it, but a question of his responsible given his role within the university.
OK, so
1. Is this common among running coaches? Is is part of Dave Smith's contract/appointment at OKST?
2. If it is for post-graduate life I think that is wonderful. University personnel, including athletics personnel, absolutely should prepare and care about post graduate life. I don't equate that narrowly to post-graduate running success.