I hope that Ritz says no. But with a couple up and coming kids of his own, you never know.
-
52
-
#1: Top-rated Training Shoe: Brooks Ghost 15 for $99Get a top 1%-rated shoe right now for $99 (30% off) -
Actually I kind of do regardless of what division I ran for. However, since you're hell bent on doxing me, you can say something to my face at 365PR LC.
44 -
Would a coach sleeping with a former athlete pass Safe Sport standards today?
76 -
I really don't think most people have a clue what comes with college coaching. The administration, college / university, city, resources, etc. all have a huge impact on a coaches ability to be effective.
Being a distance coach in the NCAA system is very unique. Trying to coach two genders through three seasons per school year and balance a continuous changing of the guard within a program has a lot more to do with circumstances than just writing some workouts.
People throwing out these names of coaches, most of those people have been successful because they are an institutional fit for where they are, have a life, support and are capable of coaching people how they want.
Can you count how many different people have coached at Stanford in the past 25 years? A ton! Why? Not because they were bad coaches or didn't have talent coming there. Burnout.
The CU situation will be hard for anyone because it's in a fishbowl and everyone will have an opinion. Wetmore came there as a volunteer, then an assistant, then distance coach and head coach. When he came on board it was 1992 and CU was in the Big 8 conference. Very good for sure, but D1 then was like D2 today (look at the TFRRS lists). Developing people and building good xc teams at the D1 level was more about coaching unless you bought a foreign team. Today it's very different. There are so many more factors today than then and recruiting itself is a huge drain of time.
CU and Boulder in general is nuts. Very expensive place, the Deion Sanders stuff going on, etc. another conference change and D1 NIL, transfer portal, etc. is all a handful. Nothing like 1992 when Wetmore started. People won't be pleased no matter what the results are.
Good luck.
511 -
Safe Sport wrote:
Would a coach sleeping with a former athlete pass Safe Sport standards today?
That would be Mike Smith too. We are all adults here.
81 -
Not 1992 wrote:
I really don't think most people have a clue what comes with college coaching. The administration, college / university, city, resources, etc. all have a huge impact on a coaches ability to be effective.
Being a distance coach in the NCAA system is very unique. Trying to coach two genders through three seasons per school year and balance a continuous changing of the guard within a program has a lot more to do with circumstances than just writing some workouts.
People throwing out these names of coaches, most of those people have been successful because they are an institutional fit for where they are, have a life, support and are capable of coaching people how they want.
Can you count how many different people have coached at Stanford in the past 25 years? A ton! Why? Not because they were bad coaches or didn't have talent coming there. Burnout.
The CU situation will be hard for anyone because it's in a fishbowl and everyone will have an opinion. Wetmore came there as a volunteer, then an assistant, then distance coach and head coach. When he came on board it was 1992 and CU was in the Big 8 conference. Very good for sure, but D1 then was like D2 today (look at the TFRRS lists). Developing people and building good xc teams at the D1 level was more about coaching unless you bought a foreign team. Today it's very different. There are so many more factors today than then and recruiting itself is a huge drain of time.
CU and Boulder in general is nuts. Very expensive place, the Deion Sanders stuff going on, etc. another conference change and D1 NIL, transfer portal, etc. is all a handful. Nothing like 1992 when Wetmore started. People won't be pleased no matter what the results are.
Good luck.
This may be the clearest and most accurate post made on LR in a long time!
Thanks!
201 -
Probably the best! wrote:
Not 1992 wrote:
I really don't think most people have a clue what comes with college coaching. The administration, college / university, city, resources, etc. all have a huge impact on a coaches ability to be effective.
Being a distance coach in the NCAA system is very unique. Trying to coach two genders through three seasons per school year and balance a continuous changing of the guard within a program has a lot more to do with circumstances than just writing some workouts.
People throwing out these names of coaches, most of those people have been successful because they are an institutional fit for where they are, have a life, support and are capable of coaching people how they want.
Can you count how many different people have coached at Stanford in the past 25 years? A ton! Why? Not because they were bad coaches or didn't have talent coming there. Burnout.
The CU situation will be hard for anyone because it's in a fishbowl and everyone will have an opinion. Wetmore came there as a volunteer, then an assistant, then distance coach and head coach. When he came on board it was 1992 and CU was in the Big 8 conference. Very good for sure, but D1 then was like D2 today (look at the TFRRS lists). Developing people and building good xc teams at the D1 level was more about coaching unless you bought a foreign team. Today it's very different. There are so many more factors today than then and recruiting itself is a huge drain of time.
CU and Boulder in general is nuts. Very expensive place, the Deion Sanders stuff going on, etc. another conference change and D1 NIL, transfer portal, etc. is all a handful. Nothing like 1992 when Wetmore started. People won't be pleased no matter what the results are.
Good luck.
This may be the clearest and most accurate post made on LR in a long time!
Thanks!
Finding one person who is great at all of these things and can adapt to the “new” NCAA is a big ask. There aren’t a lot of those people out there. I think CU would be best to go with one a person who understands these challenges and has proven success in the spotlight. Will Palmer isn’t a bad choice assuming you can’t get one of the Smiths to jump ship.
18 -
Running UberNerd wrote:
Respect 1 wrote:
CU is CU due to Merk Wetmore!!! He built that program into a National Power Period! He deserves better than this BS Crap! He should have been able to leave on his own accord when he wanted, and thrown a Huge Retirement Party by CU!! He is VERY respected by the Peers that he cares about though. He doesn't give two craps what this young weak soft generation thinks of him. He will retire in style and know that he built a LEGEND! Congrats Mark! Kick back and laugh
CU is CU because of 1) Boulder and 2) altitude. Boulder has always been a running mecca. In the 80s and 90s you couldn’t throw a rock and not hit a professional runner. Wetmore had a successful tenure, but the idea that nobody else could have taken a program that is located in one of the most popular places to be a serious runner on the planet and turn it into a national power is silly. Of course, many people could have screwed it up. He deserves some of the credit, but location, location, location deserves some of the credit as well.
Wetmore was a nobody before CU, CU hired a nobody because they weren't anything themselves, Wetmore built CU into a brand name distance program.
154 -
I believe Safe Sport doesn’t condone any coach sleeping with an athlete or former athlete due to the power imbalance. We are adults, and we know it’s wrong. Turning a blind eye is wrong. Turning a blind eye to requiring dexa scans without proper coaching with regard to eating disorders is wrong. This is common sense stuff
911 -
Safe Sport wrote:
I believe Safe Sport doesn’t condone any coach sleeping with an athlete or former athlete due to the power imbalance. We are adults, and we know it’s wrong. Turning a blind eye is wrong. Turning a blind eye to requiring dexa scans without proper coaching with regard to eating disorders is wrong. This is common sense stuff
During the late-90s to early 2000s there were 3 CU coaches sleeping with current or former athletes. They’re all still together.
81 -
CU Was a Complete Backwater wrote:
Running UberNerd wrote:
CU is CU because of 1) Boulder and 2) altitude. Boulder has always been a running mecca. In the 80s and 90s you couldn’t throw a rock and not hit a professional runner. Wetmore had a successful tenure, but the idea that nobody else could have taken a program that is located in one of the most popular places to be a serious runner on the planet and turn it into a national power is silly. Of course, many people could have screwed it up. He deserves some of the credit, but location, location, location deserves some of the credit as well.
Wetmore was a nobody before CU, CU hired a nobody because they weren't anything themselves, Wetmore built CU into a brand name distance program.
Wetmore was actually an extremely successful NJ coach. He would've been like a Dough Soles, Brosnam, etc type figure (without the extra publicity before NXN)
151 -
On that topic wrote:
Safe Sport wrote:
I believe Safe Sport doesn’t condone any coach sleeping with an athlete or former athlete due to the power imbalance. We are adults, and we know it’s wrong. Turning a blind eye is wrong. Turning a blind eye to requiring dexa scans without proper coaching with regard to eating disorders is wrong. This is common sense stuff
During the late-90s to early 2000s there were 3 CU coaches sleeping with current or former athletes. They’re all still together.
Would like to see Gault write up it truly investigative and comprehensive analysis of Wetmore: the positives, and also these dark sides. I think it is a story that is complex and it needs to be told and not brushed under the rug. I think the BroJos have bit too much admiration for Wetmore and possibly some skewed views on the role of a coach enforcing a women’s bodyweight in D1 sports without proper on eating disorders. But, I would trust that Gault would write an excellent piece.
112 -
Inside word is that Vin Lananna will take over at Colorado. You heard it here first.
312 -
Boulder bro
42 -
cramister wrote:
CU Was a Complete Backwater wrote:
Wetmore was a nobody before CU, CU hired a nobody because they weren't anything themselves, Wetmore built CU into a brand name distance program.
Wetmore was actually an extremely successful NJ coach. He would've been like a Dough Soles, Brosnam, etc type figure (without the extra publicity before NXN)
Oh yeah, NJ high school coaching was totally "like" on level with Newbury Park. CU didn't matter, nobody would've created a thread about who was going to take over CU when Wetmore's predecessor was canned.
1991- Colorado was not at NCAAs as a team, they had one individual qualifer in 129th place in 33:02, Matt Schubert.
In 1992, Wetmore moved to Colorado, where he was hired as men's distance coach at University of Colorado. Results: 11th place at NCAAs.
1993:
Then goes 4th:
1994, 2nd:
CU did not exist as XC power before Wetmore, nobody expected they could ever would become one, that's how Wetmore managed to sneak in with NJ high school coaching and four years of Seton Hall college coaching as his resume.
91 -
Yep. Ask Mike Smith
12 -
CU has the chance to do the funniest thing ever:
Hire the other Mark Wetmore, the meet promoter/agent Mark Wetmore.
This post was edited 7 minutes after it was posted.164 -
Martin from Adams state would be a good choice but he is a proven cheater and would bring bad mojo to the buffs program.
46 -
Anything you have to back up that accusation or did you go to a school that got beat by Adams a lot?
92 -
Not 1992 wrote:
I really don't think most people have a clue what comes with college coaching. The administration, college / university, city, resources, etc. all have a huge impact on a coaches ability to be effective.
Being a distance coach in the NCAA system is very unique. Trying to coach two genders through three seasons per school year and balance a continuous changing of the guard within a program has a lot more to do with circumstances than just writing some workouts.
People throwing out these names of coaches, most of those people have been successful because they are an institutional fit for where they are, have a life, support and are capable of coaching people how they want.
Can you count how many different people have coached at Stanford in the past 25 years? A ton! Why? Not because they were bad coaches or didn't have talent coming there. Burnout.
The CU situation will be hard for anyone because it's in a fishbowl and everyone will have an opinion. Wetmore came there as a volunteer, then an assistant, then distance coach and head coach. When he came on board it was 1992 and CU was in the Big 8 conference. Very good for sure, but D1 then was like D2 today (look at the TFRRS lists). Developing people and building good xc teams at the D1 level was more about coaching unless you bought a foreign team. Today it's very different. There are so many more factors today than then and recruiting itself is a huge drain of time.
CU and Boulder in general is nuts. Very expensive place, the Deion Sanders stuff going on, etc. another conference change and D1 NIL, transfer portal, etc. is all a handful. Nothing like 1992 when Wetmore started. People won't be pleased no matter what the results are.
Good luck.
Everything you say is true and well articulated. But this is still one of the best jobs in the business. It’s the opportunity to lead a top-tier program in one of the best locations for distance running on the planet. Lots of big names will be interested in this job. It’s a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.
30
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun