Coach lying about recruitment standards?

4:22 and 16:30 are significantly different levels of performance, did you mean 15:30?

Is the coach new, or have they been been in their position for 3+ years?

When you say be considered for the team, do you mean the coach said you had to run those times to be on the roster, or had to run those times to be 'recruited' and/or given consideration in the admissions process?

Cephalopod wrote:

Spoke with a D3 college coach recently about my possibly attending the college and running on their team. He mentioned some time standards (4:22 mile, 16:30 5k xc), that I should hit to be considered for the team. I thought these were a bit fast for his team, and my hunch was correct. Most of the athletes now on the team can't hit anywhere near those times, let alone did they get them in HS. What's his deal? Was he misspeaking/confused or just boosting the team?

Lol he's the coach, he could tell you that you need a 3:55 mile for all he cares. He doesn't owe you anything unless paperwork is signed. Maybe he just isn't that into you. Maybe he had more scholarship available when he told you that or perhaps he has 3 other runners who are faster currently pending to accept an offer. There's a lot going on behind the scenes and it sounds like, at the very least, you need to get faster.

Sdfsdfsdfsdf wrote:

HarvardAlum wrote:

Lol he's the coach, he could tell you that you need a 3:55 mile for all he cares. He doesn't owe you anything unless paperwork is signed. Maybe he just isn't that into you. Maybe he had more scholarship available when he told you that or perhaps he has 3 other runners who are faster currently pending to accept an offer. There's a lot going on behind the scenes and it sounds like, at the very least, you need to get faster.

For a Harvard alumn, you aren't terribly perceptive. He said d3 school.

I guess if the Brojos are typical if ivy league, you fit right in.

Oh I didn't go to Harvard. This is an internet message board so I just put whatever I want.

In any event, what I've said is true. Sounds like the bottom line is that the kid is not fast enough and it's ultimately the coach's decision to bring a kid in.

Unless you're doing XC in Vermont or Colorado, 16:30 5k should be the easier of the two "standards" to hit.

I ran for a competitive D3 school, and although my coach never stipulated standards, most guys hit at least one of the following 4:25/9:40/16:10. Almost all of us got faster in college, but it took some time. Adjusting to college is difficult, and just looking at results for the younger (freshman/sophomore) runners often does not provide the whole story. I was a 4:20 guy in HS, but only ran one race under 3k as a freshman indoor and outdoor, which was a 4:25 mile at a low-key early season indoor meet. So to an outsider checking out my progression on TFRRS, I "regressed" by 5 seconds. I ended up running 4:13 the following season.

The point of my long-winded anecdote to to get you to try to evaluate a program as a whole. Look how individuals may have progressed from freshman to senior year. Look at the attrition rate (also variable, try to stay away from making assumptions about team culture or coaching staff). Also look at how athletes do at the big meets (conference, regional, nationals). Go in with the understanding that HS athletes are trained at different levels, and some, quite frankly are already burned out once they hit the college circuit.

Out of curiosity, which team was it? This could provide insight as to whether he is rebuilding a program or is a new coach, etc.

How fast do you run? I ran D2. I have been to a few D3 XC T&F meets. At D3 meets it is not abnormal to see guys racing 1500m, 4:30. What are you asking from this D3 coach?

Cephalopod wrote:

Spoke with a D3 college coach recently about my possibly attending the college and running on their team. He mentioned some time standards (4:22 mile, 16:30 5k xc), that I should hit to be considered for the team. I thought these were a bit fast for his team, and my hunch was correct. Most of the athletes now on the team can't hit anywhere near those times, let alone did they get them in HS. What's his deal? Was he misspeaking/confused or just boosting the team?

No D3 time has those standards. Most D2 teams won't have those sort of standards. A handful of D1 teams won't even have those standards. That coach is probably just trying to attract better kids to the program, but if it's D3, you can probably walk on with a 5:15 mile and an 18:00 5k.

Either you're coach is full of shit or his program is absolutely terrible. It sounds like you mean just to have a spot on the team, not to have help getting in. No D3 program should be able to turn away a 4:23 miler. I talked to many of the top D3 coaches, and most were happy to have anyone under 4:30 -- I mean programs that have won XC nats and consistently are top 10. 16:30 actually sounds about right for a top program, but something is fishy if you're coach is saying that he doesn't have a roster spot for a 4:23 guy.

Agreed - the OP and coach must be talking about times needed for some sort of funding. Our local D3 would certainly let anyone in the 4:20-4:30 HS mile range walk-on.

I went to a pretty competitive d3 school (always top 25 in XC, usually top 5 on track) and the majority of kids were 410-435 1500 guys. Another solid portion of guys were just barely sub 5. At the d3 level, it's usually if you show up everyday, you can be a part of the team. Now.. that doesn't mean you're at all the meets, but you're on the team and will compete at some point.

I assume the coach is attempting to improve the program. There is really nothing he can do about those that are already there. But, he plans to set some standards and hopes to have a better program in a few years. And, yes, 16:30 is a bit weak.

D3Truther wrote:

Either you're coach is full of shit or his program is absolutely terrible. It sounds like you mean just to have a spot on the team, not to have help getting in. No D3 program should be able to turn away a 4:23 miler. I talked to many of the top D3 coaches, and most were happy to have anyone under 4:30 -- I mean programs that have won XC nats and consistently are top 10. 16:30 actually sounds about right for a top program, but something is fishy if you're coach is saying that he doesn't have a roster spot for a 4:23 guy.

4:22 is the standard. I doubt the coach would turn away a 4:23 guy, hell, he probably wouldn't even turn down a 4:30 guy, he's just not looking for 4:45 guys, and he's making that very clear.

if the coach tells you these dumb standards to join the team, yet most everyone is slower than those standards, I would view that as a red flag. Even if its not the fault of the coach, why would you want to go somewhere that the coach lies even to recruits?

Certain NESCAC schools are perfect examples of what you're saying. I didn't run in that league but had a great number of friends who did and I can say I'm happy that I found a DIII school with an honest coach and a team that was inclusive. It was important to me that the coach respected all the athletes if they worked hard. It ended up being vital to my own running as i wasn't super successful, despite some good hs credentials. I was thankful that the coach let me stay on as I struggled through a number of personal issues. Find a coach who won't abandon you for running poorly so long as you can prove you're committed. Running is a fickle sport and the last thing you want to worry about is some a-hole who is going to kick you off the team because you can't run time X.

My coach was invested in me as a person and I returned the favor. our program was, overall, pretty tightly knit (not to mention successful) and the experience shaped me into to the person I am today because of the way the coach conducted himself and engaged with athletes.

It depends to an extent on the conference this school is in. If there is a nationally competitive team in the conference, then all the teams are looking for nationally competitive standard just to compete in conference...it's stupid. The coaches for which I recruited wanted students to step onto the team and score day one...certainly alleviates them from the responsibility of...you know...coaching. What makes this worse is if the team values the track times more than XC, then the prospective runner would have to run that time their junior year.

Honestly, I would look at a program that does not have a sensible recruiting profile with extreme skepticism. This is usually an ambitious, young coach who wants to make a mark and leverage that into a better coaching gig anyways. Find a coach who has had a significant tenure, experience developing athletes, and shows a modicum of interest in you. Remember, coaches exist to serve you...you are not in the program for the benefit of the coach.

That makes a good case for greater regulation of College Coaches. Washington should step in. Heck, he should have AD written permission to say something that stupid. Either that or he is on some substance. That too calls for broader drug testing. Unfortunately, for most, it is that foreign substance that gives them common sense. Oh, I forget the tan, the flip flops and mono syllabic (deep) insights. Where is Dave ?!

You sure he didn't say 1500m? Or roughly 4:40 for 1600?

It's a D3 school that can't offer athletic scholarships. Pretty much anyone can play.

Any d3 coach with standards to be "considered" for the team is BS.

hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh wrote:

Any d3 coach with standards to be "considered" for the team is BS.

joedirt wrote:

It's a D3 school that can't offer athletic scholarships. Pretty much anyone can play.

Not at all true.

Certainly many DIII programs will take just about anyone, but that shouldn't be an incoming freshmen's expectation everywhere. I'm at a DIII institution with 35-40 men's and women's mid/long distance runners combined. Our slowest men are in the 16:45 range and for women about 21:00. We're not an elite program, but certainly well above average.

I never discourage someone from applying to our school with an intent to run on the team, but if they aren't close to the performances i gave above (or something equivalent) I am very clear about their chances to make the team after our tryout period. Our roster relative to the coaching staff means we're already stretched thin on being able to pay the necessary attention to each athlete (its just me for those 40 athletes, plus i'm the primary coach for other, smaller event groups), and the schedule we set up also means that runners in the 17:00/21:00 or equivalent range would be at or near last place in many meets. Track and Field may be a very accommodating sport, but it is still Varsity athletics, so for these and more reasons, we aren't going to be taking every athlete who wants to be on the team, and in most situations those athletes will get more out of a running or triathlon club anyway.