Well said surfer. Until the NCAA institutes a cap we will continue to train Europe's Olympians at the expense of our domestic kids.
Well said surfer. Until the NCAA institutes a cap we will continue to train Europe's Olympians at the expense of our domestic kids.
Someone who'd know wrote:
Carl Spackler wrote:Most people who follow college athletics know that if a coach is importing athletes, that's a sign they are taking a "shortcut" to developing a nationally competitive team. This happens in a lot of college athletics--not just women's XC. The bigger question is how good is the coach at developing runners (foreign or US) in her system.
Here is reality. To get a 2:10/4:55/10:30 american woman, USF likely has to cough up 75% give or take 25% depending on other variables. Cal & UCLA get that same kid for a books scholarship - as will most of the rest of the Pac-12 - at MOST. Honestly they probably walk-on if they're a California kid. Stanford has that kid walk-on if they let her walk on.
To get a 2:08/4:50/10:20 kid, USF HAS to drop a full ride. Cal & UCLA get that kid for pocket change & Stanford recruits that kid to walk on.
So explain this to me...when a full ride can get you a proven 21 year old winner that doesn't need much development or you have to fight like hell (a lot harder than for the better foreigner) for the 10:20 California kid who's still going to take 2 - 3 years to develop for that full ride...and they're a "California kid" (less upside with more entitlement & less grit)...who would you spend that money on? And that kid probably still isn't going to USF. It really is pretty simple. And not easy to do...it still took Helen 15 or so years to get to this point & fine tune their system...but that's still half as long as Rob Conner. Yes - I know they've been a national power for about 10 -15 years so probably took them similar amounts of time to build to national prominence. But recruiting & developing men is completely different than doing the same with women. Basically, you HAVE to buy women...not men. Trust me...
WTF!!!!
"California Kid"..."Less upside with more entitlement & less grit"
Entitlement by means of having hard working successful parents who can afford to send their kids to top rated schools of which they pay taxes for?
Less grit by means of not being from a family of corn farmers in Iowa or coal miners in West Virginia?
California is not just Hollywood and beaches. Maybe you should jump in your covered wagon and come out here and visit first before judging people's "Grit".
Here is what really needs to happen... XC needs to become an actual sport in the ncaa's eyes and the ncaa needs to allow scholarships for it. This way there would actually be money available for distance runners to develop them. As it stands now, splitting the 12.5 or 18 track scholarships, means you need your full ride athlete to have instant ncaa success. who can give a full ride to someone they hope can develop?
americans afraid of international competition. a familiar story.... and understandable. you are in decline
Top California kids don't want to go to USF when there are so many other instate options. Her job is to get the best runners she can. Why settle for 10:40 runners from California when you can get way faster Europeans? She is a great coach and over the years has done well developing US born runners but to compete at the top of the NCAA she did what she needed to do.
BUTTHOLE SURFER wrote:
Hmmmmm!!!
Univ of Colorado #1- 23 women on the CC roster.....0 foreign athletes
Univ of San Francisco #6- 24 women on the roster.....13 foreign athletes
First off, I do have a good idea of how NCAA cross country works. I competed at a D-1 school of which our X-C team was consistently ranked in the Top 5 throughout every season (#1 on and off all 4 years) and finished in the Top 5 at the NCAA Championships all 4 years..........with ZERO foreign athletes on the roster of 20. So it can be done!!
I don't have an issue with schools recruiting and having foreign athletes on their rosters. I actually think its a good thing that brings diversity to a program. My point is that when over 50% of your roster is foreign and from that is your Top 7 scoring runners something is not right. It goes back to recruiting and coaching. It's rare that schools give out full rides to X-C runners unless they're a true "Blue Chipper". The combination of academic and athletic money are the main sources of financial aid. Not too mention that X-C runners are by and large very good students and the academic money is usually available without tapping out the athletic money which also needs to cover track and field. So more times than not money isn't the issue. My point is that it takes time to build a program and if done correctly through well thought out recruiting and coaching any program can bring in home grown talent along with limited foreign talent and be successful. Not too mention that most if not all recruited foreign athletes are VERY talented and need little coaching to begin with. Don't forget, I'm referring to FOREIGN RECRUITED athletes that are being brought in make a team successful. We need to invest and recruit our home grown athletes first and then bring in foreign athletes to fill out rosters if needed. Any wannabe coach can throw money at a foreign athlete, promise them a great education and win. That's not true coaching!!
You clearly are male & ran for a Power Five school with a low threshold for academic scholarship. Probably Colorado. And have never coached in the NCAA. If you had, you’d know that “true coaching†is VERY low down on the job description list. And you’d know what I’m saying about California kids.
It is amazing to me that someone with obviously knows zero about NCAA recruiting decides to chime in about his/her opinion of USF becoming a "powerhouse" overnight. You do realize the Helen has been at USF for the better part of 20 years, slowly building up the program to what they have today. Alongside her assistant Benji who is one of the very best recruiters in the country, they have found a way to compete AND potentially beat the best top power 5 schools in the country within the rules set forth by the NCAA.
Cheating you say??? Why don't you try the word innovative.
On second thought, Why don't you become an NCAA Div. 1 coach at a mid major school, and pick and choose how you recruit based on your BS Idea of recruiting within the United States and let me know how well that works for you. Lets go a step further...Why dont you become an NCAA coach at a mid major schoool and NOT be fully funded, compete with big market programs that have football and fully scholarship allotment, and then try and decide if you should give a full ride to a California kid that will never be top 10 in cross and cry when it rains out, when you can spend the same amount on an overseas grad student with greater athletic ability and more mental toughness.
There is a reason you are on a forum writing about your opinion of recruiting, while Helen and Benji are out there STRAIGHT ROCKING your favorite power 5 schools this season. Strap in, its only going to get more painful for you as USF continues to climb the ranks, while you are locked in your mothers basement, trying to figure out why you never were able to break 20 minutes for 5k, typing away with excess lubriderm on your hands.
Who cares how long Helen's been there? That has nothing to do with the point the OP makes: USF is only competing well because of international talent.
Helen's had 20 years to try to build a team with US talent, couldn't do it. Started recruiting abroad and found success. Whoop-de-do. What a coaching genius!
Also, it appears to me that your so-called "one of the best recruiters" (Benji) sucks at recruiting within the US, and has to look abroad to get any talent. Why is that?
Plus, what a stupid argument about California kids. "Crying when it rains out". Bonus points for your ability to type while brain-damaged.
As long as they keep producing teams with gorgeous runners I am all for them recruiting wherever they please
Name me a Mid major school that has been ranked 5 in the country that has done so without going international. Go ahead, we will wait.....
Go ahead and name a mid major school that has produced an NCAA 10k champ on the track. go ahead, we will wait......... (and also feel free to explain to us why a power 5 didn't recruit her, if it is perfectly legal to do so?)
Hint. Most college coaches lack the understanding of the international system, and aren't willing to work to the level you have to with these international student and your own school to get these kids on campus.
Also, if it isn't genius, why aren't more programs doing it, and potentially becoming a national championship program. you think its because they want to stay within the US market and prove to you that it can be done? You don't think every mid major in the country would die to be ranked top 5 in the county, while their AD pats them on the back for a job well done?
USF has found a way to recruit internationally which is far more difficult than you would ever be able to comprehend, and are willing to work at it harder than anyone. They know how to look for talent that goes beyond PR's on the internet. Go ahead and check Charlotte Taylors P.R's before USF.......and tell me if you saw NCAA champ coming in the future (Hint, you can use Athletic.net for this one buddy)
Are you made Benji didn't make a recruiting call to you?
YES, Benji is one of the best recruiters, judging by their success. Go ahead and keep wishing Benji would stay within US borders, while USF keep whopping that a**.
You know what should really keep you up at night? When USF uses the momentum they are building to continue to legally pickup intenrational studs, while beginning to steal US 5 star recruits because USF more of a house hold name in XC than your favorite band wagon programs.
butseriously wrote:
Well said surfer. Until the NCAA institutes a cap we will continue to train Europe's Olympians at the expense of our domestic kids.
Yea, because the #5 runner on the team that gets 8th place at the NCAA championships will make the Olympics one day.
The best kids are still getting scholarships. It's the American kids on the scholarship bubble that lose out in this situation.
BUTTHOLE SURFER wrote:
Hmmmmm!!!
Univ of Colorado #1- 23 women on the CC roster.....0 foreign athletes
Univ of San Francisco #6- 24 women on the roster.....13 foreign athletes
First off, I do have a good idea of how NCAA cross country works. I competed at a D-1 school of which our X-C team was consistently ranked in the Top 5 throughout every season (#1 on and off all 4 years) and finished in the Top 5 at the NCAA Championships all 4 years..........with ZERO foreign athletes on the roster of 20. So it can be done!!
I don't have an issue with schools recruiting and having foreign athletes on their rosters. I actually think its a good thing that brings diversity to a program. My point is that when over 50% of your roster is foreign and from that is your Top 7 scoring runners something is not right. It goes back to recruiting and coaching. It's rare that schools give out full rides to X-C runners unless they're a true "Blue Chipper". The combination of academic and athletic money are the main sources of financial aid. Not too mention that X-C runners are by and large very good students and the academic money is usually available without tapping out the athletic money which also needs to cover track and field. So more times than not money isn't the issue. My point is that it takes time to build a program and if done correctly through well thought out recruiting and coaching any program can bring in home grown talent along with limited foreign talent and be successful. Not too mention that most if not all recruited foreign athletes are VERY talented and need little coaching to begin with. Don't forget, I'm referring to FOREIGN RECRUITED athletes that are being brought in make a team successful. We need to invest and recruit our home grown athletes first and then bring in foreign athletes to fill out rosters if needed. Any wannabe coach can throw money at a foreign athlete, promise them a great education and win. That's not true coaching!!
Woah, you must be really fast.
USF is a private university and isn't wasting tax payer dollars on cross country.
More like Butthurt surfer.
I hear you though, you'd like to see American athletes get those spots, you want the focus to be on developing American runners, and it does seem easy to just import a bunch of runners (If it was that easy everyone would do it, and there are plenty of teams that do this and are not any good)
But consider this:
Would the NCAA National Championship be more or less competitive without those foreign athletes? Can you imagine how lame NCAAs would be if it was literally just American born athletes? The quality of the meet would be nowhere near the same.
Now consider this:
Does that competition help or hurt the development of our American athletes? I think NCAA attracting athletes from all over the world raises the level of competition and therefore makes it a better environment for American athletes to develop. It calls them to a higher standard if they want to be the very best (like no one ever was...)
American men haven't won individually in a while, alright. But, look at the teams that have won the past several years. The all-foreign teams really have not done that well lately. (UTEP, Iona, Louisville, MTSU to name a few) The premier programs have consistently been Colorado, Stanford, Syracuse and NAU the past few years. (again, just to name a few) Sure, there are some foreigners in there, but most of those teams are made up of American runners. (On the Women's side you have seen more individual winners but the foreign teams have done a little better)
Be thankful for the non-american runners in the NCAA. Good for them for using their talents to get an education. They make us better.
statistically, your statement is very false (look at election numbers)but we know what you're saying
semenyagoat wrote:
americans are mostly obese trump voters. you can neither win a race with them nor make academic advances. luckily there are good foreigners
Jerry Shoemaker wrote:
Charlotte Taylor is a CUTIE
vivalarepublica wrote:But if they are foreign AND attractive, does Letsrun really care?
Useless without pics
Supertramp wrote:
More like Butthurt surfer.
I hear you though, you'd like to see American athletes get those spots, you want the focus to be on developing American runners, and it does seem easy to just import a bunch of runners (If it was that easy everyone would do it, and there are plenty of teams that do this and are not any good)
But consider this:
Would the NCAA National Championship be more or less competitive without those foreign athletes? Can you imagine how lame NCAAs would be if it was literally just American born athletes? The quality of the meet would be nowhere near the same.
Now consider this:
Does that competition help or hurt the development of our American athletes? I think NCAA attracting athletes from all over the world raises the level of competition and therefore makes it a better environment for American athletes to develop. It calls them to a higher standard if they want to be the very best (like no one ever was...)
American men haven't won individually in a while, alright. But, look at the teams that have won the past several years. The all-foreign teams really have not done that well lately. (UTEP, Iona, Louisville, MTSU to name a few) The premier programs have consistently been Colorado, Stanford, Syracuse and NAU the past few years. (again, just to name a few) Sure, there are some foreigners in there, but most of those teams are made up of American runners. (On the Women's side you have seen more individual winners but the foreign teams have done a little better)
Be thankful for the non-american runners in the NCAA. Good for them for using their talents to get an education. They make us better.
Do you know what these programs have in common that are consistently highly ranked? They get a lot of talented runners to go run for them. It's really a numbers game. A mid major is not going to be competitive consistently in the NCAA unless they are getting similar level recruits. A coach is only trying to take a shortcut if they are at a program that can get top american kids. You who say that USF can keep getting talented kids are delusional. They are ranked #4 this week. You really think that can be achieved at USF with a few americans sprinkled in. Maybe if they start stealing recruits from other power 5 schools. Point is lots of people pretend to understand how it is to be a coach in the NCAA. I ran Div I. and never really understood all the other things my coach did. Coaching is a small part of the job. The sad part is coaches at smaller schools are often paid pennies to do more work. Coaches at big schools get paid more and have more help in general. I understand the frustration of wanting to see more americans get opportunities. But... the NCAA is more competitive thanks to these overseas athletes. And... a program like USF has such a small chance of being as good as they are giving more scholarships to americans.
Stride Right wrote:
It is amazing to me that someone with obviously knows zero about NCAA recruiting decides to chime in about his/her opinion of USF becoming a "powerhouse" overnight. You do realize the Helen has been at USF for the better part of 20 years, slowly building up the program to what they have today. Alongside her assistant Benji who is one of the very best recruiters in the country, they have found a way to compete AND potentially beat the best top power 5 schools in the country within the rules set forth by the NCAA.
Cheating you say??? Why don't you try the word innovative.
On second thought, Why don't you become an NCAA Div. 1 coach at a mid major school, and pick and choose how you recruit based on your BS Idea of recruiting within the United States and let me know how well that works for you. Lets go a step further...Why dont you become an NCAA coach at a mid major schoool and NOT be fully funded, compete with big market programs that have football and fully scholarship allotment, and then try and decide if you should give a full ride to a California kid that will never be top 10 in cross and cry when it rains out, when you can spend the same amount on an overseas grad student with greater athletic ability and more mental toughness.
There is a reason you are on a forum writing about your opinion of recruiting, while Helen and Benji are out there STRAIGHT ROCKING your favorite power 5 schools this season. Strap in, its only going to get more painful for you as USF continues to climb the ranks, while you are locked in your mothers basement, trying to figure out why you never were able to break 20 minutes for 5k, typing away with excess lubriderm on your hands.
Easy there tiger!!! You have NO IDEA of my credentials as an athlete or coach. I will say this, I've been there, seen that, done that....and more!
Who said anyone is cheating?? and please don't bore me with "Within the NCAA rules" I hope your coaching idol and her side-kick (one of the best recruiters in the country- Australia and England) are working within the rules!!! I'm sure Helen is a "Good" coach but why did it take her 20 years to build a program with ALL FOREIGN athletes??? What so "Innovative" about that? She could have done that in her 1st year. The easy way out for a coach is to bring in a bunch of 25 year old foreign grad students and "STRAIGHT ROCK THE POWER 5 SCHOOLS". If that makes you proud.....Enjoy that!! Not a lot of coaching needed to do that.
Quit bitching about how you don't have money or a football team or whatever. Great coaching will draw great runners and great runners will draw more great runners. I'm good with foreign athletes coming to the U.S. and running, I'm just not good with more than 50% on a roster while neglecting our up and coming talent.
Here come the DONS!!!!!!...........with their passports and student visas in hand.
Maybe Helen and Benjii can call Mark Wetmore and ask for some coaching tips and how to recruit.
How about that "POWER 5 SCHOOL" NAU???????
Stride Right wrote:
Name me a Mid major school that has been ranked 5 in the country that has done so without going international. Go ahead, we will wait.....
So to answer your question:
I would consider NAU, Portland (Men) and Butler (Women) Mid-Majors that have been in the top 5 at nattys on the past 10 years and not really been all international (William and Mary men were in there too but I do not know if they were international or not, that was a while ago)
Few other mid-majors have been consistently successful, although I really am not sure who was and was not "international" ten years ago so.
Also, if you throw in the Ivy League schools and schools from the old Big East conference, the number rises. It has definitely happened.
Parker Valby post 5k interview... Worst of all time? Are Parker Valby interviews always cringe?
MSU men > NAU by 1 point even though Nico Young and Colin Sahlman tripled!!
NCAA D1 Conference Outdoor Championships Live Results and Discussion Thread
Live Now - Official 2024 Track Fest at Oxy Live Discussion Thread
Do Australians consider their culture closer to Britain's or America's?
Start Lists for the Men's and Women's Mile/1500 at Pre are up