I want to add something, I wonder if the "no one asked us" group from a couple months back will come out and at least admit they were wrong to prematurely speak out.
Kara already apologized, but the whole thing was so silly. I do bet they feel stupid now that they've read the report.
The sample was NOT representative of the body. The young lady that complained essentially hand picked a small group of women that had complaints about the coaches. Imagine they did it the other way - picked a group out of people that had no complaints. If they went through every woman that ran for CU and only picked supporters of the coaches then it would have been more representative than this small group of complainers.
in the end, a female distance runner is THE most dangerous athlete to coach. They have the highest rate of mental disorders and are the biggest risk to any coaches career. They tend to think of themselves as heroes when they attack coaches.
The athletes interviewed WERE NOT a representative sample, they interviewed only the people the initial complainer identified.
This is from Wetmore's statement:
"The report is clear to say it is not a misconduct investigation, and the inquiry team did not undertake specific efforts to corroborate facts related to incidents or events reported by student-athletes. See page 3 of the Inquiry. Further, the report does not establish whether the referenced statements, events or incidents occurred, which are presented primarily in summary by the investigating body. See page 3 of the Inquiry. Some of these unsubstantiated characterizations of events we vehemently deny. The report notes that the witnesses interviewed were those identified or suggested by the complaining athlete. See page 6 of the Inquiry."
Agreed, but can you imagine being a top recruit and having some options and then reading this report? Why would you choose CU? I’m a parent of recruited girls (not good enough for CU), but if they were and I read this I would strongly encourage them to go elsewhere. This report is damaging and having the positive attestations of superstars like Simpson or Coburn is not sufficiently reassuring because I’d assume they were outliers in their supreme talent.
Many top recruits won't care. It's the same reason why I know of a guy who went to the NOP after the BBC's allegations came out . His mindset was, "It's the top program. I won't cheat myself. So if it's dirty, it won't impact me."
Same thing here. "I don't have an eating disorder. I'm strong as fu**. I want to be the next Jenny, Kara, Emma. I don't want to go a cum-ba-ya program where we have theme days and are at a glorified kids camp. Iwant to be coached hard and told the truth even if it hurts. I can handle it."
Seriously, of all the great female pros in this country, what percent have come from Colorado?
IF you have a 'guys' mindset about sport (and yes I realize that's terrible sexist term), then it's not much of an issue as the report indicates. Some people want that.
I'm pleased the administration didn't cave and fire the coaches. This is the right outcome. People need to be allowed to make mistakes and improve, not just be canned.
"allowed to make mistakes"? Wetmore is 69 years old. He's not going to learn anything from this.
when was the last time Colorado was relevant? Program in the past just like the head coaches. Mike Smith running laps around these fools in Flag.
Are you joking? Colorado's women's program is MUCH more relevant than NAU nearly every years.
We're talking about the WOMEN's program and Wetmore's teams are consistently running laps around Smith's on the women's side. In Smith's 6 years in charge of the women, they've been top 10 once and beaten Colorado once.
Plus think of all the US olympians and top pro that have come from Colorado. No one produces more than CU, right? It's not even close.
In the last year or two, I asked someone who knows Wetmore well if he thought WEtmore cared Smith's NAU teams were so much better - like you I was only thinking about the men. This person replied, "You don't understand how Mark defines success."
He doesn't recruit super hard , barely does it often times and doesn't go foreign.
They are totally different types of coaches with two totally different personalities and maybe even different goals. One might be way more fun to run for and an obvious choice for you or me but let's don't start lying about the facts. The 'problems' this report talks about are almost exclusively on the women's side and Wetmore's women's team are consistently much better than NAU's.
The sample was NOT representative of the body. The young lady that complained essentially hand picked a small group of women that had complaints about the coaches. Imagine they did it the other way - picked a group out of people that had no complaints. If they went through every woman that ran for CU and only picked supporters of the coaches then it would have been more representative than this small group of complainers.
in the end, a female distance runner is THE most dangerous athlete to coach. They have the highest rate of mental disorders and are the biggest risk to any coaches career. They tend to think of themselves as heroes when they attack coaches.
Not all females are like that. But some of them know the media and public opinion will side with them.
Glad for Burroughs for speaking up--she spoke truth.
That's truly up to the individual; good point. I was a volunteer assistant coach at Northland HS in Cbus in 2016 and this also applies to HS football--as Coach Parcells (NYG) said in his autobiography guys have to be treated differently (I'm paraphrasing) based on their mental makeup. Some guys LOVE negative feedback and "chip on the shoulder" mentality--they will run for you. Others need them to feel like you're their best friend (NO sarcasm, honestly). It really is personal based on the student/athlete.
Any female recruit + family who reads the report and sides with the small group of women who have blown this issue up, are women that Wetmore does not want to deal with anyway. This self selects away from the program a certain type that is NOT fun to coach if the goal is to foster a tough but elite environment. So even if it does reduce volume of interest in the program, it's less recruiting profiles to wade through in deciding who can thrive at CU and who can't take the heat.
-Body composition is an objective variable that contributes to performance. Many athletes who are physically and mentally capable of reaching a truly elite status can get close to the flame without getting burnt
-The type of athlete who WILL get burnt if they step that close to the flame (the complainer camp), probably doesn't need to be at a program like CU to begin with. There are lots of college, even respectable DI opportunities that can develop decent athletes while sticking closer to the woke feel good narrative of a fun and healthy team culture with a focus on a simple and healthy relationship with food and say that weight doesn't matter. There is NOTHING wrong with this type of environment and opportunity, in fact this IS THE BETTER FIT for a lot of average/good distance runners that come up through the US HS system. There are lots of good runners who are too far down the type A spectrum, or at high risk for being triggered/susceptible for eating disorders. There are coaches out there who can manage this category of athlete, and build cultures that allow the type to flourish and succeed. Great. That's not the type who should end up at CU.
The ones who can handle the mindset at CU without compromising physical and mental health will continue to be the ones who support Wetmore beyond collegiate years, and will continue to be the current collegiates who excel in the program and speak out in favor of how it is ran.
The train comes off the track when the ones who can't hold up to the rigor find a way in. Doesn't make the coaches bad. Doesn't make the philosophy bad. Just makes it not for everyone. The only thing that may need to be stepped up is the vetting process for who is entrusted with a roster spot in the program
The amount of mansplaining on this thread is hilarious. Looks like 69yo coach just couldn't keep up with how coaching has evolved in the last few years and the price he'll pay is retiring at 70 like a normal person. The only reason he's not fired is the arrival of Coach Prime in Boulder... but his time will come as well.
Any female recruit + family who reads the report and sides with the small group of women who have blown this issue up, are women that Wetmore does not want to deal with anyway. This self selects away from the program a certain type that is NOT fun to coach if the goal is to foster a tough but elite environment. So even if it does reduce volume of interest in the program, it's less recruiting profiles to wade through in deciding who can thrive at CU and who can't take the heat.
-Body composition is an objective variable that contributes to performance. Many athletes who are physically and mentally capable of reaching a truly elite status can get close to the flame without getting burnt
-The type of athlete who WILL get burnt if they step that close to the flame (the complainer camp), probably doesn't need to be at a program like CU to begin with. There are lots of college, even respectable DI opportunities that can develop decent athletes while sticking closer to the woke feel good narrative of a fun and healthy team culture with a focus on a simple and healthy relationship with food and say that weight doesn't matter. There is NOTHING wrong with this type of environment and opportunity, in fact this IS THE BETTER FIT for a lot of average/good distance runners that come up through the US HS system. There are lots of good runners who are too far down the type A spectrum, or at high risk for being triggered/susceptible for eating disorders. There are coaches out there who can manage this category of athlete, and build cultures that allow the type to flourish and succeed. Great. That's not the type who should end up at CU.
The ones who can handle the mindset at CU without compromising physical and mental health will continue to be the ones who support Wetmore beyond collegiate years, and will continue to be the current collegiates who excel in the program and speak out in favor of how it is ran.
The train comes off the track when the ones who can't hold up to the rigor find a way in. Doesn't make the coaches bad. Doesn't make the philosophy bad. Just makes it not for everyone. The only thing that may need to be stepped up is the vetting process for who is entrusted with a roster spot in the program
This is just some old Vince Lombardi, Navy Seal bs. More old school nonsense that the only way to coach to athletic greatness is through fostering a culture of abuse with only the toughest surviving and thriving and the rest being wrecked or run out. I don’t know the reality of the CU program, and if the culture is being maligned by a disgruntled few, then yes, that’s crap. But if what’s being described is the actual culture, then it sucks. Doesn’t matter if Whetmore has a lot of championships and coached a lot of champions. The sport should demand better of its great coaches.
2) IMO, head T&F coach should be a former jumper, sprinter or thrower.
3) Are the body comp. advocate head coaches making male throwers have less than 7.5% body fat and making female throwers have less than 17.5% body fat?
4) These issues start as a communication problem in college between head XC coach and female XC runners.
5) When XC coach is subordinate to head T&F coach, if head T&F coach has good to great social skills, these issues can be resolved.
Coaching female athletes past middle school years is not as simple as looking at females on average six inches shorter and (10 to 13)% slower male athletes. There are females, to (11 to 14) years old, built straight up and down like their male counterparts. Some females, starting in above age range are destined to possess body fat, 20-something percent. Making some females starve, ruins their health in ways it does not ruin males.
Many top recruits won't care. It's the same reason why I know of a guy who went to the NOP after the BBC's allegations came out . His mindset was, "It's the top program. I won't cheat myself. So if it's dirty, it won't impact me."
Same thing here. "I don't have an eating disorder. I'm strong as . I want to be the next Jenny, Kara, Emma. I don't want to go a c**-ba-ya program where we have theme days and are at a glorified kids camp. Iwant to be coached hard and told the truth even if it hurts. I can handle it."
Seriously, of all the great female pros in this country, what percent have come from Colorado?
IF you have a 'guys' mindset about sport (and yes I realize that's terrible term), then it's not much of an issue as the report indicates. Some people want that.
I don't disagree with you about the fact that this program might work for a lot of young runners. But here's the issue I have...many kids at age 17 or 18 don't know whether or not they are that type of runner who can handle that type of program. There are a lot that think they are and want to challenge themselves, but really they aren't built for that sort of thing.
There are a lot of eating disorders that don't fully manifest until college years. I've seen it even in my college teammates. High Schoolers are often trying to seek approval from coaches and can be driven by it for example. They might believe that their passion is innate, and for some it truly is, but sometimes it takes being on the other side of it to realize that all that 'passion' really was just about pleasing a coach or parents or whatnot.
So say you have a young lady who is a top runner who is super passionate and driven, and she says she wants to be coached 'hard'. She likes to eat very healthy to support her running. She goes to Colorado--but really all this passion is veering on obsession and her healthy eating habits become more and more obsessive. Now, instead of being a part of a program that would encourage her health at an important juncture, she is a part of one that drives her harder, and she falls off the tight rope. She spirals into an eating disorder due to coaches pressure and it becomes a lifelong battle she has to overcome.
"But she can just transfer!" She doesn't know she has a problem. Eating disorders are tricky, and she has no awareness of the fact that what she is doing to herself is incredibly unhealthy.
I also want to say one thing about the 'guys' mindset. Have you ever considered the idea that this type of culture may be very unhealthy for men too? I brought up Adam Goucher. It was the men's team who got Metcalf fired all those years ago. Jesse Thomas has discussed having an eating disorder. Yes, it's sexist but it's sexist because it's actually less true than you think.
I'm pleased the administration didn't cave and fire the coaches. This is the right outcome. People need to be allowed to make mistakes and improve, not just be canned.
A few other thoughts.
1) Is Wetmore and Burroughs' focus on "body composition" totally not needed?
I was surprised they wrote this to the team, "We believe that optimal body composition is second only to serious training in relevance to your racing results.”
I've long said that of course weight is important to distance running but in my mind weight loss in incredibly highly correlated and the natural result of "serious training." It seems to me if people are fit, they will naturally be lean enough to compete if they were meant to be an elite distance runner. Why not just focus on the training? I think the nutrition / diet stuff is vastly overrated. Unless they are eating like a complete moron, so much of it is training/genetics.
If someone isn't thin despite training hard then they likely aren't cut out for elite distance no matter what they try to do with their diet just in the same way that if I can't keep 280 pounds on m y frame, I'm not going to cut it as D1 offensive lineman no matter what I do. Nearly half of the women involved in the inquiry reported negative experiences with Wetmore and Burroughs and about the same number said they did not trust the coaches.
2) I'm stunned by the guts of the dietician. She openly admitted, she “practices performance nutrition within a Division 1 school with high-performing teams, not an eating disorder clinic.”
The dietician telling the lineman to eat 8,000 calories a day to way 330 doesn't apologize, so why should she?
3) It's said to me that according to Runner's World nearly "nearly half of the women involved in the inquiry reported negative experiences with Wetmore and Burroughs and about the same number said they did not trust the coaches."
Half the female athletes don't trust the coaches? That's not good. Period.
The things is a lot of of college athletes do eat like morons