USF women's XC team is hard to like

As taken from the 16-17 NCAA DI manual:

2.6 The Principle of Nondiscrimination. [*]

The Association shall promote an atmosphere of respect for and sensitivity to the dignity of every person. It is

the policy of the Association to refrain from discrimination with respect to its governance policies, educational

programs, activities and employment policies, including on the basis of age, color, disability, gender, national

origin, race, religion, creed or sexual orientation. It is the responsibility of each member institution to determine

independently its own policy regarding nondiscrimination.

I don't see this trend stopping anytime soon either. For a lot of young athletes in Europe, this is a very attractive way to continue on in your sport. Most club athletes don't get money or sponsorship and struggle to train alone and juggle their studies. A lot of athletes like to have a nice training environment with teammates and support. Also the level of competition is much higher.

Cheers, man, though not really sure what you mean that the school is not "about" being homegrown. Maybe I'm dating myself, but I'm a product of a Bay Area Catholic education from a while back and I knew plenty of people from my school and/or with that same background who went to USF. With all respect, it's not even close to being in the class academically of a Cal or a Stanford and so didn't draw too much from outside of California. I doubt that has changed a lot, but maybe it has.But in re-reading my original post I confess that it was more inflammatory than I intended: I was vaguely aware that USF had a good women's team and when I saw they won Roy Griak, I checked the roster for the first time because I assumed that at least some of the runners would be NorCal (or maybe SoCal) runners. So I reacted negatively to seeing that there were literally none from the US, let alone California, in the entire top 7 and I think all of them are above the normal age for their class (not all above "college age", but things like 20 or 21 year old freshman and 24 year old seniors. Pretty much all of them would be 24-25 at graduation if they run 4 years.)Maybe I'm splitting hairs and being defensive, but I think that fairly makes them "hard to like" and doesn't for me carry the same excitement as Syracuse must carry having built it with mostly local kids. To each his or her own.And for those of you who think "USF" means South Florida, give me a break. Univ of San Francisco predates U South Florida literally by more than 100 years and is the alma mater of Bill Russell among others! USF was winning national championships before anyone even though of setting up another public u in south Florida.

Anza St wrote:

As someone who has been near to the program and seen it in different phases- I can certainly understand how anyone might feel like they would root harder for a homegrown team. That said- that is not what the school is about or the city for that matter. Diversity is key to the beauty of the city and is synonymous with the university, both academically and athletically. I'm not saying that recruiting 100% international is the mission statement- it's just what is being attracted to the school and program currently.

I don't agree with your stance, but won't give you grief for having one.

We can both have separate opinions and coexist.

Cheers

-Cs

Yawn - Didn't we already have this conversation back in 2015 with regard to the UNM XC squad?

I'm happy to see USF and UNM create squads that are highly competitive. They keep the Buffaloes, Ducks, and others sharp. Since USF and UNM probably have difficulty recruiting top US HS runners (due to academics - not coaching), then they should get the best runners they can while following all NCAA rules. I would if I was the coach.

BTW - the interview with the Griak winner from USF is on Flotrack (its free) and I'd say that the USF XC team is easy to like...

diverdown wrote:

Theodvir wrote:

They look easy to like.

pics?

Look up their roster. Best looking women's team hands down. Dat accent. No hillbilly ladies from the south or snooty California preps. They have my full support!

diverdown wrote:

Theodvir wrote:

They look easy to like.

pics?

Look up their roster. Best looking women's team hands down. Dat accent. No hillbilly ladies from the south or snooty California preps. They have my full support!

Independent voter wrote:

Dear Mr. Sanctuary City,

I voted for Trump. I don't care about their race, ethnicity, sexual orientation. I only care that USF did not cheat and they are here legally and accounted for. It must be difficult telling everyone how tolerant you are - except that you really aren't. Enjoy your evening.

Sincerely,

East Coast Independent

Please stop it with the logic.

Berlin Marathon Commenter wrote:

Lookah Uppahman wrote:

A8GES OF SELECT SAN FRAN RUNNERS

Bird - 23

Bouchard - 24

Brauer - 21+

Dias - 20+

Latraverse - 24+

Meyer - 20

Pyzik - 21+

Schulte - 20

Star - 21+

Taylor - 23+

Ulrichova - 23+

Wallace - 18

(BTW, USF is South Florida)

Nope. Definitely University of San Francisco to anyone who isn't a redneck from the pan handle.

At least those rednecks know what the panhandle of Florida refers to.

The Foreign Legion approach can work but it hasn't been sustainable. People don't like it. Mostly because the marginal U's do it. Quality schools need to get regional talent and fill in with overseas personnel on a limited basis.

I really haven't paid attention to what UTEP is doing these days. I suppose any place who recruits east Africa hard could win big. But really what is the point if everybody else is doing it a different way?

I feel for the schools that have no chance at good hs talent but I don't think I'd be quick to congratulate an HC,AC when their top 7 is majority foreign. Bill Dellinger always threatened to have a recruiting year when he went all foreign but he never did it. Maybe he was trying to put a little perspective at what was going on at WSU with John Chaplin IDK?

I was 28 when I won the Heisman Trophy but I'm American so are we cool?

Great Coaching! I am sure the San Fran Coach would love to have sub 10:15 American 2 mile HS girls. The reality is these girls all want to go to Colorado, Oregon etc. The other reality is the parents of these distance girls usually (not always) have money so a 1/3 scholarship to the schools I just mentioned trumps a full ride offer to New Mexico or San Fran. So the SF or NM coach has two choices, take the 11:00 2 mile American HS runners or go with a team whose majority scorers are from another country. Trust me, I am in this boat like the NM and SF coach. Convincing a talented young runner not to go to their dream school and parents dream school (let's say Michigan) and go to your school is very difficult and frustrating.

I am extremely frustrated by this dynamic as well. Especially as all these ladies can get a free (or almost) feducation back home and Americans are buried in school debt. My son went to our flagship state university and was only given 20 percent as they had to save the fulls for the international kids. We give them free education, food, lodging and expenses at the expense of US kids only to train them and send them home where the later beat us in international competition. I think foreigners should be able to compete but let their countries subsidize their attendance not take the spots of US tax payers. Even private schools are getting federal funding for research. Why are we giving free education to those who don't need it when we have so many in need at home.

San Francisco has its own Panhandle (right by USF incidentally)