Foreign recruiting haters - explain something to me

That belief is based on observation. IF you can't recruit to your University because its location sucks (Abilene) or you can't coach (half the D1's) or you’re a ham and egger (most D2's and 3's) then you go foreign. If you can’t coach them – buy them and be the van driver of the year!

Would you say James Li can't coach?

What is a "Ham and Egger?"

I agree with the OP. Anyways, in my experience, the guys coaching some community college with Kenyans are often the least lazy- although sometimes the most crazy. Off the top of my head, I can think of several off-the-wall coaches who took their jobs all the more seriously BECAUSE they had Kenyans, and new that they could have championship runners on their hands if they didn't screw up. As a side affect, the Americans on the team were pulled along into running impressive times as well.

If bringing in foreign talent raises the level of Americans, then explain the English World Cup results since, say........1966?????????

well your argument isn't exactly what the haters say.

You are presenting some apples to apples comparison, which isn't fair.

What the haters hate is when a d1 coach could give a scholarship to a US 4:12 HS senior...but instead gives it to a 4:05 Kenyan. the haters' view is that 4:05 kenyans are a dime a dozen and already developed and close to their potential while a 4:11 american has had to deal with HS track and HS fatty life and probably not near his potential.

The problem with that assumption is that most schools that are bringing in foreign athletes can't get the 4:12 guys. The school is not appealing to the 4:12 guys so they go the international route. I see nothing wrong with it.

agip wrote:

well your argument isn't exactly what the haters say.

You are presenting some apples to apples comparison, which isn't fair.

What the haters hate is when a d1 coach could give a scholarship to a US 4:12 HS senior...but instead gives it to a 4:05 Kenyan. the haters' view is that 4:05 kenyans are a dime a dozen and already developed and close to their potential while a 4:11 american has had to deal with HS track and HS fatty life and probably not near his potential.

I am addressing *one* of the common talking points I've read amongst the haters. What you provided is another view that they have, that is also absurd.

one too few wrote:

That belief is based on observation. IF you can't recruit to your University because its location sucks (Abilene) or you can't coach (half the D1's) or you’re a ham and egger (most D2's and 3's) then you go foreign. If you can’t coach them – buy them and be the van driver of the year!

Wait, what are you trying to say with the "ham and eggers" comment? I can assure you that D3 programs aren't recruiting many foreigners.

Also, why do you think foreign athletes don't need to be coached?

It's an old argument. What's the purpose of funding XC scholarships at all?

The coach can say he's simply there to win championships and if bringing in 25 yr old Kenyans is how you do it, fine. He's there to hang banners-nothing more.

The larger question is why do we as a society fund things like track/xc scholarships. I'd say it's not for the "glory" of winning titles. Nobody in the school care about that. It doesn't bring in money or great notoriety like fball or bball.

So the secondary reason would be to bring in people that will attend and represent the school and then go back into the society at large and in some way aid us all. Whether that's by becoming teachers successful business people or just having a more well educated society as a whole. Are we better off with the 4:12 kid NOT going to college or are we better off with the foreign athlete?

That is the rub. It's a short term gain vs long term. Do the foreign athletes come here, run, then leave? Do they stay and make their way here?

Personally I pull for CO for the very reason that Wetmore actually coaches. He's not a van driver.

AnonymousPseudonym wrote:

Personally I pull for CO for the very reason that Wetmore actually coaches. He's not a van driver.

So you don't believe coaches with foreign athletes coach? That's a very naive point of view.

nice. I agree. I would go further and say that athletic scholarships especially at public schools are ethically dubious. What is the freaking point of them? Why do my tax dollars go to pay some runner's tuition?

But your main point is a good one - what is the mission of a track/xc team and coach? is educating kenyans part of that mission? If so, why? Charity? I dunno.

AnonymousPseudonym wrote:

Personally I pull for CO for the very reason that Wetmore actually coaches. He's not a van driver.

Wetmore in Boulder is a poor example. "Boulder" recruits more Footlocker Finalists to CU than Wetmore does.

How soon in El Paso would Wetmore start recruiting ferners?

agip wrote:

nice. I agree. I would go further and say that athletic scholarships especially at public schools are ethically dubious. What is the freaking point of them? Why do my tax dollars go to pay some runner's tuition?

But your main point is a good one - what is the mission of a track/xc team and coach? is educating kenyans part of that mission? If so, why? Charity? I dunno.

I don't think you get how athletic scholarships are supposed to work. When an athlete gets a scholarship, the state doesn't pay his tuition (although the other students might). That money typically comes from donations to the athletic department. The only athlete tuition you're paying for is the service academy teams.

garland823 wrote:

agip wrote:

nice. I agree. I would go further and say that athletic scholarships especially at public schools are ethically dubious. What is the freaking point of them? Why do my tax dollars go to pay some runner's tuition?

But your main point is a good one - what is the mission of a track/xc team and coach? is educating kenyans part of that mission? If so, why? Charity? I dunno.

I don't think you get how athletic scholarships are supposed to work. When an athlete gets a scholarship, the state doesn't pay his tuition (although the other students might). That money typically comes from donations to the athletic department. The only athlete tuition you're paying for is the service academy teams.

I've heard this before but it doesn't pass the giggle test - how does a women's softball team come up with hundreds of thousands of dollars each year for scholarships? I just don't believe that it is all private fund raising.

And if, as you say, students are being taxed to pay for the softball team scholarships, that is as ethically dubious as taxpayers paying.

Then let's say that somehow all those softball scholarships are funded separately. You still have the ethically dubious problem of favoring a softball player over a better student. Esp at a state college, this is undefensible.

george oscar bluth wrote:

There always seems to be a belief amongst the haters that coaches with foreign athletes on their team are lazy and get fast foreign guys as opposed to teams comprised of Americans where the coaches have to develop their runners.

Don't you realize that coaches are developing their runners no matter where they are from? If you get a 4:03 guy from Chicago or a 4:03 guy from Eldoret, you're still going to try to develop him to the best of your abilities. The contention that foreign recruiters aren't working to develop athletes is embarrassing.

I think you said it best. Amongst the haters. Iona and providence do a great job. I think the average foreign athlete takes his running more serious too. They look at university as an opportunity, while lots of americans see it as what you're supposed to do after HS. People like to use the word "talent" as the reason they aren't as good as some other people, whether they be foreign or not.

Wow Generalize much?? Your own bias is showing. For every foreign athlete that's given a scholarship that's a US runner that is not.

Messi wrote:

AnonymousPseudonym wrote:

Personally I pull for CO for the very reason that Wetmore actually coaches. He's not a van driver.

Wetmore in Boulder is a poor example. "Boulder" recruits more Footlocker Finalists to CU than Wetmore does.

How soon in El Paso would Wetmore start recruiting ferners?

Good questions. But he could now and he's not, so all I can go on is what is in front of me, not hypotheticals.

Don't take my original post as me being a "hater". I was coached by a man that came here as a "foreign athlete" and stayed. I've seen both sides of the situation.

Again, what is the mission of the school, of the team, of the athletic department? This is not an issue that has some super easy answer.

In my experience it's not 4:12 local guy vs 4:05 Kenyan, it was 4:25 local vs 4:05 Kenyan. The very talented recruits go to the Colorado and Oregon type schools, we didn't even try. The semi talented recruits went to similar schools but in much better locations with better places to train. We got what was left over. So in order to be competitive in the conference we needed a couple Kenyans to lead the team. Then, to fill out the 3-4-5 spots, we got a slew of 4:25 kids and hoped a few of them had some untapped talent.