I understand the obvious reasons why anyone would pick Stanford if they had the opportunity, but does CU match scholarship money compared to other schools? Is this why CU rarely gets the very top level guys coming out of HS? Or is it that Wetmore such a curmudgeon / harda$$ that he refuses to actually recruit or make any prospective runner fell welcome or wanted. I've read RWTB two or three times so I feel like I have a sense of what it's like, but not much more than that.
Do any XC men get full ride scholarships at any school? Or is it all partial or maybe even no scholarship for the first year or two.
Let's face it, there is no career path in running save a handful of people. And that path is a path of poverty for all but a very few in a very small pool of professionals. Therefore, college running is really about getting a scholarship to the best school, with running goals priority two or less. In four years competitive running is over. But you've got the rest of your life in front of you.
Why didn't CU get Sprout or Culpepper
College Running
D1
Report Thread
You are reporting this thread to the moderators for review and possible removal from the forum.
-
-
"Jorge Torres and his twin brother Ed were among the nation’s top recruits when they came out of Wheeling (Ill.) High School in 1999. Ed qualified for Foot Locker finals three times. Jorge remains the only boy to qualify for Foot Lockers four times, an event which he won as a senior in 1998. Wetmore didn’t have the funds to offer both a full ride. Rather than bluffing, Wetmore laid his cards on the table. He told the twins that, unlike some other schools, he couldn’t offer them the full scholarships they deserved. He said that he was looking to build something at Colorado and that he’d love to have them if they could stomach not getting full rides.
Wetmore’s honest approach won over the Torreses, and they committed to Colorado (it didn’t hurt that their high school coach, Greg Fedyski, conducted a lot of research and concluded that Wetmore was the number one coach in the country).
Two years later, Wetmore used the same approach to secure the commitment of Ritzenhein, the two-time Foot Locker champ and one of the most highly-sought recruits in history.
“When Mark [first] recruited me, he didn’t even call me,” Ritzenhein said. “He just sent me a letter that said, ‘You’re probably going to be recruited by every school in the country so we won’t waste your time if you’re not interested.’ He didn’t have to make the big sales pitch.”"
https://www.letsrun.com/news/2014/09/wetmore-formula/ -
Jgt11 wrote:
"Jorge Torres and his twin brother Ed were among the nation’s top recruits when they came out of Wheeling (Ill.) High School in 1999. Ed qualified for Foot Locker finals three times. Jorge remains the only boy to qualify for Foot Lockers four times, an event which he won as a senior in 1998. Wetmore didn’t have the funds to offer both a full ride. Rather than bluffing, Wetmore laid his cards on the table. He told the twins that, unlike some other schools, he couldn’t offer them the full scholarships they deserved. He said that he was looking to build something at Colorado and that he’d love to have them if they could stomach not getting full rides.
Wetmore’s honest approach won over the Torreses, and they committed to Colorado (it didn’t hurt that their high school coach, Greg Fedyski, conducted a lot of research and concluded that Wetmore was the number one coach in the country).
Two years later, Wetmore used the same approach to secure the commitment of Ritzenhein, the two-time Foot Locker champ and one of the most highly-sought recruits in history.
“When Mark [first] recruited me, he didn’t even call me,” Ritzenhein said. “He just sent me a letter that said, ‘You’re probably going to be recruited by every school in the country so we won’t waste your time if you’re not interested.’ He didn’t have to make the big sales pitch.”"
https://www.letsrun.com/news/2014/09/wetmore-formula/
You know this was 20 years ago, right? And I read the book too.
This doesn't answer my question. Can CU not give scholarships while other schools can? Do other schools give full rides? -
Snow
-
Hateraid wrote:
Snow
skiing -
They all have the same number to work with and they can split them. Stanford has a need based system which makes it attractive to lower income athletes.
-
Scholar Expert wrote:
They all have the same number to work with and they can split them. Stanford has a need based system which makes it attractive to lower income athletes.
So what does that specifically mean, "need based system"? You don't have to pay any money out of pocket to go to Stanford? -
Ralphie CU wrote:
Let's face it, there is no career path in running save a handful of people. And that path is a path of poverty for all but a very few in a very small pool of professionals. Therefore, college running is really about getting a scholarship to the best school, with running goals priority two or less. In four years competitive running is over. But you've got the rest of your life in front of you.
Didn't you answer your own question here? -
Ralphie CU wrote:
I understand the obvious reasons why anyone would pick Stanford if they had the opportunity, but does CU match scholarship money compared to other schools? Is this why CU rarely gets the very top level guys coming out of HS? Or is it that Wetmore such a curmudgeon / harda$$ that he refuses to actually recruit or make any prospective runner fell welcome or wanted. I've read RWTB two or three times so I feel like I have a sense of what it's like, but not much more than that.
Do any XC men get full ride scholarships at any school? Or is it all partial or maybe even no scholarship for the first year or two.
Let's face it, there is no career path in running save a handful of people. And that path is a path of poverty for all but a very few in a very small pool of professionals. Therefore, college running is really about getting a scholarship to the best school, with running goals priority two or less. In four years competitive running is over. But you've got the rest of your life in front of you.
Eh I think it comes down to him being a coach rather than a salesman. He has good assistant coaches to help him with the recruiting aspect but I think other than that he really relies on his reputation and people coming to him because he's the best, like Torres and Ritz. He is an obvious introvert and has some issues connecting with people.
I think he's not religious at all, and Sprout is very religious, so I wouldn't be shocked if Sprout just didn't think that was a good fit for him (with the obvious draw of top-tier academics, weather, and getting out of state for an adventure at Stanford). The more I think about Culpepper's choice, the less weird it seems to me. I think Wetmore is a far superior coach to Powell, but Wetmore has not historically been known to be a middle distance guy, or really even a track guy. He certainly has runners who are incredibly successful in both XC and track, like Goucher, Jones, Simpson, etc., but his reputation is strongest in XC for sure, and CU is never a factor at conference or nationals in track. Powell is much more track-focused, and has worked with a ton of middle-distance talent (from Centro to Wheating, et al), and Culpepper wants to be a 1500 guy, not a 5000 guy. So it's not a great choice, as Wetmore has coached the most successful 1500 meter runner, male or female, in US history, but I don't think it's crazy. Also gotta remember that Cruz's parents live in Boulder. He went to school in Boulder until his freshman or sophomore year of HS, and even now Niwot is 10 minutes from Boulder. I don't blame him for thinking it'd be kind of boring to stick around your hometown when just about any school in the nation would have him. -
Fart Garfunkel wrote:
Ralphie CU wrote:
Let's face it, there is no career path in running save a handful of people. And that path is a path of poverty for all but a very few in a very small pool of professionals. Therefore, college running is really about getting a scholarship to the best school, with running goals priority two or less. In four years competitive running is over. But you've got the rest of your life in front of you.
Didn't you answer your own question here?
No. My question has to do with CU's ability to match scholarship levels with other schools. So that ties directly to what you quoted above. Do top guys not choose CU because they can get a full ride somewhere, but not at CU? Can you confirm this?
Sprout choose Stanford, and that's understandable, but why would Culpepper choose UW over CU? Similar academics, depending on the program. CU is certainly ahead of NAU in academics. -
You submit your financial info and they tell you your price. Upper middle class-$75k. Middle class-$50k. Low mid class -$25k. Low class-free.
-
Ralphie CU wrote:
Fart Garfunkel wrote:
Ralphie CU wrote:
Let's face it, there is no career path in running save a handful of people. And that path is a path of poverty for all but a very few in a very small pool of professionals. Therefore, college running is really about getting a scholarship to the best school, with running goals priority two or less. In four years competitive running is over. But you've got the rest of your life in front of you.
Didn't you answer your own question here?
No. My question has to do with CU's ability to match scholarship levels with other schools. So that ties directly to what you quoted above. Do top guys not choose CU because they can get a full ride somewhere, but not at CU? Can you confirm this?
Sprout choose Stanford, and that's understandable, but why would Culpepper choose UW over CU? Similar academics, depending on the program. CU is certainly ahead of NAU in academics.
I am a CU undergrad alum, so I have no bias, but UW is definitely a better school academically than CU. I think it has more to do with his focus on the 1500 as opposed to XC and the 5000-10000. Also if I were him I probably wouldn't want to be in the shadow of my parents all my life.
No idea on the matching scholarships. I think it just depends on what is available. Every D1 program can give up to 18 scholarships per year, but that is for both track and XC. Wetmore might spread that around. The majority of all track scholarships are half scholarships because they have to attract sprinters, jumpers, distance runners, etc. -
Creaky Bones wrote:
Ralphie CU wrote:
Fart Garfunkel wrote:
Ralphie CU wrote:
Let's face it, there is no career path in running save a handful of people. And that path is a path of poverty for all but a very few in a very small pool of professionals. Therefore, college running is really about getting a scholarship to the best school, with running goals priority two or less. In four years competitive running is over. But you've got the rest of your life in front of you.
Didn't you answer your own question here?
No. My question has to do with CU's ability to match scholarship levels with other schools. So that ties directly to what you quoted above. Do top guys not choose CU because they can get a full ride somewhere, but not at CU? Can you confirm this?
Sprout choose Stanford, and that's understandable, but why would Culpepper choose UW over CU? Similar academics, depending on the program. CU is certainly ahead of NAU in academics.
I am a CU undergrad alum, so I have no bias, but UW is definitely a better school academically than CU. I think it has more to do with his focus on the 1500 as opposed to XC and the 5000-10000. Also if I were him I probably wouldn't want to be in the shadow of my parents all my life.
No idea on the matching scholarships. I think it just depends on what is available. Every D1 program can give up to 18 scholarships per year, but that is for both track and XC. Wetmore might spread that around. The majority of all track scholarships are half scholarships because they have to attract sprinters, jumpers, distance runners, etc.
Scholarships are nice, but in the grand scheme of life, the education and starting salary that you can get based upon where you go to school will dominate any effects of scholarship money. -
Fart Garfunkel wrote:
Creaky Bones wrote:
Ralphie CU wrote:
Fart Garfunkel wrote:
Ralphie CU wrote:
Let's face it, there is no career path in running save a handful of people. And that path is a path of poverty for all but a very few in a very small pool of professionals. Therefore, college running is really about getting a scholarship to the best school, with running goals priority two or less. In four years competitive running is over. But you've got the rest of your life in front of you.
Didn't you answer your own question here?
No. My question has to do with CU's ability to match scholarship levels with other schools. So that ties directly to what you quoted above. Do top guys not choose CU because they can get a full ride somewhere, but not at CU? Can you confirm this?
Sprout choose Stanford, and that's understandable, but why would Culpepper choose UW over CU? Similar academics, depending on the program. CU is certainly ahead of NAU in academics.
I am a CU undergrad alum, so I have no bias, but UW is definitely a better school academically than CU. I think it has more to do with his focus on the 1500 as opposed to XC and the 5000-10000. Also if I were him I probably wouldn't want to be in the shadow of my parents all my life.
No idea on the matching scholarships. I think it just depends on what is available. Every D1 program can give up to 18 scholarships per year, but that is for both track and XC. Wetmore might spread that around. The majority of all track scholarships are half scholarships because they have to attract sprinters, jumpers, distance runners, etc.
Scholarships are nice, but in the grand scheme of life, the education and starting salary that you can get based upon where you go to school will dominate any effects of scholarship money.
Exactly, so why don't more top guys go to CU -
Um, the 18 scholarship limit is for women, men get 12.5.
-
We've given you all the answers already but you keep asking the same questions. So I don't know what to tell you. CU has had as many top XC runners over the last 20 years than any schools except Stanford, Oregon, and maybe Wisconsin, Arkansas, etc. Oregon's appeal should be obvious, Stanford's appeal should be obvious, and when Wisconsin and Arksans were recruiting at or above the level of CU, they had great coaches as well. Recently, Oklahoma State and NAU have been on the scene, but OSU was a bit more of a flavor of the week, it seems, and NAU has a great coach and altitude as well. Even last year, CU got Kashon Harrison (2x FLN qualifier, 11th as a senior; 2x FLW champ, 8:55 2-mile), Austin Vancil (6th at NXN, just 5 seconds behind Sprout/Young, 9:08A), Hunter Appleton (9:01 3200, just missed out on NXN), Noah Hibbard (26th at FLN as a senior, 4:08 miler). Not many schools in the country got that type of class. He didn't get a Ritz, Goucher, or Torres, but Kashon Harrison is running like the best true freshman in the country.
They missed out on two guys this year probably for fit reasons personal to those athletes, and because Wetmore is not much of a recruiter, as is obvious in all the anecdotes about his recruiting. He lets his results do the talking. -
Ralphie CU wrote:
Fart Garfunkel wrote:
Creaky Bones wrote:
Ralphie CU wrote:
Fart Garfunkel wrote:
Ralphie CU wrote:
Let's face it, there is no career path in running save a handful of people. And that path is a path of poverty for all but a very few in a very small pool of professionals. Therefore, college running is really about getting a scholarship to the best school, with running goals priority two or less. In four years competitive running is over. But you've got the rest of your life in front of you.
Didn't you answer your own question here?
No. My question has to do with CU's ability to match scholarship levels with other schools. So that ties directly to what you quoted above. Do top guys not choose CU because they can get a full ride somewhere, but not at CU? Can you confirm this?
Sprout choose Stanford, and that's understandable, but why would Culpepper choose UW over CU? Similar academics, depending on the program. CU is certainly ahead of NAU in academics.
I am a CU undergrad alum, so I have no bias, but UW is definitely a better school academically than CU. I think it has more to do with his focus on the 1500 as opposed to XC and the 5000-10000. Also if I were him I probably wouldn't want to be in the shadow of my parents all my life.
No idea on the matching scholarships. I think it just depends on what is available. Every D1 program can give up to 18 scholarships per year, but that is for both track and XC. Wetmore might spread that around. The majority of all track scholarships are half scholarships because they have to attract sprinters, jumpers, distance runners, etc.
Scholarships are nice, but in the grand scheme of life, the education and starting salary that you can get based upon where you go to school will dominate any effects of scholarship money.
Exactly, so why don't more top guys go to CU
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/university-of-colorado-boulder-1370/overall-rankings
According to US News & World Report, there are 169 options offering a better value than CU. -
CU is an average D1 school.
-
"Eh I think it comes down to him being a coach rather than a salesman. He has good assistant coaches to help him with the recruiting aspect but I think other than that he really relies on his reputation and people coming to him because he's the best, like Torres and Ritz. He is an obvious introvert and has some issues connecting with people."
Wetmore is a great coach. He has many detractors because he is so successful and winners are targets for criticism especially these days with online message boards. If he reads the board it would be surprising but he also has many fans who realize that his program is incredible. Having said that many top runners will not go to Colorado for reasons such as the weather, the academics not being what they are looking for, and the training style. -
Ralphie CU wrote:
Fart Garfunkel wrote:
Creaky Bones wrote:
Ralphie CU wrote:
Fart Garfunkel wrote:
Ralphie CU wrote:
Let's face it, there is no career path in running save a handful of people. And that path is a path of poverty for all but a very few in a very small pool of professionals. Therefore, college running is really about getting a scholarship to the best school, with running goals priority two or less. In four years competitive running is over. But you've got the rest of your life in front of you.
Didn't you answer your own question here?
No. My question has to do with CU's ability to match scholarship levels with other schools. So that ties directly to what you quoted above. Do top guys not choose CU because they can get a full ride somewhere, but not at CU? Can you confirm this?
Sprout choose Stanford, and that's understandable, but why would Culpepper choose UW over CU? Similar academics, depending on the program. CU is certainly ahead of NAU in academics.
I am a CU undergrad alum, so I have no bias, but UW is definitely a better school academically than CU. I think it has more to do with his focus on the 1500 as opposed to XC and the 5000-10000. Also if I were him I probably wouldn't want to be in the shadow of my parents all my life.
No idea on the matching scholarships. I think it just depends on what is available. Every D1 program can give up to 18 scholarships per year, but that is for both track and XC. Wetmore might spread that around. The majority of all track scholarships are half scholarships because they have to attract sprinters, jumpers, distance runners, etc.
Scholarships are nice, but in the grand scheme of life, the education and starting salary that you can get based upon where you go to school will dominate any effects of scholarship money.
Exactly, so why don't more top guys go to CU
You're agreeing with a comment from someone who tells you education and starting salary should be considered the most, while the Colorado guy explicitly told you that UW is a better school. I have no experience at either school, but rankings seem to suggest he's correct:
According to US News, University of Washington is ranked close to 62nd, and apparently, Colorado is ranked 104th. Even for Engineering, which is what it's best known for apparently, it's ranked 29th. That's not particularly stellar. Stanford does not even have to be in this discussion.
State schools like CU do not have the same weight as top tier colleges like Stanford. If you have a degree from Stanford, it's a near-automatic entry to many high-paying jobs (as long as you didn't major in something completely unusable). A huge assortment of tech companies and VCs around the area will directly draw from there while offering 6-figure salaries.
CU will ensure you're well-received within the state and local regions, but beyond that, it doesn't open nearly as many doors.
I am telling you this from the perspective of someone who was an undergraduate at a state school (UCI), worked for a few years, and then got a graduate degree at a higher tier private school (Northwestern). The difference in the recruitment resources for undergraduates was actually staggering. UCI is a good public university to begin with, but bluntly speaking, that is overwhelmed by the resources some of the private schools have thanks to their endowments. UCI would routinely have career fairs and such, and a few prominent companies would be present simply because they had major offices in the area, but the entire process was often very disorganized. However, Northwestern could effectively hand-feed their Econ/Engineering students internships to extremely prominent companies, with interviews held directly on campus. Deloitte, PwC, Bain, Abbott, Baxter, etc. were all there recruiting every single quarter.
There are tons of people here who go on blabbering that where you go to school as an undergrad isn't important since the quality of education is the same everywhere. I disagree with that, having had experience in both a middling and a high-tier school, but even if I didn't, the financial and career resources makes an absurd difference.
