University of San Francisco- All Foreign Team

BUTTHOLE SURFER wrote:

Quit being Lazy and be a "Real" coach!!!

oh you wanna talk about being a "real" coach?

This strategy of going foreign with the hopes of attracting domestic talent never works. Once they go foreign they never go back. If they do, they disappear entirely. It is pathetic and lazy. You can coach mid level talent to great things if you prioritize your scholarships to Cross Country, recruit high character individuals and stack certain years. The most impressive job of coaching ever was when Michigan State won the 2014 women's NCAA championship with a scoring roster composed entirely of girls from the state of Michigan (Runners 1-6 were from Michigan, their 7th was from Ohio). USF is a private college, so there is no obligation to the taxpayers. That being said, USF has the academic programs and endowment to attract top level talent, there is no reason for them to rely so heavily on foreign born athletes.

No problem with recruiting foreign athletes, lots of NCAA sports do it. My problem, which probably has already been stated, is when schools who use the international pipeline like a PED, as in a short cut to success. When schools bring in older foreign athletes who are only marginally better than younger domestic talent, that's not fair. You see these schools with foreign athletes on their team who came in at age 19 with 4:30x 1500M PRs, which is only slightly better than a 5-minute mile, while half of the 17 year old 5-minute milers in the U.S. go un recruited by D1 programs. The problem is, those domestic 5-minute milers may not make your XC top-5 or score points at the conference meet until their 2nd of 3rd year, while the foreign athlete can help you right away. Development versus instant success.

JAD wrote:

So, when Wetmore went to Michigan to sign Ritz or Illinois to sign the Torres brothers isn't that EXACTLY the same thing as somebody's "dad buying them a 1970 Camaro...?" He didn't "build it himself." He just signed the best of the best!

I have a ton of respect for Wetmore. I think he has really got things dialed in when it comes to coaching his teams to run at their best at the NCAA XC meet. However, I think he is a bit hypocritical in this interview. If he wants to build it himself then be like Lydiard and only sign local Colorado kids.

The difference is when Wetmore has been able to recruit a Footlocker Champion, he has coached each one to an NCAA cross country championship (I don't know of many other coaches that can say the same). Of the 6 US born athletes that have won NCAA cross country championships since Kennedy, 3 have run for Wetmore. That, and the only other school to win a national championship on the men's side without a foreign born athlete on their team in the past twenty+ years is Stanford. Not to mention the National Champions, Olympic medalists and World Champions he has coached over the years without ever using foreign talent.

for shizz wrote:

Go Dons! F the haters.

Another member of the Golden Gate Park Striders????

Go Dons! F the haters!

BUTTHOLE SURFER wrote:

for shizz wrote:

Go Dons! F the haters.

Another member of the Golden Gate Park Striders????

The Dons are a great group. I hope they make it on the podium at nats with UNM.

Ghosted 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.

How is that a shortcut? Is recruiting out of state a shortcut? Is recruiting students that have run before a shortcut?

We here on the boards only respect coaches who develop HOME GROWN TALENT. Which means: recruiting out of state is a shortcut, recruiting out of town is a a shortcut, recruiting runners who have run under another coach is a shortcut, and recruiting runners who did not grow up in the coach's house is cheating.

The DII (Soon to be DI) version is Cal Baptist U. Check out their frequent flier roster.

+ wrote:

Funny that some posts in this thread mention other California schools and specifically UCLA and how they could offer American high school students less to sign the the same or higher level of talent.

This same coach in question was the UCLA coach at one time. Those teams under her leadership didn't come anywhere close to this level of success. In theory, she had the budget and university reputation to recruit much much faster runners.

You are correct in saying that this coach in question was at UCLA at one time. And the teams under her leadership would get crushed by their cross town rival, USC, who had European athletes dominating the Pac-10 at the time.

So, I guess she learned a lesson from that situation and applied it to her current team at USF. Is this good or bad? That is up for discussion.

I see people using Wetmore as an example of how to build a program within the states. I also liked the video of him speaking about his thoughts on recruiting internationally. Does anyone have a video of his thoughts on marrying his former athletes?

You're absolutely CORRECT!!!

My post has nothing to do with the athletes. I know these women work hard and are probably great people. They've exercised an amazing opportunity to come to the U.S. to obtain a great education in one of the greatest cities in the world while at the same time competing in a very competitive environment within the rules. I get it and don't blame them one bit. As a former athlete who came up through the U.S. ranks from high school, college and professionally and competed against many international athletes at the NCAA level and beyond I am more than qualified to weigh in on this.

Your last sentence is spot on! And it's my opinion that this coach "Sold Out" due to her not being able to recruit, coach and develop young American talent. If after 20 years of coaching (UCLA/USF) and you can't build a successful D-1 program through domestic means maybe you belong in D-2 or D-3 or high school.

TrackCoach wrote:

while half of the 17 year old 5-minute milers in the U.S. go un recruited by D1 programs.

This is extremely untrue. In fact, the price tag for a 5:00 miler, or a 5:05 miler, is insanely high for women's track programs. And many are expecting scholarships.

Furthermore, recruiting "studs," foreign or otherwise, and development are not mutually exclusive.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Interesting! I never saw the BUTTHOLE SURFER rule in the rule book stating how many international students one can have on a team. Who the hell are you to lecture somebody on what nationality their cross country team should be?

If the USF coach learned some lessons while at UCLA, and applied them to her team now, than more power to her. Please show me the rule that states how many international athletes can be on one team? I can't find it!

BUTTHOLE SURFER wrote:

As a former athlete who came up through the U.S. ranks from high school, college and professionally and competed against many international athletes at the NCAA level and beyond I am more than qualified to weigh in on this.

Actually it doesn't qualify you to weigh in on this unless you have coached at a mid major DI school. But at least we know why you're so butt hurt over this. Sorry you couldn't keep up with the foreigners...

Interesting! I never saw the BUTTHOLE SURFER rule in the rule book stating how many international students one can have on a team. Who the hell are you to lecture somebody on what nationality their cross country team should be?

If the USF coach learned some lessons while at UCLA, and applied them to her team now, than more power to her. Please show me the rule that states how many international athletes can be on one team? I can't find it![/quote]

I don't think anyone is super against foreign athletes competing in the NCAA, but I just checked USF's roster and the international students are often coming in as freshmen as 20-21 year olds. Americans are almost under 18 their freshman year. That's an advantage.

You could also talk about the NCAA being an American league, and it would be strange for Americans to travel to Germany to compete in the German national championships. Not sure if that argument would hold up, but I think it has some merit.

True. Strange that pulisic plays in the german league

I was about to say the same thing about the US kid playing in Germany. In fact, most of the US Soccer team in the last World Cup grew up in Germany.

Is there a reason why kids in the US are not running faster?